From 4ebab083bff06dad4f220bd78dcab2acc2ee564a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: gauthiier Date: Tue, 31 Dec 2019 09:53:46 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] duplication fix + templates --- book/fonts/Doves Type Imprint OTF v1.9.zip | 3 + ...mplate-DOVE-NBR-two column range left.indt | 3 + ...late-GOTHIC-NBR-two column range left.indt | 3 + ...template-GOTHIC-two column range left.indt | 4 +- ...e-MINUSCULE-NBR-two column range left.indt | 3 + ...plate-MINUSCULE-two column range left.indt | 4 +- export/check.py | 34 +++ export/exportxml.py | 205 +++++++----------- selection/tm-selection-dump.js | 68 +++--- selection/tm-selection.js | 8 + 10 files changed, 176 insertions(+), 159 deletions(-) create mode 100644 book/fonts/Doves Type Imprint OTF v1.9.zip create mode 100644 book/templates/template-DOVE-NBR-two column range left.indt create mode 100644 book/templates/template-GOTHIC-NBR-two column range left.indt create mode 100644 book/templates/template-MINUSCULE-NBR-two column range left.indt create mode 100644 export/check.py diff --git a/book/fonts/Doves Type Imprint OTF v1.9.zip b/book/fonts/Doves Type Imprint OTF v1.9.zip new file mode 100644 index 0000000..5cf1a4b --- /dev/null +++ b/book/fonts/Doves Type Imprint OTF v1.9.zip @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:90e967884c58343a8f63bcf52896f6123f7b543a70ec71c2b428971f9e2d0ce5 +size 151452 diff --git a/book/templates/template-DOVE-NBR-two column range left.indt b/book/templates/template-DOVE-NBR-two column range left.indt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..74cc735 --- /dev/null +++ b/book/templates/template-DOVE-NBR-two column range left.indt @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:7d95c4228b5ad11fa3332d72d24be0ae0951fc0098d902cebeaacbe4adb25fd9 +size 495616 diff --git a/book/templates/template-GOTHIC-NBR-two column range left.indt b/book/templates/template-GOTHIC-NBR-two column range left.indt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..08bdb2c --- /dev/null +++ b/book/templates/template-GOTHIC-NBR-two column range left.indt @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:fffb6ca5689c24a81e1ef6ca58df136658f6f1d9a131a021d12c8bf6d81e1a52 +size 499712 diff --git a/book/templates/template-GOTHIC-two column range left.indt b/book/templates/template-GOTHIC-two column range left.indt index 1671a27..93e72c0 100644 --- a/book/templates/template-GOTHIC-two column range left.indt +++ b/book/templates/template-GOTHIC-two column range left.indt @@ -1,3 +1,3 @@ version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 -oid sha256:8774c116261912e00cc9bb559f4ed4f3c1d2cc63ad49145e85074624b179ead7 -size 794624 +oid sha256:6897d0decbc0f700dad866280f2d4c2f743961bfc0dae5b259a50cd637640f1d +size 565248 diff --git a/book/templates/template-MINUSCULE-NBR-two column range left.indt b/book/templates/template-MINUSCULE-NBR-two column range left.indt new file mode 100644 index 0000000..d1754fa --- /dev/null +++ b/book/templates/template-MINUSCULE-NBR-two column range left.indt @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 +oid sha256:1dff200b8e0d5fe49ecc2a688b9c3b4947c8811d11de94de85cc6c9d24720777 +size 479232 diff --git a/book/templates/template-MINUSCULE-two column range left.indt b/book/templates/template-MINUSCULE-two column range left.indt index 7c5c09c..e191a9e 100644 --- a/book/templates/template-MINUSCULE-two column range left.indt +++ b/book/templates/template-MINUSCULE-two column range left.indt @@ -1,3 +1,3 @@ version https://git-lfs.github.com/spec/v1 -oid sha256:9e0f520a025d14cce05917c1f1486ee47562867188e36b661a9a2a4f382d2361 -size 491520 +oid sha256:b110c70a9facab9fd10ab8cb638833828b63ac2b87f9add15343134b9b23b72f +size 704512 diff --git a/export/check.py b/export/check.py new file mode 100644 index 0000000..16a2743 --- /dev/null +++ b/export/check.py @@ -0,0 +1,34 @@ +import xml.etree.ElementTree as et +import os, logging, glob, hashlib + +logging.basicConfig(level=logging.DEBUG) + +def check_duplicates(xml_file): + + hashes = [] + r = et.parse(xml_file).getroot() + + for m in r.findall('mails/mail'): + f = m.find('from').text + s = m.find('subject').text + d = m.find('date').text + h = hashlib.sha256((f + s + d).encode("utf-8")).hexdigest() + + if h in hashes: + logging.info("* Duplicate: " + s + " - " + f + " - " + d) + # logging.info(h) + else: + hashes.append(h) + +if __name__ == "__main__": + + d = "out/" + xml_files = [f for f in glob.glob(os.path.join(d, "*.xml"))] + + logging.info("Checking duplicates") + + for f in xml_files: + logging.info("> " + os.path.basename(f)) + check_duplicates(f) + + diff --git a/export/exportxml.py b/export/exportxml.py index 8f11715..d0b36b4 100644 --- a/export/exportxml.py +++ b/export/exportxml.py @@ -3,39 +3,83 @@ import xml.etree.ElementTree as et from xml.sax.saxutils import unescape, escape import export.utils import config -from datetime import datetime from export import emailreply -import re +import re, hashlib, datetime nn = 0 sel_dump = os.path.join(config.selection['path'], config.selection['sel_dump']) xml_dump = os.path.join(config.export['path'], config.export['xml']) +''' +utils +''' def export_generate_path(tag): - now = datetime.now() + now = datetime.datetime.now() return os.path.join(config.export['path'], tag + "_[now].xml") +''' +xml export +''' + +def hash(m): + return hashlib.sha256((m['from'] + m['subject'] + m['date']).encode("utf-8")).hexdigest() + def make_xml_element(el, val): return "<" + el + ">" + escape(val) + "" +''' +This is pretty patched up........................................................... +''' -def emit_mail_xml(msg, li): +def to_listserv(li, msg): + if li == 'crumb': # patch + return '' + elif li == 'spectre': + return 'spectre@mikrolisten.de' + elif li == 'empyre': + return '' + elif li == 'nettime_bold': + return 'nettime-bold@nettime.org' + elif li == 'nettime_l': + # nettime-l@desk.nl -- June 8 1999 + # mettime-l-temp@material.net -- July 15 1999 + # nettime-l@bbs.thing.net> -- July 19 2007 + # nettime-l@kein.org + dtz = export.utils.parse_date_msg(msg) + if dtz is not None: + d = datetime.datetime.fromtimestamp(dtz).date() + if d < datetime.date(1999, 6, 8): + return 'nettime-l@desk.nl' + elif d < datetime.date(1999, 7, 15): + return 'mettime-l-temp@material.net' + elif d < datetime.date(2007, 7, 19): + return 'nettime-l@bbs.thing.net' + return 'nettime-l@kein.org' + else: + logging.warning("no listserv to...") + return 'n/a' - global nn +def emit_mail_xml(msg, li, thread_nbr, msg_nbr): + + global nn, hashes nn += 1 - logging.info("export xml: " + li) + h = hash(msg) # patch + if h in hashes: + logging.warning("Duplicate: " + msg['from'] + " - " + msg['subject'] + " - " + msg['date'] + ". Skipping...") + return '' + else: + hashes.append(h) + + nbr = make_xml_element("nbr", str(thread_nbr) + "." + str(msg_nbr)) + "\n" subject = make_xml_element("subject", msg['subject']) + "\n" - if 'to' in msg: - to = make_xml_element("to", msg['to']) + "\n" - else: - to = make_xml_element("to", 'n/a') + "\n" + to = make_xml_element("to", to_listserv(li, msg)) + "\n" # patch - from_ = make_xml_element("from", msg['from']) + "\n" + from_ = make_xml_element("from", msg['author_name']) + "\n" date = make_xml_element("date", msg['date']) + "\n" @@ -47,11 +91,16 @@ def emit_mail_xml(msg, li): e = emailreply.EmailMessage(export.utils.format_content(msg['content'])) e.read() - content_stripped = re.sub(r'(?