the scott baio litmus test

Wow, internet polling… is fun - erm, I suippose you better find out who
one and lost…

Marc Garrett vs David Bowie…
http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=marc+garrett&q2Uvid+bowie
&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us


Valery Grancher vs Mark Tribe
http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=valery+grancher&q2=mark+tri
be&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us



marc


> Dear friends on the rhizome raw list,
>
> Hi. It's me, curt.
>
> As a competetive American male intuitively seeking a simple and
> indisputable method of clearly indentifying "winners" (even in
> non-competetive areas of hazy subjectivity such as contemporary art),
> I've come up with the Scott Baio Litmus Test.
>
> "Who are the GOOD artists?" "who are the BEST artists?" I know I'm
> not allowed to ask these questions, but they continue to arise. I'm
> not allowed to answer these questions based on whether an artist's
> work is actually good or not; because there are lots of artists whose
> work really sucks, but who nevertheless assure me that they are
> succeeding as artists. Some of these sucky artists point to their
> gallery exhibits as proof of success, others point to their
> recognition in festivals, others to their academic degrees and
> research, and the more banal point to the amount of money their art
> has procured from patrons whom they both ridicule and disdain.
> Surely there must be a less subjective way of measuring success?
>
> And there is! Introducing the Scott Baio Litmus Test (hereafter
> referred to as the SBLT). Contemporary artists can't really be in it
> for the big money (since only about 3 contemporary artists are making
> any big money). Too obligatorily cynical to be in it simply for the
> joys of creation or the mere "fun of it," I figure most contemporary
> artists are in it for the fame. Well, Scott Baio was pretty famous
> in his day too. Alas, Scott's day was fleeting and is now 30 years
> gone. (The light that burns twice as bright burns half as long. Cf:
> http://www.neuralust.com/~curt/scott/baio.jpg )
>
> Scott's medium was not even the internet, whereas most contemporary
> artists are all wired and such. So I figure, if in your heyday, and
> in your own medium, you're not any more famous than Scott Baio, how
> can you call yourself a success? Hence the SBLT –
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> the SBLT:
> 1. go to http://www.googlefight.com
> 2. enter "scott baio" in one field (don't forget the quotation marks).
> 3. enter "your name" in the other field (where "your name" is your
> name, and don't forget the quotation marks).
> 4. submit and observe the results.
> 5. if scott wins, shrink your head, keep on self-pimpin', and try
> again in a couple of years.
> 6. if you win (and your name is not something generic like "jennifer
> smith"), congratulations, you are a successful contemporary artist.
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>
> Hopefully, this simple test will put to rest once and for all any
> sticky issues of aesthetic value, artistic worth, and ugly
> accusations of outright suckiness.
>
> your friend,
> curt
>
> _
> _
> _
> + KNORRRRRRR
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
>
>

try it again using the quotation marks. It's inaccurate if you don't
use the quotation marks!

mark garrett = 142,000 [inaccurate]
"mark garrett" = 513 [accurate]




http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=%22marc+garrett%22&q2
=%22david+bowie%22&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us

