> within that notion of space, the list claims that technology changes the
> nature of space, and from that premise aims to explore how space - be it
> social space, public space, net space, etc. - is produced, structured and
> navigated.
This is already a problem; the claim has been made for decades. And how
does a "list" make a claim here? This is the reification of the subject -
and it is also problematic in terms of governance. Am I part of the list?
Do I necessarily submit to the claim?
I agree with your claim, by the way, but it's as if the list is supposed
to be in the service of another domain, that of _space_ and theory out-
lined elsewhere - as if the list were a marker or token you assume is in
agreement. (I may be missing the point; in fact, everyone might be in
ageement on this list, part of another group - since there seems to be a
common approach/vocabulary, I'm beginning to feel that way.)
Alan (I've written on a lot of the material below, at my websites, but
that's not the point here)
>
> possible discussion topics on blast:
> What is netspace?
> How is the idea of transportation/movement changed by digital technology?
> Is there an "architecture" of the web outside of the computers and wires?
> At the level of discourse, what rules govern transfer of information?
> How do people *read* space? How to people *speak* into that space?
>
> + + +
>
> ideas? comments? ==> blast@forum.documenta.de
>
> -ag
>