Slashdot Mirror
ICANN Finally Rejects .xxx Domain
stalebread writes "Faced with opposition from conservative groups and some pornography Web sites, the Internet's key oversight agency voted Wednesday to reject a proposal to create a red-light district on the Internet." From the article: "In a split 9-5 board decision, the organisation acted ruthlessly, against its own previous position, in order to put an end to an increasingly difficult and controversial issue - the approval of a .xxx top-level domain. The .xxx registry application has been the focus of enormous political pressure on ICANN for the past six months and was used at one point as a political football in a wider tussle for power within the internet."
By managing to force ICANN to kill this initiative, you've made certain smut remains where it belongs...out of sight and out of mind (your sight and your mind, anyway).
Never mind that by stopping the
Never mind that porn is as old as the human species, and will continue to be present on the Internet just as it has been present in every other media in human history.
Never mind that your rejection of an accepted place for it to be located just insures that it will remain in unacceptable places.
Nope...it's much more important (not to mention easier) to address the hot-button issue of the legitimization of adult content, while conveniently ignoring the reality: that porn isn't going anywhere, no matter how much the fundies shout..
So porn on the Internet will remain where it belongs...all-pervasive and impossible to effectively block...but at least you made your 'stand'. Well done.
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
1) establish .xxx domain .xxx domains only .xxx domains.
2) pass law forcing all questionable content to use
3) block all
Although it would have been fun to own goatse.xxx..
Last.fm - join the social music revolution
Faced with opposition from conservative groups and some pornography Web sites
I guess that if those two can be united against a measure, it's probably a really iditotic measure.
Rome taught me patience and assiduous application to detail. Virtues which temper the boldness of great, general views.
Good riddance to .xxx. And please take .museum and .jobs with it, would you?
Dewey, what part of this looks like authorities should be involved?
Where else will I find porn on the internet now?
I really don't get why "conservative" groups would *not* want it...it would make filtering (for sites following the rules) so trivial it'd be ridiculous.
For that matter, why are some of the porn outfits against the idea? Aside from worrying about a squatter getting your domain name, what's the downside? It's not like a .xxx domain is going to have some stigma that customers would avoid.
I just don't get it.
"Murphy was an optimist" - O'Toole's commentary on Murphy's Law
They want to force a visible indication of adult content on web pages and pas tons of laws "to protect the children" but refuse an easy way responsible adult content providers (there must exist a few ones) could be filtered. I say let's play as dumb as the average congressman and put them to jail for willingly helping children get access to adult content.
As much as a liked the idea, I think there were two fundamental problems: 1) What exactly defines pr0n? Complete nudity? Partial nudity? The line between swimsuit editions and pr0n can get pretty blurry. 2) How would you keep pr0n from appearing on .com websites? Screen every image as it is uploaded? That would be very hard to monitor.
http://www.big.co.ck/ is still available I believe; let the auctioning commence!
throw new NoSignatureException();
A huge campaign against .xxx has seen ICANN's public comment board for the registry flooded in recent days by hundreds of posters with little or no understanding of the .xxx bid, but all stating their opposition to its approval. The same campaign has been raging for months, with one ICANN Board member sent threatening letters due to an assumed bias for the registry.
Sounds like a typical day on Slashdot... but seriously, everyone's so concerned about the problem of pornography and had to limit access to it, and yet here is an attractive solution, with very little downside, and of course the fanatics are opposed. They want porn banned entirely, and aren't willing to even see a half-measure put in place to curb and control it. THey want to throw the baby out with the bath water, all because their "morality" is somehow superior to mine. Well, last time I checked, the Constitution of the United States gives me the right to decide for myself what I want to look at and see, and also allows me the right to do it without fear of persecution by the Government or my fellow citizens.
Not everyone believes what the fanatics believe and every individual is entitled to his/her own opinion. And while your opinion might be different than mine, I don't get to foist mine off on you and visa versa. So the fundamentalist s need to go home and play with their toys in private and leave me alone.
What happened behind the scenes was that the US administration told ICANN chairman Vint Cerf and head Paul Twomey that it did not approve of the domain, but due to the difficult political position that it would put both ICANN and the US government in were it to be seen to be directing internet policy (against its publicly stated "hands off" policy), there has been a carefully co-ordinated effort to kill the registry through delay.