At 1:57 AM +0000 11/14/02, furtherfield wrote:
>Wow, internet polling… is fun - erm, I suippose you better find out who
>one and lost…
>
>Marc Garrett vs David Bowie…
>http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=marc+garrett&q2Uvid+bowie
>&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
>
>
>Valery Grancher vs Mark Tribe
>http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=valery+grancher&q2=mark+tri
>be&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
>
>
>
>marc
>
>
> > Dear friends on the rhizome raw list,
> >
> > Hi. It's me, curt.
> >
> > As a competetive American male intuitively seeking a simple and
> > indisputable method of clearly indentifying "winners" (even in
> > non-competetive areas of hazy subjectivity such as contemporary art),
> > I've come up with the Scott Baio Litmus Test.
> >
> > "Who are the GOOD artists?" "who are the BEST artists?" I know I'm
> > not allowed to ask these questions, but they continue to arise. I'm
> > not allowed to answer these questions based on whether an artist's
> > work is actually good or not; because there are lots of artists whose
> > work really sucks, but who nevertheless assure me that they are
> > succeeding as artists. Some of these sucky artists point to their
> > gallery exhibits as proof of success, others point to their
> > recognition in festivals, others to their academic degrees and
> > research, and the more banal point to the amount of money their art
> > has procured from patrons whom they both ridicule and disdain.
> > Surely there must be a less subjective way of measuring success?
> >
> > And there is! Introducing the Scott Baio Litmus Test (hereafter
> > referred to as the SBLT). Contemporary artists can't really be in it
> > for the big money (since only about 3 contemporary artists are making
> > any big money). Too obligatorily cynical to be in it simply for the
> > joys of creation or the mere "fun of it," I figure most contemporary
> > artists are in it for the fame. Well, Scott Baio was pretty famous
> > in his day too. Alas, Scott's day was fleeting and is now 30 years
> > gone. (The light that burns twice as bright burns half as long. Cf:
> > http://www.neuralust.com/~curt/scott/baio.jpg )
> >
> > Scott's medium was not even the internet, whereas most contemporary
> > artists are all wired and such. So I figure, if in your heyday, and
> > in your own medium, you're not any more famous than Scott Baio, how
> > can you call yourself a success? Hence the SBLT –
> >
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > the SBLT:
> > 1. go to http://www.googlefight.com
> > 2. enter "scott baio" in one field (don't forget the quotation marks).
> > 3. enter "your name" in the other field (where "your name" is your
> > name, and don't forget the quotation marks).
> > 4. submit and observe the results.
> > 5. if scott wins, shrink your head, keep on self-pimpin', and try
> > again in a couple of years.
> > 6. if you win (and your name is not something generic like "jennifer
> > smith"), congratulations, you are a successful contemporary artist.
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >
> >
> > Hopefully, this simple test will put to rest once and for all any
> > sticky issues of aesthetic value, artistic worth, and ugly
> > accusations of outright suckiness.
> >
> > your friend,
> > curt
> >
> > _
> > _
> > _
> > + KNORRRRRRR
> > -> post: [email protected]
> > -> questions: [email protected]
> > -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> > +
> > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> > Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
> >
> >

I did it again for someone else, I think I'll wait till I'm dead before I
settle in the hall of succesfulness, somehow I suspect success my desire for
success lies in life, with the one I love, not in a popularity contest - sod
everything else..

thanx for your "champ" advice…

marc


> try it again using the quotation marks. It's inaccurate if you don't
> use the quotation marks!
>
> mark garrett = 142,000 [inaccurate]
> "mark garrett" = 513 [accurate]
>
>
>
>
> http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=%22marc+garrett%22&q2
> =%22david+bowie%22&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
>
> At 1:57 AM +0000 11/14/02, furtherfield wrote:
> >Wow, internet polling… is fun - erm, I suippose you better find out who
> >one and lost…
> >
> >Marc Garrett vs David Bowie…
>
>http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=marc+garrett&q2Uvid+bowi
e
> >&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
> >
> >
> >Valery Grancher vs Mark Tribe
>
>http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=valery+grancher&q2=mark+tr
i
> >be&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
> >
> >
> >
> >marc
> >
> >
> > > Dear friends on the rhizome raw list,
> > >
> > > Hi. It's me, curt.
> > >
> > > As a competetive American male intuitively seeking a simple and
> > > indisputable method of clearly indentifying "winners" (even in
> > > non-competetive areas of hazy subjectivity such as contemporary art),
> > > I've come up with the Scott Baio Litmus Test.
> > >
> > > "Who are the GOOD artists?" "who are the BEST artists?" I know I'm
> > > not allowed to ask these questions, but they continue to arise. I'm
> > > not allowed to answer these questions based on whether an artist's
> > > work is actually good or not; because there are lots of artists whose
> > > work really sucks, but who nevertheless assure me that they are
> > > succeeding as artists. Some of these sucky artists point to their
> > > gallery exhibits as proof of success, others point to their
> > > recognition in festivals, others to their academic degrees and
> > > research, and the more banal point to the amount of money their art
> > > has procured from patrons whom they both ridicule and disdain.
> > > Surely there must be a less subjective way of measuring success?
> > >
> > > And there is! Introducing the Scott Baio Litmus Test (hereafter
> > > referred to as the SBLT). Contemporary artists can't really be in it
> > > for the big money (since only about 3 contemporary artists are making
> > > any big money). Too obligatorily cynical to be in it simply for the
> > > joys of creation or the mere "fun of it," I figure most contemporary
> > > artists are in it for the fame. Well, Scott Baio was pretty famous
> > > in his day too. Alas, Scott's day was fleeting and is now 30 years
> > > gone. (The light that burns twice as bright burns half as long. Cf:
> > > http://www.neuralust.com/~curt/scott/baio.jpg )
> > >
> > > Scott's medium was not even the internet, whereas most contemporary
> > > artists are all wired and such. So I figure, if in your heyday, and
> > > in your own medium, you're not any more famous than Scott Baio, how
> > > can you call yourself a success? Hence the SBLT –
> > >
> > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > the SBLT:
> > > 1. go to http://www.googlefight.com
> > > 2. enter "scott baio" in one field (don't forget the quotation marks).
> > > 3. enter "your name" in the other field (where "your name" is your
> > > name, and don't forget the quotation marks).
> > > 4. submit and observe the results.
> > > 5. if scott wins, shrink your head, keep on self-pimpin', and try
> > > again in a couple of years.
> > > 6. if you win (and your name is not something generic like "jennifer
> > > smith"), congratulations, you are a successful contemporary artist.
> > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >
> > >
> > > Hopefully, this simple test will put to rest once and for all any
> > > sticky issues of aesthetic value, artistic worth, and ugly
> > > accusations of outright suckiness.
> > >
> > > your friend,
> > > curt
> > >
> > > _
> > > _
> > > _
> > > + KNORRRRRRR
> > > -> post: [email protected]
> > > -> questions: [email protected]
> > > -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> > > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> > > +
> > > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> > > Membership Agreement available online at
http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
> > >
> > >
>
>

