Subject: MAX Digest - 8 Oct 1998 to 9 Oct 1998 - Special issue (#1998-27)
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 17:02:54 -0400
From: Automatic digest processor 
Reply-To: MAX - Interactive Music/Multimedia Standard Environments
     
To: Recipients of MAX digests 

There are 15 messages totalling 718 lines in this issue.

Topics in this special issue:

  1. Antiorp, since you brought it up
  2. (ahem...) (2)
  3. imbalance@BERLIN.SNAFU.DE
  4. Champ d'Action - RealAudio
  5. The unfortunate (LAST) antiorp response
  6. fwd: p0c707
  7. [7-11] gated communities (fwd)
  8. MAX Digest - 8 Oct 1998 (#1998-26) (2)
  9. Video Sampler
 10. The inevitable has happened.
 11. Antiorp
 12. 2 new lists...
 13. MAX Digest - 7 Oct 1998 to 8 Oct 1998 - Special issue (#1998-25)

McGill is running a new version of LISTSERV (1.8d on Windows NT).
Information is available on the WEB at http://www.mcgill.ca/cc/listserv

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 9 Oct 1998 00:41:31 -0400
From:    Nicholas Longo <71477.2332@COMPUSERVE.COM>
Subject: Re: Antiorp, since you brought it up

<
Subject: (ahem...)

um. hi.
just signed on to the list (used to be here a while ago, got bogged down
and split... now i'm trying to seriously dig in...).
sorry to see you caught the antiorp virus. effective, isn't it? eats at
least ten times its own weight in bandwidth.
anyway... will someone just tell me where the bleedin' faq and archive are,
before i start launching in with the stupid questions?
thanks much.

*                SEMIOTECHNICS - eric harnden (ronin)                *
*   harnden@clark.net - www.mcn.org/b/harnden - www.radiantslab.com  *
*  - Entropy Eventually Wins And I Like To Be On The Winning Side -  *

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 9 Oct 1998 01:09:53 -0400
From:    Stephen Kay 
Subject: (ahem...)

>um. hi.
>just signed on to the list (used to be here a while ago, got bogged down=

>and split... now i'm trying to seriously dig in...).
>sorry to see you caught the antiorp virus. effective, isn't it? eats at
>least ten times its own weight in bandwidth.

Thanks for the laugh.  Kinda sets it in perspective, when someone
arrives from outside and already knows the hell that antiorp has =

achieved on other lists.

>anyway... will someone just tell me where the bleedin' faq and archive
are,
>before i start launching in with the stupid questions?
>thanks much.

Don't think we have a FAQ (too bad), but here's the URL for the archive:

(Thanks, Jon)

http://www2.cybernex.net/~jonwitte/max/welcome.html

Stephen Kay

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 9 Oct 1998 09:28:19 +0200
From:    Mats Claesson 
Subject: imbalance@BERLIN.SNAFU.DE

Robert Henke 
Wrote:
>I tried to do kind of granular stuff with msp but i have not found a good
>solution

That depends on what you mean by granular stuff. Groove can be used to some
extent.
Using loop and sending new loop points works pretty nice since David sent
me a new groove object, the one you have may not work becuse of howe groove
used to receve new looppoints.
Pitch is controlled in the usual manner and... well... its a simple
solution but what i intended to us it for ( a 4 voice granulation of a
spoken voice) it works just fine.

Im new to the list and i dont know if I freely can distribute the new
groove object. I just got it a week ago........

Mats c
=46=F8rste amanuensis i elektrofoni
Norges Musikkh=F8gskole

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 9 Oct 1998 09:48:44 +0200
From:    "Dr. Karlheinz Essl" 
Subject: Champ d'Action - RealAudio

Dear MAXers!