\n" + subject + from_ + to + date + content + "\n" + mail = "\n" + nbr + subject + from_ + to + date + content + "\n" # content = et.SubElement(mail, 'content') # content.text = e.reply @@ -61,79 +110,22 @@ def emit_mail_xml(msg, li): followups = export.utils.index_follow_up(msg) followups.sort(key=lambda tup: tup[0]) for d, f in followups: - mail += emit_mail_xml(f, li) + msg_nbr += 1 + mail += emit_mail_xml(f, li, thread_nbr, msg_nbr) return mail - -# def emit_mail_xml(msg, li, xmlel): - -# global nn -# nn += 1 - -# logging.info("export xml: " + li) - -# mail = et.SubElement(xmlel, 'mail') - -# subject = et.SubElement(mail, 'subject') -# subject.text = export.utils.format_subject(msg['subject']) - -# to = et.SubElement(mail, 'to') -# if 'to' in msg: -# to.text = msg['to'] -# else: -# to.text = 'n/a' - -# from_ = et.SubElement(mail, 'from') -# from_.text = msg['from'] - -# date = et.SubElement(mail, 'date') -# date.text = msg['date'] - -# ''' -# todo: -# - filter reply -# - unescape XML -# ''' -# e = emailreply.EmailMessage(export.utils.format_content(msg['content'])) -# e.read() - -# escape_table = { -# "&": "&", -# ">": ">", -# "<": "<" -# } - -# content_str = "" + escape(e.reply, escape_table) + "" - -# print(content_str) - -# content = et.fromstring(content_str) -# mail.append(content) - -# # content = et.SubElement(mail, 'content') -# # content.text = e.reply - -# # recursuve "follow-up" -# if 'follow-up' in msg: -# followups = export.utils.index_follow_up(msg) -# followups.sort(key=lambda tup: tup[0]) -# for d, f in followups: -# emit_mail_xml(f, li, xmlel) - - -#------------------------------------------------------------ -# The following functions parse the selection files -#------------------------------------------------------------ - def export_single_tag(t, sel, fout): + global hashes + if t not in list(sel.keys()): logging.error("Tag: " + t + " does not exists.") return False - ch = sel[t] + logging.info("Exporting tag:" + t) + ch = sel[t] chapter = "\n" @@ -143,64 +135,21 @@ def export_single_tag(t, sel, fout): chapter_mails = "\n" - for m in ch['lists']: - chapter_mails += emit_mail_xml(m, m['list']) + hashes = [] + thread_nbr = 0 + + for m in ch['lists']: + chapter_mails += emit_mail_xml(m, m['list'], thread_nbr, 0) + thread_nbr += 1 chapter_mails += "\n" - chapter = "\n" + chapter_mails + "" + chapter = "\n" + chapter_title + chapter_desc + chapter_mails + "" fout.write(chapter.encode('utf-8')) - - # # root = et.ElementTree(chapter) - # # root.write(fout, encoding="utf-8", xml_declaration=True) - - # # xml = export.utils.remove_invalid_xml_characters(et.tostring(chapter).decode('unicode-escape', 'ignore')) - # xml = export.utils.remove_invalid_xml_characters(et.tostring(chapter, encoding="utf-8").decode('utf-8', 'ignore')) - # xml = '' + xml - - # print(et.tostring(chapter, encoding="utf-8").decode('utf-8', 'ignore')) - - # fout.write(et.tostring(chapter).decode('utf-8', 'ignore')) - return True - -# def export_single_tag(t, sel, fout): - -# if t not in list(sel.keys()): -# logging.error("Tag: " + t + " does not exists.") -# return False - -# ch = sel[t] - -# chapter = et.Element('chapter') -# chapter_title = et.SubElement(chapter, 'title') -# chapter_title.text = t - -# chapter_desc = et.SubElement(chapter, 'desc') -# chapter_desc.text = ch['desc'] - -# chapter_mails = et.SubElement(chapter, 'mails') - -# for m in ch['lists']: -# emit_mail_xml(m, m['list'], chapter_mails) - - -# # root = et.ElementTree(chapter) -# # root.write(fout, encoding="utf-8", xml_declaration=True) - -# # xml = export.utils.remove_invalid_xml_characters(et.tostring(chapter).decode('unicode-escape', 'ignore')) -# xml = export.utils.remove_invalid_xml_characters(et.tostring(chapter, encoding="utf-8").decode('utf-8', 'ignore')) -# xml = '' + xml - -# print(et.tostring(chapter, encoding="utf-8").decode('utf-8', 'ignore')) - -# fout.write(et.tostring(chapter).decode('utf-8', 'ignore')) - -# return True - def export_selection_all(sel_dump=sel_dump, xml_out=xml_dump): with open(sel_dump) as fin: @@ -218,7 +167,7 @@ def export_selection_tag(tag, sel_dump=sel_dump, xml_out=xml_dump): with open(sel_dump) as fin: d = json.load(fin) - now = datetime.now() + now = datetime.datetime.now() xml_out.replace("[now]", now.strftime("%d-%m-%y_%H:%M:%S")) with open(xml_out, 'wb') as fout: @@ -245,7 +194,7 @@ def export_file(f, fout): fout.write(et.tostring(all_mail).decode('utf-8', 'ignore')) def parse_date_file(fname): - return datetime.strptime(fname, '%B_%Y.json') + return datetime.datetime.strptime(fname, '%B_%Y.json') def export_year(d, dt, fout): diff --git a/selection/tm-selection-dump.js b/selection/tm-selection-dump.js index e065841..d224f9f 100644 --- a/selection/tm-selection-dump.js +++ b/selection/tm-selection-dump.js @@ -5158,6 +5158,46 @@ "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0305/msg00078.html", "content-type": "text/plai", "content": "\nOn Wed, 28 May 2003 19:17:40 +0200\nthe nettime mod squad wrote:\n\n> As an experiment, Nettime-bold was a failure, but a revealing one. First,\n> there was very little interest in it. At its best, nettime-bold had about\n> 130 subscribers, which, at the time, was 5% the subscribers nettime-l had.\n\nI think these figures serve no useful purpose.\n\nI switched to nettime-bold but soon found replies to threads\nappearing that never made it to nettime-bold in the first place.\n\nI posed the question several years ago, and got an explanation of\nwhy it happened that way, but we didn't get much further than that.\n\nhttp://amsterdam.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-bold-0104/msg00096.html\n\nSort of killed the whole point of being on the bold list for me,\nso I gave up and went back to nettime-l.\n\nI think an unmoderated version of nettime is a good idea -- I \nwould join it, if it worked. \n\nI volunteered to help at the time, even met with a moderator to\ndiscuss what we could do, but there seemed to be a major\nresistance going on at the t op.