b3tEncyclopediatRokDaZonetfpf2s3c02 ENCYCLOPEDIA OF CONTEMPORARY SCENOLOGY f1c03 by RokDaZone c04The following is a dictionary of the most common Scenology terms ordered alphabetically. Certain terms are explained and their roots displayed. Updates will be released in future issues; HTML- and Guide versions are planned. The author is thankful for any critics, corrections and/or new entries. f3ggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggggg f2c04AGA-SYNDROME f1c03In his article 'AGA-Syndrome, General Concerns' (RAW#7), c04Macnoc03 defines this as f4"basically the state of c02->c03pathology due to the impossibility of having the desired AGA-machine and to the consequent preoccupation of missing some new AGA-demos. (...) We have realised that actually the whole history of humanity is signed by similar syndromes who had a specifically different cause but similar effects. (...) The syndrome is more diffused in countries where the numbers of AMIGA users is higher and where the influence of the consumatic mentality is more deeply rooted in the consumers mind." f1Following this, a new slightly different wave is to be expected with the release of the first PPC-demoes! In a seperate chapter of the earlier article, the syndrome gets combined with the c02->c03Sheep-Syndrome. f2c02DARWINISM f1c03A misused term in this context as by no means the genetical meaning of the historical term can be referred to Scenic definition. Actually when using Darwinism in Scenologist concerns, a propere referance can only by 'Social Darwinism' and often even is used to explain c02->c03National Scenism! c04Terroxc03 seems to be the first one to raise the question in his essay 'Scene Darwinism joind Scene' (RAW#8). Here, he puts up three axiomes: f4"- Scene is about getting Darwinistic (only the strongest survives) - Being revolutionary is stronger! - Being independent is strongest" f1(Independancy as protection against group despots like e.g. c04Chaos/Sanity c03or c04Hydra/Andromedac03) c04Magellanc03/Royal dives deeper into that topic in 'The Scene is Physical' (Gen24) where he provokes the picture of a seperatist National Scenism: f4 "I suppose the Scene to be the same matter consisting of molecules (national Scenes), atoms (groups) and electrons/protons (individual Sceners). (...) We have individual Sceners who make cores of atoms (groups) - the protonSceners and neutronSceners who are active inside their own groups and make the core of the atomGroup. We also have the less active (or inactive) electronSceners who just move around the active core of the atomGroup and easily leave the structure (as well as easily join the structure). (...) The atomGroups of each country form national Scenes - the molecule of national atomGroups. Now we have moleculeScene. (...) The national Scenes (moleculeScenes) form the international Scene (the matterScene)." f1c04The Ripperc03, who already in Generation#23 warned before a chauvinist nationalism in the Scene answers directly in the same publication. f4 "You've forgotten the Scene itself is a sociological phenomenon which can be explained using juridical, statistic or psicological tools (...), but that can't be certainly not reduced to physical terms. You've forgotten that (...) a theory has to shown why something happens, but, be careful, it's fundamental to find the LINK between cause and effect. You've stated that: Scene (A) is Matter (B) which is Energy (atoms 'fighting' each other). So, if maths is not an opinion as A=B and B=C then A=C, is your conclusion. 1. As I said Scene is not matter, and can't even be compared to that. Scene is just a name some men have given to a chain of human actions. It has no sense to affirm anything else. 2. Let's suppose Scene (...) can be compared to Matter. If so, thus does not mean that as Matter uses to act in a particular way also the Scene must act in this way as "it's phisically correct". f1 The Ripper ends with clear words: f4"You've drawn a nice picture of a phenomenom, useful, if related to didactic terms, but which can't be substained as a scientifical theory." f2c02EGOSTIMULATION f1c03This gets first mentioned in Abnominio#3 by c04Parsecc03 and c04Macnoc03 and is defined as a drug. In Abnominio#4, c04Parsecc03 describes its effects in one of the most splendid Scenology pamphletes. f4 "It consists in an artificial stimulation of the perceiving membranes of the human body. This stimulation works directly on the synaptic tissue