Ok, who sees this for the FUD it is? Of course the US Government is directing things at ICANN; they've been basically getting ICANN to thumb its nose at the rest of the world's concerns for years. Why should now be any different? They undoubtedly made it clear that this wasn't going to happen, and Cerf and Twomey then had to find some way to kill the thing gracefully, rather than coming out and saying "the US made us do it" and face the wrath of Congress. And so the slow, lingering death.
ICANN gets less relevant every month it seems.
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
Can you...ummm...send me a list of those unsuspecting websites?
If you look at the people who typically support these initiatives in public, it becomes quite obvious that they're not fundamentalists in any sense of the word.
Such people are basically greedy. Nothing more, and nothing less. They only rally against pornography because it brings them political power and money. They don't have any fundamental belief against pornography, thus they are not 'fundamentalists'. If it were more profitable for them to support pornography on the Internet, they would likely be doing that instead.
Even then, those who are swayed towards politicians who argue against Internet pornography, video game violence, and so forth, likely just do it as part of the social dance. Each person is publically against it because they expect everyone else to be. And that goes for each individual.
So in the end, it's something that most people as individuals do or support, but everyone in turn also publically denies and condemns. Few have the guts or the smarts to publically point out the fact that everyone supports it or does it privately, but all are against it in public. 'Fundamentalism' has very little to do with this situation.
Tripmaster, I often agree with you, but not this time. I would, but for this one thing:
Creating a 'red light district' would be a fine idea IF that could limit the 'red light' business to that district. But of course it doesn't -- Joe Boobmaster will have one more domain to register, but will keep right on doing business in the existing TLDs -- so this can't be used to protect minors from exposure (one might even argue an extra (obvious) domain would INCREASE exposure).
If you can come up with a way to effectively force 'red light business' to stay within their designated TLD, I'd be all for it. Really.
"Good news, everyone!"
In many discussions it seems that this is getting turned into a "conservatives vs. liberals" discussion or similar. I do not really see why.
.xxx tld domain a good idea after all is that I cannot see how one would ever be able to come up with rules about what should or should not belong there, in a world with such diverse opinions about what is sexual/inappropriate/pronographic/etc and in a world with such diverse laws about pornography.
It seems there are both good sides and bad sides to having a XXX domain, but many of them do not have to do anything with the question of whether one hates or not pornographic web sites.
My main reason for not finding the
So remind me: what *good* was this TLD supposed to be again?
Great, now everyone in the World that uses the Internet has to do what right-wing Christian US politicians say is right. Again.
Keep in mind never confuse (people of the World's) silence with acceptance.
...in zoning regulations, and accidentally allowing them to pop up anywhere without restriction.
I was all excited about buying an xxx domain and putting no porn on it, thereby breaking the system.
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
As stated, it is a foothold for censorship... of the worst kind, and that is because it will be totally ineffectual, cannot be enforced any better than any other pornography law. Worse, it would make some groups feel they are getting something done, and soon there would be other domains where this or that is supposed to be neatly filed away.
.xxx domain is the right thing to do as it would only allow the same result as above, and not achieve anything but allow ICAAN or others to make more money off of the porn industry... sigh
The ONLY real answer is sensible sex industry cooperation and self censorship. I don't mean they should take their websites down, but they should open their site with a uniform warning page allowing the site to be filtered thereafter, or other such methods. By following rules that make them nice netizens, they will effectively allow the law enforcement agencies to track those that are not playing nice... and it IS the ones that don't play nice that we all want hammered into dust. Pop-ups, spam, pop-unders, hijacking... all these things need to go away, and if legitimate porn sites played nice, it would soon become apparent how to attack the problem from a legal standpoint.
Not having the
Support NYCountryLawyer RIAA vs People
Sure...here you go.
And I sure as hell support this domain. Why? It's the only way to let us conservative Christians block porn that won't get struck down by the courts.
I'm tired of the pornographers whining about the "ghettoization of their free speech." Why don't we just let them sell their goods in the kids' section of a book store? Pornography is not sexual speech. Should it be outlawed? No, each adult has to work on their own morality and forcing them won't make the right moral changes to fix society.