\n\n\n\n- cpaul\n\n# distributed via : no commercial use without permission\n# is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} bbs.thing.net and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} bbs.thing.net\n\n" + }, + { + "from": "nettime ", + "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9906/msg00069.html", + "author_name": "nettime", + "content": "\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - \n is the temporary home of the nettime-l list\nwhile desk.nl rebuilds its list-serving machine. please continue to send\nmessages to and your commands to .\nnettime-l-temp should be active for approximately 2 weeks (11-28 Jun 99).\n- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - \n\n\n\n\n\n\n [greetings...as of Tue, 8 Jun 1999 10:18:58 +0200 (CEST) or so,\n basis.desk.nl, the computer nettime runs on, has been more or\n less dead. it's alive in the sense that it receives mail, but\n dead in the sense that it cannot distribute mail. desk is pre-\n paring to upgrade the server, but that might take a few weeks. \n so, until that upgrade is complete, we are moving the task of \n *distributing* nettime to ; however, the *incom-\n ing* addresses will be the same: mail for distribution to the \n list goes to , and all majordomo commands--\n un/subscriptions--to . while the kludge is\n in effect, unfortunately, mail will be 'From: nettime.' we'll\n mangle it so that the subject line includes who actually sent\n the message. and all messages will have a header and a footer\n explaining the situation. over the next few days--today being\n 11 june--we will resend all messages that arrived but seeming-\n ly were never distributed. we expect this situation will last\n for about 2 weeks. thanks for being patient. --cheerrrs tb/fs]\n\n\n\n", + "to": "nettime-l-temp ", + "date": "Fri, 11 Jun 1999 22:17:38 +0100", + "message-id": "19990611221738.00204 {AT} basis.Desk.nl", + "content-type": "text/plai", + "id": "00069", + "subject": "Incredibly Important Administrativa, Sort of", + "list": "nettime_l" + }, + { + "from": "\"nettime's_mod_squad\" ", + "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0707/msg00025.html", + "author_name": "nettime's_mod_squad", + "content": "Dear nettimers,\n\nFor many years, through work and play, the nettime-l moderation team has \nmaintained this list from locations, both banal and exotic, around the \nworld with very little interruption. For lurkers, the break of the last\nweek probably seemed like the usual summer slack; but for those who sent\nmessages to the list, error message may have revealed that something was \nafoot.\n\nThe Thing in NYC -- in particular, bbs.thing.net -- has been nettime-l's\nhome since July 1999. However, a reorganization of The Thing's energies \nand resources has been long overdue. And that, in combination with server \nproblems, put the list offline for the longest time since it made its\nfirst move, from desk.nl to a temporary home on material.net.\n\nWe'd like to offer our sincere thanks to thing.net, and the people who've \nmade bbs.thing.net such a fine home for nettime-l for eight years, almost\nto the day. In particular, we'd like to thank Wolfgang Staehle for his \npatient and generous support of the list (as well as many other excellent \nprojects in our neighborhood). \n\nNettime's new home is at kein.org. Kein currently hosts hundreds of lists \nvery effectively, so we're especially grateful to Florian Schneider for \ngraciously setting up the peculiar configuration this list needs. Really,\nwe couldn't have asked for a better technical or social environment.\n\nPlease not that nettime has now new addresses:\n\n -> to post to the list: nettime-l {AT} kein.org\n\n -> to reach us: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n -> to un/sub: majordomo {AT} list.kein.org\n\nAll the rest -- in particular, the archives at nettime.org, maintained \nby Michael van Eeden at the Waag in Amsterdam -- will remain the same.\n\nFor those who automatically filter email and/or rely on the list's host \nor headers to process list traffic, please note that this move will \nprobably require some effort on your part.\n\nTed Byfield\nFelix Stalder\n\n# distributed via : no commercial use without permission\n# is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} kein.org and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n", + "to": "Nettime ", + "follow-up": [ + { + "from": "Andreas Broeckmann ", + "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0707/msg00026.html", + "author_name": "Andreas Broeckmann", + "content": "dear moderators, people at kein.org, fellow nettimers,\n\nthanks for the info, and for all the work that must have preceeded \nthis short notice on the move!\n\nthanks also to wolfgang, jan and the other people at the thing ny! a \nlot of what has become possible through your efforts will remain as \ninfluential as the infrastructure and labour that it has been based \non, is invisible...\n\nregards,\n-a\n\n\n>We'd like to offer our sincere thanks to thing.net, and the people who've\n>made bbs.thing.net such a fine home for nettime-l for eight years, almost\n>to the day. In particular, we'd like to thank Wolfgang Staehle for his\n>patient and generous support of the list (as well as many other excellent\n>projects in our neighborhood).\n>\n>Nettime's new home is at kein.org.\n\n\n\n# distributed via : no commercial use without permission\n# is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: majordomo {AT} kein.org and \"info nettime-l\" in the msg body\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n", + "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org", + "date": "Thu, 19 Jul 2007 22:09:55 +0200", + "message-id": "200707201033.l6KAXWth029365 {AT} poodle.kein.or", + "content-type": "text/plai", + "id": "00026", + "subject": "Re: kein nettime-l" + } + ], + "date": "Thu, 19 Jul 2007 15:44:30 +0200", + "message-id": "200707191348.l6JDm7lV016598 {AT} poodle.kein.or", + "content-type": "text/plai", + "id": "00025", + "subject": " kein nettime-l", + "list": "nettime_l" } ], "desc": "..." @@ -10702,23 +10742,9 @@ "content": "Hello Michael -\n\nAnd first of all, thanks for your reading! Always interesting to hear \nyour views.\n\n> First, art does not have to justify itself by offering a different way \n> to live or to coexist. To put it most simply art justifies life; it is \n> why we are here, or it can be.\n\nWell, art is also famously what people disagree about, which is OK by \nme. I offered a distinctly political definition of art, one which does \nnot simplify or deny all the subtle potentials of form and metaphor and \nreference that I do appreciate, but instead suggests that all those \nqualities come into strongest relief and offer the greatest resonance in \nourselves when they stand out against the background of a society and, \nrather than justifying life as it is, open up possibilities of becoming \ndifferent. A definition which seems relevant to much good art these \ndays, and could be interesting to disagree about too!