[sudo-discuss] cuddling it

Wed May 8 11:25:11 PDT 2013

...

yeah how dare those people who still suffer at repeated negative utterances
of a racial slur be offended by some rich privileged people co-opting that
term and erasing their current struggles.

On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Eddan Katz <eddan at clear.net> wrote:

> these are terrible examples.
>
>
> I beg to differ.
>
>
> 1. that song has been repeatedly called from as derogatory to both african
> americans and the plight they suffer, as well as a text book example of
> white feminism co-opting and erasing the struggles and experiences of POC.
>
>
> In the article you link to below, the objections described are from black
> women who thought that the song gave particular lower status to black
> women.
>
> It is an unfortunate interpretation of the song and a depressing admission
> of how deeply engrained the word nigger is in our culture.
>
> But it is my understanding of the intent of the songwriters to expose the
> degrading aspects of sexism that were being dismissed in response to the
> mainstreaming of feminism at the time.
>
> http://msmagazine.com/blog/2011/10/06/woman-is-the-n-of-the-world/
>
> 2. Dave Chapelle quit his highly popular show because he realized that
> white producers were actually making a legit modern day minstrel out of
> him, not a parody of that mentality, and white audiences were using his
> show to embrace ironic racism.
>
> http://www.popmatters.com/pm/feature/162955-darkest-america-black-minstrelsy-from-slavery-to-hip-hop/
>
>
> I think you may have missed the point I was trying to make in regards to
> this example. Thanks for articulating further what is so illuminating about
> it. Though I remember Chappelle blaming audiences as much or more than his
> producers, for not getting the parodic nature of his social criticism.
>
>
>
>
> -hep
>
>
> On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 10:58 AM, Eddan Katz <eddan at clear.net> wrote:
>
>> Rachel,
>>
>> I partially agree with the special status of the identified targets of
>> slurs for self-determination about how the socially acceptable language
>> evolves. But there's still a trump card aspect to it that doesn't sit right
>> with me.
>>
>> The slutwalk you described, which I had admittedly never heard of,
>> doesn't seem to be the same as walking in someone else's shoes by the way,
>> or sensual clothes for that matter. Walking around with just about anything
>> written on your forehead has a high likelihood of being humiliating - with
>> that word being slut removing any doubts of misinterpretation.
>>
>> I worked at the Museum of Tolerance (http://www.museumoftolerance.com/)
>> in Los Angeles during high school and during vacations in college,
>> sometimes giving tours. There's a "Whisper Gallery" in the bottom floor
>> exhibit that they take school kids through especially. It's a darkened
>> hallway about 50 feet long with speakers hidden in the walls all around.
>> They're all set on loop and to go off with all these horrible racist,
>> sexist, etc. insults at you as you walk through. Unfortunately, my
>> impression of what the junior high kids got out of it, in particular, is
>> the delight at having learned some new words they had never heard before.
>>
>> A couple of examples that come to mind to challenge the Re-Appropriation
>> trump card rules you described below. Granted, they are both examples of
>> extraordinary artists piercing through dominant culture in provocative
>> ways. John Lennon co-wrote "Woman is the Nigger of the World" with Yoko Ono
>> (http://www.songmeanings.net/m/songs/view/3458764513820543055/), neither
>> of whom were black. And from the other perspective of the provocative
>> tightrope on black racist reappropration, I think Dave Chappelle's public
>> struggle is another important example to consider. (
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Chappelle)
>>
>> My suggestion for a Sudo-Libs kind of thing, by the way, is intended to
>> help try to toe the line between making the point about the harmful impact
>> of biased language and the particular sensitivity of entrenched
>> discrimination through semi-(blind)-randomness, with an ability to have
>> some prior control over the context.
>>
>>
>> sent from eddan.com
>>
>> On May 8, 2013, at 10:03 AM, rachel lyra hospodar <rachelyra at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> On May 7, 2013 11:15 AM, "Anthony Di Franco" <di.franco at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > There's something to be said for being able to challenge the mainstream
>> connotations words have and the implicit assumptions they throw over
>> everyday discourse. Does Heeb Magazine have a place on sudo room's shelves?
>>
>> Sure, right next to Bitch Magazine. But woe be unto you if you think that
>> makes 'heeb' or 'bitch' appropriate descriptors for anyone, or that they
>> can be used by you in casual conversation.
>>
>> You are basically bringing up the practice of reclaiming language, a
>> process where members of oppressed groups take words that are/have been
>> used pejoratively towards them, and defiantly use the language for
>> themselves.  I did some quick google searching around this issue and would
>> like to share two links that seemed most helpful here.
