[Chapter_Fourteen] Chapter 14

Tue Nov 9 12:24:31 PST 2010

just a quickie here, (love the topic thread...)
-a rhizome(atic) structure can produce wonderful, (albeit sometimes
'invasive'), ground cover, even 'bush' like aggregations, but to get a
'tree', or a 'forest', some pretty specific differentiation, (if not
'hierarchy', (in some sort of definition)), is required. One could continue
to have some fun with that metaphor v.a.v. creeper vines, moss, algae and on
up the food chain...likewise the 'virus' metaphor seems pretty potent,
(sic.)...but a virus 'requires' a host...by definition...it can kill
something, but it can't survive on its own...
-i think this leads ultimately to a kind of classic teleology of 'intention'
connundrum: what/who/how many etc. is the earth, the universe 'designed'
for, is this knowable in any practical sense,  ...its kind of like that line
from the 'Matrix' when Smith whispers to Morpheus the menancing: "human
beings are a *virus*...a cancer on this planet...',

i actually agree with many of the oft cited 'problems'/ambiguities that
arise in any close reading of Foucault,  but in a way i think there is
something emblematic of the present age/condition in what has arisen,
(experiments* *in general..*),* around the particular threads that he and so
many others have pulled on as part of this much broader assault on ossified
'structures' of organization, design, etc. throughout the culture.  The
principle methodological point i think i was trying to get at in that
initial (casual), invocation, (would have actually gone back to "the
Archeology of Knowledge", the autonomy of the 'statement', how truth is
'created', etc..if we were to really run down that rabbit hole...), is just
this idea of one by one, household by household, etc., to stop feeding the
'roots', the capillaries, of the 'cancer'...
-The challenge, (to keep restating the obvious...), is effectively
organizing that 'unplugging/re-'structuring' at even the scale of 'the
collective farm'...which i personally think is very much going to come down
to setting some pretty specific/explicit 'goals' re master planning, (the
teleo- 'intention' question...), and then all that flows from there that
people have been working on/talking about re: site planning, program
planning, resource management, rigorous documentation, continuity-synergy of
effort and inputs...  all on a limited budget of capital and volunteer
energy... Machiavelli might smile...

r.

On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 12:46 AM, margaretha haughwout <
xmargarethax at gmail.com> wrote:

> dear ron, antonio, rachel and all --
>
> many interesting threads through the conversation here. ron, thanks so much
> for starting the conversation; it seems a vital one to begin at the launch
> of this new list -- how effective is permaculture at enacting real change?
>
> one thing i always found sort of frustrating with the foucault i've read is
> his avoidance of a clear definition of power. he talks about it all the time
> but rarely defines it. the most i can get for a definition out of discipline
> and punish (the whole book can be found here<http://aaaaarg.org/text/15247/discipline-and-punish-birth-prison>- just register!)  is something along the lines that power is the ability to
> exert force. the ability to exert force via a hierarchical king or
> hierarchical nation state needs no long explication as to its devastation.
> if we were to toss deleuze (hardt and negri too?) into the mix (i know i
> know, so predictable), we'd be able to think broadly about the double
> death-like nature of fixed, organizations, of solidified power but also to
> argue that the only way out of hierarchy + capitalism is a rhizomatic ever
> multiplying network, where relations and cross pollinations are made
> spontaneously and across species. in permaculture terms i think this would
> be adding more, diverse life to problems (integrating rather than
> segregating), closing loops, valuing diversity. and yes thanks to rachel for
> that keeper of a pdf - finding the leverage points in the system....
>
> there are many things i agree with in gladwell's article you mention above,
> antonio. i have the same criticism of clay shirky (though i wish gladwell
> had been more explicit about the implicit racism shirky's social media
> story) and of social media. however there are lots of different kind of
> networks -- centralized networks (which may or may not be the same as top
> down hierarchies), decentralized networks, and distributed networks being 3
> main kinds -- and i question whether it is a simply matter of vertical vs.