CHAMP D'ACTION - a meta-composition for computer-controlled ensemble
(utilizing MAX) was recently performed at the RadioKulturHaus in Vienna. A
RealAudio recording of this concert is available at:

        http://www.essl.at/works/champ.html

Cheers, and happy MAXin'

   Dr. Karlheinz Essl - Composer
   Vienna / Austria
   Studio for Advanced Music & Media Technology
   http://www.essl.at/

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 9 Oct 1998 09:05:02 -0000
From:    Nick Rothwell 
Subject: Re: The unfortunate (LAST) antiorp response

> I live in a democracy, to me this means that the majority determines
> how, where, what, when and why things will happen. This means that
> if the majority votes against me, I have to accept it.

This issue has come up on each of the lists that Antiorp has been on
and been removed from. (There are a few.)

This mailing list is not a democracy because it has a moderator, like
most mailing lists. In the end, people vote with their feet. Anyone
who disagrees with what Chris did can leave and start their own
list. He's free (within the confines of the McGill's charter, I guess)
to do with it as he will. I'm happy with that, and I'm still here.

Antiorp's album is interesting, and has some worthwhile material on
it. On the other hand, if he turns up here again I'll just procmail
him.

--
        Nick Rothwell, CASSIEL              contemporary dance projects
        http://www.cassiel.com              music synthesis and control

  You've read the rant, now buy the album:
http://www.cassiel.com/listenmove/

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 9 Oct 1998 11:56:53 +0200
From:    Guy Van Belle 
Subject: fwd: p0c707

Dear all:

With lots of interest I followed the new anti-antiorp action.
I had discussions with moderators of other lists about this
in the past and I don't want to run into that again.

But all these personal interventions are most of the time an
underestimation of the self-regulating properties
of email lists (why do spams stop?). The cause for all this is
probably due to the crusader-syndrome (aka rescue rangers syndrome).

Often the timely excitation ends with an exclusion of members,
a technique proven historically to be very unsuccessful,
see the surrealist case & Andre Breton, to avoid all religious
examples...

The systematic denial of access to communication and information
for people who do not conform to standards and objectives of the happy
few, whatever the background is, is a very dubious activity, and risks to
cause bigger discussions (freedom! aha!).

Since we are also suffering from the crusader-syndrome (aka rescue rangers
syndrome), and now that the max-list is saved from impure objectives,
at the same time all these questions remain unanswered properly,
        (here in Belgium we have a history in political debates
        that don't allow the real participants to take part in the debate,
        "not to blur objectives")
.... we decided to give antiorp the possibility to communicate from one
of our servers: go there! go there! and read!
ftp://quixot.rug.ac.be/MP%26G_11H.dbh%21/antiorp/sentimentz_null-binbuf.html

> >they seem to have a bit of a hangover
> >are you still getting this?
> jas. takk++.
> d!sz = rezponsz 2 serta!n postz.
> plz 4ward 2 max-l sensor bocz
> v!elen dank. bzzp.
>
ftp://quixot.rug.ac.be/MP%26G_11H.dbh%21/antiorp/sentimentz_null-binbuf.html
>
>
>
> =cw4t7abs

Thanks,
gz

ps _ Mr. Chris Murtagh, there are people out here who resent your decision
to ban antiorp from the max-l. Don't be such a damn schoolmaster and
subscribe antiorp again! This issue is about the right to be
involved in information as well! Will you go on banning anyone from the
list who doesn't behave? bweeek!

Advancements in technology have meant that all manner of equipment is now
available for reappropriation by whoever has the time to learn how to use
redefine, misuse and rewire it          http://simsim.rug.ac.be/dbonanzah

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 9 Oct 1998 12:05:14 +0100
From:    Guy Van Belle 
Subject: [7-11] gated communities (fwd)