of the brain's cortex and is mainly related to the Pavlov's conditioned reflex." According to c04Parsecc03 it relies on a 'Positive Factor' which is a "product of the subject that reached a high agreement by the whole Scene or a part of it." f1Important hereby is that the dose has to be increased after each stimulation to achieve newly a satisfying state of affairs. Also no traces of spontaneous recovery has been found so far. f2c02FILLERS f1c03Against popular believe, Fillers and c02->c03So-What? Articles are not the same, although they are related quite closely. The major deviding can be made in their intention. A c02->c03So-What? Article might be written with the best intentions, but disqualifies itself due banality. Fillers, however, are only written to fill up a Scenzine, some can in a strange way even gather sympathy for their extravaganza - too bad in 95% they are nothing but ordinary So-What? Articles. f2c02FRIENDSHIP CONFRATERNITY (FC) f1c03As reaction to certain socalled 'friendship movements', both c04RokDaZonec03 with F.F.F.F. (Abnormalia#5) and c04Macnoc03 with FC (ROM#3) answer ironically with madeup new movements. FC is mentioned here as it is brought into direct connection to f4Scod f1- the Scene God (also defined in the same article for the first time). After death and having reached Sceaven, we meet Scod who invites us to join f4"the last, unique and ultimate Scene group." f1A group in which all Sceners are invited to take part in. f2c02GAWPING f1c03In Abnormalia#5, c04RokDaZonec03 first defines and explaines his theory for what he calls f4"the most efficient way of bringing information to the Sceners" f1in his article 'Gawping - The Art of Informing the Sheeps'. There he postulates five axiomes from which he derives the following consequences: f4"1. Consequence: Information has to be combined with entertainment. 2. Consequence: The entertainment effect besides the information has to be given in a narratitive style. 3. Consequence: The narratitive part may give impressions of impossibility to a reasonable mind (...) yet an informational part has to be inserted. 4. Consequence: Every attempt to boast ones own position be writing mega-long articles appears to be an intellectual own-goal, as the average scener wants to be entertained and not to take part in an intellectual hurdlerace. 5. Consequence: If the way, a text is presented demands a certain kind of tone, then it has to be provided by that particular tone. A mag can't be held in one single type of tone, if each individual article has to reflect a different sort of topic and point of view." f1As substract, Gawping means shortstories (narration) about the Scene, where the characters are Sceners and the moral is the useful/actual information about the Scene. Following editors made strong use of this technique: c04Macnoc03, c04Mopc03, c04Fishwave c03and c04RokDaZonec03. f2c02HELMETITIS f1c03A c02->c03pathogenic state found by c04Macnoc03 which forces a certain (main)editor to suddenly be convinced that he has to copy the style of Lord Helmet and write in an sarcast c02->c03Spandimerda way - and fails miserably. The ones admired writer becomes a ridiculous shadow of himself and loses his position without even understanding why. Two known subjects: c04Napoleon/Rage! c03and c04Puh/Oepir Ristic03. f2c02JOURNALISTITE f4c03 "A disease which transforms normal and seemingly peaceful editors in mad scoopseekers and scandalitic journalists"f1, c04Macnoc03 defines wittily in his 'Scene Pearls' article in Abnormalia#3.124. c04Macnoc03 uses the term to as explaination for c04Wolman/Balance's c03unexpected human interest and scandal press outbreak in Upstream, where he claimed c04Heatbeat c03to be a racist and made a big upheaval out of the jealousy of c04RWO's c03girlfriends ex-lover. f2c02LEMMINGITIS f1c03First sources can be found in 42#1 in The Marvellous(!) Lunatics Ball. Here c04RokDaZonec03 first accuses the Sceners to be "Lemmings"; therefore to follow thoughtlessly hypes. The Lemmingitis lateron got a deeper definition in other places c02->c03Pathologies. f2c02MASTERS OF THE SCENE (MOS) f1c04Mopc03 often also uses f4'Masters of Puppets' f1which he prefers (no wonder, the initials make M.O.P.). In an interview in Abnormalia#3.124, c04Mopc03 postulates that f4"MOS are an organisation, ... What they seek is simply the power to controls other beings. They control diskmags, Demos, Sceners' opinions and they are the hands who generally