Swerve wrote:
The original meanings and expectations are part the problem.
I or my vision didn't fit into any of those narrow categories in 1995.
I wasn't a pure .Com or pure .Net or pure .Org or pure .Mil or pure
.Edu or pure .Gov
I was a solo pot smoking hack neZ artist excited about putting my work out.
Were you going to make money for it? .com. Were you not going to?
.org. Easy.
From what i recall, i was forced into .Com by the limitations of the
original system that didn't have a suffix that reflected my identity. The
only Club, (from what i recall) i was allowed into was .Com. Anyone
remember when .Net or .Org dropped their membership requirements??
.org never had any. .net's were never enforced.
It's confusion for the sake of vanity.
That's one insulting way to describe it.
I'm sorry that you heard that as a personal attack. I think the entire
"I can have any suffix I want, no matter what it may do to confuse the
end-user" attitude is confusion for the sake of vanity, no matter who
does it.
It was exclusion as a result of narrow and not forward thinking that
resulted in a system that divided the world/people/reality into 6 (?) main
categories.
Sounds perfectly fine to me.
Try and explain that classification to a group of rationalists who
controlled and probably still control the namespace.
Systems must be rational to work. Artistic expression is free not to be.
