ARTBASE (1)
PORTFOLIO (1)
BIO
The McElroys are a husband and wife collaborative artist, technology, and business team who bring significant artistic, technology and community development skills to Corporate Performance Artists. Joseph, is a graduate of Computer Science from Duke University and a former team leader at IBM. He has been a CEO of several companies, and has been responsible for raising $2 million to fund a startup company called EveryDayPrint.com, which while part of the dot-com boom and bust, he managed to bring to profitability and which still survives to this day.
Donna was an operations manager and PR specialist in the firms they have started together. She has recently been credited by several business leaders in the Bronx as being "top spokesperson for the Bronx." She is active in many community development projects, such as participating on the Board of the Bruckner Arts and Antique District, and working to promote many Bronx activities through an online newsletter called Cupcake Kaleidoscope.
Joseph was the leader of the Open Source Sig for the New York Software Industry Association. And was track co-chair for Open Source at the 2001 New York Software Industry Summit. He was on the advisory board for PostgreSql, Inc - the leading Open Source Database and has had articles published by Lutris Technologies and Open Magazine on Open Source business models and technology solutions. He is a database expert with extensive Fortune 500 experience. Among other awards, he won an IBM Division Award for Technical Excellence.
From magazine "Open" issue September 2001 - "The McElroys kick open the doors of old business models and capitalize on what they believe." The McElroys have achieved re-known as Open Source visionaries with interviews by Interactive Week, Infoworld, Fortune Technology, Open magazine, and others. Joseph and Donna make no claims of divine insight, but in review by Lewis Lacock, it is said, "that this dynamic duo of art are the closest things we have to true shamans today". They are doing their best to pursue the knowledge to support such claims someday.
HIGHLIGHTS
* Achieved reputation as Open Source visionarys with interviews by Interactive Week, Infoworld, Fortune Technology, Open magazine among others.
* National Columnist on Money Matters for Gather.com.
* Judge for the Advanced Technical Categories of the Emmys.
* Successfully raised $2 million funding for startup.
* Successfully built and sold two technology businesses.
* First Entry into the Multimedia wing of the Museum of Computer Art.
* Artwork collected by the Library at Cornell University.
* Artwork in the collection of Rhizome.org.
* Developed first ever Exhibition Catalog completely on CD Rom. Done for Alternative Museum. Reviewed by New York Times.
* Selected to attend first ever Summer Institute for Performance Art at The Kitchen in NYC.
* IBM Division Award for Technical Excellence.
* Various academic, mathematic and scholarship awards. Attended Duke University on a full scholarship in mathematics.
* Poetry published in various journals. Art exhibited in museum shows.
* Certificate of Artistic Excellence from Congressman Jose Serrano.
* Recognized by Bronx Borough President Aldofo Carrion for contributions to the community.
Donna was an operations manager and PR specialist in the firms they have started together. She has recently been credited by several business leaders in the Bronx as being "top spokesperson for the Bronx." She is active in many community development projects, such as participating on the Board of the Bruckner Arts and Antique District, and working to promote many Bronx activities through an online newsletter called Cupcake Kaleidoscope.
Joseph was the leader of the Open Source Sig for the New York Software Industry Association. And was track co-chair for Open Source at the 2001 New York Software Industry Summit. He was on the advisory board for PostgreSql, Inc - the leading Open Source Database and has had articles published by Lutris Technologies and Open Magazine on Open Source business models and technology solutions. He is a database expert with extensive Fortune 500 experience. Among other awards, he won an IBM Division Award for Technical Excellence.
From magazine "Open" issue September 2001 - "The McElroys kick open the doors of old business models and capitalize on what they believe." The McElroys have achieved re-known as Open Source visionaries with interviews by Interactive Week, Infoworld, Fortune Technology, Open magazine, and others. Joseph and Donna make no claims of divine insight, but in review by Lewis Lacock, it is said, "that this dynamic duo of art are the closest things we have to true shamans today". They are doing their best to pursue the knowledge to support such claims someday.
HIGHLIGHTS
* Achieved reputation as Open Source visionarys with interviews by Interactive Week, Infoworld, Fortune Technology, Open magazine among others.
* National Columnist on Money Matters for Gather.com.
* Judge for the Advanced Technical Categories of the Emmys.
* Successfully raised $2 million funding for startup.
* Successfully built and sold two technology businesses.
* First Entry into the Multimedia wing of the Museum of Computer Art.
* Artwork collected by the Library at Cornell University.
* Artwork in the collection of Rhizome.org.
