No subject

[A!]

Frederic Madre wrote:

> At 19:43 16/05/00 +0200, A! wrote:
> >yes and I guess I am surprised to not see more of that dialog going on
> >in lists across the net.
>
> it's nonetheless a very crucial topic,

very

> the one of "success" for online stuff (let's not talk of art, please)

good idea.

>
>
> this is why there is
> popular pleine-peau
>
> and not
> succesful pleine-peau

what would it mean if pleine-peau were suddenly successful?
the one who is sucessful is not the one who gets to define what 'successful' is.
the beginning of the end?
and why is that?

>
>
> how does one measure success ? does one need it ?

more importantly who measures success?

> this is why I said I was glad you got the money, not the prize

> I understand the need for money, the prize not

 and we are of course just in it for the money :-)
want to stress... maybe not to you or to other net creatives but to society at large that this type of work (online stuff)  is worth
something is important to culture in general and worth supporting if entertaining or useful. an exchange of services. ecstacy for
money.... again... porn sites do it all the time.... web designers do it all the time... individuals can and should use the net to
avoid becoming part of the web 'industry' by just being themselves. by saying what you really mean.

>
>
> I do not understand also _lots_ of things about this particular competition
> why does the sfmoma need the webbys to award something, for instance ?
>
> street cred ?!
>

i don't think the webbys carry much street cred except among media companies in san francisco.
the money was given to the sfmoma by a donor who choose to remain anonymous.
i think the webbys was a good excuse for them to not have to put together their own ceremony, generate their own crowd... lots of
people already there... the pr machine grinding away... they took advantage of it.

>
> >  maybe those concerned online just don't want to discuss it anymore or are hanging out in neigborhoods where they all agree....
>
> I think we have been disagreeing right here quite a lot!
> let's disagree + qu'hier.

;-) yes
but whatever happened to 7-11?
it must still be around somewhere
and those 0110101002.org kids
did they retire or something?

>
>
> > > and the antagonism with
> > >  >the blinking-pixel fake-virus green-on-black semi-political
> > > > >pseudo-critical "low-tech poser copy-paste" crap may be numbered.
> > >
> > > I find surprising
> >
> >in so far as what has been pushed as 'experiment' we've actually seen very little 'experimentation'
>
> mmm, but this phrase could also be interpreted easily as a direct stab at jodi.org

 jodi was the original which was then copied and beaten to death by about half a million other 'experimenters'
so why continue to call that stuff 'experimental'?

a one liner
or get into peoples bodies, memories, senses

the choice is......

>
> but let's get back on track
>
> >sick of so called 'experiment'
> >
> >need some 'action'
>
> there is very little experiment without action

exactly!

>
> in fact, experimentation is pure action
>
> so, let's call this something else than experiment

salty started it :-P

>
> you shoot first, maybe by giving examples of experimentation
>
> for me vrml is experimentation
> which fails
>
> >don't be fake
> >http://ciac.llnl.gov/ciac/CIACHoaxes.html
> >
> >be real........
> >http://news.cnet.com/news/0-1003-200-1837495.html?tag=st.cn.1.lthdne
>
> eh
> but your work is quite far from online terrorism
> no ?

not what i meant but now that you mention it....
all depends on whose eyes you're looking through, as with everything else.

>
>
> computer viruses are not fiction

i couldn't find the article where i read it but this kid who they accuse of the virus said he made it by accident. he was only
trying to steal passwords to get free internet access.

now thats experimentation....

much respect,
Au-