direct the whole Scene." f1c04Macnoc03 gets deeper in RAW#5. f4 "What you know about what happens in the Scene is not something that you live and see directly, is something that you read (...). The whole Scene reaches your knowledge just via the words of some more or less known guys. Look at the 'Patsy Affair'. It was enough to see few words on Zine and Patsy became real." f1The forces behind mags, he defines as MOS - he here does not mean main-editors! c04Nimrodc03 and c04RokDaZonec03 both deny the existance of MOS in the 'Pandemic Scenology Debate', published in Abnormalia#5. c04RokDaZonec03 sees in them just a f4"wish for a might to take over responsibility for ones own doings"f1, while c04Nimrodc03 criticises them as mere conspiracy theory as a whole. In 1997, c04Parsecc03 and c04Macnoc03 have pointed at the possibility of an unique MOS, impersonned by one individual Scener, who over authority, social competence and Scenish socialisation plays the role of a covered regent. Possible candidates mentioned: c04Mopc03 and c04RokDaZonec03. f2c02MEDICAL SCENOLOGY f1c02->c03Pathology/Pathologies/Pathogenic f2c02MORBUS ROKDUS f1c03First mentioned in Abnominio#1 (released in RAW#8). A disturbance of visual perception, named after c04RokDaZonec03, who was the first subject studied in c04Nimrod'sc03 clinic. f4 "The subject seems to see a different reality, as if other and different images are mixed with his normal view and lead his mental processes to distorted paths. Even if the subject seems normal for all the aspects this visual disturb drives him into a confusion state which could degenerate into c02->c03pathogenic states." f1This disease could be one cause for Sceners to leave the Scene! f2c02NATIONAL SCENISM f1c03This term describes the idea of a Scene which is split into different parts, seperated by countryborders. In c04Magellan/Royalc03, it has found a strong favourer (c02->c03Darwinism). National Scenism Often one can find references like f4"the c02Polish c03Scene has improved", "the c02Swedish c03Scene has died" f1etc. Sadly, it too often is used for f2racial reasons. f1Certain wordclones have been used on that term so that a clear source can not be found. f2c02PATHOLOGY/PATHOLOGIES/PATHOGENIC f1c03There have been certain amounts of attempts to describe Scenic states of pathologies (short: illnesses/diseases) which partly are shortly tipped on in this dictionary. The most splendid collection, however, is written by c04Macnoc03; released under the title of 'The Scene Syndromes' in ROM#4. The editor strongly recommends a revision to interested Sceners. f2c02PRIESTS OF THE SCENE (POS) f4c03 "POS, or main-editors for the common Scener," f1c04Mopc03 simplificates in Abnormalia#3.124 just to get more specific in the 'Pandemic Scenology Debate'. According to him, POS are the f4"main-editors of the best five diskmags"f1, who have f4"huge power"f1. In recent times, with the decrease of influential maineditors, one could restrict the field to the leading three diskmags. we can be sure that c04Mopc03 did not necessarily mean plain charts as those rather reflect than influence the mood of the Scene. Nowadays, the POS therefore could be: c04Mopc03, c04The Ripperc03, c04Fishwave c03and c04RokDaZonec03. This best guess list is temporary and can f2change any day f1of course. The powerful situation isn't indisputed in writers circles as c04RokDaZonec03 proves in the 'Pademic Scenology Debate': f4 "Editors should be instrument of the masses an not aux contraire to achive more power." f2c02ROBIN-HOOD-SYNDROME f1c03According to c04RokDaZonec03 the negative trend to the c02->c03Helmetitis. The RHS is an outbreak of populism by upstreamers (especially editors) in which they try to attack VIS to get the 'oppressed masses' behind themselves. The later always in the hope to gain votes to become VIS themselves. This he assumes to be difficult as f4"the moment you personally grow, the moment you are endangered of shrinking." f1RHS has been mentioned for the first time in 'Diskmags of Today; Opinions Are Dangerous! Are They?' released in Generation#20. f2c02SCENER/SCENESS f1c03In his 'Basic Thoughts about Party-Sceners' - one of the first Scenology works ever - c04RokDaZonec03 gives a short definition of a Scener. Following him, a Sceners is f4"a shortened technical term for each person being more or less involved into the Scene and therefore studyable object for Scenology as a whole." f1As trivial as this might seem does it contain a very disputable hypothesis: A Scener does not necessarily participate in the process of producing and spreading of releases. An active exchange and vivid interest (e.g. shown by votings) may very well be enough. This is also underlined by c04Lord Helmet c03in one of his few Scenology relevant statements, found in the article 'Who is in the Scene?' (RAW#3). f4 "1) All owners of Amiga that is interested in either demos/music/graphics o.I. which is made by demogroups. 