Chasing Eris

[Nephew Twiddleton]

It seems very much like you want to be a journalist, Dingo, so I'm curious about whether you have experience in the field. What have you reported on? What are your most important principles in producing a piece of journalism?

Could you give an example of a journalist, documentarian, or a particular piece of work that you hold in high esteem? What special considerations, if any, do you keep in mind in terms of writing about a culture that 1) you're an active participant in, 2) has nearly zero awareness among the broader public, and 3) that you have a vested interest in?

Hi Net!

Irrelevant, but it's been awhile.

Hey Blight!

I've been on an observant, contemplative trip lately. Since I type all day at work it's been one of the last things that I want to do after my 11-12 hour days.

I hear that. I'm back and school myself, so it's a bit iffy if I'll post or even read some days.

More power to the thinking dude. I hope it's a good trip.

It's been good all right.

I can't say much about it because it's often in relation to the multi-corporation clusterfuck at which I work and how fastidious they are about internet content that puts them in a bad light, let alone the non-disclosure agreement I signed.

Say no more. Good to see you again, glad it's good.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Dingo's recent actions positively REEK of Captain Utopia. Especially the part where he thinks he's being reasonable in spite of it being totally obvious to everyone else how utterly fucked up his words and actions are.

Dingo, there's no reason for me to ban you from PD (personal feelings aside) but I will have to absolutely insist that the Chasing Eris project and any future projects you might look to publish are not in any way connected to PD.com. I don't even want this site, any of the content in this site, or any of the usernames on this site mentioned at all, not even in passing.

Post seen.

Also, bump.

Talk to ECH re: this. I have contacted him regarding concerns, and he has said he will get back to me.

I'm not sure when or how you contacted me and what you're waiting for me to get back to you on. I already made my wishes clear.

Facebook messages 18/11/2012 (or 19th depending on how tomezones affect message date stamps), my message and your reply.
If you wish I can bump the conversation for you, or if you like I can disregard it and understand that the quote in this thread remains your full and only position.

You are correct, and I completely forgot about it. But I feel exactly how LMNO described a few pages back, so I'm not feeling all that charitable about it. I'd really prefer if PD.com was left out of the book.

Also, what's up with him and the "oh he didn't mean what he said, I'll pretend it was unclear and ask for clarification"?

[East Coast Hustle]

It was more of a "hey, if I interview people and they mention PD.com in the interview I'm probably gonna use it unless my lawyers tell me I have to redact the name of the forum because editorial control blah blah blah".

Or, in the more common vernacular, it was more of a "hey, fuck you guys".

[East Coast Hustle]

The reality is, obviously, that I won't bother pursuing any legal action even if any were possible. I don't have access to the sort of funds that Dingo seems to have laying around, nor the time to waste on something so petty. But the final editorial decision will certainly reveal a whole lot about his character.

[Pæs]

I'm basically already committed to WOMPing his head onto TERRIBLE THINGS, hosting them somewhere and then making sure that's the first thing that comes up when you Google "Chasing Eris".

I mean, I don't especially dislike the guy, it just seems appropriate.

[Placid Dingo]

Q: Do you think that including LS content could possibly increase the appeal to publishers or increase sales of the published book? 

A: Short answer is no. Longer answer is that I didn't really consider it strongly one way or the other. 

A: Suppose a publisher said they'd print your work but only if you edit it to include more emphasis on LS and people's various reactions to his opinions. Would you edit it to appease the publisher? Or suppose a publisher said they looked up LS and said there is no way they're publishing the book if you include his interview? 