\n\n> So what does cause continued imperialism? For one thing, America's \n> inward looking. Our politics is mostly localist and parochial, and yet \n> politicians end up making decisions to sustain foreign involvements on \n> the basis of little knowledge. It is always safer to view the outside \n> world as menacing rather than benign. It is always safer to refer to the \n> US as the greatest country and to assume that the world needs our armies \n> and weapons rather than not.A pointless patriotism helps hold this \n> disparate country together, much as India is partially held together by \n> such means. And, as in the case of the British empire, what keeps ours \n> going is mostly habit — a bad habit, but hard to change — perhaps \n> addiction would be the better word.\n\nThis seems to me a little naive, Michael, if you can excuse me saying \nso. I think that \"their\" empire (I would never call it \"ours\") is upheld \nnot just by our localist politics (of course that lets it go \nunchallenged, you are right) but above all because it is in the interest \nof certain people to uphold it. I do not believe that America went to \nIraq out of parochialism or ignorance, but because the party of war, oil \nand engineering saw immense profits in setting up shop there. Similarly, \nI think that the army, air force and navy all stay in South Korea \nbecause the maintenance of that Cold War standoff helps justify, not \njust U.S. presence in that particular country, but on outposts all over \nthe world. Arms production, engineering contracts and the maintenance of \nhigh-paying officer jobs associated with rank, privilege and amazing \ntechnology to play with are some of the benefits of prolonging Cold War \nconditions, which is why the Pentagon set about looking for a \"near \npeer\" right after 1989, and finally decided to accept a \"long war \nagainst terrorism\" instead.\n\nBeyond the direct military establishment, the free trade and free \ncapital flows from which the United States has prospered so \ndisproportionately since WWII are linked in the minds and strategies of \nthe corporate and political elites to the regulatory presence of a \nworld-spanning army, which has also been the reason that our huge debts \nhave been shouldered by other countries such as Japan, since \nmanufacturing exports declined in the 1970s. One of the most bald \nstatements of this kind of \"free trade guaranteed by the military\" \ndoctrine can be found in Thomas Barnett's recent books; but when you \nlook closer at the intellectuals staffing the State Department over the \nlast 60 years, the same doctrine is everywhere, from Kennan and Acheson \non forward. That this is an addiction - to power, to profit, to oil, to \nbig projects and machines - is something I would agree with.\n\n> If the US is so inward looking, doesn't reporting such as yours from \n> South Korea help create balance? Very little, I suspect. The internal \n> \"patriotic\" reading would only be that some Koreans are \"ingrates,\" who \n> \"don't know what's good for them,\" which implies they need our \n> protection despite themselves.\n\nAlong these lines, even a cursory scan of the Internet will dredge up \nexactly those kinds of opinions from the largest group of Americans \nhaving anything to do with the two Koreas, namly, ex- and current \nservicemen. It is much as you say. And I definitely agree that finding \nways of convincing these kinds of people is a real problem. Even Mark \nGillem, the author of America Town and himself part of the air force, \ndoes not read as very convincing from the viewpoint that one finds on \nthese Internet sites about Korea.\n\n> This imperialism can only be changed, I think, if it either becomes \n> unaffordable or if a really different US self-conception can take hold, \n> for instance of our being simply one country that ought to be striving \n> to live cooperatively with the rest of the world. I think we should take \n> heart that the Iraq war has proved so unpopular despite no draft and \n> despite the US death toll being far below Vietnam levels. I think a new \n> \"Iraq syndrome\" will sharply reduce the tendencies towards such active \n> military adventures for another generation.\n\nYes, I think you are right and I also think it is interesting to add to \nthat feeling of rejection. The low American profile after Vietnam was a \ngood thing imho.\n\n> But dismantling the existing \n> network of bases is another story. To give up the addiction to military \n> spending and the idea that the military offers a good career for certain \n> young people will be less rather than more easy if the US monetary \n> economy keeps declining. The only hope I see is the rise of an utterly \n> new sense of who we are. That , of course, will be intensely resisted.\n\nYes, I think that's where art can become so interesting as a force of \nchange! If all of us want it to, anyway. There again is another reason \nthat I chose the definition of art that I initially put forth.\n\nThanks again, Michael, for your perspectives.\n\nbest, BH\n\n\n# distributed via : no commercial use without permission\n# is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n", "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org", "message-id": "488767EB.1070603 {AT} wanadoo.fr", - "author_name": "Message not available", + "author_name": "Brian Holmes", "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0807/msg00086.html", "content-type": "text/plai", - "follow-up": [ - { - "subject": "Re: 50 Ways To Leave Your Lover", - "content": "Hello Michael -\n\nAnd first of all, thanks for your reading! Always interesting to hear \nyour views.\n\n> First, art does not have to justify itself by offering a different way \n> to live or to coexist. To put it most simply art justifies life; it is \n> why we are here, or it can be.\n\nWell, art is also famously what people disagree about, which is OK by \nme. I offered a distinctly political definition of art, one which does \nnot simplify or deny all the subtle potentials of form and metaphor and \nreference that I do appreciate, but instead suggests that all those \nqualities come into strongest relief and offer the greatest resonance in \nourselves when they stand out against the background of a society and, \nrather than justifying life as it is, open up possibilities of becoming \ndifferent. A definition which seems relevant to much good art these \ndays, and could be interesting to disagree about too!