Edition brief: Encoded lens#

Status: Backlog hypothesis

Proposition#

An edition publishes part of the judgment through which Mike and Karlie paired its works. The lens might be a versioned taste package, a rich process microsite, or another inspectable structure that people and software agents can use to examine their own observations.

The encoded lens is not a verdict about the work or a profile of the viewer. It reveals an authored instrument of judgment and leaves room to disagree with it.

Possible score#

• Timing: the lens may appear before, during, or after a stay.
• Audience: public, host-only, or carried by the work.
• Artist role: none, contributor, critic, or author of a counter-lens.
• Host contribution: no response is required; a host might optionally run their own material through the published package without sending it to MOOI NIET.
• Change: the package can be dated and revised without overwriting what an earlier host encountered.
• Digital fossil: retain the work, edition, and relevant version of the published lens without storing a viewer's comparison or response.
• Closure: preserve the versioned lens, withdraw it, or publish the disagreement it produced.

What this tests#

• Whether curatorial taste can be made inspectable without becoming a rubric.
• Whether software can deepen judgment without assigning taste or measuring agreement.
• Whether artist process and gallery interpretation remain clearly attributed.

Refusals#

No compatibility scores, automated work rankings, viewer profiles, engagement analytics, fake objectivity, or claim that an encoded structure contains the whole reason the works belong.

Open before release#

The actual collection proposition, source material, artist permissions, package format, privacy boundary, versioning, and relationship to the physical encounter remain undefined.