why a name?
'give it a name and it will exist'
/don't give it a name and others will make up a name for it/
= it will exist anyway
in a different form, though.

borut savski

the concept

- that we all work in parallel, communicating with 'our' remote friends and keep them active in any way
- use all computers there at full of their capacity: as transmitters, receivers, chats, instruments...
- that we bring our 'instruments' there
- to use exclusively production instead of reproduction (CDs...)
- to involve the interesting people there to do the same
- to disregard the 'one channel' logic
- to create a common platform of individual activities instead of the platform of common content.

borut savski

- one is the coordination and synchronisation of different roles during the event: who is at what time a "player", "technician", "producer"; who is creating the material, who is collecting it, mixing, restreaming... i lack a lot of technical knowledge to be able to think in terms of structurising this part, so i won't even try to go into details. but, an overall schedule (meaning, one coordinating all points) will probably have to be established before it becomes part of the offficial openx thing.
- sensitive question no.2: the balance between prepared and improvised material. both have their advantages and setbacks and both are neccessary. obviously, the improvised material brings much more in terms of creation and revelation, but it cannot carry the whole event. as to the prepared material, i would suggest a double role for it: it can be in function of the "primary material" (meaning the bearer of the content) or it can have the function of the "safety net". namely, there can be material that can work as a background when needed (a basis for weaving another content into it); but, when something goes wrong in the streaming from other points (which is always possible), it can take over the function of primary material simply by the fact that it has content, rhythm and structure and can last long enough for the other points to get back into streaming. for instance:
- sensitive question no. 3: the content. as an example of such "safety net" material, i would be interested to record during the first days of AEF a lot of atmospheric sounds, excerpts from talks and lectures, and whatever interesting i run onto while roaming around the place (if reni would be there, i'm sure she would do a similar thing). then i would choose the interesting parts and create a kind of sound tapestry that can be both a background or, if needed, a carrier. of course, it would be much better to have a possibility to jump randomly between the excerpts (moni - max? or, borut, just a minidisc with edited parts, plugged in the mixing desk and playing them randomly?). it seems to me that, contentwise, the linz crew should reflect also the place and occasion, especially since it is such a tricky one.

katarina pejovic

> X - stands for two senders who are listening back the signal of the > other at the same time, but do not resend (no loop) what they are > (getting) listening to.
...
> X - underlined - presents the same situation + the mix at the third > party destination.
...

marko kosnik

yes... i poerfectly agree... it's the only way to handle this kind of simulacrum... 'this illusion' of _simple_ communication...

> > well - maybe your right... but i think, you missed the player: > > - the net itself - (the 4th one)

martin schitter

well - maybe you're right... ;)) - but i think there is no such player as the net - the net is a structure, nothing but a structure, and - a hirarchical one... just like other structures surrounding us, made by ourselves, or otherselvesotherslaves instead of us for us, it has no own value ( darwinistic approach ?? no! but anyways..:)

monika glahn

> > it's some times a more dominating ghost than all these other actors... > epecialy, if it isn't explicit mentionned in this broad set of casts :) > > an then => the net playing with us... >

martin schitter