> lateral. for instance, one functioning model for land stewardship for
> indigenous tribes in maine (among other places) is a reverse hierarchy,
> where the people living closest to the land have ultimate veto power. this
> is in effect still a centralized network where leaders of nations petition
> tribes who petition clans who petition families who petition women (the
> closest to the land) - who then say yea or nay. i think we need a more
> coherent analysis of networks. there are strong tie networks and weak tie
> networks that can apply to any of the types described above; no doubt the
> internet supplies an abundance of weak ties - weak ties only to other humans
> with the exception of the occasional lolcat.
>
> the water wars of bolivia, i think, are a good example of a successful
> decentralized resistance.
>
> i also think it is a matter of who tells the history. we all know that
> hierarchies align histories with powerful central figures, while the people,
> the connections between people, and between people and place, go
> unrecognized.
>
> no doubt hierarchy combined with capitalism is a positive feedback loop
> that seems to eat every opposition and grow from it. but i do think there
> are cracks in the system. an economic system based on profit cannot continue
> indefinitely. i would also assert that power is in fact afraid of networks.
> take the virus, for example; both computer viruses and SARS travel networks
> (be it the internet or airlines), and this terrifies. also regardless of
> whether al qaeda actually was a decentralized network or a hierarchy, the
> narrative sold to the american public is that al qaeda cells are
> distributed, can exist independently of each other - therefore scary!
>
> i think the real challenge is to make our networks thick and full of trust.
> thick with people and community as well as plants and animals. if we are
> tied to place as closely as we are to our children, lovers or our friends,
> we fight for them. so, it is not just a matter of making a backyard garden,
> but to make gardens with others in empty lots, toss seed bombs, and engage
> the marginal. it is also a matter of closing loops - feed off of the waste
> that capitalism outpours, turn it all into nutrient and grow food from its
> disaster. is it possible to turn the feedback loop around?  undoubtedly,
> power is not going to give up without a fight, and as derrick jensen so
> convincingly argues, we need each of us to figure out when, where and how we
> draw the line.
>
> /m
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 12:14 PM, Rachel A. Buddeberg <rachel at rabe.org>wrote:
>
>> There was an interesting (and somewhat depressing/discouraging) interview
>> with Heather Rogers on Against the Grain a few weeks ago who was talking
>> exactly about the co-option of alternative ways of being by the mainstream
>> capitalist system.  See
>> http://www.againstthegrain.org/program/342/id/351519/mon-8-30-10-green-panaceas.
>>  BUT as I don't see one thing that would bring the whole system down (well,
>> with the except of running out of oil but even that doesn't seem to stop the
>> system, at least not yet), I think we just have to keep trying from as many
>> angles as we can think of.  Maybe there are leverage points that we hit by
>> accident or design that can change things more dramatically (
>> http://www.sustainer.org/?page_id=106).  Also, I think it's important to
>> show that alternatives are possible because one counter-argument that is
>> often hurled at people suggesting alternatives is the "it's not possible"
>> mantra.  If we can point to place where it is done that counter-argument
>> implodes...
>>
>> Thanks for sending the two Foucault pieces, Ron!
>>
>>
>> On Nov 8, 2010, at 9:35 AM, Antonio Roman-Alcala wrote:
>>
>> A few brief comments:
>>
>> 1) My entrance into the world of permaculture was surely rooted in just
>> this foucault-style description of means of challenging power (though I've
>> never read him of course). But as I've spent time doing this work, I am
>> extremely skeptical about its ability to fundamentally alter the conditions
>> of production (food or otherwise) or address longstanding iniquities, at
>> least in any relatively quick timespan (50-100 years). The reasons for this
>> are manifold, but one major aspect is that the capitalist system has a
>> powerful drive to re-incorporate critique into its functions and
>> justifications for its continued existence. (see "The New Spirit of
>> Capitalism" by Luc Boltanski and Eve Chiapello). Another critique I'm
>> finding more and more persuasive is that the network, horizontal mode of
>> organization (while it has incredible value in many respects) is not
>> necessary conducive to mass culture change in a society where so many of the
>> links in that network are tenuous or weak (see Malcolm Gladwell's article<http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2010/10/04/101004fa_fact_gladwell?currentPage=1>on Twitter: I don't agree with everything he says but its something to
>> consider). Effective counter-power may require more resources and
>> organization than the network permaculturists/anti-capitalists/etc currently
>> manifest. I don't know.
