I place Fascicle's link on my list, but so far am equiviocal about the project. I haven't read a lot yet but must note my dissatisfaction with the lay out. this is a print journal online. that's okay, so is Jacket. Jacket is as neat a translation of print aesthetics (if that's the right word, it sounds a little huffy) as I've seen online. MAG takes a somewhat different approach but fulfills the inferred necessity of being book readable. check out some of Joel Weishaus' sites, however, such as Sasquatch, for a sense of design that is bookish (written for a page) but still exploits the values of html. Joel's sites please the eye. Fascicle's pages irritate me. looking at the masthead of Fascicle, I'm left to wonder about the editorial imperative. there's a shitload of material, sure enough. the expanse that the internet allows goes at odds with a stating of editorial vision beyond wide inclusion. I mean MAG has clearly demarcated a place of abundance, simplement. Fascicle implies a focus of sorts in its vision, but to look at the masthead one sees a blurry muddle of stuff. I don't doubt it's a lot of good stuff. I just wonder how one can comprise it all as an aesthetic presentation. Muse Appreciation Guild is encyclopedic and doesn't seem meant to be taken as a whole, but I'm getting the message that Fascicle intends its feast to serve a vision. I join no controversy here. Fascicle is out there, and it certainly isn't as gunky as Fence is (tell me this editorial note isn't 2nd rate Tina Brown and sinking). and I agree with KSM re Kent Johnson's poems. too much Sisyphus behind the boulder, and better can be done. but, again with Kasey (not to primp my self image too much thus), over all the deed is impressive. I don't want to sniff against the real work out there. we all seek our ways and means. I think, editorially speaking, a need exists to shiver the timbers vis-a-vis what the hell the opportunity of internet means. in a nutshell.