Matthew Allen

Disclaimer: liveblogging, forgive partiality, slightly revised to correct errors

The Association of Internet Researchers holds its annual general meeting.

After many years on the AoIR Executive I now take my place in the audience of the AGM; finally I am free of the stage. A sense of excitement builds in the room, a hubbub of voices, ready to engage in the finely tuned political debate of the AGM.

This public sphere may well be full of agonistic debate; perhaps there will be a strong dose of truthiness? (apologies to Megan Boler, a great keynote which is very loosely thrown in here).

Charles Ess thanks the outgoing executive (also known as the vintage executive or the mature executive); Axel Bruns, Heidi Campbell, Asa Rosenberg, Monica Murero, Sabryna Cornish, Marcus Foth are all departing, while Mia Consalvo, Alex Halavais and Charles himself continue on the new executive; and Holly Kruse remains to manage the list. The public sphere at the moment is entirely non-agonistic; there is trust and love in the room. Perhaps even there will be an end to patriarchy [explanatory note: there is a longrunning Ess-Baym joke concerning this; don't take seriously]

Mia Consalvo ascends the stage, the new leader, who is a videogame scholar; she replaces a philosopher. This may say something about AoIR! Mia now introducing the new exec: Alex Halavais (VP); Catherine Middleton (Secretary), MIchael Zimmer (Treasurer), Gordon Carlson (Grad student), Suely Fragoso (open seat), Ted Coopman (open seat rep), Elizabeth Buchanan (open seat rep). Holly Kruse has foolishly agreed to stay on as the list manager, god bless her. Yuri Takhteyev is systems officer

Treasurer’s report is now presented by Steve Jones, for Monica Murero. Will the Association be broke? Will the IRS come calling? Hardly! AoIR has a good financial position. This demonstrates the strength of the Association and its ongoing viability to conduct the critical work of aiding and supporting Internet research. Part of the reason for the strength of the Association’s financial situation is the assiduous work over several years of conference organisers to ensure that the annual conference, the main activity of the association, did not run at a loss.

Now Susanna Paasonnen takes the stage, waving regally, to conclude her role as the wonderful program chair for the conference. She reports on the conference; 223 proposals, with 194 papers and some panels and roundtables. Very few papers presented for full reviewing (an interesting comment on the value of AoIR Conference as a place for sharing ideas, not formalistic CV padding). Around 70% acceptance rate.

Michael Zimmer astutely presents the finances of the conferences. 370 people registered and attended; around 15-20 came in for a day or so. This is an excellent result, second only to AoIR in Toronto.

Now we move on to some recognition for achievement and effort; it seems to me that the Internet, if it is to really operate as a public sphere of some kind, needs as many affective forms of recognition of effort. Charles gets a lovely plaque which will hang proudly on his wall.

Where will the next conferences be…there is a drum roll…

Gothenberg in 2010 – brilliant!! Internet: Sustainable Futures (Ylva speaks). The venue is Chalmers University – a lovely building. And the planning is so far advanced we already know the reception venue too. The sales pitch is commencing – we are all becoming entranced with Gothenberg and are being lured to the wintry shores of the Skagerrak.

And, we will be headed back to the USA in 2011 to Seattle, Washington. There is a spooky resonance here… Vancouver; Copenhagen; Milwaukee; Gothenberg; Seattle.

These conferences are going to be very good. AoIR conferences are, without doubt – and speaking with limited if any bias – very good indeed. They are interdisciplinary; friendly; excellent for graduate students; they include sufficient political edge; and there’s gossip and fun.

Now the AGM is moving to other business and taking questions from the floor.

There’s going to be a discussion of race and diversity relating to the handbooks, both the one in which Jeremy H., Lisbeth K. and I were involved and that from Charles E. and his crew. Question raised indicating the need for a list of expertise of AoIR members which might assist editors in ensuring that appropriate diversity in publishing is sustained. Good point.

Comments from floor relating to slight difficulties in managing the information provision relating to the program. There was also a comment relating to the need for birds of a feather to be reintroduced. Some questions about reviewing processes and procedures. Several other comments about conference organisation; all useful feedback.

And now we move to the air-list and the decision to shift to the reply-all function.

The agonism of the public sphere is building and we are getting into Habermas’ zone of dispute and discussion which might, through the sharing of disagreements, move us to a place of higher consciousness through communicative rationality. Now a case of community emerges – will we be able to generate volunteers to be able to work on researching the way in which we manage the list. The value of the AGM is the chance for disagreements to be aired in ways that, largely, feel safe.

That’s about all: my batteries died at this point

Coda (Sunday)
The public sphere references in this blog should not be taken too seriously; that said, the workings of the conference and the AoIR meeting might provide a useful prompt for reflection on the mechanisms of politics…