Hi curb,

it's marc (born with it) not mark.


marc


> try it again using the quotation marks. It's inaccurate if you don't
> use the quotation marks!
>
> mark garrett = 142,000 [inaccurate]
> "mark garrett" = 513 [accurate]
>
>
>
>
> http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=%22marc+garrett%22&q2
> =%22david+bowie%22&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
>
> At 1:57 AM +0000 11/14/02, furtherfield wrote:
> >Wow, internet polling… is fun - erm, I suippose you better find out who
> >one and lost…
> >
> >Marc Garrett vs David Bowie…
>
>http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=marc+garrett&q2Uvid+bowi
e
> >&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
> >
> >
> >Valery Grancher vs Mark Tribe
>
>http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=valery+grancher&q2=mark+tr
i
> >be&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
> >
> >
> >
> >marc
> >
> >
> > > Dear friends on the rhizome raw list,
> > >
> > > Hi. It's me, curt.
> > >
> > > As a competetive American male intuitively seeking a simple and
> > > indisputable method of clearly indentifying "winners" (even in
> > > non-competetive areas of hazy subjectivity such as contemporary art),
> > > I've come up with the Scott Baio Litmus Test.
> > >
> > > "Who are the GOOD artists?" "who are the BEST artists?" I know I'm
> > > not allowed to ask these questions, but they continue to arise. I'm
> > > not allowed to answer these questions based on whether an artist's
> > > work is actually good or not; because there are lots of artists whose
> > > work really sucks, but who nevertheless assure me that they are
> > > succeeding as artists. Some of these sucky artists point to their
> > > gallery exhibits as proof of success, others point to their
> > > recognition in festivals, others to their academic degrees and
> > > research, and the more banal point to the amount of money their art
> > > has procured from patrons whom they both ridicule and disdain.
> > > Surely there must be a less subjective way of measuring success?
> > >
> > > And there is! Introducing the Scott Baio Litmus Test (hereafter
> > > referred to as the SBLT). Contemporary artists can't really be in it
> > > for the big money (since only about 3 contemporary artists are making
> > > any big money). Too obligatorily cynical to be in it simply for the
> > > joys of creation or the mere "fun of it," I figure most contemporary
> > > artists are in it for the fame. Well, Scott Baio was pretty famous
> > > in his day too. Alas, Scott's day was fleeting and is now 30 years
> > > gone. (The light that burns twice as bright burns half as long. Cf:
> > > http://www.neuralust.com/~curt/scott/baio.jpg )
> > >
> > > Scott's medium was not even the internet, whereas most contemporary
> > > artists are all wired and such. So I figure, if in your heyday, and
> > > in your own medium, you're not any more famous than Scott Baio, how
> > > can you call yourself a success? Hence the SBLT –
> > >
> > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > the SBLT:
> > > 1. go to http://www.googlefight.com
> > > 2. enter "scott baio" in one field (don't forget the quotation marks).
> > > 3. enter "your name" in the other field (where "your name" is your
> > > name, and don't forget the quotation marks).
> > > 4. submit and observe the results.
> > > 5. if scott wins, shrink your head, keep on self-pimpin', and try
> > > again in a couple of years.
> > > 6. if you win (and your name is not something generic like "jennifer
> > > smith"), congratulations, you are a successful contemporary artist.
> > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > >
> > >
> > > Hopefully, this simple test will put to rest once and for all any
> > > sticky issues of aesthetic value, artistic worth, and ugly
> > > accusations of outright suckiness.
> > >
> > > your friend,
> > > curt
> > >
> > > _
> > > _
> > > _
> > > + KNORRRRRRR
> > > -> post: [email protected]
> > > -> questions: [email protected]
> > > -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> > > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> > > +
> > > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> > > Membership Agreement available online at
http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
> > >
> > >
>
>