>>
>> 2) Re: specialization: this is a distinct outgrowth of university system
>> expansion in the US in the late 19th, early 20th century. Before that, most
>> people were autodidacts and "experts" (or at least dabblers) in all sorts of
>> fields of inquiry (both upper class officially "educated" and
>> homesteader/farmer alike). I'd really like to see us promoting a vision of a
>> new world where we can have both the benefits of specialist knowledge
>> production and see a generalization of the population's understanding of the
>> world and (the way I fantasize about my own future) even an ability to make
>> a living from multiple interests/vocations: farming/gardening/the production
>> of basic needs as one aspect that a majority of folks are involved in.
>>
>> 3) Re: land question. Also, I'm not sure it's "the solution", but it's
>> interesting to consider, as a post-capitalist land ownership model to pursue
>> (if we can't forsee a return to non-ownership of land, aka full commons):
>> Henry George and his "single land tax". just google it, pretty easy to find
>> info.
>>
>> Best,
>> Antonio
>> On Sun, Nov 7, 2010 at 8:57 PM, ron stanford <rstan1122 at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> some foucault and tangential permaculture...
>>>
>>> The analysis of power *“should not concern itself with the regulated and
>>> legitimate forms of power in their central locations', **but **'with
>>> power at its extremities, in its ultimate destinations, with those points
>>> where it becomes capillary...”** **“...the point where power surmounts
>>> the rules of right which organize and delimit it, and extends itself beyond
>>> them...”*
>>>
>>> *p.96 "Two Lectures." Power / Knowledge: Selected Interviews and Other
>>> Writings, 1972-1977. Ed.*
>>>
>>> *Colin Gordon. Brighton: Harvester, 1980.*
>>>
>>> This 'de-centered' interpretation of power and its potential pragmatic
>>> implications, (of which I had personally been generally skeptical), is what
>>> I was referring to in offering 'Permaculture' as a kind of qualified,
>>> (obviously 'minimalizing'), 'acquittal' of Foucault. While he himself did
>>> not focus on pragmatist 'action' per se, my point would be that as one does
>>> look at Permaculture based 'action', (essntially building-rebuilding
>>> sustainable/resilient ecologies from the ground up), Foucault's conceptual
>>> formation presents an imageable overlay on which to map the
>>> coherence/co-adherents of that action as influence and organizational
>>> transformation moves back *up* the scale.
>>>
>>> The example we're all somewhat involved in would obviously be this broad
>>> question of transforming food production/land use patterns-distribution
>>> networks-consumption patterns. At one end of the scale there might be
>>> agribusiness-trade regimes-federal subsidies-commodities trading/global
>>> shipping-big box distribution/advertising-predatory pricing...*(collectively
>>> represented as juridicial or monarchic power in the liberal and marxist
>>> models)*. But it is the other end of the scale, at the most discrete
>>> level, *the 'capillary' level*, where Foucault's model suggests the
>>> power actually manifests itself, in what you put into your mouth on a daily
>>> basis, in the not so subtle coercion to 'super size', to accept the putative
>>> convenience the system offers, to 'pay no attention to the infrastructure
>>> behind the 'package', etc.
>>>
>>> Conventional 'structuralist' thinking, (simplified into cliché, (and I
>>> still consider myself to be something of a structuralist...), might argue
>>> that one person's organic garden or individual food choices cannot really
>>> impact such a large scale problem; That It must be attacked closer to the
>>> multiple heads, at the level of trade accords and protocols, perhaps with
>>> direct action against the companies/the W.T.O., better mass organizing
>>> strategies, mass boycotts, etc...