\n\n> So what does cause continued imperialism? For one thing, America's \n> inward looking. Our politics is mostly localist and parochial, and yet \n> politicians end up making decisions to sustain foreign involvements on \n> the basis of little knowledge. It is always safer to view the outside \n> world as menacing rather than benign. It is always safer to refer to the \n> US as the greatest country and to assume that the world needs our armies \n> and weapons rather than not.A pointless patriotism helps hold this \n> disparate country together, much as India is partially held together by \n> such means. And, as in the case of the British empire, what keeps ours \n> going is mostly habit — a bad habit, but hard to change — perhaps \n> addiction would be the better word.\n\nThis seems to me a little naive, Michael, if you can excuse me saying \nso. I think that \"their\" empire (I would never call it \"ours\") is upheld \nnot just by our localist politics (of course that lets it go \nunchallenged, you are right) but above all because it is in the interest \nof certain people to uphold it. I do not believe that America went to \nIraq out of parochialism or ignorance, but because the party of war, oil \nand engineering saw immense profits in setting up shop there. Similarly, \nI think that the army, air force and navy all stay in South Korea \nbecause the maintenance of that Cold War standoff helps justify, not \njust U.S. presence in that particular country, but on outposts all over \nthe world. Arms production, engineering contracts and the maintenance of \nhigh-paying officer jobs associated with rank, privilege and amazing \ntechnology to play with are some of the benefits of prolonging Cold War \nconditions, which is why the Pentagon set about looking for a \"near \npeer\" right after 1989, and finally decided to accept a \"long war \nagainst terrorism\" instead.\n\nBeyond the direct military establishment, the free trade and free \ncapital flows from which the United States has prospered so \ndisproportionately since WWII are linked in the minds and strategies of \nthe corporate and political elites to the regulatory presence of a \nworld-spanning army, which has also been the reason that our huge debts \nhave been shouldered by other countries such as Japan, since \nmanufacturing exports declined in the 1970s. One of the most bald \nstatements of this kind of \"free trade guaranteed by the military\" \ndoctrine can be found in Thomas Barnett's recent books; but when you \nlook closer at the intellectuals staffing the State Department over the \nlast 60 years, the same doctrine is everywhere, from Kennan and Acheson \non forward. That this is an addiction - to power, to profit, to oil, to \nbig projects and machines - is something I would agree with.\n\n> If the US is so inward looking, doesn't reporting such as yours from \n> South Korea help create balance? Very little, I suspect. The internal \n> \"patriotic\" reading would only be that some Koreans are \"ingrates,\" who \n> \"don't know what's good for them,\" which implies they need our \n> protection despite themselves.\n\nAlong these lines, even a cursory scan of the Internet will dredge up \nexactly those kinds of opinions from the largest group of Americans \nhaving anything to do with the two Koreas, namly, ex- and current \nservicemen. It is much as you say. And I definitely agree that finding \nways of convincing these kinds of people is a real problem. Even Mark \nGillem, the author of America Town and himself part of the air force, \ndoes not read as very convincing from the viewpoint that one finds on \nthese Internet sites about Korea.\n\n> This imperialism can only be changed, I think, if it either becomes \n> unaffordable or if a really different US self-conception can take hold, \n> for instance of our being simply one country that ought to be striving \n> to live cooperatively with the rest of the world. I think we should take \n> heart that the Iraq war has proved so unpopular despite no draft and \n> despite the US death toll being far below Vietnam levels. I think a new \n> \"Iraq syndrome\" will sharply reduce the tendencies towards such active \n> military adventures for another generation.\n\nYes, I think you are right and I also think it is interesting to add to \nthat feeling of rejection. The low American profile after Vietnam was a \ngood thing imho.\n\n> But dismantling the existing \n> network of bases is another story. To give up the addiction to military \n> spending and the idea that the military offers a good career for certain \n> young people will be less rather than more easy if the US monetary \n> economy keeps declining. The only hope I see is the rise of an utterly \n> new sense of who we are. That , of course, will be intensely resisted.\n\nYes, I think that's where art can become so interesting as a force of \nchange! If all of us want it to, anyway. There again is another reason \nthat I chose the definition of art that I initially put forth.\n\nThanks again, Michael, for your perspectives.\n\nbest, BH\n\n\n# distributed via : no commercial use without permission\n# is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n", - "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org", - "message-id": "488767EB.1070603 {AT} wanadoo.fr", - "author_name": "Brian Holmes", - "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0807/msg00086.html", - "content-type": "text/plai", - "date": "Wed, 23 Jul 2008 19:18:35 +0200", - "from": "Brian Holmes ", - "id": "00086" - } - ], "date": "Wed, 23 Jul 2008 19:18:35 +0200", "from": "Brian Holmes ", "id": "00086" @@ -10861,18 +10887,6 @@ "from": "\"Michael Gurstein\" ", "id": "00107" }, - { - "subject": "Re: 50 Ways To Leave Your Lover", - "content": "Hello Michael -\n\nAnd first of all, thanks for your reading! Always interesting to hear \nyour views.\n\n> First, art does not have to justify itself by offering a different way \n> to live or to coexist. To put it most simply art justifies life; it is \n> why we are here, or it can be.\n\nWell, art is also famously what people disagree about, which is OK by \nme. I offered a distinctly political definition of art, one which does \nnot simplify or deny all the subtle potentials of form and metaphor and \nreference that I do appreciate, but instead suggests that all those \nqualities come into strongest relief and offer the greatest resonance in \nourselves when they stand out against the background of a society and, \nrather than justifying life as it is, open up possibilities of becoming \ndifferent. A definition which seems relevant to much good art these \ndays, and could be interesting to disagree about too!