A: While being pretty hesitant to go too far down the path of hypotheticals, I will say a few things about this. First is that yes, the publisher does get to make suggestions that other participants do not. I am pretty sure I've alluded to that before.
Also, I have a potential publisher, who I won't name just yet out of avoiding presumption*, but they are someone I feel secure in being able to work with. As I've said before I do still regard myself as Discordian, and have a vested interest in displaying Discordia fairly and accurately, so while it's plausible that a publisher could ask me to make choices that would not meet this goal, the publisher I've spoken with is involved in Discordia, and I do trust them not to ask me to make choices that damage the integrity of the work. If it falls through with the current publisher and I work with someone else, naturally I will evaluate suggestions and if it takes things in a direction I'm uncomfortable with I'm willing to look at alternative options. 

Q: How important is it to you that these interviews are published? 

A: I suspect everything will be published at some point, as stand alone interviews or in the book. But how important is it that any given interview is published in the book? Not especially. It's important that I have the best final product possible and for that reason I have some favourites, but I'm prepared for the brutality of judgement that comes with the cut and burn of the editing process (the horror! The horror!)

Q: How important is it that you recoup costs? How important is it that you make a profit? And how do these interests relate to your editorial decisions?

A: This project, on paper, makes no sense. The short answer to the first two questions is that I don't realistically have any expectation of recouping costs and therefore have less expectation of making a profit. From a financial standpoint this project is a weird thing to do. From the standpoint of being in a bit of a rut, in a small town I'd grown frustrated by and a desire to produce something creative, it makes more sense. My main hope with this is that I produce something interesting and high quality enough that I can start to open up creative opportunities for myself that I didn't have access to previously.







*not Anaphora, before the conspiracy theory starts forming.

[Faust]

Dingo's recent actions positively REEK of Captain Utopia. Especially the part where he thinks he's being reasonable in spite of it being totally obvious to everyone else how utterly fucked up his words and actions are.

Dingo, there's no reason for me to ban you from PD (personal feelings aside) but I will have to absolutely insist that the Chasing Eris project and any future projects you might look to publish are not in any way connected to PD.com. I don't even want this site, any of the content in this site, or any of the usernames on this site mentioned at all, not even in passing.

Post seen.

Also, bump.

Talk to ECH re: this. I have contacted him regarding concerns, and he has said he will get back to me.

I'm not sure when or how you contacted me and what you're waiting for me to get back to you on. I already made my wishes clear.

Facebook messages 18/11/2012 (or 19th depending on how tomezones affect message date stamps), my message and your reply.
If you wish I can bump the conversation for you, or if you like I can disregard it and understand that the quote in this thread remains your full and only position.

You are correct, and I completely forgot about it. But I feel exactly how LMNO described a few pages back, so I'm not feeling all that charitable about it. I'd really prefer if PD.com was left out of the book.

I'd make an exception:
This is a repository of every Discordian material I can get my hands on, nothing there is for sale, it's all hosted here and I want to include this in it.
http://www.principiadiscordia.com/readinglist.php

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

Dingo was here in the UK with Purpleris and I a couple weeks ago. I'm sure we discussed PD.com in our interviews, both because that's how we met and because I went on a long rant about how wrong I was in my initial observations on BiP and some other stuff. I personally think its absurd to request that the website not be mentioned when some (but not all) of the Discordians interviewed know each other because of this forum and it plays a part in their life directly related to the topic being discussed.

Also, having met Dingo and talked about this entire mess... well I'm sorry some of you decided not to be involved, because thus far, its looking like lots of good material from many Discordians, Discordian history and Discordian groups... Based on what I know at this point, it looks like IF RL gets mentioned, it would be in a small email interview that's pretty much nothing. Fears that it would somehow taint everyone else seem, to me, absurd. I was impressed with Dingo and with some of the material I looked at. It may well end up being a damned good snapshot of Discordia in the 21st century and I'm sorry that some rather smart and cool Discordians chose not to participate.

[Junkenstein]

For the ignorant and interested, what's the deal with Uncle BadTouch? Various allegations make him seem less than savoury to say the least and if any of them have any substance then it makes some of the decisions taken ITT very strange indeed.