Let's call a spade a spade. Pornography is only art if you consider a picture of the virgin Mary painted in elephant dung to be art. I consider Playboy's photos to be low class art. A typical porn site is not even remotely art or expressive except in the lowest, most attavistic sense. There are two good reasons for not banning porn: we don't want judges and legislators legally defining what is and isn't art and it's a private moral issue that cannot be stopped by the stroke of a pen.
They may or may not be fundamentalists, but they are American.
The conservatives don't want an easy to access way to find lots of porn. They want to keep it tucked out of sight.
.org or only net based businesses being .net or only businesses in a certain country using that countries extension (i.e. .us and .uk for example))
The porn industry doesn't want to be partially forced into one little cubbyhole where they can be easily targeted and persecuted for the services and products they provide. They want to stay out of the limelight of persecution.
The geeks know that this is useless as it will be impossible to enforce (just like ONLY non profits being
Is there ANYBODY who actually has a good reason for this to exist?
I'm a fiscal conservative, it's a pity we don't have a political party anymore
Now where am I supposed to post naked pictures of myelf?
1 2 1 2 The Naken Crew
There's already a dedicated top level domain for porn: .com
The ICANN should put a stop to all those wise asses trying to make legitimate, non-porn related .com sites that have popped up throughout the sea of quality sex media.
The announcement coincides with ICANN's move to dismiss the introduction of .XXX.
An ICANN spokesman commented off the record, "In truth, we should be more honest. XXX indicates we're hiding something."
He added, "That can't be on the open and transparent internet. We feel that Dot-FUK and Dot-SUK represent what everone is looking for, just like all Dot-ORGs are not-for-profit groups, right? Know what I mean? Say no more."
ICANN also expressed interest in adding .GAY so "straight dudes and closet dudes needn't worry."
ICANN's next step coming in June is a decision on .PERV, whose supporters hope can be used to herd all the child molesters into one spot.
The move is opposed by the producers of Dateline: NBC, who say it could destroy their growing cottage industry of filming pedophiles being confronted.
ICANN is believed to be leaning toward adopting .PERV, as all things on the internet belong in nifty containers marked accurately.
I scream. You scream. I assume that means we're both acquainted with the problem. We proceed.
That's it in a nutshell. If I post some renaissance artwork featuring ancient european boobies, tell a dick joke on my blog, or say "fuck" in a podcast, how easy would it be to force me to move my entire site to .xxx to "protect the children?" For that matter, would they have to move Slashdot to .xxx because I did this -> (.)(.)?
Slashdot Burying Stories About Slashdot Media Owned
who and what were to force all the sites with porn to register as a .xxx domain?
.xxx concept only stands if all online porn site creators are honest enough to say, oh hey, i'm porn i better register as such while knowing full well that .xxx is going to be blocked at so many points. this only would have ever stopped children from seeing someting like playboy or hustler, any short lived site with spam as advertising would more than likely have continued using .com.
.xxx and than register your non-porn front end as a .com, oh oops, who installed that proxy software on the front end, gosh now you can see the .xxx behind your filter. I'm sure there are many other ways around it as well, this is just what was off the top of my head. if you want porn away from the children (and i do myself) than you have to do something about there browsing habits like (bad word time) parenting. installing some flimsy technical device and than assuming the children are safe is the outter range of foolish. this will give kids more access to porn because the real filter, the parents, are going to think they don't need to be concerned anymore.
The whole
I'm curious, did anyone actually believe or still does believe that the really bad porn sites or even those pedo sites were going to raise their hand and register?
some of these sites are already engaging in shady activities like installing porn dialers and backdoors, asking them nicely or making it a law isn't going to faze them, it may bring about fits of laughter but that's probably all. the whole concept involves a massive amount of honesty that i don't believe the target audience has.
or better yet, you are honest, register as a
It's a shame that some of the biggest influences who were lobbying against it from inside the adult industry were domain owners who did not want to lose their most valuable .com assets. That's the problem with business being done over the internet, it seems as if there is no real loyalty to others in the same business as you, more of a dog-eat-dog and selfish attitude, which one day may well contribute to the downfall of the current widespread availability of porn on the net which makes so many people money.