my apologies.

the 513 figure is still accurate, though. you're evil twin "mark
garrett" actually yields 2,360.




At 2:33 AM +0000 11/14/02, furtherfield wrote:
>Hi curb,
>
>it's marc (born with it) not mark.
>
>
>marc
>
>
> > try it again using the quotation marks. It's inaccurate if you don't
> > use the quotation marks!
> >
> > mark garrett = 142,000 [inaccurate]
> > "mark garrett" = 513 [accurate]
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=%22marc+garrett%22&q2
> > =%22david+bowie%22&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
> >
> > At 1:57 AM +0000 11/14/02, furtherfield wrote:
> > >Wow, internet polling… is fun - erm, I suippose you better find out who
> > >one and lost…
> > >
> > >Marc Garrett vs David Bowie…
> >
> >http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=marc+garrett&q2Uvid+bowi
>e
> > >&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
> > >
> > >
> > >Valery Grancher vs Mark Tribe
> >
> >http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=valery+grancher&q2=mark+tr
>i
> > >be&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >marc
> > >
> > >
> > > > Dear friends on the rhizome raw list,
> > > >
> > > > Hi. It's me, curt.
> > > >
> > > > As a competetive American male intuitively seeking a simple and
> > > > indisputable method of clearly indentifying "winners" (even in
> > > > non-competetive areas of hazy subjectivity such as contemporary art),
> > > > I've come up with the Scott Baio Litmus Test.
> > > >
> > > > "Who are the GOOD artists?" "who are the BEST artists?" I know I'm
> > > > not allowed to ask these questions, but they continue to arise. I'm
> > > > not allowed to answer these questions based on whether an artist's
> > > > work is actually good or not; because there are lots of artists whose
> > > > work really sucks, but who nevertheless assure me that they are
> > > > succeeding as artists. Some of these sucky artists point to their
> > > > gallery exhibits as proof of success, others point to their
> > > > recognition in festivals, others to their academic degrees and
> > > > research, and the more banal point to the amount of money their art
> > > > has procured from patrons whom they both ridicule and disdain.
> > > > Surely there must be a less subjective way of measuring success?
> > > >
> > > > And there is! Introducing the Scott Baio Litmus Test (hereafter
> > > > referred to as the SBLT). Contemporary artists can't really be in it
> > > > for the big money (since only about 3 contemporary artists are making
> > > > any big money). Too obligatorily cynical to be in it simply for the
> > > > joys of creation or the mere "fun of it," I figure most contemporary
> > > > artists are in it for the fame. Well, Scott Baio was pretty famous
> > > > in his day too. Alas, Scott's day was fleeting and is now 30 years
> > > > gone. (The light that burns twice as bright burns half as long. Cf:
> > > > http://www.neuralust.com/~curt/scott/baio.jpg )
> > > >
> > > > Scott's medium was not even the internet, whereas most contemporary
> > > > artists are all wired and such. So I figure, if in your heyday, and
> > > > in your own medium, you're not any more famous than Scott Baio, how
> > > > can you call yourself a success? Hence the SBLT –
> > > >
> > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > the SBLT:
> > > > 1. go to http://www.googlefight.com
> > > > 2. enter "scott baio" in one field (don't forget the quotation marks).
> > > > 3. enter "your name" in the other field (where "your name" is your
> > > > name, and don't forget the quotation marks).
> > > > 4. submit and observe the results.
> > > > 5. if scott wins, shrink your head, keep on self-pimpin', and try
> > > > again in a couple of years.
> > > > 6. if you win (and your name is not something generic like "jennifer
> > > > smith"), congratulations, you are a successful contemporary artist.
> > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Hopefully, this simple test will put to rest once and for all any
> > > > sticky issues of aesthetic value, artistic worth, and ugly
> > > > accusations of outright suckiness.
> > > >
> > > > your friend,
> > > > curt
> > > >
> > > > _
> > > > _
> > > > _
> > > > + KNORRRRRRR
> > > > -> post: [email protected]
> > > > -> questions: [email protected]
> > > > -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
>http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> > > > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> > > > +
> > > > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> > > > Membership Agreement available online at
>http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
> > > >
> > > >
> >
> >