This message is an appendix for my prev msg
gz

>---------- Forwarded message ----------
>Date: Fri, 9 Oct 1998 11:45:16 +0200 (CEST)
>From: Josephine Bosma 
>Reply-To: 7-11@mila.ljudmila.org
>To: nettime-l@desk.nl, XCHANGE@re-lab.net, list@rhizome.org
>Cc: 7-11@ljudmila.org
>Subject: [7-11] gated communities
>
>This mail is a protest against the removal of antiorp from the
>three mailinglists this mail is going to. At the same time it
>is a contemplation of what these lists mean to me and maybe to
>others. What is it, that people get so uptight over having to
>delete mails. I am sure they delete most of the other postings
>too without ever reading them. Do we have the lists we have like
>we have 'the right newspaper' or magazine? Just to give ourselves
>the idea we are on the right track, because at least we know the
>headers of the latest thread that was produced by some people that
>know what is best for us?
>
>The problem is complex because it has been lying around for too
>long. The problem is that we never really talk about the tool and
>manner we chose to communicate with. Nettime listowners once said:
>it is not useful to discuss the list on the list. Why is it not
>useful? Is it useful to let a list bleed to death, miss loads of
>chances to enhance a discussion and miss chances to understand better
>what we are doing?
>
>The three lists are very different, but all seem to have the pretention
>to be some sort of community that is heading for the best there is
>to offer in the particular subject it is dedicated to. The lists are
>supposed to be critical and in search of new paths that fit with
>the medium it is situated in. I think throwing someone like antiorp
>off is not going to help with this. I was in favor of throwing people
>off in the past, for different reasons, but I think now this is
>wrong. It narrows the scope of the list in an unexceptable way.
>
>Take for example the reason why nettime moderation started: the
>namespace debate became so faul that people told others to "go in the
>corner and piss on themselves". Was the person who wrote this
>removed? No. He is a friend who just lost control for a moment.
>Another example: on xchange a guy hangs out who has been seriously
>harrassing me in real life, and who has been making problems in Linz
>for someone else, a real life sucker. Is he removed? No. He is a
>friend who lost control for some moments.
>All fine. But to remove a dilletant, one of the few, if not the only,
>listpunks, because of a different way of communicating sucks.
>Especially as this person obviously is very young, and on top of
>that, knows the medium very well. From corresponding with it I know
>it certainly has more layers then simply cursing and insulting.
>I will include a mail from another list about this, which I liked
>a lot, and which has respect for antiorp.
>
>What can you see reading some of the discussions that happened on
>other lists where antiorp got into trouble? First of all, there
>are many dicussions about the yes or no of throwing someone off.
>This is the first thing that bothers me: it never happened on
>either nettime, xchange or rhizome. I would not be surprised
>if people did not even know it was going on. Moderators on all
>three lists seem to work from the rumor that "this person has been
>causing problems everywhere, so let's throw him off immediately".
>Then on the other lists people acknowledge antiorps 'occasional'
>intelligent and mindstirring comments, and most of all its
>excellent code writing, especially with soundsoftware.
>But the most important thing one notices is the extremely bourgois
>posts of people who even admit never to post, but who now -have-
>to say how relieved they are antiorp is gone. I do not want to be
>part of this attitude, of this narrowminded, clean designer office
>crowd. (no offence meant to openminded people in clean designer
>offices)
>
>I have been very displeased when the moderation button went on on
>nettime. As I have written allready, I want an open list. It is
>ridiculous that after a year (!) of moderation now the listowners
>have still not been able to find a solution for this problem.
>There have been several discussions, both in email and 'real life',
>in which the listowners themselves proposed experiments with
>an open list and a digest, maybe even a usenet group. The fact that
>the majority of listmembers are lurkers who prefer their dinner
>chewed, does not mean that the magazine/editor format is the most
>suitable for what we want. But then of course: what do we want?
>I wonder about that a lot lately. Net.criticism, mediatheory,
>cyberfeminism, net.radio: in what way is the discussion around these
>topics dominated by people in powerful positions outside the net,
