Nettime Survey (1995-2016)

Synopsis

While contemporary social media have been critiqued for their ephemeral effects on activist politics, the mailing list has proven an enduring venue for geographically dispersed communities to participate and remain in dialog over the course of decades. Founded in Amsterdam in 1995, the Nettime mailing list (http://nettime.org) has played host to a community of activists and media artists and help to launch or establish the careers of a number of prominent new media theorists and Internet critics. Established in an era prior to the corporatization of the Web, over the course of its twenty first years (1995-2016), Nettime has continued to discuss the Web in terms of the radical political possibilities with which it was imagined in its ‘salad days’.

This project aims to trace the evolution of Nettime (more precisely nettime-l) through a survey of its mailing list's archive (http://nettime.org/archives.php).

Survey

During our quick investigation of Nettime's list structure and content, we came up with three main clusters of questions that we subsequently approached in our study.

It is worth noting that our study does not (at this stage) present a discourse analysis of the content of the mailing list per se. Rather, we used the structure of the list itself (the "meta-data" so to speak) to infer a type of "time series" of the networked activity that occurred on the list in the past 21 years (1995-2016).

Activity

There are a few instances where Nettime talks to itself, notably to inform the list of the number of its subscribers. These messages usually report certain subscription milestones, and from the current archive, we have identified six of these messages (listed in the table below) which gives an idea of the 'subscription rate' of Nettime over the years.

One can clearly see that this rate increases at the beginning of the 00's, flattens out between 2002 and 2005, diminishes considerably between 2005 and 2011 and increases slightly between 2011 and 2015. More precisely, if, for the sake of argument, we were to assume the subscription rate to be linear (which of course is not really), then from 1995 to 2001 the rate is roughly 33 subscriptions/month, from 2001 to 2002 it is 66 subscriptions/month (600 in 9 months), from 2002 to 2004 it accounts to 27 subscriptions/month, from 2004 to 2005 to 25 subscriptions/month, form 2005 to 2011 it drops to 6 subscriptions/month and finally it amounts to 10 subscriptions/month from 2011 to 2015.

Subscribers Date Reference
4500 (N4.5K) 09/2015 https://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1509/msg00035.html
4000 (N4K) 11/2011 https://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-1111/msg00041.html
3500 (N3.5K) 04/2005 http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0504/msg00003.html
3250 (N3.25K) 06/2004 http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0407/msg00029.html
2600 (N2.6K) 06/2002 http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0207/msg00087.html
2000 (N2K) 09/2001 http://www.nettime.org/Lists-Archives/nettime-l-0109/msg00133.html

table 0: Nettime's subscriptions digest

Put simply, 3500 subscribers joined Nettime in the first 10 years of its existence, and it took 10 years for another 1000 subscribers to join them.

Though this is only subscriptions. Not everyone post to the list. So what about the actual number of messages over time?

figure 0: Sum of first message instances per month

figure 0: Sum of first message instances per month

What we colloquially refer to as a "cohort" resembles, to some degree, the notion of subscription rate discussed above. Both notions speak to the idea of Nettime's "newcomers". Though rather than consisting of the sheer amount of subscriptions over time (data which is not available from the archive), we consider when a message first appeared on the list given an email address provenance. The graph of figure 0 displays the sum of these "first message" instances per month (50 months quintiles). A spike in the graph could be read as the formation of a new cohort, that is, an increase in the activity of newcomers, which may signify, albeit hypothetically, that an aggregate of common interests are brought forth on the list.

Theres are observable spikes that appear here and there through out the months and years in figure 0, however, these are short lived (max 6 months). What is more striking is the sustained activity that occurred in first two quintiles of the graph (1996-2004). This activity can be correlated with the high subscription rate described earlier. Though, unlike subscriptions, the amount of "first messages" peaked around the year 2000, rather than between 2001-2002 (66 subscriptions/month). Let us call this peak the 2000 cohort.

After 2004, the number of first messages declines. As noted below, this can be attributed to the creation of nettime-ann in 2005, which rerouted announcement-type activity out off nettime-l. Nonetheless, it can be argued, when considering the low subscription rate in the interval 2005-2011 (6 subscriptions/month), that the barely noticeable peaks of 2008 and 2011 are significant. Thus Nettime may harbor more than a single 2000 cohort, 2008 and 2011 being the other two though remarkably less momentous than the first one.

figure 1: Total number of messages on Nettime

figure 1: Total number of messages on Nettime

The graph above illustrates the total amount of messages that have been posted on Nettime over two decades. It is clear that, as with the subscription rates and the cohorts, the list was most active in 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, and 2003. It diminished considerably in 2004 and plateaued (more or less) until 2010, then increased in 2011 and decreased again the last 5 years.

