[D-G] unmoderated discussion list

charles hubaker solntsepyati at yahoo.com
Tue Sep 7 09:24:14 PDT 2010


It is just this opacity (shadow of the object)that makes the modus of the 
'trisexual' which we are investigating on the deleuzelist, so seductive. It is a 
concept pre-oedipal (Klein), an-oedipal (Deleuze): apart from mommy-daddy-me, it 
seems that the 'trisexual' motive is along the lines of Wahhabism.  As far as 
can be determined, there still is no internet access at Sukhumi, precisely where 
we are looking for resonance in the Seda case. At the least, there was no chance 
for moderation at Sukhumi during the times we are investigating, either.

From: Super Dragon <superdragon at addlebrain.com>
To: deleuze-guattari at lists.driftline.org
Sent: Sun, September 5, 2010 9:04:48 PM
Subject: Re: [D-G] unmoderated discussion list

Hi Charles
I remember the moderator debate years ago on Spoons. At the time, I was very 
anti the list being  moderated as I felt that list members could striate the 
space themselves for example, filtering out what each classified as junk mail 
rather than have a moderator do it.It didn't work-the list became full of 
narcissistic pseudo schizos whose sole purpose it seemed was to sabotage any 
form of debate.

Ten years on ( and still not much interesting debate) I have moved to the view 
that explicit light touch moderation is not such a bad idea as no striation 
results in undifferentiated mush. And, with the best will in the world, 
complaining that the moderator can't see why your post is a mess doesn't stop it 
being a mess! You can't have it both ways-the freedom of email is that it is not 
limited to local context even though it is undoubtedly limited by it. Sounds 
like the real frustration here is not moderation but getting a less restricted 
space to write at all. And with that I genuinely sympathize

Cheers R

--- solntsepyati at yahoo.com wrote:

> From: charles hubaker <solntsepyati at yahoo.com>
To: deleuze-guattari at lists.driftline.org
Subject: Re: [D-G] unmoderated discussion list
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2010 07:34:06 -0700 (PDT)

Three dimensions and context is what is relevant. Malgosia was not in the
library in Indiana where the attempt to transmit information to this list was
being made. The local gestapo having deliberately dumbed down the ergonomics
(crouched like a frog, peering into a cabinet to look at a computer screen,
while being videotaped buy security) makes the moderator's referral to the
message as 'a mess' quite out of context. This writer also has a spelling and
typo problem, but even without glasses, one should not worry too much about
spell checking. One should, however, worry about State surveillance. Thus, at
least one reason to eliminate the moderator.

We note the D&G-style article published a while back, on whale-viewing in
Australia. The author describes the experimentation of traffic flows. In another
location, the U.S., we see here (in three actual dimensions) a like experiment
whereby the median strip between lanes is (fenced[italics]) so that the
pedestrian has to do a kind of genuflexion and travel to the crooks of the
nazi-atheist cross (the intersection) to make either a left or right turn.
Again, the moderator is not there, but the moderator and other readers simply
have to take the writer's word for it ("I'm writing from the Kent State

List address: deleuze-guattari at driftline.org
Info: http://lists.driftline.org/listinfo.cgi/deleuze-guattari-driftline.org
Archives: www.driftline.org


More information about the Deleuze-Guattari mailing list