>>>
>>> Permaculture, it seems to me,(without any necessity for discarding other
>>> transformational strategies), has a relatively inspiring track record of
>>> more or less *doing* the solution, and allowing the collective 'power'
>>> of the idea to accumulate discretely. And in that way, making the case,
>>> maybe more effectively than many louder voices, that it is actually possible
>>> to impact the problem from the 'ground' up.
>>>
>>> Refs.:
>>>
>>> The Two Lectures writings cited above should be attached, the relevant
>>> section is page 11 of the PDF, (Pg. 96 of the text.)
>>>
>>> Also attached: Chandra Kumar, “Foucault, Disciplinary Power, and the
>>> 'Decentering' of Political Thought, A Marxian View” 2009
>>>
>>>
>>> On the question of how 'necessary' private property might be. I'd also be
>>> interested if anyone could present some sort of model of organization/non
>>> organization and argue how it might scale, while avoiding the well known
>>> pitfalls of the past. Malcolm X once said: “Revolution has never been about
>>> a cup of coffee at a lunch counter; Its about land....”  As long as there
>>> are hierarchies, there generally have to be a boundaries, literal or
>>> otherwise, almost by default.  (typically starting with the protection of
>>> children...)
>>>
>>> Also might say that, at least in some measure, it is the very particular
>>> position of specialization that confers a certain 'comfort' v.a.v.  decision
>>> making. Not sure how long the list would be of people would feel comfortable
>>> spontaneously making the same decision. But at the same time, I don't think
>>> that is necessarily a bad thing. Hierarchies have an upside, (if they are
>>> transparent and accountable...couple of big if's...'--)
>>>
>>>
>>> ron.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 12:43 PM, margaretha haughwout <
>>> xmargarethax at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> dear ron & rachel,
>>>>
>>>> absolutely - break the protocols! ha. we'll have moderators every two
>>>> weeks who will introduce a topic, a problem, an assertion, or a solution for
>>>> the list. they hopefully inspire conversation and debate with the intention
>>>> of deepening our sense of what are the possible and ethical steps we can
>>>> take to move into a regenerative world... jay rosenberg and i will put
>>>> forward some stories in the next couple of days about the fence line at
>>>> hayes valley farm, about how we find heroin needles in our broccoli plants,
>>>> and the reach of the decisions we make about that fence.... we're looking
>>>> forward to your engagement!
>>>>
>>>> that said spontaneous conversations around chapter fourteen topics on
>>>> this list are very welcome also!
>>>>
>>>> in regards to your the topics you raise -
>>>> a) how is permaculture an "acquittal of Foucault" ? wondering what
>>>> texts of foucault you could quote or refer us to here.
>>>> b) i want to challenge the thinking that there must be land ownership.
>>>> enclosure <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enclosure> seems to me to be
>>>> one of the most damaging movements in the western world. what if we
>>>> unraveled the idea of property. how could we begin to do this? perhaps to
>>>> show how much more fun it is to share land, to close loops in empty lots,
>>>> share yields, invite folks into your backyard, etc. slow and steady
>>>> solutions.
>>>> c) permaculture, being in part the reinvigoration of ecological systems
>>>> through feedback and "closing loops" is also geared toward making food
>>>> forests, flourishing systems that also produce yields. the idea is that
>>>> these food forests, as opposed to current "top down" agricultural practices,
>>>> require very little inputs. in turn the yield also is more diverse and more
>>>> abundant (compare an acre of food forest to an acre of corn...).  this is to
>>>> say yes, i think we can still have dentists. but the impetus becomes not
>>>> necessarily one of survival (must have a job to survive) but one of real
>>>> curiosity and desire to contribute to community, health, etc. one of the
>>>> questions becomes: if you have food, community and shelter, what do you want
>>>> to do for your community, rather than what do you have to do. i am hesitant
>>>> to come up with state, top down rules and laws to make examples of how this
>>>> is possible - maybe someone can step in here to fill in some of the blanks.
>>>> i'd love to hear an anarchist perspective on how people self organize...
>>>> because it is an issue of self organization. i don't see how self
>>>> organization is possible if we put a price on land, and people own it. in
>>>> one scenario we act in service to land and in another we act in service to
>>>> the wealthy, the dollar.
>>>>
>>>> i can speak a little to self organization (bottom up models) through
>>>> what i've seen at hayes valley farm in this regard. i've seen people, myself
>>>> included, first come on the farm and say "look i have this specialty that is
>>>> of value!" "you need me because of my specialty!" what i've noticed over
>>>> time is that, while people still have specializations, we all also find
>>>> great satisfaction from dedicating at least part of our time to the needs of
>>>> the moment, and the more mundane needs of the farm. it's an interesting
>>>> transition to note: the dominant culture tells us we are not valuable to
>>>> others unless we have a specialty, but on the farm, where the orientation is
>>>> more cooperative, we are valued not just for a specialty we may have, but
>>>> also for our responsiveness to the needs of the moment, for our ability to
>>>> work together, do at least some mundane tasks, etc. etc. most of my time
>>>> these days in spent in the greenhouse and in research, but the other day i
>>>> walked by the front gate and noticed it needed some attention, so i planted
>>>> some trees, comfrey and clover. i think when the orientation is toward self
>>>> organization, we have a more nuanced responsiveness that allows for
>>>> specialization (into dentistry, for example) but also that allows for deep
>>>> pleasure in responding to the needs of nature, self, and community...
>>>>
>>>> much more can be said here. in my opinion these questions dive to the
>>>> heart of how we get from here to there.
>>>>
>>>> my friend aimee reminded me of permaculture principle #4 yesterday: "accept
>>>> feedback and apply self regulation<http://permacultureprinciples.com/principle_4.php>
>>>> "
>>>>
>>>> all the best,
>>>> /m
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sat, Nov 6, 2010 at 9:31 AM, ron stanford <rstan1122 at gmail.com>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> realized that might have sounded like Shakespeare championed Jay, the
>>>>> bastard...not quite was i was thinking, although Shakespeare  no doubt would
>>>>> have loved jay, i don't think he's actually a bastard, either literally or
>>>>> figuratively...the long lost thought there was more an off-handed defense of
>>>>> 'non-pedigree' thinking...(really...(sic...))...
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Nov 5, 2010 at 8:35 PM, Rachel A. Buddeberg <rachel at rabe.org>wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Not quite sure what protocols you might have breeched...  I found your
>>>>>> question intriguing because I've wondered about that myself.  It seems that
>>>>>> not everyone might become a successful farmer... Given our knowledge of
>>>>>> where markets can lead - at least the unregulated kinds - maybe exchange
>>>>>> might be better.  Historically, when buyer and seller haggled directly,
>>>>>> prices tended to be fairer than now when most of the money I pay for
>>>>>> athletic shoes (for example) goes into the pockets of the CEO of [fill in
>>>>>> your least favorite shoe company].  I can't haggle - and neither can the
>>>>>> person ask for higher wages.   Of course, there remain other
>>>>>> power-differentials to watch out for in 1-on-1 markets.  I am sure that the
>>>>>> craftsperson didn't feel as comfortable setting a price for a
>>>>>> nobleperson...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Rachel
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Nov 4, 2010, at 12:22 AM, ron stanford wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> not quite sure how the idea exchange here is supposed to work, but
>>>>>> just diving in: (as a relative neophyte), marvelously impressed by the
>>>>>> gravity of fukuoka, the look of his 'farm', the food forest concept, seed
>>>>>> balls, etc.  My first question v.a.v. discussion would be the macro level
>>>>>> implications of.traditional property rights and markets/ exchange of
>>>>>> 'surplus'.  Recognizing that permaculture, (seems to me), is something,
>>>>>> (literally), of a ground up' concept, (the best e.g. acquittal of Foucault
>>>>>> i've personally encountered...), i wonder about the convergence of
>>>>>> enlightened 'ground up' food production and the perhaps not so comfortable
>>>>>> atrophy of top down-large scale production/distribution models.