Business Voyeur
Although an .xxx domain would help with the blocking of adult content to minors or the easily offended, would the creation of it eventually lead to even slightly provocative content banned to a wasteland awash with garish porn? For example, if one had a website with an image of a woman with a bared breast or fiction with a passage describing an erotic scene, would a complaint from a fundie group lead to the owner of that domain having to remove the content to a .xxx domain or perhaps having the .com one shut down? And depending on where, some places may outright decide to block all .xxx domains completely (for the children, of course).
Although having porn so prevalent on the net can sometimes be annoying, it's trivial to avoid it. And I think it'd be awful to have my or someone elses website to be forced to use a .xxx domain just because it contained some content which may be mature in nature, just because some prude can't be forced to read a disclaimer or use filtering software.
I'll take my internet with its imperfections, instead of something sanitized and scrubbed into nothingness by people who dont mind letting their kids see violence and degredation but scream bloody murder over a glimpse of a breast.
If you read the actual ICANN news release, you will note at the bottom that the person to direct questions to is named Tanzanica King and is totally hot.
Never mind that your rejection of an accepted place for it to be located just insures that it will remain in unacceptable places.
.com, .org, .net , etc domains?
What's so unacceptable about pornographic sites residing in
People in western countries, and in the United States in paticular, have, for reasons inexplicable, a huge problem with sex. It's still seen as wrong, dirty, nasty, etc, etc. Unfit for public exposure. Unacceptable.
Tough shit. People are interested in sex. People want to know about sex. In fact, people need to know about sex. Just because certain wretches find anything to do with sex perturbing does not mean that the rets of us have to kowtow to their demands.
Of course, most contemporary pornography is pretty grotesque. This is of course, a result of the mass censorship and taboos placed on it, not because sex is inherantly predisposed to concoct such images.
Todays fun fact: In the 1930's, the Irish Free State Government commissioned a report into the sexual behaviour of the strongly Catholic, highly conservative irish population. What did they find? Rampant deviancy. Incest, Beastiality, pedophilia, rape, extra-marital affairs, sado-masochism, etc were all extremely common. Why? Because of the censorship and vilification of normal healthy sexual relationships. The report was vigourously supressed, and is largely unspoken of to this day. Now I understand where all those jokes about farmers and sheep came from when I was growing up.
My own opinion is that the Bible Belt territory of the United States is probably in a similar state, thank' to years of repression. Whenever I see images of crowds of "moral crusaders", I'm of the opinion that a large number of them are very depraved in private. I think statistics would back me up if anyone had the gall to do some surveys on the matter. I suspect that these are the people buying all this twisted porn.
So screw them. And screw the opinion that the rest of us should have to censor ourselves because of their dirty minds. People should grow up knowing what a clitoris is and what it's for. If some poor girl grows up never knowing because her idiot parents or pastor felt it was better that she didn't, that's unacceptable.
May the Maths Be with you!
the Internet's key oversight agency voted Wednesday
Ummmm... I thought they were supposed to be responsible for assigning names to numbers, not "overseeing" the internet. That seems a bit different.
Ok, take the analogy to the next step: .whitesupremacy. I don't think a great majority of the planet likes the idea any more than I do, so let's segregate it as well.
This isn't a free speech issue. Anyone can sign up for a domain name and host a web site. You can have just about any combination of domain and TLD you can think of to represent your business, your ideas, your organization. And it's free for anyone to access (except in China [different topic for a different day]). Not only is it free to access, it's also possible for you to avoid content you don't like. The choice is yours -- it should not be up to any subgroup or splinter faction.
Now, I hate white supremacists, but they have the right to espouse their views just as I have when I post here. Do I go to their web sites? No. I avoid them. Real easy -- I don't search for them and don't follow links to them. If they wanted their own TLD (and ICANN decided [with US Government "assistance"] it was ok) that it was ok, fine by me. It makes it easier for me to find, true, but it also makes it easier for me to avoid. Don't go to sites with the TLD .whitesupremacy. Buy filtering software for my computer so my kids can't go there either.
In the end, this is not some heinous idea. It won't lead to the fall of civilization -- lying, backstabbing, graft, corruption and violence will take care of that. I see your point, but I don't think you've taken into consideration the scope of human belief. THe only way we're going to make things work in this world is to accept the premise that everyone is different, while at the same time those differences can be bridged by common, fundamental rights that all can enjoy without duress.