In our conversations with Geert Lovink, we derived a few observations on the data at hand, mainly that:

Was Nettime's heyday only part of the first decade of its existence? Judged solely in terms of sheer amount of postings to the list (activity), it clearly can be seen to have diminished. However, in what follows, we propose different schemata, measuring the amount of dialog on the list (vigour) as well categorizing that dialog by the most prolific contributors (outspokeness).

Vigour

A mailing list certainly lay itself to announcements-type messages where a single message is posted to the list while no one does and/or is expected to reply. Yet, more importantly, what mailing lists also allow is to produce 'threads' which are formed around a varying amount of replies to an initial message. These threads form the basis of an asynchronous 'dialog' so to speak. As introduce in the previous section, we came up with the term 'vigour' to account for this practice of replying to messages, which, in turn, create 'dialogical' dynamics between some of the list's members.

Our study surveys Nettime's vigour by analyzing the 'who' and 'when' of the list's thread formation. What follows is an overall (initial) measure of this vigour over time.

Year Messages Threads Replies Avg. Threads Ratio Replies per Thread
1995 55 3 4 0.0545 1.3333
1996 575 64 108 0.1113 1.6875
1997 1305 194 348 0.1487 1.7938
1998 1286 78 126 0.0607 1.6154
1999 2449 148 229 0.0604 1.5473
2000 2766 283 657 0.1023 2.3216
2001 2338 248 477 0.1061 1.9234
2002 2043 246 431 0.1204 1.7520
2003 1669 210 420 0.1258 2
2004 967 125 244 0.1293 1.9520
2005 814 115 228 0.1413 1.9826
2006 839 110 302 0.1311 2.7455
2007 886 132 412 0.1490 3.1212
2008 1068 212 573 0.1985 2.7028
2009 1076 191 611 0.1775 3.1990
2010 758 161 458 0.2124 2.8447
2011 1324 270 802 0.2039 2.9704
2012 1005 191 607 0.1900 3.1780
2013 697 129 330 0.1851 2.5581
2014 851 118 389 0.1387 3.2966
2015 803 98 304 0.1220 3.1020
2016 698 80 350 0.1146 4.3750

table 1: Nettime list's components (message, threads, replies) year by year

It is worth noting and explaining here the nomenclature/taxonomy used in the survey. First, the survey differentiates between what is called a 'message' and a 'thread', a message being anything that is posted on the list while a thread is a message that has at least one reply (a type of message that initiates a 'dialog'/thread). Every thread is a message but not all messages are threads. Second, the survey differentiates between what is dubbed a 'reply' and a thread. A reply is typically a reply to a thread, or, differently put, it is a reply to a message that makes this initial message a thread. Thus reply and thread are closely connected yet different. Needless to say that, as for the case of a thread, a reply is a message but not all messages are replies. Finally, there is single messages, ones that are neither threads or replies. The following chart is a breakdown of figure 1, following this 'message-thread-reply' taxonomy.

figure 2: Total number of (1) single messages, (2) threads and (3) replies to threads

figure 2: Total number of (1) single messages, (2) threads and (3) replies to threads

What becomes clear from the chart above is how the ratio of replies and threads versus the sheer amount of messages increases considerably in the last 10 years. While the volume of messages decreases, the average number of 'dialogical' messages increases (threads and replies). The following charts attest this (quite simple and obvious) observation.

figure 3: Average of the sum of threads and replies

figure 3: Average of the sum of threads and replies

figure 4: Difference of the sum of threads and replies versus single messages

figure 4: Difference of the sum of threads and replies versus single messages

According to our survey, it is fair to say that Nettime has become a more dialogical mailing list in the second decade of its existence. Since 2006, the list steadily churns out, on average, more threads and replies than single messages posting; in other words, less announcements and more discussions/dialogs.

