Talk:Jennifer Ringley

message: This is my first contributin to Wikipedia (-: We-ho!
Anyway, I added a small paragraph of information, mainly translated from the mentioned book. I also corrected a few spelling mistakes (hit enter instead of clicking Show preview - duh). There is still much more to be written about the JenniCam phenomomen. Feel free to do so (-:
-Berge Schwebs Bjørlo
I think I just did the edit that makes the page complete, if poorly worded.
--Defenestrate 08:29, 2 Jan 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: It's probably as noteworthy as the "anonymous Wikipedia asshole" phenomenon, anyway, or the "hypocrites who can't stand anyone who dares to get naked but who troll sites and pages about them anyway" one.  I say go for it.  RGTraynor 15:36, 27 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Previous discussions without headers

message: I removed this text today: "There was, however, certainly a voyeuristic aspect of this which Ringley had to have been aware of, since whenever Ringley would spread her legs for her male lover, the penises of thousands of her male subscribers, and fellow Dickinson College students, would become erect and they would masturbate. Ringley, in a sense, became the alpha female who would allow only one male to access Ringley's vagina, whereas all other members of her tribe of followers had to pay to masturbate to her." - sorry, what is this rubbish? Someone projecting their fantasies, no doubt. Achromatic 22:31, 7 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've removed some of the more provocative language but have reinstated my changes with my central claim, and some necessary supporting text, intact:  that this was the first opportunity ever, in any setting whatsoever other than an illegal or purely pornographic one, to observe the explicit sexual behavior of a complete stranger.  This claim is not mere fantasy on my part--there are any number of surviving photos on the internet supporting my claim that explicit sex was shown.  If you wish to dispute the other aspect of my claim and claim that this was not the first such case, you should provide a supporting example and not merely delete my text.  I also reinstated my claim that Ringley had the same initials as J.K. Rowling since it is hard to see how that can be dismissed as fantasy.--DharmaLion 14:17, 8 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text:  If you'll read the actual text that I removed, you'll see that it IS purely limited to that 'provocative' language. I am well aware that she was one of the first - I'm kinda curious though as to the absolute of your language, "first opportunity ever" - I doubt that, even beyond the context of the Internet. Jennifer was very doubtfully the first person to ever let someone watch her on webcam. One of the first to become internationally well-known as a result. Achromatic 21:35, 31 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Origins 

message: I dunno. Seems kinda like a whitewashing with no mention of the Courtney incident or even of Dex at all. It is relevant because it caused an enormous drop in her fanbase, from which she never recovered. 02:59, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hmmm... 

message: The following large blockquote is something of a rabbit trail, so I cut it down to just the bolded part:
:Since the mid-twentieth century, surveillance has been an increasingly significant subject of literature, cinema, and art. From George Orwell's novel 1984, first published in 1949, to Francis Ford Coppola's 1974 film The Conversation, surveillance typically has been portrayed as a menacing specter of government or corporate power. By the end of the twentieth century, however, cultural attitudes toward surveillance had become more ambivalent. While concerns about the invasion of privacy remained, surveillance was also seen as a necessary evil, protecting the innocent from threats of abuse, crime, or terrorism. Surveillance began to appear not only as a technology of military and police control but also as a form of entertainment. In Web sites like JenniCAM, in which a young woman installed Web cameras in her home to expose her everyday actions to online viewers, and Reality television shows like Big Brother, in which contestants volunteered to subject themselves to around-the-clock public observation, surveillance became a source of voyeuristic and exhibitionistic excitement. This shift paralleled a dramatic rise in the sophistication and pervasiveness of such surveillance technologies as networked cameras, biometric identification systems, satellite imaging, and data mining. Institutional surveillance and the invasion of privacy have been widely explored by New Media artists.
This passage might be more relevant on the lifecasting article.  Also, I'm not convinced Jenni viewed herself as an artist, or JenniCAM as conceptual art.  From what I've read, I think it was more of an experiment; something she wanted to try because it was fascinating to her. Eseymour 14:15, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps. But the point is that others viewed her as a conceptual artist (as Googling reveals). Pepso2 15:13, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Chuck Jones once said that "artist" is a "gift word" -- meaning a person must wait for others to decide if they are an artist. Pepso2 15:17, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Fair enough.  I've changed the wording a little.  Could you provide a source where someone labels Jenni a conceptual artist? Eseymour 16:08, 22 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Unfortunately, this can't be sourced but in her online diary she alluded to the fact that she saw herself as an erstwhile artist and published some of her film photography self-portraits. She sometimes stated that her cam was her version of performance art. She started talking like this after she met Ana Voog. Jenni had a bit of inflated ego as to the importance of what she was doing, often fueled by her more enthusiastic subscribers. She made a big deal about her site being featured in a MOMA exhibition, but it would be unlikely that they would hold such an exhibition now. —M (talk • contribs) 17:55, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

text: Unlikely unless her journal entries were re-published. —M (talk • contribs) 20:18, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Reference added. Btw, that Webjunk video at bottom link is worth watching, as she tells what she's doing today. Pepso2 20:30, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Jenni as "New Media Artist"? 

message: There is a link to an article concerning an individual, Hasan M. Elahi, that doesn't seem relevant. He appears to be making more of a political statement or is an activist of some sort. I would like to remove this link as it doesn't seem related to Jennicam or Jennifer Ringley at all. The only thing they have in common is they seem to both have used webcams to cpature images of themselves. If such weak connections were to be used, we should have Jaleel White listed under "see also" on George Clooney's article, as they both have worked in front of a TV camera. :) --Patrick80639 18:21, 8 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: See also

message: :Image:Modernferret28.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot 04:45, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Modernferret28.jpg

message: I found:
* http://www.arttech.ab.ca/pbrown/jenni/jenni.html
It seems to be a university page, but I don't know whether it was a faculty member or a student. If it is the former, it may have more weight
WhisperToMe (talk) 02:48, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: Try this full profile from the BBC .  It includes her new (married) name, which might be considered irrelevant, in breach of WP privacy guidelines.Onanoff (talk) 06:14, 18 October 2016 (UTC)
thread_title: Jennicam sources?

message: I've asked over at the helpdesk whether it's appropriate to include a 15 year old wayback link in the infobox.  Chaheel Riens (talk) 07:34, 2 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  use of wayback and/or archive.org for website in infobox