GetOuttaMySpace - The Anti-Social Network
Oh yes, I was disturbed beyond repair as a child by seeing a pair of boobs. I think we have greater concerns than worrying about what children see on the internet. What we should be doing is teaching them how to process that information. Much of that material sends mixed messages, leading children to emulate bad behavior. Banning it does nothing but put a glorious halo on it that children will be drawn to look. Instead of glorifying it, maybe you should put it on display and make your feelings PUBLICLY known. That way they can learn by YOUR example. And those breasts I refered to earlier, I was breastfed as a child.
I have nothing to say.
This makes me happy.
No, each adult has to work on their own morality and forcing them won't make the right moral changes to fix society.
That says it all. The hallmark of liberalism isn't that we lack moral values, it's that we just don't feel right about shoving them down everyone's throat.
FTA: http://forum.icann.org/lists/xxx-tld-agreement/ind ex.html
Gives a link to the emails sent ICANN about the XXX domain. The majority of the ones I read were from the XXX industry complaining how this was an encrochment on their freedom of speech. I didn't read one Fundy saying anything against this on religious convictions. I personally think a lot of people are making Fundies into the new Boogie Man. Try doing some reasearch instead of believing every skewed politcally motivated bs article you read on the internet.
The problem is this. If you create a top-level domain specifically for porn, you are admitting that porn exists. And unfortunately, there are too many people who have a problem with that.
Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
I simply don't see a reason for it's existence except for more meme about the existence of porn. The existing websites function perfectly fine with the obscurity and warnings they already have. I really don't think those arguing for the .xxx domain are really interested in moving all existing porn sites there anyway/banning them out of the existing .com (etc) domains. That would after all be breaking the first amendment. What this is all about is added porn venue/convenience in meme.
How can mere pornography compare to the soul-eating danger of Cthulhu?
ICANN must act to wall off this seeping horror, for the sake of sanity itself!
--- Attorneys Assisting Citizen-Soldiers & Families -
for the simple reason that the Internet doesn't have a kids' section.
.xxx or go to prison". It should be fairly obvious what would happen in that case: Andorra, Jersey or some other small country will pass a law defining pornography in the narrowest possible terms, then sit back and watch the pornography websites rush in with their trillions of dollars of dirty money.
What the fundies should be campaigning for is the creation of a kids.us domain, for pre-approved "child-suitable" content. Those of you who believe in parenting by machine can then restrict your children to kids.us and a few other whitelisted domains, and let the rest of us get on with raising our children by talking to them.
I followed the link to your blog post - you want the world to "ratify a treaty that would require pornography web sites to use
There should be an international standard on what is and is not porn, you say? Sure - but whose standard do we follow? Will it be the representative from Tokyo, who's OK with anything as long as you can't see pubic hair? Or will it be the representative from Tehran - say goodbye to your holiday snaps? Because odds are it won't be the representative from Bumfuck, Ohio.
I am completely in favor of .xxx. Then we can start hunting porn sites outside if it down and hurt them back.
The real reason it was rejected is that it would lock up american sexuality, wich is rightly considered unamerican.
The imperialist USA wants to tell the world what 'sex' is all about.
Well, let me tell you my friend, the best sex will be sex on mars.
With a
Now, this would not do anything to "protect" the children from a
"Protection" is in quotes because this is about filtering and legal liability, not "protecting" children.
That being said, I don't think another TLD is scalable. Instead, a
The following instructions are for members of the congress, and specifically, the ICANN, to stop internet pornography.
1. Put hands on the level of your face
2. Open your hands.
3. Face your palms towards your face.
4. Cover eyes with palms.
CONGRATULATIONS! You have stopped pornography!
I have never bothered to really figure out how top-level domains work, so this may be a stupid idea, but...
.com and then some_site.com could purchase some_site from that entity.
Why don't they just sell top-level domains like they do domain names? Some entity could own
This way, we can have an infinite number of top-level domains, and everyone could stop bickering about this.
I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if a million Slashdotters cried out in torment and were silenced at once.
Friends don't let friends line-dance.
now i cant type in google.xxx and have all the worlds pr0n at my fingertips =(
You wanted to be able to access .xxx domains? Sure, no problem. It's just $19.95 a month on top of your regular service...
I'm sure that someone already had this in mind.
I don't mind measures to make porn less accessible on the Internet. I just mind stupid measures to make porn less accessible on the Internet. I would have to get raging drunk and lobotomize out everything I know about human nature and technology to think, for an instant, that this would be in any way successful. The problem is that whole "for sites following the rules" bit. It is sort of like CAN-SPAM: hey, if spammers put [ADV] in their subject lines, well wouldn't that be swell. Show of hands here: how many people got an [ADV] spam in, say, the last year? How many have spam loads which are so much as 1% [ADV]-tagged? Bueler? Bueler? I'm generally opposed to laws which purport to solve a problem and don't because they convince people, who are not experts as to the effect of laws, that the problem is solved and doesn't need more fixing. "Don't we already have a spam law? Don't we already have effective regulation of Internet porn? Didn't we pass the bill you would have wanted last year?" No, no, no. Go back to the drawing board and find me something which couldn't be circumvented by a webmaster with a two-digit IQ, then we'll talk.
Help poke pirates in the eyepatch, arr.
Setting the substance of the decision aside, was anyone else intrigued by the tone of the article? Was this meant as an editorial piece? It is far from straight reporting. The Register's taxonomy categorized this article in The Register Internet and Law Digital Rights/Digital Wrongs.
.xxx top-level domain.
.xxx registry from being approved thanks to a campaign of right-wing Christians with close links to the current administration. .xxx, ICM Registry, has done all that has been asked of it in order to answer people's concerns, but has had its efforts ignored or misrepresented by those opposed to the registry. ...
.xxx TLD should have gone through - I'm just trying to take a more critical look at the sole article the submitter linked to. Couldn't the submitter have found additional, more substantive, and less soapboxing articles to link to?
The article starts off colorlessly enough:
Plans for an area of the internet dedicated to pornography were killed last night in a vote by overseeing organisation ICANN. In a split 9-5 board decision, the organisation acted ruthlessly, against its own previous position, in order to put an end to an increasingly difficult and controversial issue - the approval of a
True enough. But then the writer begins adding statements that have not been established:
1. The US government, despite its constant denials, has been the driving force in preventing the
2. The company behind
What happened behind the scenes was that the US administration told ICANN chairman Vint Cerf and head Paul Twomey that it did not approve of the domain.... [T]here has been a carefully co-ordinated effort to kill the registry through delay.
If this is meant to be straight reporting, I would expect some substantiation of these claims, such as references to public statements made by the administration or ICANN officials, when and in what form the administration acted "behind the scenes", and whose "carefully co-ordinated effort" was this, anyway? Do you think Woodward and Berstien could've broken the Nixon administration with this kind of reporting?
If this is meant to be editorializing, I would still expect something more than inflamatory and unsubstantiated statements interspersed with the known facts of the article - it would make for a much more persuasive argument. I would also expect an editorial to be labeled as such.
I'm not trolling here - I actually think the
I would think everyone, especially those against pr0n, would want to confine all pr0n, as much as possible, into one neat little box, where it could be easily filtered out.
I would think everyone, especially those for pr0n, would want to confine all pr0n, as much as possible, into one neat little box, where it could be easily found.
Steve
A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
Five people voted for this crap? Man, that's unsettling...
Laws do not persuade just because they threaten. --Seneca
ian
A huge campaign against
Are there any reasonable arguments to oppose this bid?
Any true Conservatives, should have rather supported this .xxx bid, as it will help in better blocking/controlling (atleast to some extent) pornography.
Or, maybe it is just another example of Orwellian doublespeak, maybe the Conservatives aren't really bothered about pornography and have some ulterior motives.
Creativity uninhibited www.kreeti.com
Sucks that the Internet is under the control of these religious fundermentalists...
You mean the ones in the porn industry who opposed this?
Or the liberal religious fundamentalists who saw this heading down the road to censorship?
I'm left wondering, who actually wanted this in the first place???
My kids are targeted in online games everyday. Pedophiles know where kids are and go after them. Thats why McDonalds is now a favorite hang out for Pedos. Some on the left hate the pedo label and like to call it intergenerational sex. Teachers in public schools feel its more important to teach 5 year olds "tolerance" with regard to sexual orientation than it is to teach numbers and letters. The list of accepted behaviors now includes cross-dressers, transsexuals, and gays but will soon include pedophiles, feces eaters, snuff film makers as soon as those become acceptable to the "intellectuals" and "progressives". That is one reason why my kids are home schooled. Can I protect my kids from all the filth in the world? No. I just want them to enjoy being kids while they are young. I don't see the urgent need to introduce them to the fact that some think anal intercourse Is a very natural act. In fact there is no way I can shield them from the way the world is. By the time they are grown up they will know all they want to about what some people Feel is natural. I just want to teach them that they have choices and choices lead to consequences. If you want to have sex with 56 partners every night that is your choice. You will also encounter the consequences of that choice.
Very well stated. I don't have a problem with sex. I like sex. But I don't really think it's helpful to society to have explicit pictures everywhere, and as a parent who is trying to introduce my kids to sex in an appropriate way I find it really bothersome to have so much really raunchy stuff so readily available. My eight year-old daughter's first serious introduction to sex was pictures of an anal-rape gang bang. That's healthy, isn't it?
Really, providing a specific TLD for porn, and keeping it there, seems like the best of all worlds. Nothing is censored, but it allows parents to retain some proactive control (monitoring your childrens' Internet usage is critically important but unless you have time to watch every second -- and no one does -- it's reactive, not proactive).
There was a lot of discussion about this at The Phoenix Forum 2006. I think it's in the "state of the industry" webcast at http://www.thephoenixforum.com/2006webcast.php
.xxx and then shuffled off to some dark, often-blocked corner of the internet. They want the same free speech and equal footing of every other internet business.
Basically they don't want to be labelled
Forgive the anonymous post. Full Disclosure: I work for a company that provides hosting and services for many adult clients.
Oh this is great...
.name, .biz, .info, and abandon plans for .tel and that whole other bunch of silliness ...
If only we can get them to abolish the stupid and useless TLDs such as
2bits.com, Inc: Drupal, WordPress, and LAMP performance tuning.
The fact that you can't distinguish between "breast feeding" which is a normal natural function and "boobs", since to indicate that pornography has warped your brain. Sex portayed in porn and sex in a real relationship are as far apart as the east is to the west. If you don't know the difference, stay out of a relationship please.
It's funny, but I'm not seeing the word 'happy' in that quote. Actually, I'm not seeing any synonyms for the word 'happy', either. In fact, I'm not seeing anything whatsoever that pertains to my state of mind regarding this situation.
At this point, I'd normally say 'nice try', but this was pretty pathetic.
____
~ |rip/\/\aster /\/\onkey
Anything you lose interest in after ejaculating is pornography.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
I would think everyone with an interest in controlling access to controversial topics would want to be able to classify it as pr0n and take advantage of likely substantial pre-existing blocking (i.e., from schools, workplaces, etc) of the .xxx TLD.
Who gets to define what's pr0n? Want to ruin a commercial site? Get it classified as pr0n on the basis of some sexual content and force it into the .xxx TLD.
A .xxx TLD in an ideal world is a good and handy thing. A .xxx TLD in a world run by slimeballs isn't.
... the pornographers themselves might appreciate not having to put a page that says "You must be 18 or older to view this site."
.XXX, as long as it was entirely opt-in. I would guess that pornographers, unless they really were targeting children and teens, would much rather just put up a .xxx site. These would, of course, be the same pornographers that put links to NetNanny on their site, so parents can easily block them -- can't get much easier than just blocking .xxx entirely, right?
.xxx, so you're not losing any business by staying away from .com and .net.
.com name.
.com rush. I'd remove .com to remove the "claim to legitimacy" that corporations have before I'd remove .xxx.
I didn't have a problem with
Certainly, someone looking for pornography will find it easily enough on
Obviously, you do have to wonder at what point it becomes art, but as long as it's opt-in, anytime someone wants to claim it's art, they just use a
And personally, I think pornography is a far more legitimate business than most corporations, especially the ones from the
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
I was hoping .xxx would be established, thereby freeing up hornyteensluts.com for a legitimate, non-porn business.
"We only made them wear yellow stars. What's the harm in that?"
Done with slashdot, done with nerds, getting a life.
Rome didn't teach you much about grammar though, pal. Your second sentence is a fragment.
Ad men love sentence fragments. Fragments that tell a story. The whole story. About their product. In fragments.
ICANN.
I mean, how much money would they have made in the first month?
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on