The following chart (figure 5) shows an even more sustained trend that complements our observations, that is, the ratio of the number of replies per thread. This steady, almost linear, increase over time of the number of replies to given threads shows a certain 'maturity' of the list as it demonstrates how Nettime dialogs are composed of an increasing number of messages and interlocutors.

figure 5: Ratio of number of replies per thread

figure 5: Ratio of number of replies per thread

While there are many reasons that can explain this shift in the list's activities and behaviours (branching off of nettime-ann in 2005, the 'rise' of political activism since 2008, the list's subscribers knowing each other, etc.) our survey nonetheless observes a sustained trend towards Nettime developing a 'thread culture' as opposed to an earlier 'announcement culture'. Yet, since we are not performing discourse analysis of the content of the list, it is impossible to correlate a shift of discourse which could, potentially, accompany such a shift of culture.

Coming back to our notion of 'vigour' (as described in the previous section), our survey clearly demonstrates that Nettime is more vigourous then ever, as it harbours more dialogs (threads and replies) on average than it did in its early 'salad days'. While the subscription rate may have decreased in the last decade, Nettime, nonetheless, seems to have become an durable/stable dialogical space that features an increasing amount participation from its members.

Outspokenness

What messages have being discussed the most on Nettime? Who are the list's most prolific contributors in terms of (1) messages, (2) threads and (3) replies? In this section, we are interested in ranking messages and contributors according to their respective (brute) statistics derived from the archive. What follows is a set of self-explanatory tables and figures that have been produced with these statistics.

Activity (aka. messages)

From Messages
geert{at}xs4all.nl 888
patrice{at}xs4all.nl 726
tbyfield{at}panix.com 447
sondheim{at}panix.com 388
morlockelloi{at}yahoo.com 260
jya{at}pipeline.com 245
bhcontinentaldrift{at}gmail.com 220
bruces{at}well.com 199
brian.holmes{at}wanadoo.fr 190
jaromil{at}dyne.org 184

table 2: Top 10 contributors ranking for total amount of messages

figure 6: Top 10 contributors ranking for total amount of messages over time

figure 6: Top 10 contributors ranking for total amount of messages over time

Threads

From (Initiated) Threads)
geert{at}xs4all.nl 145
patrice{at}xs4all.nl 126
felix{at}openflows.com 60
bhcontinentaldrift{at}gmail.com 58
tbyfield{at}panix.com 56
brian.holmes{at}wanadoo.fr 46
jaromil{at}dyne.org 40
sondheim{at}panix.com 39
jya{at}pipeline.com 36
newmedia{at}aol.c 34

table 3: Top 10 contributors ranking for total amount of (initiated) threads

From Messages Threads Avg. Threads
felix{at}openflows.com 181 60 0.3315
f{at}mediafilter.org 62 20 0.3226
armin{at}easynet.co.uk 74 22 0.2973
mckenziewark{at}hotmail.com 75 21 0.2800
bhcontinentaldrift{at}gmail.com 220 58 0.2636
stalder{at}fis.utoronto.ca 95 25 0.2632
anansi1{at}earthlink.net 76 20 0.2632
dk{at}telekommunisten.net 88 22 0.2500
brian.holmes{at}wanadoo.fr 190 46 0.2421
jaromil{at}dyne.org 184 40 0.2174

table 4: Top 10 contributors ranking for average amount of (initiated) threads

Replies

Our survey's replies statistics are divided into two categories: (1) replies to a thread initiated by a given contributor ('replies to') and (2) replies originating from a given contributor ('replies from')

From Replies
geert{at}xs4all.nl 483
patrice{at}xs4all.nl 311
bhcontinentaldrift{at}gmail.com 263
felix{at}openflows.com 175
brian.holmes{at}wanadoo.fr 145
jaromil{at}dyne.org 128
tbyfield{at}panix.com 128
jya{at}pipeline.com 112
dk{at}telekommunisten.net 104
newmedia{at}aol.c 102

table 5: Top 10 contributors ranking for total amount of 'replies to'

figure 7: Top 10 contributors ranking for total amount of 'replies to' over time

figure 7: Top 10 contributors ranking for total amount of 'replies to' over time

From Threads Replies Avg. Replies
flrncrmr{at}gmail.com 12 59 4.9167
dk{at}telekommunisten.net 22 104 4.7273
bhcontinentaldrift{at}gmail.com 58 263 4.5345
alex.foti{at}gmail.com 24 96 4
armin{at}easynet.co.uk 22 83 3.7727
lotu5{at}resist.ca 16 59 3.6875
geert{at}xs4all.nl 145 483 3.3310
jaromil{at}dyne.org 40 128 3.2000
brian.holmes{at}wanadoo.fr 46 145 3.1522
jya{at}pipeline.com 36 112 3.1111

table 6: Top 10 contributors ranking for average amount of 'replies to'