Yeah,

I'm gonna have to sort out that evil twin of mine, been pestering me for
years…

marc


> my apologies.
>
> the 513 figure is still accurate, though. you're evil twin "mark
> garrett" actually yields 2,360.
>
>
>
>
> At 2:33 AM +0000 11/14/02, furtherfield wrote:
> >Hi curb,
> >
> >it's marc (born with it) not mark.
> >
> >
> >marc
> >
> >
> > > try it again using the quotation marks. It's inaccurate if you don't
> > > use the quotation marks!
> > >
> > > mark garrett = 142,000 [inaccurate]
> > > "mark garrett" = 513 [accurate]
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=%22marc+garrett%22&q2
> > > =%22david+bowie%22&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
> > >
> > > At 1:57 AM +0000 11/14/02, furtherfield wrote:
> > > >Wow, internet polling… is fun - erm, I suippose you better find out
who
> > > >one and lost…
> > > >
> > > >Marc Garrett vs David Bowie…
> > >
> >
>http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=marc+garrett&q2Uvid+bowi
> >e
> > > >&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >Valery Grancher vs Mark Tribe
> > >
> >
>http://www.googlefight.com/cgi-bin/compare.pl?q1=valery+grancher&q2=mark+tr
> >i
> > > >be&B1=Make+a+fight%21&compare=1&langue=us
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >marc
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > Dear friends on the rhizome raw list,
> > > > >
> > > > > Hi. It's me, curt.
> > > > >
> > > > > As a competetive American male intuitively seeking a simple and
> > > > > indisputable method of clearly indentifying "winners" (even in
> > > > > non-competetive areas of hazy subjectivity such as contemporary
art),
> > > > > I've come up with the Scott Baio Litmus Test.
> > > > >
> > > > > "Who are the GOOD artists?" "who are the BEST artists?" I know
I'm
> > > > > not allowed to ask these questions, but they continue to arise.
I'm
> > > > > not allowed to answer these questions based on whether an artist's
> > > > > work is actually good or not; because there are lots of artists
whose
> > > > > work really sucks, but who nevertheless assure me that they are
> > > > > succeeding as artists. Some of these sucky artists point to their
> > > > > gallery exhibits as proof of success, others point to their
> > > > > recognition in festivals, others to their academic degrees and
> > > > > research, and the more banal point to the amount of money their
art
> > > > > has procured from patrons whom they both ridicule and disdain.
> > > > > Surely there must be a less subjective way of measuring success?
> > > > >
> > > > > And there is! Introducing the Scott Baio Litmus Test (hereafter
> > > > > referred to as the SBLT). Contemporary artists can't really be in
it
> > > > > for the big money (since only about 3 contemporary artists are
making
> > > > > any big money). Too obligatorily cynical to be in it simply for
the
> > > > > joys of creation or the mere "fun of it," I figure most
contemporary
> > > > > artists are in it for the fame. Well, Scott Baio was pretty
famous
> > > > > in his day too. Alas, Scott's day was fleeting and is now 30
years
> > > > > gone. (The light that burns twice as bright burns half as long.
Cf:
> > > > > http://www.neuralust.com/~curt/scott/baio.jpg )
> > > > >
> > > > > Scott's medium was not even the internet, whereas most
contemporary
> > > > > artists are all wired and such. So I figure, if in your heyday,
and
> > > > > in your own medium, you're not any more famous than Scott Baio,
how
> > > > > can you call yourself a success? Hence the SBLT –
> > > > >
> > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > > the SBLT:
> > > > > 1. go to http://www.googlefight.com
> > > > > 2. enter "scott baio" in one field (don't forget the quotation
marks).
> > > > > 3. enter "your name" in the other field (where "your name" is your
> > > > > name, and don't forget the quotation marks).
> > > > > 4. submit and observe the results.
> > > > > 5. if scott wins, shrink your head, keep on self-pimpin', and try
> > > > > again in a couple of years.
> > > > > 6. if you win (and your name is not something generic like
"jennifer
> > > > > smith"), congratulations, you are a successful contemporary
artist.
> > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Hopefully, this simple test will put to rest once and for all any
> > > > > sticky issues of aesthetic value, artistic worth, and ugly
> > > > > accusations of outright suckiness.
> > > > >
> > > > > your friend,
> > > > > curt
> > > > >
> > > > > _
> > > > > _
> > > > > _
> > > > > + KNORRRRRRR
> > > > > -> post: [email protected]
> > > > > -> questions: [email protected]
> > > > > -> subscribe/unsubscribe:
> >http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> > > > > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> > > > > +
> > > > > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> > > > > Membership Agreement available online at
> >http://rhizome.org/info/29.php
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > >
> > >
>
>