* Developed first ever Exhibition Catalog completely on CD Rom. Done for Alternative Museum. Reviewed by New York Times.
* Selected to attend first ever Summer Institute for Performance Art at The Kitchen in NYC.
* IBM Division Award for Technical Excellence.
* Various academic, mathematic and scholarship awards. Attended Duke University on a full scholarship in mathematics.
* Poetry published in various journals. Art exhibited in museum shows.
* Certificate of Artistic Excellence from Congressman Jose Serrano.
* Recognized by Bronx Borough President Aldofo Carrion for contributions to the community.
Re: yawn list
Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <death@zaphod.terminal.org>:
> Upon mention of concepts such as objective reality or
> difficult to swallow truths for some such as 'angels'
> too many of you have jumped and attacked.
Truths to be force fed down the patient's throat doctor. Only it is bad
medicine, past its expiration date, and causes a bad reaction.
joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
frank + lyn - mc + El + roy
go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
CupcakeKleidoscope-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> Certainly Mark.
>
> Funny how the lot of you re-act like a herd against towards any semblance
> of individuality and thenit's that one single continuity's fault.
>
> Is that how it works? An individual appears. Mm fresh meat.
> Everybody attacks. If the individual falls, bleat,
> they are a GIVING MARTYR SAINT (oh).
>
> If the ondividual doesn't, then of course it's the "individual's fault".
>
> How about no.
>
> How about you wake the fuck up (and we aren't going to be nice about it).
>
> The "state" of Rhizome is YOUR OWN FAULT.
>
> From all of the humans we have been approached with, most all
> have attempted to EXTERT energy, DATA or SOMETHING ELSE
> for their EGOS.
>
> Either that, or half-witted twits pretending to be "zen
> influenced" "sufism influenced" "beuys influenced"
> "shamans with modem" etc.
>
> Upon mention of concepts such as objective reality or
> difficult to swallow truths for some such as 'angels'
> too many of you have jumped and attacked.
>
> None of you have been able to withstand HONESTLY and with INTEGRITY
> what your actual state is.
>
> This is not how "civilized" communities function.
>
> Nevermind all of this pseudo-esoteric posturing,
> that is mostly picked up from obvious traceable SOURCES
> in popular culture, yet you're stitting here
> swearing up and down levels of initiation and
> consciousness of unfathomable degrees.
>
> Are you cuckoo? If 20 of you were conscious,
> not half of human suffering would be occurring.
>
> Nevermind that there are TOO MANY who claim to be here
> with "noble purposes" yet are ready to debase
> and slap down anything that isn't DEBASED to your level.
>
> In actuality what you are all interested is YOURSELVES.
>
> Your EGOs. That is ALL.
>
> And you will squash anything possessin consciousness.
>
> As you did to NN even, and hypocritically now you're starting
> to wave her "martyr flag".
>
>
> The same with Eryk Salvaggio who is bloody beaten black and blue,
> which is not what he was 2 years ago.
>
> Rhizome cripples 'artists". Not Rhizome.org.
> The mailing list.
>
> The only ones allowed to breathe are mediocre twits who fancy that
> anything they produce is "the bee's knees" and match up an enormous ego
> with it.
>
> Revolting and sickening.
>
> We are not a troll for not playing along, and for demonstrating this.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
> Upon mention of concepts such as objective reality or
> difficult to swallow truths for some such as 'angels'
> too many of you have jumped and attacked.
Truths to be force fed down the patient's throat doctor. Only it is bad
medicine, past its expiration date, and causes a bad reaction.
joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
frank + lyn - mc + El + roy
go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
CupcakeKleidoscope-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> Certainly Mark.
>
> Funny how the lot of you re-act like a herd against towards any semblance
> of individuality and thenit's that one single continuity's fault.
>
> Is that how it works? An individual appears. Mm fresh meat.
> Everybody attacks. If the individual falls, bleat,
> they are a GIVING MARTYR SAINT (oh).
>
> If the ondividual doesn't, then of course it's the "individual's fault".
>
> How about no.
>
> How about you wake the fuck up (and we aren't going to be nice about it).
>
> The "state" of Rhizome is YOUR OWN FAULT.
>
> From all of the humans we have been approached with, most all
> have attempted to EXTERT energy, DATA or SOMETHING ELSE
> for their EGOS.
>
> Either that, or half-witted twits pretending to be "zen
> influenced" "sufism influenced" "beuys influenced"
> "shamans with modem" etc.
>
> Upon mention of concepts such as objective reality or
> difficult to swallow truths for some such as 'angels'
> too many of you have jumped and attacked.
