> As a snarky example, 0100101110101101.org is an artist collective whose > absolutely unmemorizable domain name didn't keep them and their website > from getting popular and famous. Obviously it's good to have a simple and > clear url, but the actual relevance of the project will be a much bigger > driver of pageviews than a 6-letter domain name. > > Finally, i did read somewhere that most people seem to look for a site by > googling its name (or even its url! the horror) -- most of the > less-than-geeky people i know do this. So again, it's relevance that > should be the priority for the project and its website in order for it to > be known. > > Other than that, +1 to Create Foundation/Association/*. It's a very good > (and catchy) name, with enough identity to be associated with graphics but > vague enough to give some leeway to future broadening of the project's > scope. And it avoids the usual pitfalls of arguments around 'free' vs. > 'libre', or 'graphics' vs. 'art' vs. 'design'. >
createfoundation .com/.org/.us are taken for now. .info and others are available. createassociation .com/.org etc are available. Personally, I prefer create foundation.. the second feels like an unfinished sentence, but the first sounds like something that exists. Craig _______________________________________________ CREATE mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/create
