Re: <nettime> What do you think about .art?

[miltosmanetas@gmail.com]

I absolutely agree. .art is simply ridiculous, who wants to be called .art?
Only those who are "trying hard", or amateurs without real passion.  From
the other side, .art is a perfect package for a meta-conceptual artist to
acquire and do yet another one of those pseudo-dada art operations. In
either case, its totally uninterested and better to be left to the regular
market.

Ps: I also believe that the "classic"- and "realistic"- domainname
extension for art, is simply .Com  

Miltos Manetas

Sent from my BlackBerry? smartphone

-----Original Message-----
From: Heiko Recktenwald <heikorecktenwald@googlemail.com>
Sender: nettime-l-bounces@mail.kein.org
Date: Wed, 07 Mar 2012 22:33:28 
To: nettime's_roving_reporter<nettime-l@kein.org>
Subject: Re: <nettime> What do you think about .art?

IMHO one should never call oneself an artist, .art is .kitsch
 <...>


#  distributed via <nettime>: no commercial use without permission
#  <nettime>  is a moderated mailing list for net criticism,
#  collaborative text filtering and cultural politics of the nets
#  more info: http://mx.kein.org/mailman/listinfo/nettime-l
#  archive: http://www.nettime.org contact: nettime@kein.org