From Replies
morlockelloi{at}yahoo.com 248
jya{at}pipeline.com 199
bhcontinentaldrift{at}gmail.com 175
tbyfield{at}panix.com 167
jhopkins{at}neoscenes.net 151
patrice{at}xs4all.nl 148
brian.holmes{at}wanadoo.fr 118
jaromil{at}dyne.org 115
newmedia{at}aol.c 110
mgoldh{at}well.com 110

table 7: Top 10 contributors ranking for amount of 'replies from'

From Messages Replies Avg. Replies
morlockelloi{at}yahoo.com 260 248 0.9538
rob{at}robmyers.org 84 78 0.9286
carlg{at}vermilion-sands.com 68 61 0.8971
benjamin.geer{at}gmail.com 93 82 0.8817
heikorecktenwald{at}googlemail.com 88 77 0.8750
jhopkins{at}neoscenes.net 177 151 0.8531
porculus{at}wanadoo.fr 123 102 0.8293
jya{at}pipeline.com 245 199 0.8122
matze.schmidt{at}n0name.de 85 69 0.8118
bhcontinentaldrift{at}gmail.com 220 175 0.7955

table 8: Top 10 contributors ranking for average amount of 'replies from'

Most replied messages overall (1995-2016)

Date Subject From Replies
2015-04-01 07:35:14 <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim nettime{at}kein.org 48
2016-11-09 09:44:53 <nettime> What is the meaning of Trump's victory? bhcontinentaldrift{at}gmail.com 37
2014-05-11 15:57:28 <nettime> tensions within the bay area elites geert{at}xs4all.nl 35
2011-05-13 06:52:45 <nettime> ISEA 2011 fees nak44{at}cornell.edu 34
2003-10-01 06:36:04 Re: <nettime> A Puff Piece on Wikipedia (Fwd) sdela{at}ahk.nl 29
2006-06-06 19:51:17 <nettime> report_on_NNA tobias{at}techno.ca 29
2016-02-12 21:33:21 <nettime> notes from the DIEM25 launch geert{at}xs4all.nl 27
2012-08-27 13:21:03 <nettime> crowd-funding on nettim nettime{at}kein.org 26
2012-05-03 08:43:01 <nettime> The insult of the 1 percent: "Art-history majors" bhcontinentaldrift{at}gmail.com 25
2009-09-21 22:58:08 <nettime> Has Facebook superseded Nettime? fc-nettime{at}pleintekst.nl 23

table 9: Top 10 most replied messages

Most replied messages per year (1995-2016)