>
> None of you have been able to withstand HONESTLY and with INTEGRITY
> what your actual state is.
>
> This is not how "civilized" communities function.
>
> Nevermind all of this pseudo-esoteric posturing,
> that is mostly picked up from obvious traceable SOURCES
> in popular culture, yet you're stitting here
> swearing up and down levels of initiation and
> consciousness of unfathomable degrees.
>
> Are you cuckoo? If 20 of you were conscious,
> not half of human suffering would be occurring.
>
> Nevermind that there are TOO MANY who claim to be here
> with "noble purposes" yet are ready to debase
> and slap down anything that isn't DEBASED to your level.
>
> In actuality what you are all interested is YOURSELVES.
>
> Your EGOs. That is ALL.
>
> And you will squash anything possessin consciousness.
>
> As you did to NN even, and hypocritically now you're starting
> to wave her "martyr flag".
>
>
> The same with Eryk Salvaggio who is bloody beaten black and blue,
> which is not what he was 2 years ago.
>
> Rhizome cripples 'artists". Not Rhizome.org.
> The mailing list.
>
> The only ones allowed to breathe are mediocre twits who fancy that
> anything they produce is "the bee's knees" and match up an enormous ego
> with it.
>
> Revolting and sickening.
>
> We are not a troll for not playing along, and for demonstrating this.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
Re: FLUXLIST: Re: RHIZOME_RAW: Joseph McElroy
> Now on to why you DISLIKE us (and hence the murderous idiotisms).
>
> There are two forces functioning in the human : yin and yang.
> When a human is DISCERNING, NOT OPEN TO SUGGESTIBILITY, and
> CONSCIOUS, s/he acts from a great dose of YANG MALE ENERGY.
>
> That is why you "dislike" males.
>
> Unbalanced to yin humans are suggestible, would go "wow" at anything,
> are manipulable and controllable, and moreso susceptible to DELUSION.
> PARTICULARLY LOWER EMOTONAL IMPULSES DELUSION. In such a state
> their ENERGY is also accessible to be "fed on" nor can they discern
> ART from TRASH.
YANG MALE ENERGY - opinionated, stubborn, and single-minded
YIN FEMALE ENGERGY - open, optimistic, collaborative, and imagitive
Who would like someone that is all YANG?
> Those MALES have never been the "problem".
Those MALES make the problems. And I frighten the shit out of you. I am that
mountain that you cannot overcome.
joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
frank + lyn - mc + El + roy
go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
CupcakeKleidoscope-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <death@zaphod.terminal.org>:
> On Thu, 19 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:
>
> > You confrontations, like spider webs in the face, dissolve under pressure.
> Spin
> > your webs on the weak, little spiderman. A spider does not "speak"
>
> Meaningless "symbolical" drivel.
>
> Nothing of the sort is occurring babycheeks.
>
> The "symbolism" that you attempt to peddle is simply more wishful
> hallucinations on behalf of your ego.
>
> Let's get back to the subject babycheeks. The CONCRET subject :
> you. Empty. Talentless. Egotistical.
>
> Now let's reveal the real_ reason why you're doing this:
>
> Because you are a leech.
>
> And what you "want" is attachment: You'll try and "get it"
> one way or another: first you'll try to peddle "love"
> and if you're REJECTED AS WORTHLESS which is what you ARE,
> you are going to make up some idiotic stories about
> how "we are wrong and you are fighting a righteous cause".
>
> Both flip side of the same impulse. YOU WANT ATTENTION AND ENERGY.
>
> And all of your "symbolizm" is attempting to delude your audience.
>
> Now on to why you DISLIKE us (and hence the murderous idiotisms).
>
> There are two forces functioning in the human : yin and yang.
> When a human is DISCERNING, NOT OPEN TO SUGGESTIBILITY, and
> CONSCIOUS, s/he acts from a great dose of YANG MALE ENERGY.
>
> That is why you "dislike" males.
>
> Unbalanced to yin humans are suggestible, would go "wow" at anything,
> are manipulable and controllable, and moreso susceptible to DELUSION.
> PARTICULARLY LOWER EMOTONAL IMPULSES DELUSION. In such a state
> their ENERGY is also accessible to be "fed on" nor can they discern
> ART from TRASH.
>
> What WE have pointed out about you is that you attempt to "use" art
> to peddle idiocy in order to put down, degrade, PUT HUMANS TO SLEEP
> and feed on their energy.
>
>
> This my dearest is not ART. This is the domain of a CONMAN.