>>
>> http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reappropriation
>>
>>
>> http://www.womanist-musings.com/2011/11/reclaiming-language-and-who-gets-to-say.html?m=1
>>
>> Basically, any white folks wanting to REclaim language around the
>> african-american experience, can't. Boo hoo. It's because that language is
>> already CLAIMED by white folks, for its pejorative purpose. If you don't
>> like that, well, sit on it. Meditate on our white supremacist culture and
>> cry big salty tears. Whatever. Similarly, if you want to help women at
>> large reclaim some kinda nasty word, but you are a man, too bad for you.
>> There is no way for you to use those words without reinforcing their
>> negative meanings.  Unless & until a woman invites you, eg, to go on a
>> Slutwalk. Then you can write the word 'slut' on yourself & walk down the
>> street amongst a group doing the same thing.
>>
>> R.
>>
>> >
>> > On May 7, 2013 10:30 AM, "Anca Mosoiu" <anca at techliminal.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> +1, and Amen!
>> >>
>> >> Anca.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 10:26 AM, Alcides Gutierrez <
>> alcides888 at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>
>> >>> If I may chime in, I think it would be awesome just to coin our own
>> phrases and not try to replace anything. Instead of characterizing any
>> current or past lingo, we could just go ahead and move on... NEW LINGO!
>> >>>
>> >>> I think this would lessen the chances of political/cultural/social
>> frustrations due to sensitive associations and differing perspectives of
>> describing whatever random related concepts.
>> >>>
>> >>> So, if we actually are interested in creating a new positive lingo,
>> we can just submit positive words and tech words into a bucket and
>> creatively combine them to attach to whatever cool concept. (BEAUTIFUL
>> CODE! = GREAT DISCUSSION!)
>> >>>
>> >>> So, is there going to be a lingo raffle party!?!?!?! That sounds
>> kinda fun to me!!! What if it was a raffle / poetry / public reading
>> party???? I'm sure there would be great code there!
>> >>>
>> >>> Alcides Gutierrez
>> >>> http://e64.us
>> >>>
>> >>> On May 6, 2013 2:01 PM, "Max B" <maxb.personal at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>
>> >>>> +1
>> >>>>
>> >>>> Thank you for that.
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> On 05/06/2013 01:40 PM, hep wrote:
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> it is really sad that this list is literally turning into a game of
>> oppression bingo. i will make this brief.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> 1. using terms like "civilization" to refer to a class of dominant
>> majority with a huge history of colonialistic oppression, at the expense of
>> any class who has experiences colonialistic oppression is pretty offensive.
>> if you want to qualify this as "what they wrongly refer to themselves as"
>> then use quotes and indicate as such. ie "Doesn't the so-self-called
>> 'civilized' psyche secretly crave the things it sets itself apart from and
>> gives up and projects on its image of the noble savage though?" it would be
>> better however to reword this overall to say something like "Doesn't the
>> privileged majority psyche secretly crave the things it sets itself apart
>> from and gives up and projects on its image of the oppressed culture
>> though?"
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> 2. using tropes like "noble savage" is ok as long as everyone
>> involves understand that you are referring to the named trope and not using
>> that term as an offensive term. this can be solved by referencing the trope
>> at hand. ie http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Noble_savage
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> 3. some people are still going to be offended by this term, because
>> it is still hugely offensive to native peoples even as it is used as a
>> handy moniker to call out offensive behavior by the privileged majority.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> 4. using the term noble savage in reference to african americans is
>> doubly offensive, even if it fits the point you are trying to make fyi. if
>> you MUST use tropes to refer to POC, make sure you are using the correct
>> one that examines the colonial aspects of the behavior being discussed.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> 5. when someone is offended by your choice in language, the correct
>> thing to do is not double down and try to explain that you weren't being
>> offensive. the correct thing to do is to say something like "i am sorry my
>> language choice offended you. what i was trying to say was___". do not
>> attempt to use dictionary.com, etymology, wikipedia usage, etc to try
>> and prove that you weren't being offensive. offense is not in the eye of
>> the person who offended, it is in the eye of that person offended. so just
>> accept that you behaved offensively even as you did not intend to and move
>> on. trying to explain to the world at large how you totally weren't
>> offensive citing media to try and "prove" it just makes you more offensive,
>> and it is incredibly disrespectful to the person you are communicating with
>> who likely doesn't give a shit what you were actually trying to say at this
>> point, and did not sign on for a weeks long multiple page scroll email
>> battle/war of attention attrition. accept, move on. don't become a cliche.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> 6. free speech is not a get out of jail free card. you have the
>> right to say anything you want. and we all have the right to think of you
>> as an asshole for saying it. if someone says "don't say that" they aren't
>> depriving you of your right to free speech, they are trying to save you