1995
Date Subject From Replies
1995-12-14 22:02:24 No geert{at}xs4all.nl 2
1995-11-19 17:01:30 Utopian Promises-Net Realities / Critical Art Ensembl pit{at}uropax.contrib.de 1
1995-11-13 22:31:48 No geert{at}xs4all.nl 1
1996
Date Subject From Replies
1996-01-04 12:17:28 No geert{at}xs4all.nl 7
1996-05-07 11:40:08 distribution matt{at}aec.at 6
1996-01-07 02:17:55 The Disappearance of Public Space on the N f{at}mediafilter.org 6
1996-12-10 02:21:59 nettime: "Wired?" cbertsch{at}crl.com 4
1996-11-01 16:09:16 Re: nettime: net.weight launch vuk{at}kud-fp.si 3
1997
Date Subject From Replies
1997-06-16 00:59:00 <nettime> Translation: The vagina is the boss on intern sigorney{at}knoware.nl 10
1997-08-05 11:03:19 <nettime> Olia Lialina interview Ljubljana jesis{at}xs4all.nl 10
1997-06-17 20:57:31 <nettime> bossy cunts onlin gashgirl{at}sysx.apana.org.au 9
1997-08-05 11:39:38 <nettime> net.<foo> sondheim{at}panix.com 9
1997-08-05 18:18:27 Re: <nettime> net.<foo> jesis{at}xs4all.nl 8
1998
Date Subject From Replies
1998-03-12 06:05:49 <nettime> Technorealism davidsol{at}panix.com 5
1998-12-15 14:26:18 <nettime> net.times, not swatch tim geert{at}xs4all.nl 5
1998-02-05 20:42:10 <nettime> The Californian Demonology markdery{at}well.com 4
1998-10-12 07:06:34 <nettime.free> Re: many questions! cinque{at}kdi.com 4
1998-07-28 16:12:21 <nettime> Net Criticism 2.0/network extension crandall{at}blast.org 4
1999
Date Subject From Replies
1999-09-06 02:28:42 <nettime> Linux wins Prix Ars due to MICROSOFT INTERVENTION marleen{at}dds.nl 15
1999-08-23 09:18:48 <nettime> Fragments of Network Criticism geert{at}xs4all.nl 10
1999-11-09 02:23:14 <nettime> Re: olia lialina: Re:art.hacktivism snafu{at}kyuzz.org 8
1999-11-22 03:23:36 <nettime> e-LITISM (UK and beyond) geert{at}desk.nl 7
1999-04-06 19:52:16 <nettime> Digital Resistance: WWW War... geert{at}xs4all.nl 4
2000
Date Subject From Replies
2000-07-22 20:13:35 <nettime> Terror in Tune Town mwark{at}laurel.ocs.mq.edu.au 21
2000-09-09 23:06:37 <nettime> draft article on WTO jbunzl{at}simpol.org 21
2000-11-11 05:00:57 <nettime> Cellphones and the Cancer of Cellspa mollybh{at}pop.netspace.net.au 17
2000-12-03 06:42:02 <nettime> Fw: Enemies of the Futur geert{at}xs4all.nl 11
2000-06-12 03:36:14 <nettime> [talk given at tulipomania dotcom] ar4{at}is.nyu.edu 11
2001
Date Subject From Replies
2001-02-13 15:53:12 <nettime> Usenet archives sold? nda{at}ais.org 19
2001-01-06 22:26:54 <nettime> Disassociate Webdesign from Usability geert{at}xs4all.nl 11
2001-12-12 00:56:27 <nettime> The Fading Altruism of Open Source Developmen oliver{at}firstfloor.org 9
2001-03-14 18:29:52 <nettime> Armor, Amour crandall{at}blast.org 8
2001-01-10 20:11:23 RE: <nettime> don't Disassociate Webdesign (as an aspect of app engineering) from Usability talan{at}percepticon.com 8
2002
Date Subject From Replies
2002-11-01 23:43:27 <nettime> From Tactical Media to Digital Multitudes geert{at}xs4all.nl 11
2002-07-03 15:56:54 <nettime> the language of tactical media subsol{at}mi2.hr 10
2002-04-17 04:06:49 <nettime> The Economist: The Internet sells its soul geert{at}xs4all.nl 8
2002-10-20 20:51:23 <nettime> 'IANA' to revoke .su ccTLD? nettime{at}bbs.thing.net 7
2002-12-01 11:49:32 Re: <nettime> joxe's empire of disorder hart_keith{at}compuserve.com 7
2003
Date Subject From Replies
2003-10-01 06:36:04 Re: <nettime> A Puff Piece on Wikipedia (Fwd) sdela{at}ahk.nl 29
2003-10-15 09:56:37 <nettime> Linux strikes back III auskadi{at}tvcabo.co.mz 19
2003-10-04 22:32:02 <nettime> New Media Education and Its Disconten treborscholz{at}earthlink.net 15
2003-09-25 20:02:13 <nettime> Request to Nettime to be part of DISTRIBUTED CREATIVITY online forum with Eyebeam bethr{at}eyebeam.org 14