>who have built their careers on new media research? Why not let
>more radical, new blood in?
>
>I admit: there is probably no medium that has offered more to its
>'audience' to participate then the net and its mailinglists. I
>seriously doubt the way they are developing now though. Spin offs
>of nettime like xchange and rhizome (yes) are gradually copying
>the way nettime is developing. I was very surprised to hear about
>Rhizome throwing of antiorp, as I know Rachel Green is in for
>experiments and letting the list develop in its way. She likes
>the noise on R-raw, and has even in the past made me like it too.
>With xchange, the youngest, it seems even more sad: there are rarely
>more posts there then announcements of web.casts, and when xchange
>was invited for Ars Electronica the preparation for this went off list
>completely, in the hands of a few. This far even nettime never went.
>xchange owners are a bit too gentle in some ways and very hard in
>others. Lack of experience? Too busy? While I think antiorp fits best
>there!
>I am not saying all the people behind this are fascists (antiorp
>would say that for sure), it seems more like a lack of good discussion
>and openness. This lack came to be because of the incredible speed
>careers have been taking off in the fields of mediatheory, art on
>the net and net.radio. There seems to be some kind of panic reaction
>coming from it, the fear to loose control. This seems the main reason
>why people react so fast and hard to antiorp. It is a human reaction,
>and "humansukz". I like antiorp. I feel like that too often.
>
>It might be good for both us and antiorp to live in peace. Why throw
>away such a talent and keep so much overestimated academic bullshit?
>(no offence meant to all relevant academic texts)
>
>regards
>
>
>
>J
>
>
>--from MAX Digest
>
>Date:    Wed, 7 Oct 1998 18:23:29 +0000
>From:    Carlton Joseph Wilkinson
>Subject: Antiorp, since you brought it up
>
>It's your list, friend, you do whatever you want with it, but I for one
>find your actions a helluva lot more offensive than his. I would have
>spoken up sooner, but I had no idea this was even under debate.
>
>I'll give you and the members of the list four points to consider,
>ranked as to how important I think they are. Having done this, I will
>drop the subject, at least for now.
>
>1. He has earned my respect and continues to earn my respect by not
>caving into shallow, routine standards like those you are trying to
>apply here and by continuing to be exactly who is. If he had said, or if
>he ever says, "I'm sorry, I'll try to keep my posts on the subject from
>now on" -- my respect for him would vanish. Worse, with that one cave-in
>he'ld have shown us that the antiorp we all knew up to then had all been
>nothing but a disposible shtick. My sense is it isn't a shtick. It is a
>deliberate choice to live a worthwhile life based on firm principles.
>It's a culture of choice, like a religion, that he can't back away from
>without losing himself. In that choice, he risks ( and knows it) the
>rejection that you just handed him.
>
>2. Antiorp's ideas are only ideas, they're not bombs, they're not
>furniture he's asking you to store. They're ideas that you can ignore if
>you want or ponder if you want or argue with or about if you want. They
>are ideas that stem directly from the conversations on this list and
>therefore are relevant to this list.
>
>3. You imply that you've given him every opportunity to participate. But
>you haven't. You've given him every opportunity to conform--which on
>principle he can't do. His participation requires his voice, and his
>thorny, difficult speech and confrontational, sometimes derisive style.
>
>4. It seems right, what you've done, but it's not right. The illusion of
>rightness is you hiding behind a common, thoughtless acceptance of
>standards of how a community should operate in its own best interests.
>But I tell you, order is not always in a community's best interests.
>Let's say that again: Order is not always in a community's best
>interests. The discourse needs to be preserved--we need to be challenged
>on our basic assumptions, not in some "appropriate," rarified
>philosophical forum, but where and as differences occur.
>
>--Carlton Joseph Wilkinson
>
>"If this is the case, and you cannot respect the majority of people's
>wishes, I shall have to ask you to leave." --Christopher Murtagh
>
>"reszpekt = bas!s ov ras!zm. fasc!zm. kap!tal!zm"--=cw4t7abs
>
>
>
>
>
>
>*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> what
>**** Command 'what' not recognized.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> why
>**** Command 'why' not recognized.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>