>
> Specifically you attempt to use "words" and "symbolism"
> as mesmeric devices, exploiting a very naive fault in the
> unconscious human brain to "superimpose" things.
>
> It's "just like, just like". Babycheeks NOTHING IS JUST LIKE.
> EVERYTHING IS EXACTLY WHAT IT IS. Not "like" WHAT IT IS.
>
> TRUE_ symbolism is in the realm of those who can SENSE and PERCEIVE
> ENERGY DIRECTLY, and that requires CONSCIOUSNESS (which you lack
> completely).
>
> To put it in "your parlance" you're an idiotic wannabe.
>
> An ignorant, talentless, imbecilic, powerless + lifeless slave
> to ego LAZY idiotic New Yorker who thinks that having a "big attitude"
> and talking "symbolic trash" (you just don't get it, you just don't
> get it) is going to SELL your trash.
>
> You RIDE on the SURFACES OF IDEAS of _MALE LEADERS_ (and we don't
> mean genders here, we mean an energetic configuration in the spirit
> of humans) who ARE authorities, IDEAS which are not YOURS, nor do
> you have a CAPACITY to UNDERSTAND least of all USHER, BE OF SERVICE TO
> or COMPREHEND to any degree (least of all "create. ha).
>
> Those MALES have never been the "problem". And the only ones who
> see a "problem" with these beings are the weak, powerless, egotistical,
> talentless whores (again we don't mean women who get paid to have
> sex or have indiscriminant sex here) "like" yourself, who can only
> "shine" by a. leeching off others energy b. attempting to ingratiate
> themselves and satellite around actual magnetic talented personages
> and be it by being "students" or "inspired by" or etc. or c.
> "rebelling against".
>
> Your "problem" is that you're a weak and powerless shithead who couldn't
> STAND ON HIS OWN FOR TWO SECONDS FLAT.
>
> And hence your "bleating about community". Only a person who can
> STAND on his OWN can give anything to a "commmunity". And a community
> is a group of INDIVIDUALS. YOU need a community in order to
> "lose yourself" "feel a rush of power" (like most asleep idiots
> who have none of their own so they "lose themselves in the
> humaaableeeeeeeeeeeeeatinity "rush") and feed on energy.
>
> You don't give a fuck about the community, if it doesn't
> serve your purposes. You cannot CREATE a community.
> But you will always BLEAT the loudest in order to attract attention.
> You will make up all sorts of shite about being "misunderstood, fragile,
> persecuted, here to save the planet, driven by noble impulses, etc.).
>
> All talk babycheeks. All talk. SHIT.
>
> That is what you are.
>
> And not an artist. Most definitely.
>
> And we will rub your face in reality CONTINUOSLY.
>
> Now "bleat' again.
>
> Tell us about your NOBLE causes.
>
> And for God's sake don't try to peddle your verbal diarrhea as
> "meaningful". It isn't. There are no "spiderwebs." No spiders.
> No "melting". This ain't a kindergarten magic class.
>
> There are two forces functioning in the human : yin and yang.
> When a human is DISCERNING, NOT OPEN TO SUGGESTIBILITY, and
> CONSCIOUS, s/he acts from a great dose of YANG MALE ENERGY.
>
> That is why you "dislike" males.
>
> Unbalanced to yin humans are suggestible, would go "wow" at anything,
> are manipulable and controllable, and moreso susceptible to DELUSION.
> PARTICULARLY LOWER EMOTONAL IMPULSES DELUSION. In such a state
> their ENERGY is also accessible to be "fed on" nor can they discern
> ART from TRASH.
YANG MALE ENERGY - opinionated, stubborn, and single-minded
YIN FEMALE ENGERGY - open, optimistic, collaborative, and imagitive
Who would like someone that is all YANG?
> Those MALES have never been the "problem".
Those MALES make the problems. And I frighten the shit out of you. I am that
mountain that you cannot overcome.
joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
frank + lyn - mc + El + roy
go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
CupcakeKleidoscope-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <death@zaphod.terminal.org>:
> On Thu, 19 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:
>
> > You confrontations, like spider webs in the face, dissolve under pressure.
> Spin
> > your webs on the weak, little spiderman. A spider does not "speak"
>
> Meaningless "symbolical" drivel.
>
> Nothing of the sort is occurring babycheeks.
>
> The "symbolism" that you attempt to peddle is simply more wishful
> hallucinations on behalf of your ego.
>
> Let's get back to the subject babycheeks. The CONCRET subject :
> you. Empty. Talentless. Egotistical.