2) People who are actually doing something for the Scene (Music, Graphics (...) and so on!)." f1The term itself has according to various sources been invented by c04Macnoc03. The female expression ("Sceness") has been first used by c04RokDaZonec03. f2c02SCENER PSYCHOLOGY f1c03Early form of c02->c03Socioscenology. First approaches by c04RokDaZonec03 ('Basic thoughts about Party-Sceners'; Abnormalia 3). f2c02SCENICAL CORRECTNESS (SC) f1c03It was c04Pearl/Passion c03who first described the danger of having an own opinion might be dangerous for ones socioscenic state in 'Opinions are Dangerous' in Generation#20. He found negative sanctions if this opinion is not entirely compatible to the major trend. c04RokDaZonec03 followed his train of thoughts and postulated the concept of Scenical Correctness in 'Duck or get Ducked', released in Generation#21. The term is directly related to the fashionable Political Correctness from outerscene. f4 "Having an opinion might be dangerous for your Scenish career. Well, actually not f2having f1it, yet f2expressing f1it. S.C. means to be calm. To applaude or give a boo when one is asked to. Scenically correct means to duck oneself in order not to get ducked. A Scenically uncorrect statement or action (...) may break your neck." f1After having ones reputation unbalanced through the negative reactions as result of the expression of ones non-SC opinion, the consequence of the common c02->c03Sheep Syndrome, will force the unfashionable to his knees. f4 "Sometimes even a single incrimination may be enough" f1c04RokDaZonec03 closes. f2c02SCENOLOGY f1c03The name itself stands as mainterm for a science approach to study and analyse the Demo Scene. First meant to be used only on Amiga Scene, interscenical comparances between different platforms (PC, C64, AMIGA) have widened the field. Scenology was born the morning of the 19th of October 1993 at c04Macnoc03's home in Vimercate/Italy. According to c04Macnoc03 it was his pet-rat c04Beppe c03who gave the initiation. This also describes brilliantly the main tone in Scenology: Irony and exaggerations often are used to increase the enjoyability of the otherwise scientific writings. One major difference to common sciences. In 'Short Comment on Scenology' (42#1), c04Nimrodc03 sees Scenology "as integral part of the Scene" and understands f4"'Why'-articles f1(= c02->c03So-What! Articles) f4as early bland attempts into direction of Scenologist questioning." f1Those f4"were offsprings of an unquenchable thirst for truth and enlightment. (...) Lacking a scientific methode, their prose was unclear and the tendency to explain the Scene with cliches were unacceptably widespread." f1Scenology has split up in several subdevisions like c02->c03Socioscenology c02->c03Interscenical Scenology and c02->c03Medical Scenology. f2c02SCENZINE f1c03Following a definition crisis for Scenish publications which not longer are read from (floppy)disks directly, c04RokDaZonec03 answers 1995 in an unpublished essay that f4"if there really is a need for a new term, the only appropriate must and can be 'Scenzine'" f1Although not being used frequently so far, the term might be very well a considerable substitution to the older word as it more closely defines the sense of magazines from/about the Scene. f2c02SHEEP-SYNDROME f1c03First speculation about this c02->c03Pathology are expressed by c04Nimrodc03 in RAW#6. He calls it an f4"automatical believe" f1in gossips/hypothesis'/rumours and underlines that f4"sometimes it seems Amiga freaks are sheaps". f114 months later, c04Macnoc03 postulates in RAW#7 that the Sheep-Syndrome is f4"the incredibly common habit of refusing the own individuality to dive in a more comfortable and generalized group. (...) Once communication is established, the same Sceners realise that their individual intellectual capacity is too limited. (...) In order to feel himself part of the Scene (...) he loses himself in the mass of other Sceners" f1via adaptation to standardised behaviours. 