_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._.
       [e r r o r = h o m e] http://simsim.rug.ac.be/staff/guy
       [anti_analog:hit_men] ftp://quixot.rug.ac.be  *\HK/YFCF
_._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._._.

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 9 Oct 1998 04:49:46 -0800
From:    Gene Schwartz 
Subject: Re: MAX Digest - 8 Oct 1998 (#1998-26)

Chris Murtaugh wrote:

 I live in a democracy, to me this means
>that the majority determines how, where, what, when and why things will
>happen. This means that if the majority votes against me, I have to accept
>it. If you cannot accept this, then I'm sorry, we do not have the common
>ground on which to actually have a logical, philosophical debate on this
>subject.
>

Well, there are some instances where we don't automatically assume that the
majority opinion should rule. If the majority votes an injustice against a
minority group, for instance.

In this case, those who object to antiorp's removal, (if they are in the
minority - I don't recall a vote), are of the view that this action was
wrong. I would hope that you would accept this as valid philosophical
ground for a debate, even if you don't want one for more pragmatic reasons.

>From: "David Crandall" , on 10/8/98 3:23 PM:
>>At first I was inclined to reply to your email in a sympathetic,
>>head-shaking, it's-too-bad vein, but after sleeping on it, I must strongly
>>disagree with your points.
>
>By sleeping on it do you mean a 5 minute nap? This was sent to you this
>morning. My thoughts are that you don't want to consider other people's
>points of view, and the time it took you to 'sleep on it' is/was the time
>it took you to come up with this plan of attack.
>

I consider your point of view. I consider it to be incorrect.

>
>>Antiorp isn't (wasn't) hindering anything, but our ignorance of what we're
>about certainly is.
>
>Speak for yourself. I don't know about you, but I find much better ways to
>learn, interact, play, teach, live, love, etc. than by spamming a mostly
>technically oriented list with garbage, insults and ascii art. I also have
>other ways of exploring my world around me and expanding my mind other than
>reading an academic listserv. If this is your only way of getting some real
>input in your life, then I suggest you put down that mouse and go get some
>fresh air. I simply cannot see how having antiorp's crap forced on me, or a
>large group of people will help my life in any way other than making it
>shorter.
>

>If you simply cannot deal with a list without antiorp, or simple democracy

Simplistic democracy.

"I began to add a few things up and realized there was no way I could come
from a little town in Iowa, be eating 2,000 people a year, and nobody said
anything about it"

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 9 Oct 1998 07:41:57 -0500
From:    Bill Vorn 
Subject: Re: Video Sampler

Hi,

As I'm planning to use the QT movie object to output video thru a Media100
video card, I would like to know if it's possible to get this object to
play from RAM instead of direct-from-disk. Disk access is too slow to
realize video "granular synthesis" and fast loops.

Thanks.

Bill Vorn
Montreal (Quebec) Canada

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 9 Oct 1998 14:42:34 +0100
From:    Roby Steinmetzer 
Subject: Re: The inevitable has happened.

>This was not desireable, but it had to be done. Sorry.
>

Everybody on the list had the choice to read antiorp's messages or to
ignore them.

Make Filter...
Match: Incoming
"From" contains "antiorp@TEZCAT.COM"
Action: Delete Message (transfer to Trash)

This choice has gone now.
Democracy is not the easiest form of living together.

>... we decided to give antiorp the possibility to communicate from one
>of our servers: go there! go there! and read!
>
ftp://quixot.rug.ac.be/MP%26G_11H.dbh%21/antiorp/sentimentz_null-binbuf.html

Thanks to Guy van Belle.

Roby Steinmetzer
Luxembourg, Europe

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 9 Oct 1998 09:31:59 -0500
From:    Kirk Corey 
Subject: Antiorp

Chris,

If you wanted to measure the MAJORITY (and I'm not sure whether that's
reasonable), you ought to have told the list that the matter was up for a
vote.  You didn't, so youu don't even know whether you had a majority
or not.  What you measured was not a majority, but only who yelled first,
and how loudly.  Big difference there.

Majorities are a subjective matter.  The majority of Americans polled want
an end to the current witch-hunt in Washington.  The majority of their
supposed representatives don't.  Which majority gets its way?

Or, as we see on Usenet so often, "Democracy is 5 wolves and a sheep
voting on what's for dinner."