\n\n> So what does cause continued imperialism? For one thing, America's \n> inward looking. Our politics is mostly localist and parochial, and yet \n> politicians end up making decisions to sustain foreign involvements on \n> the basis of little knowledge. It is always safer to view the outside \n> world as menacing rather than benign. It is always safer to refer to the \n> US as the greatest country and to assume that the world needs our armies \n> and weapons rather than not.A pointless patriotism helps hold this \n> disparate country together, much as India is partially held together by \n> such means. And, as in the case of the British empire, what keeps ours \n> going is mostly habit — a bad habit, but hard to change — perhaps \n> addiction would be the better word.\n\nThis seems to me a little naive, Michael, if you can excuse me saying \nso. I think that \"their\" empire (I would never call it \"ours\") is upheld \nnot just by our localist politics (of course that lets it go \nunchallenged, you are right) but above all because it is in the interest \nof certain people to uphold it. I do not believe that America went to \nIraq out of parochialism or ignorance, but because the party of war, oil \nand engineering saw immense profits in setting up shop there. Similarly, \nI think that the army, air force and navy all stay in South Korea \nbecause the maintenance of that Cold War standoff helps justify, not \njust U.S. presence in that particular country, but on outposts all over \nthe world. Arms production, engineering contracts and the maintenance of \nhigh-paying officer jobs associated with rank, privilege and amazing \ntechnology to play with are some of the benefits of prolonging Cold War \nconditions, which is why the Pentagon set about looking for a \"near \npeer\" right after 1989, and finally decided to accept a \"long war \nagainst terrorism\" instead.\n\nBeyond the direct military establishment, the free trade and free \ncapital flows from which the United States has prospered so \ndisproportionately since WWII are linked in the minds and strategies of \nthe corporate and political elites to the regulatory presence of a \nworld-spanning army, which has also been the reason that our huge debts \nhave been shouldered by other countries such as Japan, since \nmanufacturing exports declined in the 1970s. One of the most bald \nstatements of this kind of \"free trade guaranteed by the military\" \ndoctrine can be found in Thomas Barnett's recent books; but when you \nlook closer at the intellectuals staffing the State Department over the \nlast 60 years, the same doctrine is everywhere, from Kennan and Acheson \non forward. That this is an addiction - to power, to profit, to oil, to \nbig projects and machines - is something I would agree with.\n\n> If the US is so inward looking, doesn't reporting such as yours from \n> South Korea help create balance? Very little, I suspect. The internal \n> \"patriotic\" reading would only be that some Koreans are \"ingrates,\" who \n> \"don't know what's good for them,\" which implies they need our \n> protection despite themselves.\n\nAlong these lines, even a cursory scan of the Internet will dredge up \nexactly those kinds of opinions from the largest group of Americans \nhaving anything to do with the two Koreas, namly, ex- and current \nservicemen. It is much as you say. And I definitely agree that finding \nways of convincing these kinds of people is a real problem. Even Mark \nGillem, the author of America Town and himself part of the air force, \ndoes not read as very convincing from the viewpoint that one finds on \nthese Internet sites about Korea.\n\n> This imperialism can only be changed, I think, if it either becomes \n> unaffordable or if a really different US self-conception can take hold, \n> for instance of our being simply one country that ought to be striving \n> to live cooperatively with the rest of the world. I think we should take \n> heart that the Iraq war has proved so unpopular despite no draft and \n> despite the US death toll being far below Vietnam levels. I think a new \n> \"Iraq syndrome\" will sharply reduce the tendencies towards such active \n> military adventures for another generation.\n\nYes, I think you are right and I also think it is interesting to add to \nthat feeling of rejection. The low American profile after Vietnam was a \ngood thing imho.\n\n> But dismantling the existing \n> network of bases is another story. To give up the addiction to military \n> spending and the idea that the military offers a good career for certain \n> young people will be less rather than more easy if the US monetary \n> economy keeps declining. The only hope I see is the rise of an utterly \n> new sense of who we are. That , of course, will be intensely resisted.\n\nYes, I think that's where art can become so interesting as a force of \nchange! If all of us want it to, anyway. There again is another reason \nthat I chose the definition of art that I initially put forth.\n\nThanks again, Michael, for your perspectives.\n\nbest, BH\n\n\n# distributed via : no commercial use without permission\n# is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n", - "to": "nettime-l {AT} kein.org", - "message-id": "488767EB.1070603 {AT} wanadoo.fr", - "author_name": "Brian Holmes", - "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0807/msg00086.html", - "content-type": "text/plai", - "date": "Wed, 23 Jul 2008 19:18:35 +0200", - "from": "Brian Holmes ", - "id": "00086" - }, { "subject": "Re: 50 Ways To Leave Your Lover", "content": "Concerning the concept of artistic rupture, Eric Kluitenberg wrote:\n\n> As I have come to understand this... rupture is part of process of\n> negation, a negative dialectics as some have called it (Adorno / Lyotard),\n> in the case of the visual arts a 'negative dialectics of the image'. Now\n> the point of negation is not the replacement of one mode of the visual by\n> another, alternative one. Much rather the object of negation is to 'break'\n> the image, to show its disfunctionality, to expose that every image hides\n> more than it reveals.\n...\n> The real point of the negation and this negative dialectics as it was\n> emblematically embodied by the bold quest of the avant-gardes, was not to\n> find a somehow \"better\" alternative for that which was negated\n> (perspective, unity of space, unity of time, surface, support, material,\n> medium, etc etc...) but much rather to reveal the infinity of\n> possibilities, the infinite space of alternatives.\n> \n> Now what has changed and where I would follow you in most of your analysis\n> is that the context in which art, criticism, and critical cultural\n> production operate, has diversified to the point where multiplicity has\n> replaced revolt.