>
> Now let's reveal the real_ reason why you're doing this:
>
> Because you are a leech.
>
> And what you "want" is attachment: You'll try and "get it"
> one way or another: first you'll try to peddle "love"
> and if you're REJECTED AS WORTHLESS which is what you ARE,
> you are going to make up some idiotic stories about
> how "we are wrong and you are fighting a righteous cause".
>
> Both flip side of the same impulse. YOU WANT ATTENTION AND ENERGY.
>
> And all of your "symbolizm" is attempting to delude your audience.
>
> Now on to why you DISLIKE us (and hence the murderous idiotisms).
>
> There are two forces functioning in the human : yin and yang.
> When a human is DISCERNING, NOT OPEN TO SUGGESTIBILITY, and
> CONSCIOUS, s/he acts from a great dose of YANG MALE ENERGY.
>
> That is why you "dislike" males.
>
> Unbalanced to yin humans are suggestible, would go "wow" at anything,
> are manipulable and controllable, and moreso susceptible to DELUSION.
> PARTICULARLY LOWER EMOTONAL IMPULSES DELUSION. In such a state
> their ENERGY is also accessible to be "fed on" nor can they discern
> ART from TRASH.
>
> What WE have pointed out about you is that you attempt to "use" art
> to peddle idiocy in order to put down, degrade, PUT HUMANS TO SLEEP
> and feed on their energy.
>
>
> This my dearest is not ART. This is the domain of a CONMAN.
>
> Specifically you attempt to use "words" and "symbolism"
> as mesmeric devices, exploiting a very naive fault in the
> unconscious human brain to "superimpose" things.
>
> It's "just like, just like". Babycheeks NOTHING IS JUST LIKE.
> EVERYTHING IS EXACTLY WHAT IT IS. Not "like" WHAT IT IS.
>
> TRUE_ symbolism is in the realm of those who can SENSE and PERCEIVE
> ENERGY DIRECTLY, and that requires CONSCIOUSNESS (which you lack
> completely).
>
> To put it in "your parlance" you're an idiotic wannabe.
>
> An ignorant, talentless, imbecilic, powerless + lifeless slave
> to ego LAZY idiotic New Yorker who thinks that having a "big attitude"
> and talking "symbolic trash" (you just don't get it, you just don't
> get it) is going to SELL your trash.
>
> You RIDE on the SURFACES OF IDEAS of _MALE LEADERS_ (and we don't
> mean genders here, we mean an energetic configuration in the spirit
> of humans) who ARE authorities, IDEAS which are not YOURS, nor do
> you have a CAPACITY to UNDERSTAND least of all USHER, BE OF SERVICE TO
> or COMPREHEND to any degree (least of all "create. ha).
>
> Those MALES have never been the "problem". And the only ones who
> see a "problem" with these beings are the weak, powerless, egotistical,
> talentless whores (again we don't mean women who get paid to have
> sex or have indiscriminant sex here) "like" yourself, who can only
> "shine" by a. leeching off others energy b. attempting to ingratiate
> themselves and satellite around actual magnetic talented personages
> and be it by being "students" or "inspired by" or etc. or c.
> "rebelling against".
>
> Your "problem" is that you're a weak and powerless shithead who couldn't
> STAND ON HIS OWN FOR TWO SECONDS FLAT.
>
> And hence your "bleating about community". Only a person who can
> STAND on his OWN can give anything to a "commmunity". And a community
> is a group of INDIVIDUALS. YOU need a community in order to
> "lose yourself" "feel a rush of power" (like most asleep idiots
> who have none of their own so they "lose themselves in the
> humaaableeeeeeeeeeeeeatinity "rush") and feed on energy.
>
> You don't give a fuck about the community, if it doesn't
> serve your purposes. You cannot CREATE a community.
> But you will always BLEAT the loudest in order to attract attention.
> You will make up all sorts of shite about being "misunderstood, fragile,
> persecuted, here to save the planet, driven by noble impulses, etc.).
>
> All talk babycheeks. All talk. SHIT.
>
> That is what you are.
>
> And not an artist. Most definitely.
>
> And we will rub your face in reality CONTINUOSLY.
>
> Now "bleat' again.
>
> Tell us about your NOBLE causes.
>
> And for God's sake don't try to peddle your verbal diarrhea as
> "meaningful". It isn't. There are no "spiderwebs." No spiders.
> No "melting". This ain't a kindergarten magic class.
Re: monetizing net.art ... don't sell it ... rent it!
Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <death@zaphod.terminal.org>:
> And maybe you personally would acquaint yourself with a good and
> expensive Ladies Salon so that you don't get your desires confused,
> and learn not to expect humans to degrade themselves in order to
> "survive".
>
> But thena gain, so many ladies, so little time, and they are ALL EQUAL
> after all.
>
> Bleat.
Another fine missive from that MALE YANG LEADER who plans to whore is wife.
Tell us again how right you are.
joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
frank + lyn - mc + El + roy
go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
CupcakeKleidoscope-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> On Thu, 19 Dec 2002, David Goldschmidt wrote:
>
> > instead of selling it for thousands of dollars ... make it affordable.
>
> Cheap. Fast + kitsch. make it a #4 superSize.
>
> > rent access to your werks for a few days for a few bucks.
>
> Allow the artwork to be mistreated for cheap often.
>
> Tak.
>
> The "uncreative" wrote.
>
> > in effect ... there is no real difference between "selling" and "renting"
> in the digital world
>
> Actually there is. Huge difference.
> There is no 'digital world'.
> And 'art" does not revolve around "the digital world".
>
> In effect, you are so luvlungly suggesting that art be
> MOVED BY (passive, inactive, impotent) rather than MOVE
> or EXIST INDEPENDENTLY of 'the digital world".
>
> > ... it is a matter of semantics (or marketing).
>
> No it isn't.
>
> > consumers are used to renting videos for a few bucks (instead of buying).
>
> Consumers are accustomed. For a few bucks.
>
> > besides content (net.art, hollywood movies, etc.) is coming and going at
> > light speed.
>
> Net.art, hollywood movies.. it'z just the same.
> Cheap + easily "rentable" "for a few bucks" "to consumers"
> + "easily replaceable".
>
> > personally, i don't want to buy any of it if i can rent it (video
> > games, movies, etc) and then return it.
>
> And so net.art should "personally" "satisfy" "you"
> "for rent" for a "few bucks".
>
> > i can rent four movies for the price of buying one ...
>
> Two picassos for the price of one!. Hurrah.
>
> > why would i buy one experience when i can rent four for the same price.
>
> Why would you, indeed. Insatiable voyerism for increasingly
> cheaper trash.
>
> > owning content is becoming an outdated concept!!!
>
> No it isn't!!! No matter how much you scream it does!!!
> You are even so ignorant to realize that the issue you are
> addressing has been going on for 2000 years!!! Factually!!!
> And there have been always_ "those who say" that it's
> "becoming like this"!!! But it's all interlocked in a
> balancing mechanism!!!
>
> > (caveat: i still buy books).
>
> It'z much cheaper to watch. Thinking ist god. Voyeristic
> energy sapping ist king. The more you read, the more
> energy you need to "feed your brain" because you are running
> it inappropriately, too much, WAY TOO MUCH. So you muzt consume
> lotz of energy so you may read more so you must conzume more energy
> fazter + fazter + fazter.. Personally I do enjoy "renting"
> two whores for the price ov one.
>
> > besides even when one buys content ... you don't really OWN it.
> > the copyright holder is the one that really OWNS it!
>
> That's horrible. Kill the copyright laws, now!
> And the copyright owner. Now!!! Two murders for the price of one!!!
>
> We rent guns, cheaply!!!
>
> > rhizome (or some other clever third party) should develop a kind of
> "newmedia access pass" (akin to the blockbuster video membership card) that
> RENTS net.art.
>
> Blockbuster as a Joseph Beuys. Someone run with it. Make a "career".
>
> > i truly hope that net.artists figure out a way to get paid for their
> effort. it would really help the genre grow and develop.
> >
> Me too. Like maybe the audience waking up
> and finally realizing that art is not Blockbuster entertainment,
> and that one GETS what one PAYS FOR.
>
> And maybe the audience who hasn't learned to appreciate life + reality
> on levels beyond hamburger consummation and cheap self-destructive
> "rebellious" "kill daddy" 2 for the price of one
> pornographic magazine reproductive diarrhea sex would stop
> attempting to dictate to art and LISTEN.
>
>
>
>
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
> And maybe you personally would acquaint yourself with a good and
> expensive Ladies Salon so that you don't get your desires confused,
> and learn not to expect humans to degrade themselves in order to
> "survive".
>
> But thena gain, so many ladies, so little time, and they are ALL EQUAL
> after all.
>
> Bleat.
Another fine missive from that MALE YANG LEADER who plans to whore is wife.