Oh well, vindictiveness is in vogue these days.  Too bad the MAX list has
had to drop to the level of national politics.

In martyring Antiorp, you've merely proven his point:  zum humanz really
do zuk.

Granted, Antiorp is a pain in the butt.  But Chris, you're not really in
a position to accuse others of over-reacting here.

Can anyone show me a Max patch to turn two wrongs into a right?

If you can't let Antiorp stay, better unsubscribe me too.  I'm not sure
I'm comfortable staying any longer.

My three cents.

Kirk Corey
kirk-corey@uiowa.edu

------------

Date:    Thu, 8 Oct 1998 15:43:31 -0400
From:    Chris Murtagh Hrdc-drhc 
Subject: Re: The unfortunate (LAST) antiorp response

Ok, this debate is getting childish, and many people are over-reacting.
I've tried to be polite, I've listened to MANY email messages, and I acted
according to the MAJORITY of them. I live in a democracy, to me this means
that the majority determines how, where, what, when and why things will
happen. This means that if the majority votes against me, I have to accept
it. If you cannot accept this, then I'm sorry, we do not have the common
ground on which to actually have a logical, philosophical debate on this
subject.

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 9 Oct 1998 09:31:12 -0700
From:    Steve Anderson 
Subject: Re: MAX Digest - 8 Oct 1998 (#1998-26)

         Reply to:   RE: MAX Digest - 8 Oct 1998 (#1998-26)
>I've listened to MANY email messages, and I acted
>according to the MAJORITY of them.

Chris,

Thanks for doing a good job managing the MAX list. i have not posted or
emailed on this subject previously, but appreciate what a hassle it can be
for you. thanks for miminimizing spam.

Steve Anderson, ET III       "time is all we really have"
Physics & Astronomy Dept.
Sonoma State University
707-664-2330 fax 664-3012
steve.anderson@sonoma.edu

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 9 Oct 1998 12:56:17 -0400
From:    Stephen Kay 
Subject: 2 new lists...

I would like to propose the creation of 2 new lists:

antiorp@lists.somewhere

Purpose: antiorp lovers of all races, creeds and positions in life
get together to discuss their love for ASCII art, quotes from
philosphical and artistic tracts, and general interest in pseudo-german
machine-like deconstructions of the english language.  Further
threads will include: why all software should be free, why humanz
zukc, how to make web pages and max patches that crash computers,
and the ups and downs of projectile vomitting.

censorship@lists.somewhere

Purpose: people with too much time on their hands meet to discuss
why their idol/poster child antiorp has been booted off of three,
four or maybe more lists.  If you come from a very moderated,
conservative, restrictive lifestyle (perhaps academic), your views
on why the total abscence of moderation is wonderful will be
especially appreciated.

Will someone please volunteer to host these lists?  No time will
be required of anyone to *moderate* them, obviously.

In the meantime, maybe we can get back to business.  Let's hear
from people about their work, projects, use of max and msp.
No one will vomit on you any longer.  Thank god.  Of course,
s/he/it did nicely *request* permission to vomit.

Stephen Kay

------------------------------

Date:    Fri, 9 Oct 1998 16:59:46 -0000
From:    Kurt Ralske 
Subject: Re: MAX Digest - 7 Oct 1998 to 8 Oct 1998 - Special issue
(#1998-25)

Hello,

i've just tuned in.....& i'm surprised at all this at all this 'antiorp'
nonsense: so typical of the worst of the web. i thought you'd all just be
trading patches or maybe even discussing....MUSIC. (ah well. anyway....)

1) as a MAX novice, i've spent the last few months experimenting with
simple algorithms for controlling the cd drive. the results have been
really excellent. has anyone else spent much time working on this,
and would you care to describe your work?

2) has anyone worked much with the vdp object (videodisc control),
and what kind of results did you get?

thanks,
kurt ralske

------------------------------

End of MAX Digest - 8 Oct 1998 to 9 Oct 1998 - Special issue (#1998-27)
***********************************************************************