>>>>>> In the new model, if one is not specifically a grower, or one in
>>>>>> possession of land, (maybe a dedicated painter/writer/old school doctor,
>>>>>> etc.), is there the comfortable possibility of making one's 'specialized'
>>>>>> way, without being a 'farmer' oneself, (and not relying on charity, strictly
>>>>>> speaking...), that is, an exchange, a market, where services/goods/produce
>>>>>> can be priced?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> have no doubt breeched any number of protocols, but...testing,
>>>>>> testing...is this thing on...? ...'--)
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ron.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, Nov 3, 2010 at 2:47 PM, Jay <protojay at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Website: onestrawrevolution.net
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Chapter 14 discussion invite
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net mailing list
>>>>>>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net at lists.beforebefore.net
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> http://lists.beforebefore.net/listinfo.cgi/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net mailing list
>>>>>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net at lists.beforebefore.net
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://lists.beforebefore.net/listinfo.cgi/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net mailing list
>>>>>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net at lists.beforebefore.net
>>>>>>
>>>>>> http://lists.beforebefore.net/listinfo.cgi/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net mailing list
>>>>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net at lists.beforebefore.net
>>>>>
>>>>> http://lists.beforebefore.net/listinfo.cgi/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> ♫ Spread the word, please help us support the farm on Kickstarter!
>>>> http://bit.ly/hvf-kickstarter
>>>>
>>>> Lead Researcher, Hayes Valley Farm
>>>> http://www.hayesvalleyfarm.com/
>>>>
>>>> Lecturer, Film and Digital Media
>>>> University of California Santa Cruz
>>>> Communications 151
>>>>
>>>> chapter fourteen<http://lists.beforebefore.net/listinfo.cgi/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net>
>>>> http://www.beforebefore.net/
>>>> http://www.bitterpattern.net/
>>>>
>>>> I am best contacted by email:
>>>> xmargarethax at gmail.com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net mailing list
>>>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net at lists.beforebefore.net
>>>>
>>>> http://lists.beforebefore.net/listinfo.cgi/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net mailing list
>>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net at lists.beforebefore.net
>>>
>>> http://lists.beforebefore.net/listinfo.cgi/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> sf urban ag alliance @ sfuaa.org
>> movie and blog @ insearchofgoodfood.org
>> community farm @ www.alemanyfarm.org
>> permaculty @ www.permaculture-sf.org
>> newspaper @
>> http://soex.org/alternativeexposure/index.php/antonio-roman-alcala/
>> personal music @ www.myspace.com/ammra
>> people people @www.myspace.com/mercurialbombastictenacity
>>
>>  _______________________________________________
>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net mailing list
>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net at lists.beforebefore.net
>>
>> http://lists.beforebefore.net/listinfo.cgi/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net mailing list
>> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net at lists.beforebefore.net
>>
>> http://lists.beforebefore.net/listinfo.cgi/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net
>>
>>
>
>
> --
>
> ♫ Spread the word, please help us support the farm on Kickstarter!
> http://bit.ly/hvf-kickstarter
>
> Lead Researcher, Hayes Valley Farm
> http://www.hayesvalleyfarm.com/
>
> Lecturer, Film and Digital Media
> University of California Santa Cruz
> Communications 151
>
> chapter fourteen<http://lists.beforebefore.net/listinfo.cgi/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net>
> http://www.beforebefore.net/
> http://www.bitterpattern.net/
>
> I am best contacted by email:
> xmargarethax at gmail.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net mailing list
> chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net at lists.beforebefore.net
>
> http://lists.beforebefore.net/listinfo.cgi/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.beforebefore.net/pipermail/chapter_fourteen-beforebefore.net/attachments/20101109/3e1f1e7c/attachment-0004.htm>