yeah sure ~ lol


We aim above the curb in order to hit the curb

,ceape
marc


> >thanx for your "champ" advice…
>
> we aim above the mark in order to hit the mark (no pun intended).
>
> peace,
> curt
>
>

Number of results on Google for the keywords scott baio and joseph mcelroy:
scott baio( 25 800 results) versus joseph mcelroy ( 52 000 results)

Results for joseph franklyn mcelroy (2500 results) loser
Results for donna mcelroy (40 100 results) winner
Results for joseph and donna (910 000 results) winner
Results for joseph and donna mcelroy (10 500 results) loser
Results for max herman (295 000 results) winner

joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
frank + lyn - mc + El + roy

go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
call me 646 279 2309



Quoting Curt Cloninger <[email protected]>:

> Dear friends on the rhizome raw list,
>
> Hi. It's me, curt.
>
> As a competetive American male intuitively seeking a simple and
> indisputable method of clearly indentifying "winners" (even in
> non-competetive areas of hazy subjectivity such as contemporary art),
> I've come up with the Scott Baio Litmus Test.
>
> "Who are the GOOD artists?" "who are the BEST artists?" I know I'm
> not allowed to ask these questions, but they continue to arise. I'm
> not allowed to answer these questions based on whether an artist's
> work is actually good or not; because there are lots of artists whose
> work really sucks, but who nevertheless assure me that they are
> succeeding as artists. Some of these sucky artists point to their
> gallery exhibits as proof of success, others point to their
> recognition in festivals, others to their academic degrees and
> research, and the more banal point to the amount of money their art
> has procured from patrons whom they both ridicule and disdain.
> Surely there must be a less subjective way of measuring success?
>
> And there is! Introducing the Scott Baio Litmus Test (hereafter
> referred to as the SBLT). Contemporary artists can't really be in it
> for the big money (since only about 3 contemporary artists are making
> any big money). Too obligatorily cynical to be in it simply for the
> joys of creation or the mere "fun of it," I figure most contemporary
> artists are in it for the fame. Well, Scott Baio was pretty famous
> in his day too. Alas, Scott's day was fleeting and is now 30 years
> gone. (The light that burns twice as bright burns half as long. Cf:
> http://www.neuralust.com/~curt/scott/baio.jpg )
>
> Scott's medium was not even the internet, whereas most contemporary
> artists are all wired and such. So I figure, if in your heyday, and
> in your own medium, you're not any more famous than Scott Baio, how
> can you call yourself a success? Hence the SBLT –
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> the SBLT:
> 1. go to http://www.googlefight.com
> 2. enter "scott baio" in one field (don't forget the quotation marks).
> 3. enter "your name" in the other field (where "your name" is your
> name, and don't forget the quotation marks).
> 4. submit and observe the results.
> 5. if scott wins, shrink your head, keep on self-pimpin', and try
> again in a couple of years.
> 6. if you win (and your name is not something generic like "jennifer
> smith"), congratulations, you are a successful contemporary artist.
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>
>
> Hopefully, this simple test will put to rest once and for all any
> sticky issues of aesthetic value, artistic worth, and ugly
> accusations of outright suckiness.
>
> your friend,
> curt
>
> _
> _
> _
> + KNORRRRRRR
> -> post: [email protected]
> -> questions: [email protected]
> -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> +
> Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php

Once again, you've forgotten the essential quotation marks! These
results are invalid.

