Hi !
I have to apologize for a recent posting of mine: I correct myself: it
does make NO sense to keep things "as a whole" further on. We HAVE to
split work , get started, and remain together on this list. That is how
the collaborative / collective creation can work. Nobody can explore
every detail of oudeis - but we have to keep close contact and an
extensive exchange of information.
To jump ahead in your mail, juli, the answer to your question nr.1 can
only be YES and YES again. MOO is a part of oudeis, as it grows and
develops and it will thus necessarily remain a part of it when it comes to
its realization.
When I said, we have to split our group and begin to work (yes really
work) independntly, I should include myself! I am still speaking with 2
voices: its Gernot and me combined. But to be honest, Gernot, you
strength does not lie in the exploration of the virtual world/space. On
the other hand, we desperately need you to furhter explore the real space
and its theatralic expansions, when it is added to the virtual space.
For those who have not been there physically, its hard to explain what
the beauty and the power of Gernot's work was in AEC. For me it was even
more visible, as I tried to do something similar in MMK before - and
failed. That's where Gernot defintely has to continue working on. The
Problem as expected and as raised above: how can we keep the flow of
information? How can we keep each other updated?
> I don't see it that way. I feel that the MOO part has had little or no
> attention from the team, which is not a criticism, just an observation.
Yes, you are right! I also apologize for that. What I meant was - and
that connects to my previous paragraph: I feel that this part, I can lie
into your hand and into Jim hands mainly, similar as I the part of the RL
realization lies in Gernot's hand.
> I believe in the oudeis project! But the oudeis that I believe in has a
> central part of it devoted to MOO. Perhaps this is the time for another
> show of hands.do WE want MOO in or out? If it's out, that is fine with
> me. But I sure would appreciate knowing where that issue stands so I
> don't spend time that could be devoted to other projects trying to
> incorporate athemoo where it is not wanted. I am NOT angry, quite the
> contrary. I am exhilerated. I am so interested in this debate that the
> night is ticking away and I can't leave the office!
As stated above - how can MOO ever be out of oudeis :) what would oudeis
be without MOO????????????
No, it was not included in the initial idea - that is finding
representatives of the virtual actors on the screen
but
- nobody says that the MOO is *not* a representatvie (in fact it is even
more than - what santiago described so well - a "comic"like represenation
might be)
- and I really LOVE the surf n turf client of MOO. it is SUCH a gerat
thing, it makes life so much easier ... uups what I wanted to say is: it
opens new opportunities for being included into the webstage. in fact it
gave me an idea how the webstage can look like - what java can do etc
(aaron? santiago?)
> Can this performance/demonstration be a MOO only demonstration? How can we
> set this up that people will be attracted? Who are the audience members?
> Are those people sitting in front of a computer all
> their workday long? Will they have to sit in front of our computer/screen
> all performance long?
>
> This is a good point, one we might discuss further. I think there is a
> way to make it work, for them and for us.
As we just met in MOO, Juli and me, I think many of my doubts have been
eliminated by your suggestion
juli&jim suggested a demo that
will start with a history of the project
then show video of sept
then do online performance, using a rented computer, projector,
and screen
then have discussion
Juli says, "that's the cheapest...."
MonikaW nods and smiles
Juli says, "the online performance would be full-on.....just as if there
were also the physical stages doing their thing"
Juli says, "but since all we show is moo, we don't have to do that part, can
nes, focus on what/how we want moo-web thing to work"
You say, "dan said we should not be driven by other peoples deadlines, but
this would 1) be a reason to start doing the webinterface 2) gernot could
if he wants to , try another RL aspect in Vienna (which would also be
important for the public sponsors there, they said again they want to "see"
something physically)
But , yes - let's focus on one aspect:
THE WEBINTERFACE
> Aarong again:
> c) therefore it follows you have no idea on where "we" (whatever
> that is) need to go.
>
> I disagree quite strongly. I have very clear ideas about where oudeis
> might go at this juncture. I think we should focus on the MOO/web.
> Monika has different ideas tho I think a similar interest in developing
> the athemoo part. But there is no point in going any further unless the
> team wants to do it. Unless the team is willing to move forward together.
> Our WE is a disparate one, that's the good news.with our combined
> strengths and creativity we can go far IF we combine them. Thus far, the
> We seems to be a large group of people who share an interest in the
> project.
Still oudeis needs a formulation of its common goal - is that what you
mean aaron?
> I. Despite our differences, we seem to want to do something there, but a
> decision hasn't been made. This is always a problem with collective work.
> Who makes the decision? Will the group disband if the decision doesn't
> please some members? Are we truly a collective or is someone among us the
> final decision-maker? Is there a hierarchy that I wasn't aware of?
> Hierarchies aren't always bad things so that comment was not a criticism,
> simply an honest question.
:) Yes we are a truly collective - waiting for the decsion maker. That's
mainly why oudies is still underdeveloped in so many aspects.
I often act as if I was the decision maker - but I never really have
been! I don't feel strong enough for this position yet. Who should it be?
Juli and I figured out what oudeis needs: it needs an organisation (yes a
central one) that will serve as the producer and provides us with the
"Executive Director"
Can kispro still fullfill this position? ARe we waiting for Gernot to be
the Executive Director. He should have more time to be the artistic
director! Karin serves as the Development Director.
(sorry guys, I am just spending 12 hours a day with my work for "arts
Adminstration " school)
Let's update our crew list! I hope georg will assist us with his
webskills, but let's put it together her. Maybe that would help us to
delegate responsibilities and work.
I am aware of the fact that a big obstacle is still there. This is the
fact that might have caused the frustration of Aaron and Jonny: When
itgoes to the actual work, this work has to be done locally, and so
locally somebody has to those who are asked to do "something" to articulate
what the ideas of the group are!
Let's stay with our visions but put them into work and realize them !
> Human-Computer Interface (HCI) Issues
> Virtual Reality
> 1. Will MOO be part of oudeis as it grows and develops.
yes
> 2. Will we propose something for Freiburg?
yes
> 3. What will we focus on if we do decide to go for it?
virtual actors (can we alos start working with our little lightcones)?
> 4. Who will write up the proposal?
...ahem you?
> 5. Will the proposal be for a panel, demonstration, or both?
demo
> 6. Who will go?
2-3 people from the team would be great. for the european participants at
least the travel would be less expensive
> 7. How much would one computer, a projector, and a screen cost? >
and who will pay for it?
CUsoon
Mon
-------------------alles Theater------------
Monika Wunderer wunderer@oudeis.org
http://st1hobel.phl.univie.ac.at/~wunderer/
http://www.oudeis.org
telnet://moo.hawaii.edu:9999