[Bebek Sincap Ratatosk]

For the ignorant and interested, what's the deal with Uncle BadTouch? Various allegations make him seem less than savoury to say the least and if any of them have any substance then it makes some of the decisions taken ITT very strange indeed.

Uncle BadTouch is a guy that says many things... some of those things appear to be real, some appear to be bullshit... indeed verylarge% seems to be bullshit. One of his pet things to rant about is that its not right/fair for there to be an age of consent, since he had a good first sexual experience as an underaged person with an adult. He sadly takes this opinion and stretches beyond the realm of credulity and it seems to be a pretty huge bar in his personal BiP. This led to normal PD fistacuffs and Uncle BadTouch went way too far trying to defend the idea and came off sounding like a pederast. He may or may not be a pederast, but it was squicky enough that his Golden Apple got Black Balled.

On top of that he often sticks his name on other work, takes credit for stuff he hasn't done or has only had a small hand in... added other peoples name to his stuff and generally behaves in a way that makes the little 17th century British guy in my head say "Bad Form, Sir!"

All in all, some guy who has his name plastered all over the Internet as being a big part of Discordia... but in reality he seems more like a blow hard to me.

[Faust]

It is pretty much all hot air from him.

He and this site were investigated the year before I took over hosting it. Nothing was found or he would have been prosecuted. Chances are he is just an unpleasant sleazy man with delusions about sexuality which could be harmful if anyone listened to him. Which they don't.

[hooplala]

Q: Do you think that including LS content could possibly increase the appeal to publishers or increase sales of the published book?

A: Short answer is no. Longer answer is that I didn't really consider it strongly one way or the other.

A: Suppose a publisher said they'd print your work but only if you edit it to include more emphasis on LS and people's various reactions to his opinions. Would you edit it to appease the publisher? Or suppose a publisher said they looked up LS and said there is no way they're publishing the book if you include his interview?

A: While being pretty hesitant to go too far down the path of hypotheticals, I will say a few things about this. First is that yes, the publisher does get to make suggestions that other participants do not. I am pretty sure I've alluded to that before.
Also, I have a potential publisher, who I won't name just yet out of avoiding presumption*, but they are someone I feel secure in being able to work with. As I've said before I do still regard myself as Discordian, and have a vested interest in displaying Discordia fairly and accurately, so while it's plausible that a publisher could ask me to make choices that would not meet this goal, the publisher I've spoken with is involved in Discordia, and I do trust them not to ask me to make choices that damage the integrity of the work. If it falls through with the current publisher and I work with someone else, naturally I will evaluate suggestions and if it takes things in a direction I'm uncomfortable with I'm willing to look at alternative options.

Q: How important is it to you that these interviews are published?

A: I suspect everything will be published at some point, as stand alone interviews or in the book. But how important is it that any given interview is published in the book? Not especially. It's important that I have the best final product possible and for that reason I have some favourites, but I'm prepared for the brutality of judgement that comes with the cut and burn of the editing process (the horror! The horror!)

Q: How important is it that you recoup costs? How important is it that you make a profit? And how do these interests relate to your editorial decisions?

A: This project, on paper, makes no sense. The short answer to the first two questions is that I don't realistically have any expectation of recouping costs and therefore have less expectation of making a profit. From a financial standpoint this project is a weird thing to do. From the standpoint of being in a bit of a rut, in a small town I'd grown frustrated by and a desire to produce something creative, it makes more sense. My main hope with this is that I produce something interesting and high quality enough that I can start to open up creative opportunities for myself that I didn't have access to previously.







*not Anaphora, before the conspiracy theory starts forming.

I think it's really cute how you interview yourself whenever anyone asks a couple questions.

[Anna Mae Bollocks]

I'm basically already committed to WOMPing his head onto TERRIBLE THINGS, hosting them somewhere and then making sure that's the first thing that comes up when you Google "Chasing Eris".

I mean, I don't especially dislike the guy, it just seems appropriate.

