Re: <nettime> Pruning and gardening

[Juergen Fenn via Nettime-tmp <nettime-tmp@mail.ljudmila.org>]

Paul,

thanks for elaborating on your plans. I'm also quite grateful that there
will still be a Nettime-l in the future which I have been lurking, or
even studying, and, if time permits, taking part for some 20 years.

I also second that you please keep the existing community together, as
this is a time of falling apart rather than building or re-building
social structures.

If you think there is anything I can do to help Nettime carry on would
you please let me know.

Best,
Jürgen.

--
Jürgen Fenn, Neu-Isenburg
http://juergenfenn.de/


Am 15.07.23 um 03:33 Uhr schrieb paul van der walt via Nettime-tmp:
> Hey all,
>
> I wanted to reassure folks - tl;dr: if you're receiving this email,
> you'll receive "new nettime" emails! :)
>
> We (and please correct me if i'm misrepresenting things, other mods)
> have no intention of dropping folks off the list.  I'd like to clarify
> what the intended course of action is:
>
> * add all current subscribers of nettime-tmp to nettime-l when  it's ready,
>
> * send out an announcement with the new list details,
>
> * try to find folks we might've missed, and subscribe them, too  <--
> this one deserves some explanation.
>
> From what i understand Felix explained, the reason we don't have a
> "canonical, full" list of nettime subscribers, is because due to spam
> and delivery issues over the course of time, Mailman will have
> auto-unsubscribed people in some circumstances.  These recipients will
> necessarily have been missed when instantiating nettime-tmp, and we want
> to at least make an effort to try and figure out who might've been
> unsubscribed in this fashion.  I'm hoping there might be logs, if not,
> i'm thinking that scouring the archives of the past year or two might be
> another source of email addresses.  The risk there of course is that we
> might pick up addresses of folks who have purposely unsubscribed, and
> might perceive it as "spammy" if we resubscribed them.  But such is
> life, and i guess it's the best we can do in the circumstances.
>
> But rest assured, there are no plans to "prune" folks for inactivity. 
> Lurking is acceptable and welcome - i know i did it for a while! :)
>
> And as an aside, i did want to say that it's heart-warming to see folks
> coming out of the woodwork expressing enthusiasm to continue receiving
> nettime-l, even if not everybody has time or inclination to contribute. 
> I also perceive a shift in that it seems lately we're allowing a lot of
> space for the "human" side of nettime -- expressing that we value it,
> that we value the connections made through it, etc.  I think that's
> great.  At one point someone (was it Felix or Menno?) said that nettime
> had a bit of a forbidding "academic" aura, which i can understand.  My
> personal feeling is that being more free in our "meta-conversation" for
> want of a better term, actually goes a fair way to reestablishing the
> humanity of this community's participants.
>
> Thanks everyone, keep well,
>
> p.
>
> PS: I'm based in Naarm Melbourne, Australia and am always happy for a
> coffee catchup!
> #  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
> #  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
> #  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
> #  more info:
> https://mail.ljudmila.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-tmp
> #  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org
> #  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject:

#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: https://mail.ljudmila.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nettime-tmp
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org
#  @nettime_bot tweets mail w/ sender unless #ANON is in Subject: