User:Eleanorg/2.1/work in progress: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
Line 12: | Line 12: | ||
* Proposal: zine on consent, content generated on the fly [[File:EmbedSketch1-page1.png]] | * Proposal: zine on consent, content generated on the fly [[File:EmbedSketch1-page1.png]] | ||
was going to expand this into a magazine format, where you have bits of content hosted in different places. but it changes the subject position of the host if they know what they're hosting, so i needed to look more into what this position is. what are the motivations, pleasures and dilemmas of transmitting other ppl's content? | |||
this relates to my own role as 'facilitator' (like a curator but less enamored of hierarchical control). trying to invite participants to be facilitators as well, and to reflect on this 'dual' attitude of Assertiveness and Neutrality (see Seeds briefing at http://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/free/shortfacilitation) | |||
Thinking about a tool for discussion of Consent. Need a tool that combines both: | |||
* the ethical position of endorsing consensual relations over nonconsensual ones | |||
* the ambivalence of endorsing 'consent' while recognizing that individuals aren't autonomous | |||
So I've been seeing how this subjectivity manifests in various social set-ups, where the preliminary task is to 'transmit the content of others': | |||
==First experiments== | ==First experiments== | ||
* Photocopied editions | * Photocopied editions | ||
:: - A single book made multiple by the differing tastes of the copiers [[file:cataloguesOpen.JPG]] | :: - A single book made multiple by the differing tastes of the copiers [[file:cataloguesOpen.JPG]] | ||
* Transcribers | * Transcribers | ||
:: - A single text split across multiple people, dependent upon their commitment to accuracy. | :: - A single text split across multiple people, dependent upon their commitment to accuracy. | ||
Line 32: | Line 42: | ||
What's interesting here is how it questions autonomous agency when we start to speak others' words - authorship/agency becomes confused. | What's interesting here is how it questions autonomous agency when we start to speak others' words - authorship/agency becomes confused. | ||
=== | ===More experiments with broadcasting others=== | ||
Aymeric said this idea of 'transmitting others' was too vague. So, brought it back to networked publishing. | Aymeric said this idea of 'transmitting others' was too vague. So, brought it back to networked publishing. | ||
Line 45: | Line 55: | ||
===Where Next=== | ===Where Next=== | ||
* Better understand P2P transmission models; role of individuals and how they relate to trackers/indexes. | * Better understand P2P transmission models; role of individuals and how they relate to trackers/indexes. | ||
so, things I'd like to keep from these experiments: | |||
* Pleasure of seeing content from others appearing/changing | |||
* Practice at listening to others/getting beyond personal opinion | |||
* The challenge of hosting uncomfortable/unpredictable material | |||
* Confusion over attribution of the content | |||
* Different versions (Eg, printed editions) with minor variations | |||
Things that didn't work so well that I'll leave out/change: | |||
* 'open editing' interfaces that encourage purely formal experimentation/mashups | |||
* ability to 'fork' every time a disagreement happens - multiplicity of versions without a demand for solidarity | |||
* Lack of a stake in the content itself (eg Image Ring), encouraging spam/jokes. | |||
Where next: | |||
* Figure out which technologies best serve the above aims | |||
:: understand P2P transmission models/protocols better | |||
:: learn more about 'post-digital' printing/publishing models - porous books |
Revision as of 18:48, 18 November 2012
Prev work
(and back to...
- Open Sauce
- Play!Fight!)
Themes:
- -many subjectivities called to collaborate/cohere
- -solidarity called for even with things we may disagree with.
was going to expand this into a magazine format, where you have bits of content hosted in different places. but it changes the subject position of the host if they know what they're hosting, so i needed to look more into what this position is. what are the motivations, pleasures and dilemmas of transmitting other ppl's content?
this relates to my own role as 'facilitator' (like a curator but less enamored of hierarchical control). trying to invite participants to be facilitators as well, and to reflect on this 'dual' attitude of Assertiveness and Neutrality (see Seeds briefing at http://www.seedsforchange.org.uk/free/shortfacilitation)
Thinking about a tool for discussion of Consent. Need a tool that combines both:
- the ethical position of endorsing consensual relations over nonconsensual ones
- the ambivalence of endorsing 'consent' while recognizing that individuals aren't autonomous
So I've been seeing how this subjectivity manifests in various social set-ups, where the preliminary task is to 'transmit the content of others':
First experiments
- Photocopied editions
- Transcribers
- - A single text split across multiple people, dependent upon their commitment to accuracy.
Residency
Expanding beyond digital realm. Concern shifted from Hosting to Dissemination. Looked at diverse ways of disseminating the views of others.
What's interesting here is how it questions autonomous agency when we start to speak others' words - authorship/agency becomes confused.
More experiments with broadcasting others
Aymeric said this idea of 'transmitting others' was too vague. So, brought it back to networked publishing.
Tried out existing method (embedding) for testing willingness to 'broadcast together'
- Placard generator < placards! >
Learning new methods of transmitting the words of others.
Moving towards: publishing model incorporating the most interesting aspects of the above experiments, probably with more emphasis on P2P technologies. Idea of text as multiple not singular <Marit M - annagrammatical books>
Where Next
- Better understand P2P transmission models; role of individuals and how they relate to trackers/indexes.
so, things I'd like to keep from these experiments:
- Pleasure of seeing content from others appearing/changing
- Practice at listening to others/getting beyond personal opinion
- The challenge of hosting uncomfortable/unpredictable material
- Confusion over attribution of the content
- Different versions (Eg, printed editions) with minor variations
Things that didn't work so well that I'll leave out/change:
- 'open editing' interfaces that encourage purely formal experimentation/mashups
- ability to 'fork' every time a disagreement happens - multiplicity of versions without a demand for solidarity
- Lack of a stake in the content itself (eg Image Ring), encouraging spam/jokes.
Where next:
- Figure out which technologies best serve the above aims
:: understand P2P transmission models/protocols better :: learn more about 'post-digital' printing/publishing models - porous books