2003-08-14 15:07:05 <nettime> Six Limitations to the Current Open Source Development Methodology felix{at}openflows.org 8
2004
Date Subject From Replies
2004-08-01 15:08:38 <nettime> The Art of Sweatshops nettime{at}bbs.thing.net 12
2004-08-06 23:44:53 <nettime> A 'licensing fee' for GNU/Linux? felix{at}openflows.org 10
2004-02-25 06:33:44 <nettime> floss enforcement/complian auskadi{at}tvcabo.co.mz 9
2004-03-22 16:11:49 <nettime> Marion von Osten: email interview with Brian Holmes geert{at}xs4all.nl 8
2004-02-16 13:24:13 <nettime> One year After Rhizom afterrhizome{at}ilse.nl 7
2005
Date Subject From Replies
2005-11-01 22:19:12 <nettime> a new definition olia{at}profolia.org 13
2005-05-19 14:43:22 <nettime> Landscape Painting of the Information Ag armin{at}easynet.co.uk 9
2005-11-23 22:50:44 <nettime> FW: [IP] Craigslist Planning To Shake Up Journalism gurstein{at}adm.njit.edu 6
2005-01-16 12:22:55 <nettime> Re: What's the meaning of "non-commercial"? patrice{at}xs4all.nl 5
2005-08-01 02:15:01 Re: <nettime> Benjamin Mako Hill on Creative Commons cantsin{at}zedat.fu-berlin.de 5
2006
Date Subject From Replies
2006-06-06 19:51:17 <nettime> report_on_NNA tobias{at}techno.ca 29
2006-04-17 12:36:38 <nettime> Network, Swarm, Microstructur brian.holmes{at}wanadoo.fr 13
2006-06-08 18:33:35 <nettime> nettime as idea human{at}electronetwork.org 13
2006-02-13 09:22:52 Re: <nettime> publication of "Jyllands-Posten" cartoons is not... s-i{at}publiclife.org 11
2006-01-07 17:47:29 <nettime> Frank Rieger: We lost the War--Welcome to the World of Tomorrow geert{at}xs4all.nl 10
2007
Date Subject From Replies
2007-11-06 09:17:29 <nettime> Goodbye Classic ? davidg{at}xs4all.nl 23
2007-08-09 18:08:53 <nettime> The banality of blogging phatzopoulos{at}gmail.com 20
2007-12-18 23:33:23 <nettime> Critique of the "Semantic Web" fc-nettime{at}plaintext.cc 18
2007-01-05 20:36:42 <nettime> Iraq: The Way Forward mgoldh{at}well.com 17
2007-09-19 10:41:50 <nettime> search engines on the mov geert{at}desk.nl 10
2008
Date Subject From Replies
2008-12-05 00:31:58 <nettime> Call for support: Pirates of the Amazon, taken down by Amazon.com fc-nettime{at}plaintext.cc 14
2008-10-14 14:44:55 <nettime> Zittrain’s Foundational Myth of the Open Intern geert{at}xs4all.nl 14
2008-10-14 22:43:42 Re: <nettime> Zittrain?s Foundational Myth of the Open Intern fc-nettime{at}plaintext.cc 12
2008-12-03 15:25:48 <nettime> Saskia Sassen: Cities and new wars: after Mumbai patrice{at}xs4all.nl 11
2008-12-05 20:04:14 Re: <nettime> Call for support: Pirates of the Amazon, taken down by Amazon.com morlockelloi{at}yahoo.com 11
2009
Date Subject From Replies
2009-09-21 22:58:08 <nettime> Has Facebook superseded Nettime? fc-nettime{at}pleintekst.nl 23
2009-05-11 21:29:14 <nettime> Political Work in the Aftermath of the New Media Arts Crisis geert{at}xs4all.nl 23
2009-01-22 04:10:41 <nettime> Digital Humanities Manifesto kdevries{at}csustan.edu 15
2009-03-05 00:27:17 <nettime> Amsterdam-Surfing the Crisis and Anomalous Waves with Edufactory and Unirio stef_arello{at}riseup.net 13
2009-01-22 23:00:07 Re: <nettime> Digital Humanities Manifesto fc-nettime{at}pleintekst.nl 13
2010
Date Subject From Replies
2010-01-13 11:09:19 <nettime> Googl tbyfield{at}panix.com 15
2010-11-11 18:29:05 <nettime> Steve Coll: Leaks (The New Yorker) patrice{at}xs4all.nl 12
2010-12-06 01:58:28 <nettime> FW: [IP] WikiLeaks sold classified intel, claims website's co-founder gurstein{at}gmail.com 12
2010-01-11 17:51:50 Re: <nettime> Facebook demands Cease & Desist for the "Web 2.0 Suicide Machine" i.poppe{at}chello.nl 11
2010-11-11 22:42:19 Re: <nettime> Steve Coll: Leaks (The New Yorker) jya{at}pipeline.com 11
2011
Date Subject From Replies
2011-05-13 06:52:45 <nettime> ISEA 2011 fees nak44{at}cornell.edu 34
