july

My two cents on the debate. If you spend a few moments with the @botto project you will quickly see that the outputs are only part of a larger conceptual framework. And like all conceptual ideas, it's the thought(s) that count. If you judge a conceptual project purely on the basis of aesthetic merit you will probably be (at least partly) missing the point. It seems to me that the people most offended by @botto are those with excellent technical skills (and many of these are artists I also very much respect). But there is no great surprise here because there is a long history of this kind antagonism in the history of art - ie challenging on the basis of technical merit and prowess. It just alerts me to the fact that web3 art is an infant compared the the so called traditional art world that has had to deal with this discussion (and got over it) so many many time before. The real question is, is @botto interesting from a conceptual perspective?