Tell us again how right you are.
joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
frank + lyn - mc + El + roy
go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
CupcakeKleidoscope-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> On Thu, 19 Dec 2002, David Goldschmidt wrote:
>
> > instead of selling it for thousands of dollars ... make it affordable.
>
> Cheap. Fast + kitsch. make it a #4 superSize.
>
> > rent access to your werks for a few days for a few bucks.
>
> Allow the artwork to be mistreated for cheap often.
>
> Tak.
>
> The "uncreative" wrote.
>
> > in effect ... there is no real difference between "selling" and "renting"
> in the digital world
>
> Actually there is. Huge difference.
> There is no 'digital world'.
> And 'art" does not revolve around "the digital world".
>
> In effect, you are so luvlungly suggesting that art be
> MOVED BY (passive, inactive, impotent) rather than MOVE
> or EXIST INDEPENDENTLY of 'the digital world".
>
> > ... it is a matter of semantics (or marketing).
>
> No it isn't.
>
> > consumers are used to renting videos for a few bucks (instead of buying).
>
> Consumers are accustomed. For a few bucks.
>
> > besides content (net.art, hollywood movies, etc.) is coming and going at
> > light speed.
>
> Net.art, hollywood movies.. it'z just the same.
> Cheap + easily "rentable" "for a few bucks" "to consumers"
> + "easily replaceable".
>
> > personally, i don't want to buy any of it if i can rent it (video
> > games, movies, etc) and then return it.
>
> And so net.art should "personally" "satisfy" "you"
> "for rent" for a "few bucks".
>
> > i can rent four movies for the price of buying one ...
>
> Two picassos for the price of one!. Hurrah.
>
> > why would i buy one experience when i can rent four for the same price.
>
> Why would you, indeed. Insatiable voyerism for increasingly
> cheaper trash.
>
> > owning content is becoming an outdated concept!!!
>
> No it isn't!!! No matter how much you scream it does!!!
> You are even so ignorant to realize that the issue you are
> addressing has been going on for 2000 years!!! Factually!!!
> And there have been always_ "those who say" that it's
> "becoming like this"!!! But it's all interlocked in a
> balancing mechanism!!!
>
> > (caveat: i still buy books).
>
> It'z much cheaper to watch. Thinking ist god. Voyeristic
> energy sapping ist king. The more you read, the more
> energy you need to "feed your brain" because you are running
> it inappropriately, too much, WAY TOO MUCH. So you muzt consume
> lotz of energy so you may read more so you must conzume more energy
> fazter + fazter + fazter.. Personally I do enjoy "renting"
> two whores for the price ov one.
>
> > besides even when one buys content ... you don't really OWN it.
> > the copyright holder is the one that really OWNS it!
>
> That's horrible. Kill the copyright laws, now!
> And the copyright owner. Now!!! Two murders for the price of one!!!
>
> We rent guns, cheaply!!!
>
> > rhizome (or some other clever third party) should develop a kind of
> "newmedia access pass" (akin to the blockbuster video membership card) that
> RENTS net.art.
>
> Blockbuster as a Joseph Beuys. Someone run with it. Make a "career".
>
> > i truly hope that net.artists figure out a way to get paid for their
> effort. it would really help the genre grow and develop.
> >
> Me too. Like maybe the audience waking up
> and finally realizing that art is not Blockbuster entertainment,
> and that one GETS what one PAYS FOR.
>
> And maybe the audience who hasn't learned to appreciate life + reality
> on levels beyond hamburger consummation and cheap self-destructive
> "rebellious" "kill daddy" 2 for the price of one
> pornographic magazine reproductive diarrhea sex would stop
> attempting to dictate to art and LISTEN.
>
>
>
>
> + ti esrever dna ti pilf nwod gniht ym tup
> -> post: list@rhizome.org
> -> questions: info@rhizome.org
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
Re: Re: An editing job for the ages
Quoting "-IID42 Kandinskij @27+" <death@zaphod.terminal.org>:
> On Sat, 21 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:
>
> > Wally, while you seem sincere in your passion, you also seem more
> determined to
> > quash opposing viewpoints than in constructive dialog.
>
> There is no such thing as "constructive dialog".
> The nature of Babylon is death.
Two people can engage in a dialog at which they just throw insults at each
other an insist upon the "truth" of their position (such as you do), or they
can engage in a dialog in which they realize they have opposing positions, yet
are willing to discuss alternatives that might bring about mutually acceptable
outcomes. In business parlance, this is called win-win negotiating. From my
observations of you, you either "win" or run away.
>
> > Multiple worldviews are GOOD
>
> GOOD? As in MORAL? As in JESUS?