\n\nThis way of thinking, developed from Adorno to Lyotard among many \nothers, is one of the more powerful and compelling stories that can be \ntold about the vanguard \"overcoming of art,\" and my thanks to Eric for \nbringing in this precise theoretical level of conversation. When I said, \n\"let's take it as axiomatic that all that has changed,\" I was indeed \nthinking of the end of any transcendence of artistic representation, and \ntherefore of any reason or art to go on referring to art alone, to its \nsequential evolutions and/or ruptures. Of course, the idea that there is \none single story of the avant-gardes in the 20th century is itself \ntotally dubious, but I think that many of the stories which have been \nelaborated lead to the point art serves as some sort of ever-changing \nmediation between an active multiplicity and an existing context of \nsocial reality. How that kind of mediation works is, I think, the \nsubject for a micropolitical aesthetics - but I'd like to touch on that \nin a later reply to Snafu's excellent post on productivism. As Eric says \nhee,\n\n > How this then works for activists, artists, critics in practice\n> is the next step.\n\nConcerning the \"existing context of social reality\" which forms the \nbackdrop to any next step, that is definitely where geopolitical \nthinking becomes an issue. How to name the context? Is there any \noverarching structure? If so, how to avoid supporting it with one's own \nconceptual activity?\n\n> The second comment relates to the use of the concept of Empire. I wonder\n> if the concept of Empire is really productive here to address your\n> question of finding \"a different way to live, a fresh chance at\n> coexistence\", which I read as a call for pluralism and multiplicity.\n> Empire, however, suggest the rise of a hegemonic and more or less unitary\n> form of social and economic/political organisation (along with its\n> military extensions). Of course in Negri and Hardt's vision there are many\n> internal struggles and conflicting actors within the body of Empire, but\n> still they seem guided by a similar organisational logic and set of\n> (hegemonic) objectives.\n\nWell, what I am talking about is first of all best approached as \nclassical imperialism, not Empire in Hardt and Negri's sense of a \ncenterless, networked imperium -- because what we have seen in the past \nfive years, with the Iraq war, is clearly an attempt to project a \nspecifically American sovereignty onto a resource-rich country. Beyond \nthe war, I think the case for American hegemony is very strong and tends \nto be understated, if only because people on the left would \nunderstandably like to see other alternatives. However, lucidity is also \nimportant. The acts of the Bush administration have forced me, as a \nresponsible citizen, to look at the consequences of US military bases \nall over the world, military domination of space, financial domination \nthrough the continuing status of the dollar as international reserve \ncurrency, techoscientific domination through the fruits of military R&D \nspending, cultural domination through global English and the benchmark \nstatus of American universities, etc. etc. All of this is, to be sure, \nin decline, and that is probably why it has gotten so ugly in recent \nyears. But decline can go on for a long time... and in the meantime, \nunfortunately, this whole construct of military-industrial imperialism \ncontinues to furnish the basic definitions of what is good in life, \nincluding the canonical measures of economic growth and prosperity \ninherited from the Fordist/Cold War era, which still hold sway among all \nthe official bodies and orient, for the worst, the development of the EU \nin particular (not to mention China). The really obscene victory of US \nhegemony is making everyone desire and love this bloated form of \noverdevelopment.\n\nNow, I definitely do not have a one-dimensional view of all this, \nbecause the geopoliical study that I have carried on within the \nContinental Drift project definitely suggests that regional \nbloc-formation and the increasing sovereignty of countries that already \nhave a continental scale (China, India, Russia) is the wave of the \nfuture. I see two likely scenarios over the next 20 years. Either \ncontinued American decline will allow other major actors to literally \n\"buy in\" to the American hegemony, eventually achieving a true \nintra-imperial distribution of power and consequent tempering of the US \ncapacity to go lashing out with its military when the other major \nplayers do not agree -- and then we will really reach the state that \nHardt and Negri described in Empire. Or, the existence of any worldwide \nhegemony will gradually fade, and much greater power will accrue to the \ncontinental ensembles, giving rise to some kind of truly multi-polar \nworld. In the best of cases this could lead to the \"fractalization\" you \nsuggest, with interesting roles for multiple kinds of plurality in the \nsystem (not that there isn't plurality already, but this would be \nquantitatively and qualitatively different, more heterogeneous). Or, in \nthe worst of cases, we could easily get rivalries between blocs, \nresource wars, etc.\n\nThe obvious thing that keeps these scenarios at a distance is the \ngigantic disproportion between the US military and all the rest. But it \nmay be that popular resistance of all kinds will finally prove that to \nbe an \"ineffective disproportion\" -- finally answering Madeleine \nAlbright's famous question by showing that having such a great army \nreally is useless, and thus opening up the possibility, at least, of \nmore positive scenarios. This is the geopolitical reason why I am \nantimilitarist. The other reason is unreflected and immediate: I don' \nthink men with guns is the way to solve any problem.\n\n> Much rather I would opt for an approach focused on a simultaneous\n> localisation and multiplication of alternatives to such hegemonic forces\n> and leave the concept of Empire behind.\n\nIt can be a very good philosophical approach and also the right one, I \nthink, to base alternative strategies on (including aesthetic \nstrategies). However the trick is keeping reality enough in mind that \nyou can actually hope to change it, i.e. leave the military-industrial \npimp behind and find some better lover.\n\n> ---------\n> \n> Finally, on the reduction of American bases and how this plays out locally,\n> in the case of your report in S-Korea, highly fascinating!\n> \n> In such a localised address to a shift in 'hegemonic domination', I see\n> the most productive approach to a new form of social and cultural\n> critique. It will be very difficult to build that critique convincingly,\n> given the lingual, cultural, material, economic and social rifts that\n> separate the various actors that would need to be included in this, and\n> also given the reliance on a global pigeon-English that many of us are\n> struggling with..., but still this could be truly productive.