'Shephard' is a definition by c04Mopc03 in the 'Pandemic Scenology Debate'. Those are f4"exceptional Sceners who develope the Scene" f1(c04Macnoc03: 'Scenedevelopers'). f2c02SO-WHAT? ARTICLES f1c03These intrigueing category of writings have been first defined by c04Macnoc03 in Abnormalia#3. In issue 3,124 of the same publication he gives a short insight. So-What? articles are f4"real pearls that contain so deep meditations and concerns that at the end you wonder: 'So what?'" f1In the fifth revision which will remembered as climax of the Scenology movement, c04Macnoc03 closes the definition in his essay 'Psicological motivations behind So-What? articles'. f4 "A So-What? article is basically useless, it typically expresses an unoriginal opinion about a boring and pointless topic. The writer feels strongly the need to express his ideas about certain things, he does this even if the matter already been discussed largely before, because mysteriously, he pretends to have a slightly different and more defined point of view. The final result (...) is a short article (1500 bytes) where there are written obvious things which rarely add something new to the cultural richness of the reader." f1c04Cyclonec03/Eskimos tries in the very same issue to find historical reasons. f4 "In need of articles, some editors decided to make the appearance of adverts depending of an article. Sceners had to write articles with their intellect to get three free adverts. The result are So-What? articles." f2c02SOCIOSCENOLOGY f1c03Socioscenology deals with the perception and emotion of the individual Scener in interaction with the Scene. First traces can be found in 'Basic thoughts about PartySceners' published in Abnormalia#3.124 by c04RokDaZonec03, who also was one of the most active researchers on this field. In this article c04RokDaZonec03 first considers about a possible differenciation between partyvisitors. He describes the hardwarerers (HW) and Nonhardwarerers (NHW) and their interaction and dependency. Further works: c04Macnoc03's 'Psicological Motivations behind c02->c03So-What? Articles' (Abnormalia#5). f2c02SPANDIMERDA (AWARDS) f1c03In Compass#1, c04Macnoc03 gives a fine definition of the the term he invented in an interview held by c04Mopc03. f4 "The word Spandimerda (shitspreader or selfcentred person) is the natural reaction to the stale, false, boring and hypocrite abuse of silly words like friendship, friend, friendly and similar. The Spandimerda awards are given only to the proud and brave guys who have the guts of spreding shit around, raising wars and quarrels which are food for every mag. (...) I don't think any good or bad about Spandimerda; I just award them." f1The most frequent awardtaker is c04Uyanik! c03(formerly Zinkfloid) of TRSI for his radical attacks in Suicide. c04Parsecc03 used Spandimerda as argument against the c02->c03Sheep-Syndrome. f4 "You still suppose the Scene to be an homogenous paste of behaviours? Then how can it be that half of the Scene hates the Spandimerda and the other half loves it?" f2c02TAG-O-JOY f1c03According to c04Cyclone/Eskimos c03the desire to f4"see ones name printed everywhere". f1This includes diskmags, credits and greetingslists and causes the demand for search functions in magazines. The disappointment not to find appropriate reflections in credits repordetly even has caused groupsplits; forgetting contacts in groups list require excuses or even the end of a letterexchange. One possible reason for c02->c03So-What! Articles. f2c02VERY IMPORTANT SCENER (VIS) f1c03This term has gotten into focus for its uncertain root lately. To his bitterest disappointment, the editor has to admit that he hasn't found any significant source or even definition. The first time the term was found mentioned is in ROM#2 in an article called 'Scene Fashion' written by c04Mopc03. f4 "Then there are those few entrepreneur VIS, that try their best, to wake up this Scene of ours from its daily monotony. Some do it with demos, others do it by themselves!" f1In ROM#4 we found it mentioned again in c04Mopc03's article "Images". f4 "VIS can have many identities and be members of multiple groups." f1c04Mopc03 himself, however, underlines that although it was him first technically using VIS in an article, the term itself had been found by c04Macnoc03 and c04Parsecc03 before. The author is thankful for this highly appreciated information from his colleague writer.