Some google bombing and redirects to the bodyshake page might be in order.
We could even make a new word out of "Uncle BadTouch". You know, like they did with "Santorum".

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Q: Do you think that including LS content could possibly increase the appeal to publishers or increase sales of the published book?

A: Short answer is no. Longer answer is that I didn't really consider it strongly one way or the other.

A: Suppose a publisher said they'd print your work but only if you edit it to include more emphasis on LS and people's various reactions to his opinions. Would you edit it to appease the publisher? Or suppose a publisher said they looked up LS and said there is no way they're publishing the book if you include his interview?

A: While being pretty hesitant to go too far down the path of hypotheticals, I will say a few things about this. First is that yes, the publisher does get to make suggestions that other participants do not. I am pretty sure I've alluded to that before.
Also, I have a potential publisher, who I won't name just yet out of avoiding presumption*, but they are someone I feel secure in being able to work with. As I've said before I do still regard myself as Discordian, and have a vested interest in displaying Discordia fairly and accurately, so while it's plausible that a publisher could ask me to make choices that would not meet this goal, the publisher I've spoken with is involved in Discordia, and I do trust them not to ask me to make choices that damage the integrity of the work. If it falls through with the current publisher and I work with someone else, naturally I will evaluate suggestions and if it takes things in a direction I'm uncomfortable with I'm willing to look at alternative options.

Q: How important is it to you that these interviews are published?

A: I suspect everything will be published at some point, as stand alone interviews or in the book. But how important is it that any given interview is published in the book? Not especially. It's important that I have the best final product possible and for that reason I have some favourites, but I'm prepared for the brutality of judgement that comes with the cut and burn of the editing process (the horror! The horror!)

Q: How important is it that you recoup costs? How important is it that you make a profit? And how do these interests relate to your editorial decisions?

A: This project, on paper, makes no sense. The short answer to the first two questions is that I don't realistically have any expectation of recouping costs and therefore have less expectation of making a profit. From a financial standpoint this project is a weird thing to do. From the standpoint of being in a bit of a rut, in a small town I'd grown frustrated by and a desire to produce something creative, it makes more sense. My main hope with this is that I produce something interesting and high quality enough that I can start to open up creative opportunities for myself that I didn't have access to previously.







*not Anaphora, before the conspiracy theory starts forming.

I think it's really cute how you interview yourself whenever anyone asks a couple questions.

If "cute" is a euphemism for "batshit", then I agree.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Dingo was here in the UK with Purpleris and I a couple weeks ago. I'm sure we discussed PD.com in our interviews, both because that's how we met and because I went on a long rant about how wrong I was in my initial observations on BiP and some other stuff. I personally think its absurd to request that the website not be mentioned when some (but not all) of the Discordians interviewed know each other because of this forum and it plays a part in their life directly related to the topic being discussed.

Also, having met Dingo and talked about this entire mess... well I'm sorry some of you decided not to be involved, because thus far, its looking like lots of good material from many Discordians, Discordian history and Discordian groups... Based on what I know at this point, it looks like IF RL gets mentioned, it would be in a small email interview that's pretty much nothing. Fears that it would somehow taint everyone else seem, to me, absurd. I was impressed with Dingo and with some of the material I looked at. It may well end up being a damned good snapshot of Discordia in the 21st century and I'm sorry that some rather smart and cool Discordians chose not to participate.

This is me not giving a shit.

He chose a pretty skeevy way of handling the whole thing, and has a fixation on "control". He can go fuck himself, I want nothing to do with him or any of his projects. Ever.

It started out just not wanting to participate in a project that involved Uncle BadTouch (and for the record, a number of us here made it clear that we won't participate in anything involving Uncle BadTouch before Dingo ever came along) but Dingo's dishonesty and dismissiveness have morphed it into not wanting to participate in a project that involves him. As far as I'm concerned he's the philosophical love child of Uncle BadTouch and Ben Mack.