\n\nYes, to the extent that we have a world society, we do need a cultural \ncritique that can work through global divides, with all the quite \nfascinating and, I think, rewarding difficulties that you mention. In my \nopinion, this kind of dialogical exchange is one of the ways to leave \nbehind the imperial tendency to oppressive hegemony, but without falling \nback into essentialism and identity-thinking.\n\n> A problem that worries me on a more day to day basis and that follows\n> directly from your account of the reduction and shifts of foreign US\n> military basis is the question of the demilitarisation of society, and the\n> technology and research sector in particular. It seems to me that there is\n> a continuing legacy of the cold war era in which the military / industrial\n> complex attempts to hold its ground, not just in the US, but also in the\n> Russian Federation and many of the post-Soviet and other 'Western' powers,\n> in terms of contracts, jobs, positions, production-infrastructures,\n> international market-shares, entrenched financial positions. I.e. this is\n> now a completely post-ideological space of political action.\n\nYou are so right. The vampires are keeping the cold warbody \"alive\" so \nthat they can maintain the dead-end mode of production that has been put \nin place since, or rather by, the Second World War.\n\n> Especially the domain of technological research and development has become\n> so deeply militarised (fuelled even further by the 'war on terror'\n> discourse) that it becomes difficult to imagine how to get rid of this\n> condition. A reliable inside source told me years ago that even a\n> relatively 'civil'-looking institution such as the MIT Media-Lab was at\n> the time supported for more than 65 percent by military funding, carrying\n> out projects that are conducted in utter secrecy, about which we can\n> safely assume that they exist, but about which we cannot get any reliable\n> information as to what they are and what they aim for. Stuff that you will\n> never see on their public web pages. No doubt this percentage has only\n> grown since, and it is presumably even worse in many other technological\n> R&D centres.\n >\n> How do \"we\" as cultural producers, critics, artists, deal with such\n> realities if we are so prominently working in and with the products of\n> this technological domain? How to bring this back to the civil domain?\n\nI think this remains the key question. In my reading, for instance, A \nThousand Plateaus is entirely about this question, it's about subverting \nand derailing the warmachine of the state, mostly from within, through \nthe undermining of what they call \"royal science.\" It is true that one \nalways works largely on the state's domain (that's the very definition \nof hegemony, it sets the terrain for everyone). So the question you \nraise is really the central problem, culturally as well as politically.\n\n> Some 'help' might be expected from the apparent economic demise of the US,\n> making it increasingly difficult to provide for the upkeep for the world's\n> largest army (hence the reduction and re-alignment of foreign US military\n> bases). In effect, the upkeep is currently mostly financed by China.\n\nActually, Japanese capital remains tremendously important as well... \nAlong with Middle Eastern and European money, the genius of empires has \nalways been to get others paying tribute. Basically because they want \nthe protection of -- or are frankly afraid of -- the empire's military. \nHowever, this seems to be headed for a change. A collapse of the dollar, \na real run on the dollar, would signify a radical change. We will see... \nI am not betting on it as I think that everyone is afraid of such a \nviolent turnabout. I think the strategy of the other world powers is to \nhollow the US out from the inside, and then just wait and see what can \nbe done about the hard core of the military, wait and see whether it \nwill really decline along with the middle class and the old bridges and \nlevees and so on. The strategy of the US, as Brzezinski said flat out in \nThe Grand Chessboard, is to hold on to hegemony as long as possible.\n\n> This\n> is, however, certainly not a problem of the US alone, and it plays out\n> very differently in different contexts. The shared problem faced is how to\n> turn this trend around (without a complete collapse), how to civilise the\n> technological domain?\n\nThanks, Eric, it is great to see that we can finally ask a big question \nagain. All that tactical shyness was kinda buggin' me...\n\n> This is one area where the search for alternatives seems highly urgent,\n> and it will require more than a process of mere 'negation' - A process of\n> negation of dominant symbolic modes of hegemonic domination only serves to\n> show that an infinity of other worlds is possible, I would say.\n\nIndeed, the continued return to avant-garde negation is pointless. I \nthink it is intimately bound up with the tautological self-reference of \nart to itself alone, which is strangely persistent, mainly because it \nwas institutionalized as the definition of modern art (another zombie \ncategory as Ulrich Beck puts it). My off-the-cuff manifesto was meant to \nsay that self-reference and radical negation ought to be things of the \npast for art - stages which have truly been overcome - so I heartily \nagree with the above!\n\n> Well anyway, just some thought on a damp Sunday afternoon (it's hot and\n> wet in Amsterdam).\n\nHmm, can we hope for more such reflective weather in the future? It's \npretty hot in Paris but it only rains at night!\n\n> bests,\n> Eric\n\nmy best to all as well, Brian\n\n\n# distributed via : no commercial use without permission\n# is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,\n# collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets\n# more info: http://mail.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l\n# archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime {AT} kein.org\n\n", diff --git a/selection/tm-selection.js b/selection/tm-selection.js index d06de7d..9970da4 100644 --- a/selection/tm-selection.js +++ b/selection/tm-selection.js @@ -112,6 +112,14 @@ { "list": "nettime_l", "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0305/msg00078.html" + }, + { + "list": "nettime_l", + "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-9906/msg00069.html" + }, + { + "list": "nettime_l", + "url": "https://nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0707/msg00025.html" } ], "desc": "..."