>> from losing friends and allies in your community. "congress shall make no
>> law abridging free speech." there is nothing in there that says someone HAS
>> to remain your friend after you were unintentionally a racist asshole.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> 7. most people who fight oppression in their communities do not
>> want to argue about it in their hobbies. respect that. just because you
>> have the time and inclination to have a long-winded email argument does not
>> mean that you are not also being totally offensive by assuming the other
>> person wants/needs/is going to engage in it. often times i see people "win"
>> arguments on email lists only because they were the more persistant
>> asshole, not because they are right. and be aware that that is totally
>> obvious to people not involved but still reading.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> 8. a point to everyone: native american peoples are not dead. there
>> are still many thriving native cultures, and people need to understand that
>> when they refer to native things or topics they are talking not just about
>> past people that were wiped out, but also active real working native
>> peoples still here. the bay area is full of native people who are active in
>> their tribal affiliations, who work to promote native rights, and who are
>> invested in the topics of native americans. when you frame out things like
>> that there is a "civlized" society, and native societies (implying not
>> civilized) many of those people are GOING to be super offended. Like when
>> native people try to call out white people on wearing headdresses as
>> culturally appropriative, and white people rebut with "YOU ARE ON THE
>> INTERNET. THAT WAS INVENTED BY US MAYBE YOU SHOULDN'T USE THAT". fucked up.
>> (for the ignorant: native people are americans as well and have equal
>> rights to share in american culture as any other american. besides which:
>> last i checked many native peoples have also contributed to the internet,
>> even as there are colonial privileged oppressionistic usages of native
>> culture as well, such as apache.) try to keep that in mind as you use terms
>> that may evoke native americans, at the risk of being seen as a total
>> racist asshole.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> also everything that rachel said.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> -hep
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> On Sun, May 5, 2013 at 2:10 PM, Anthony Di Franco <
>> di.franco at aya.yale.edu> wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Rachel, I've had a bit more time to reflect on what you wrote, and
>> while I don't have anything to add about the immediate question beyond what
>> I said yesterday, I'd like to talk about some of the broader context you
>> brought up in your reply and the more general issues involved.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> The first thing is that I am primarily viewing what we are trying
>> to do as having a discussion, so it seems to me that when there are
>> misunderstandings that is exactly when we should be having more discussion
>> to clarify what we are trying to say and find out effective ways to say it,
>> not less. Meanwhile, you are using the terms of some sort of power struggle
>> where I am being attacked and defending myself and allegiances are forming
>> and shifting around the patterns of conflict. I do not see a power struggle
>> but rather a community trying to communicate and communication depends on
>> shared understanding among senders and recipients of symbols and how to use
>> them to convey meaning. Where this is not immediately clear, clarifying it
>> explicitly seems the most direct way to move towards better mutual
>> understanding. I hope this can be reconciled with your own views and I
>> welcome further discussion on this.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Within the attacking and defending point of view, I am also
>> uncomfortable with some things. To speak of attacking and defending and
>> also then to say that the subject of the attack should *stop defending*
>> reminds me too much of the revolting cries of "stop resisting" from police
>> - I could certainly never meditate on such an ugly phrase and I find the
>> suggestion grotesque. It's something I've heard while authoritarian thugs
>> victimize people who are not resisting but only perhaps trying to maintain
>> their safety and dignity under an uninvited attack, perhaps not even that,
>> and one way the phrase is used is as a disingenuous way of framing the
>> situation so that later, biased interpretations of what happened will have
>> something to latch onto. I am glad we have much less at stake in our
>> interactions here than in those situations but I still really don't like to
>> see us internalizing that logic in how we handle communications in our
>> group.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> There is another aspect of this I am uncomfortable with, which is
>> the idea that people should respond to feedback only by silently assenting.
>> This reminds me too much of other situations where people, sometimes
>> myself, were supposed to be seen and not heard, and it deprives people of
>> agency over and responsibility for what they do by expecting them to let
>> others determine their behavior unilaterally. I am happy to take feedback
>> and, generally, I hope you can trust people to act on feedback
>> appropriately rather than trying to short-circuit their agency. The more
>> informative feedback is, then, the better, and it should contain
>> information people can use themselves to evaluate what they are doing the
>> way others do so they can figure out how to accommodate everyone's needs.