2011-07-24 03:52:03 <nettime> some more nuanced thoughts on SWARTZ dgolumbia{at}gmail.com 12
2011-02-19 00:28:17 <nettime> Wisconsin repor danwang{at}mindspring.com 12
2011-07-27 12:38:37 Re: <nettime> some more nuanced thoughts on publishing, editing, reading, using gary.hall{at}connectfree.co.uk 11
2011-02-19 11:51:47 Re: <nettime> Wisconsin repor tapasrayx{at}gmail.com 11
2012
Date Subject From Replies
2012-08-27 13:21:03 <nettime> crowd-funding on nettim nettime{at}kein.org 26
2012-05-03 08:43:01 <nettime> The insult of the 1 percent: "Art-history majors" bhcontinentaldrift{at}gmail.com 25
2012-02-07 15:45:39 <nettime> Sex Work and Consent at {AT} transmedial dk{at}telekommunisten.net 22
2012-03-07 00:59:17 <nettime> What do you think about .art? desiree{at}relax.co.uk 17
2012-05-08 09:21:40 <nettime> Privacy, Moglen, {AT} ioerror, #rp12 dk{at}telekommunisten.net 15
2013
Date Subject From Replies
2013-05-13 10:01:51 <nettime> Jaron lanier: The Internet destroyed the middle class nettime{at}kein.org 15
2013-07-01 15:00:10 <nettime> NSA-spying-on-Europe outrage somewhat disingenuous armin{at}easynet.co.uk 15
2013-10-11 13:46:08 Re: <nettime> Pascal Zachary: Rules for the Digital Panopticon (IEEE) newmedia{at}aol.c 15
2013-09-23 08:46:44 <nettime> The secret financial market only robots can s nettime{at}kein.org 13
2013-04-06 14:54:40 <nettime> Bitcoin, the end of the Taboo on Money jaromil{at}dyne.org 11
2014
Date Subject From Replies
2014-05-11 15:57:28 <nettime> tensions within the bay area elites geert{at}xs4all.nl 35
2014-01-20 18:47:57 <nettime> The Californian Reality (from: New Geography) geert{at}xs4all.nl 21
2014-06-09 23:17:25 <nettime> a free letter to cultural institutions ozgur.k{at}httpdot.net 20
2014-03-01 14:53:30 <nettime> Hans Magnus Enzensberger: Rules for the digital world flrncrmr{at}gmail.com 20
2014-04-14 09:58:33 <nettime> Will your insurance company subsidize your quantified self? felix{at}openflows.com 16
2015
Date Subject From Replies
2015-04-01 07:35:14 <nettime> nottime: the end of nettim nettime{at}kein.org 48
2015-09-25 21:01:33 <nettime> VW tbyfield{at}panix.com 10
2015-11-01 16:24:30 <nettime> choose-your-own adventure: a brief history of nettim nettime{at}kein.org 10
2015-10-02 16:31:53 Re: <nettime> VW jaromil{at}dyne.org 9
2015-07-10 14:45:11 <nettime> Hacked Team jaromil{at}dyne.org 8
2016
Date Subject From Replies
2016-11-09 09:44:53 <nettime> What is the meaning of Trump's victory? bhcontinentaldrift{at}gmail.com 37
2016-02-12 21:33:21 <nettime> notes from the DIEM25 launch geert{at}xs4all.nl 27
2016-06-24 06:42:09 <nettime> England leaves Europ alex.foti{at}gmail.com 20
2016-05-01 23:30:54 <nettime> Live Your Models bhcontinentaldrift{at}gmail.com 18
2016-04-05 15:17:42 <nettime> Ten Theses on the Panama Papers patrice{at}xs4all.nl 16

Method & Archives

The survey's object of study is Nettime's archived mailing list, which is available online nettime.org/archive.php. We had to program a custom MHonArc web scrapper to gather all the messages from this online archive since there is no export function available from the current web interface.

Also, consistent with the ‘90s’-era origins of Nettime, our survey aesthetically resembles a web 1.0 report and does not allow for much interaction (static html page). This was deliberate ;-)

Further Research

To our mind the content of the posts and conversations in Nettime is, in fact, what makes this list of particular interest from the perspective of new media studies. Our survey is, of course, limited in scope and could have featured a much deeper (and perhaps more scientific) analysis of the list. To this end, here are a couple of points that may be worked on:

Nettime Surveyors

David Gauthier and Marc Tuters. Special thanks to Geert Lovink for his insights.