> There are no "multiple worldviews".
> This is a meaningless phrase.
Worldview - the mental construct that people use to understand and participate
in their environment, usually encompassing as much of the world of which they
are aware. Any world view is incomplete as no person has a complete awareness
of the world. Thus, recognizing and accepting/participating with other world
views creates a more complete construct...this is GOOD. Forcing everybody to
accept your personal worldview is BAD - it creates a less complete construct.
>
> Besides, when will you stop waving DEATH around like
> some boogeyman? Everyone DIES. Humans are born to DIE.
>
So we should all march and jump off a cliff? The reason we get togethor in
little groups is help each other survive as long as possible. Then rules
develop to help the groups exist. So - an individual's (premature) death
represents a failure of the group. Waving around DEATH is confronting a
group with the possibility of its failure. The "liberal left" considers its
group to be much broader than the "conservative right", and the DEATH of
'innocents' on either side of conflict are seen as a failure of the "liberal
left" group, while the "conservative right" view it as necessary to protect
the survival of members of its narrowly defined group.
joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
frank + lyn - mc + El + roy
go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
CupcakeKleidoscope-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Q
> On Sat, 21 Dec 2002, joseph (yes) wrote:
>
> > Wally, while you seem sincere in your passion, you also seem more
> determined to
> > quash opposing viewpoints than in constructive dialog.
>
> There is no such thing as "constructive dialog".
> The nature of Babylon is death.
Two people can engage in a dialog at which they just throw insults at each
other an insist upon the "truth" of their position (such as you do), or they
can engage in a dialog in which they realize they have opposing positions, yet
are willing to discuss alternatives that might bring about mutually acceptable
outcomes. In business parlance, this is called win-win negotiating. From my
observations of you, you either "win" or run away.
>
> > Multiple worldviews are GOOD
>
> GOOD? As in MORAL? As in JESUS?
> There are no "multiple worldviews".
> This is a meaningless phrase.
Worldview - the mental construct that people use to understand and participate
in their environment, usually encompassing as much of the world of which they
are aware. Any world view is incomplete as no person has a complete awareness
of the world. Thus, recognizing and accepting/participating with other world
views creates a more complete construct...this is GOOD. Forcing everybody to
accept your personal worldview is BAD - it creates a less complete construct.
>
> Besides, when will you stop waving DEATH around like
> some boogeyman? Everyone DIES. Humans are born to DIE.
>
So we should all march and jump off a cliff? The reason we get togethor in
little groups is help each other survive as long as possible. Then rules
develop to help the groups exist. So - an individual's (premature) death
represents a failure of the group. Waving around DEATH is confronting a
group with the possibility of its failure. The "liberal left" considers its
group to be much broader than the "conservative right", and the DEATH of
'innocents' on either side of conflict are seen as a failure of the "liberal
left" group, while the "conservative right" view it as necessary to protect
the survival of members of its narrowly defined group.
joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
frank + lyn - mc + El + roy
go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
CupcakeKleidoscope-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
Q
Re: Re: An editing job for the ages
Quoting Wally Keeler <poetburo@sympatico.ca>:
> Absolutely NOT. This is simply imaginary on your part. I certainly respond
> to viewpoints, and my comments are critical of those particular viewpoints.
> I also consider it constructive to point out that the emporer has no
> clothes. That includes the dissident pointing out that Mugabe has no
> clothes, that Bush has his fly open, that peace activist hurt their own
> cause. That i s constructive.
Well, it is pretty easy to go around pointing out what is wrong with someone
else's position. However, it is much more constructive to understand the
objectives and aims of all participants and then go about building a mutually
beneficial outcome.
joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
frank + lyn - mc + El + roy
go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
CupcakeKleidoscope-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
> Absolutely NOT. This is simply imaginary on your part. I certainly respond
> to viewpoints, and my comments are critical of those particular viewpoints.
> I also consider it constructive to point out that the emporer has no
> clothes. That includes the dissident pointing out that Mugabe has no
> clothes, that Bush has his fly open, that peace activist hurt their own
> cause. That i s constructive.
Well, it is pretty easy to go around pointing out what is wrong with someone
else's position. However, it is much more constructive to understand the
objectives and aims of all participants and then go about building a mutually
beneficial outcome.
joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
frank + lyn - mc + El + roy
go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309
SUBSCRIBE TO OUR NEWSLETTER CUPCAKEKALEIDOSCOPE - send email to
CupcakeKleidoscope-subscribe@yahoogroups.com