>> When feedback consist simply of naked statements it is too much like
>> trolling in the small or gaslighting in the large, and especially then,
>> amounts to an insidious way to deprive people of agency by conditioning
>> them to fear unpredictable pain when they exercise agency, and has a
>> chilling effect. In general, the idea that certain people are less able
>> than others to handle the responsibilities of being human, and so they
>> should have their behaviors dictated to them unilaterally by others, is a
>> key to justifying many regimes of oppression, especially modern ones, and
>> because of that I am very uncomfortable when I see any example of that
>> logic being internalized in our group dynamics.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> I don't know what passed between you and Eddan involving trump
>> cards but if the card game analogy really is apt then it may be a sign of
>> trivializing the question of safe space by saying that certain people's
>> concerns trump other people's concerns, based not on the concerns
>> themselves, but only on who is raising the concerns. Both are important. I
>> have heard some justifications for 'trumping' as I understand it that
>> remind me of the debate around the Oscar Grant case. There, defenders of
>> Mehserle's conduct claimed that police should be the judges of what
>> legitimate police use of force is because they have special training and
>> experience that give them a uniquely relevant perspective on what violence
>> is justified and what demands of compliance they can legitimately make of
>> people. Another justification I heard was that police are especially
>> vulnerable due to the danger inherent in their duties and so things should
>> be biased heavily towards a presumption of legitimacy when they use
>> violence or demand compliance. To me both these justifications seem
>> problematic because they create a class that can coerce others without
>> accountability and can unilaterally force standards of conduct on others. I
>> am happy that there is much less at stake among us here than there is in
>> cases of police brutality or Oscar Grant's case, and that there is no
>> comparison other than this logic being used. But the logic that certain
>> people's perspectives are uniquely relevant, or that their vulnerability
>> gives them license to force things upon others unilaterally, is still a
>> logic I don't think we should internalize among ourselves, because it
>> produces unaccountable authoritarianism that can be exploited for
>> unintended ends, and does not help with the ostensibly intended ones
>> anyway. It results in us 'policing' ourselves in a way much too much like
>> the way the cities are policed to the detriment of many people and of
>> values we share.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Finally, you mentioned the evening at Marina's apartment and I
>> want to clarify my experience of what happened there. My 'aha' moment
>> didn't have anything to do with the point you were trying to make - I can't
>> even remember exactly what that point was, because it is so strongly
>> overshadowed by my memory of how you treated me. You called me out for
>> something that had passed between you and me in the middle of a social
>> gathering among a mix of friends and strangers, none of whom were involved,
>> which immediately put me in a very uncomfortable situation. Then, you
>> dismissed my attempts to defer speaking to a more appropriate setting, and
>> to open up a dialog with you where I shared my perspective. The only way
>> out you gave me was to assent without comment to you. My 'aha' moment was
>> when I realized that things between us had degenerated to that point; it
>> was when I realized I was mistaken in trying to have a discussion because
>> we were interacting like two territorial animals, or like a police
>> interrogator and a suspect, and you were simply demanding a display of
>> submission or contrition from me before you would let me slink off. While
>> it felt degrading, I took the way out you offered to spare myself and the
>> others in the room the experience of things continuing. I take the risk of
>> sharing this openly with you now because I think we know each other much
>> better than we did then and we would never again end up interacting like
>> potentially hostile strangers passing in the night, or worse. I think we
>> can and should and have been doing better, and overall it's best not to let
>> a mistaken assumption about what I was thinking and how I felt influence an
>> important discussion about how we treat one another in our community.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> I, like you, hope you can appreciate that I am taking the time to
>> write this admittedly long-winded reply, not to suck the air out of the
>> room, whatever that means, but to contribute to a discussion that moves us
>> towards a better shared understanding of how to respect our shared values
>> and towards more appreciation of one another's perspectives.