"scott baio" vs."your name"

try again.


At 5:51 AM +0000 11/14/02, joseph (yes) wrote:
>Number of results on Google for the keywords scott baio and joseph mcelroy:
>scott baio( 25 800 results) versus joseph mcelroy ( 52 000 results)
>
>Results for joseph franklyn mcelroy (2500 results) loser
>Results for donna mcelroy (40 100 results) winner
>Results for joseph and donna (910 000 results) winner
>Results for joseph and donna mcelroy (10 500 results) loser
>Results for max herman (295 000 results) winner
>
>joseph (cor e form art) + (porat per ance ist)
>frank + lyn - mc + El + roy
>
>go shopping -> http://www.electrichands.com/shopindex.htm
>call me 646 279 2309
>
>
>
>Quoting Curt Cloninger <[email protected]>:
>
> > Dear friends on the rhizome raw list,
> >
> > Hi. It's me, curt.
> >
> > As a competetive American male intuitively seeking a simple and
> > indisputable method of clearly indentifying "winners" (even in
> > non-competetive areas of hazy subjectivity such as contemporary art),
> > I've come up with the Scott Baio Litmus Test.
> >
> > "Who are the GOOD artists?" "who are the BEST artists?" I know I'm
> > not allowed to ask these questions, but they continue to arise. I'm
> > not allowed to answer these questions based on whether an artist's
> > work is actually good or not; because there are lots of artists whose
> > work really sucks, but who nevertheless assure me that they are
> > succeeding as artists. Some of these sucky artists point to their
> > gallery exhibits as proof of success, others point to their
> > recognition in festivals, others to their academic degrees and
> > research, and the more banal point to the amount of money their art
> > has procured from patrons whom they both ridicule and disdain.
> > Surely there must be a less subjective way of measuring success?
> >
> > And there is! Introducing the Scott Baio Litmus Test (hereafter
> > referred to as the SBLT). Contemporary artists can't really be in it
> > for the big money (since only about 3 contemporary artists are making
> > any big money). Too obligatorily cynical to be in it simply for the
> > joys of creation or the mere "fun of it," I figure most contemporary
> > artists are in it for the fame. Well, Scott Baio was pretty famous
> > in his day too. Alas, Scott's day was fleeting and is now 30 years
> > gone. (The light that burns twice as bright burns half as long. Cf:
> > http://www.neuralust.com/~curt/scott/baio.jpg )
> >
> > Scott's medium was not even the internet, whereas most contemporary
> > artists are all wired and such. So I figure, if in your heyday, and
> > in your own medium, you're not any more famous than Scott Baio, how
> > can you call yourself a success? Hence the SBLT –
> >
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> > the SBLT:
> > 1. go to http://www.googlefight.com
> > 2. enter "scott baio" in one field (don't forget the quotation marks).
> > 3. enter "your name" in the other field (where "your name" is your
> > name, and don't forget the quotation marks).
> > 4. submit and observe the results.
> > 5. if scott wins, shrink your head, keep on self-pimpin', and try
> > again in a couple of years.
> > 6. if you win (and your name is not something generic like "jennifer
> > smith"), congratulations, you are a successful contemporary artist.
> > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> >
> >
> > Hopefully, this simple test will put to rest once and for all any
> > sticky issues of aesthetic value, artistic worth, and ugly
> > accusations of outright suckiness.
> >
> > your friend,
> > curt
> >
> > _
> > _
> > _
> > + KNORRRRRRR
> > -> post: [email protected]
> > -> questions: [email protected]
> > -> subscribe/unsubscribe: http://rhizome.org/preferences/subscribe.rhiz
> > -> give: http://rhizome.org/support
> > +
> > Subscribers to Rhizome are subject to the terms set out in the
> > Membership Agreement available online at http://rhizome.org/info/29.php