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> Anthony
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> On Sat, May 4, 2013 at 10:14 AM, rachel lyra hospodar <
>> rachelyra at gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> I am really sad about this whole thread.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Anthony, I think I know you well enough to say that your intent
>> here was not to be offensive, but unfortunately... Here we are. I am
>> responding to the specific message below because it is the one that made me
>> want to unsubscribe from this mailing list and unassociate myself from this
>> group. Everything that came after, gah.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Anti-oppression for the priveleged class, ie not being an
>> unintentional giant jerkface: if someone points out that you are offending
>> or harming them, they are not seeking an explanation, but a change in
>> behavior.  Perhaps an apology or acknowledgement, even a query. If someone
>> says 'i think your POV is fucked up and harmful' please do not go on to
>> elaborate on your POV to them. Even if you think they don't get your
>> amazing nuances. Your amazing nuances are not always important, and part of
>> 'oppression' is that some peoples' nuances are always shoved in other
>> people's faces. Sometimes being a friend means keeping your opinion to your
>> damn self.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> This relates to something that eddan has on occasion termed 'the
>> trump card'.  We are all individuals, and as such we ultimately need to
>> keep our own house in order. The trump card concept relates to safe spaces
>> - as safe as eddan might feel in a space, I'm not going to average it
>> together with my safety levels to achieve some sort of average safety
>> rating. My safety reading of a space will always, for me, trump eddan's,
>> and while I am happy if he feels safe it doesn't really matter to my safety
>> level.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> The interesting thing about telling most people they are making
>> you feel unsafe, or that they are offending you, is that for some reason
>> their response is almost never 'gosh, whoops!'. It's more usually like what
>> happened here - a bunch of longwinded explanation that completely misses
>> the point, and then a perceived ally of the offender jumping in, also
>> talking a lot, and sucking all the air out of the room.  People always have
>> reasoning for why they did what they did. Requiring offended folks to read
>> about your reasoning for why you said what you said misses the point, and
>> to me makes this conversation read like you don't care if you were
>> offensive.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> It's deja vu to me that you are giving all this definition and
>> explanation around the terms you used. It seems identical to our debate
>> around the use of 'constable' and it is sad to me to see you take refuge in
>> the same pattern of defense. It doesn't matter about the etymological
>> history of a phrase. It doesn't. As fun as you may find it to think about,
>> the way things are *heard*, by others, NOW, is a trump card for many.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Anthony, I hope you can understand that I have taken the time out
>> of my life to write this message in the hopes of helping you to modulate
>> your behavior to be less offensive. I am sure you remember the first time I
>> engaged with you on this topic, at Marina's house. Perhaps you'll remember
>> the aha moment when you *stopped defending* and simply accepted the input,
>> thanking me. Perhaps you'll find in that a sort of meditative place of
>> return.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> Good luck to you all. I enjoy many things about sudo community
>> and am sure I will stay connected in many ways.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> R.
>> >>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>> On May 3, 2013 3:05 PM, "Anthony Di Franco" <di.franco at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Doesn't the civilized psyche secretly crave the things it sets
>> itself apart from and gives up and projects on its image of the noble
>> savage though?
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> Your description seems more like meditatively flowing through it.
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 2:58 PM, netdiva <netdiva at sonic.net>
>> wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> Here I was thinking "killing it" was just another example of
>> appropriation of african american vernacular by the mainstream.
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> On 5/3/2013 2:46 PM, Leonid Kozhukh wrote:
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> "killing it" is a recently popular term to denote excellence
>> and immense progress. it has a violent, forceful connotation.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> friends in the circus community - through empirical evidence -
>> have established a belief that operating at the highest levels of talent
>> requires mindfulness, awareness, and calm. thus, a better term, which they
>> have started to playfully use, is "cuddling it."
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> thought sudoers would appreciate this.
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> cuddling it,
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> --
>> >>>>>>>>>> len
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> founder, ligertail
>> >>>>>>>>>> http://ligertail.com
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>>>>>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>> >>>>>>>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> >>>>>>>>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>> >>>>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>>>>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>> >>>>>>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> >>>>>>>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>>>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>> >>>>>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> >>>>>>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>> >>>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> >>>>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> --
>> >>>>> hep
>> >>>>> hepic photography || www.hepic.net
>> >>>>>     dis at gruntle.org || 415 867 9472
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>> >>>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> >>>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>>
>> >>>> _______________________________________________
>> >>>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>> >>>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> >>>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>> >>>>
>> >>>
>> >>> _______________________________________________
>> >>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>> >>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> >>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>> >>>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> --
>> >> -=-=-=-
>> >> Anca Mosoiu | Tech Liminal
>> >> anca at techliminal.com
>> >> M: (510) 220-6660
>> >> http://techliminal.com | T: @techliminal | F: facebook.com/techliminal
>> >>
>> >> _______________________________________________
>> >> sudo-discuss mailing list
>> >> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> >> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>> >>
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > sudo-discuss mailing list
>> > sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> > http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>> >
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> sudo-discuss mailing list
>> sudo-discuss at lists.sudoroom.org
>> http://lists.sudoroom.org/listinfo/sudo-discuss
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> hep
> hepic photography || www.hepic.net
>     dis at gruntle.org || 415 867 9472
>
>

-- 
hep
hepic photography || www.hepic.net
    dis at gruntle.org || 415 867 9472
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://sudoroom.org/pipermail/sudo-discuss/attachments/20130508/ae235377/attachment.html>