<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
Re: [ga] Pressure Mounts On ICANN To Approve .xxx Domain
- To: Matthew Pemble <matthew@xxxxxxxxxx>, "ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx >> GA" <ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: [ga] Pressure Mounts On ICANN To Approve .xxx Domain
- From: "Jeffrey A. Williams" <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri, 7 May 2010 14:45:47 -0500 (GMT-05:00)
<HEAD>
<STYLE>body{font-family:
Geneva,Arial,Helvetica,sans-serif;font-size:10pt;font-family:arial,sans-serif;background-color:#ffffff;color:black;}p{margin:0px}</STYLE>
<META content="MSHTML 6.00.6000.16825" name=GENERATOR></HEAD>
<BODY id=compText>
<P>Matthew and all,</P>
<P> </P>
<P> Thank you. I don't worry about 'principle' as opposed to
'fairness' as fairness is or should be</P>
<P>included as part of any sound principal. If not, or the
perception of not, the courts will test that </P>
<P>at some point. And yes saddly porn is with us regardless, but need not
or should not be further </P>
<P>propagated or enabled in any way. .XXX would
likely/potentially do that. Still the 1st amendment</P>
<P>and similar legally similar laws in other jurisdictions may be a formadable
argument or basis for</P>
<P>same in favor of .XXX that may not be with respect to
'principal', abridged. </P>
<P> </P>
<P> The idea that .XXX would provide for an opertunity to filter porn
more easily doesn't</P>
<P>hold up well either as I earlier briefly and many times before pointed out,
and in fact</P>
<P>'May' cause more confusion and misdirection. Compartmentizing online
bahavior</P>
<P>via the DNS is simply a bad idea as the risk vs reward is too high and
represents</P>
<P>a gamble that once taken is difficult if not practically possible to
reverse. The</P>
<P>DNS is not the vehicle by which to accomplish such, if such is even
actually</P>
<P>accomplishable. Other means are avaliable and work to a degree, and
are far</P>
<P>easier to modify as the need arises or is percieved/necessary. A
comprehensive</P>
<P>approach/means is/are seemingly required here excluding using TLD
creation</P>
<P>policy.</P>
<P> </P>
<P> But we have already been down this/these debate/argument paths
haven't </P>
<P>we?<BR><BR><BR></P>
<BLOCKQUOTE style="PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 0px; BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff
2px solid">-----Original Message----- <BR>From: Matthew Pemble
<MATTHEW@xxxxxxxxxx><BR>Sent: May 6, 2010 6:20 PM <BR>To: "ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>> GA" <GA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx><BR>Subject: Re: [ga] Pressure Mounts On ICANN
To Approve .xxx Domain <BR><BR>Folks,<BR><BR>
<DIV class=gmail_quote>On 6 May 2010 20:23, Jeffrey A. Williams <SPAN
dir=ltr><<A href="mailto:jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";
target=_blank>jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx</A>></SPAN> wrote:<BR>
<BLOCKQUOTE class=gmail_quote style="PADDING-LEFT: 1ex; MARGIN: 0pt 0pt 0pt
0.8ex; BORDER-LEFT: rgb(204,204,204) 1px solid"><BR>All,<BR><BR> If this
bit of news wasn't so tragic is would be humorous.<BR>Frankly a better argument
in favor of .xxx would be based<BR>on discrimination or repressing
expression/speach. I personally<BR>am against promoting in any way, porn
on the Internet. .xxx<BR>will not help one bit in supressing porn on the
Internet as<BR>ccTLD's and other gTLD's such as .biz, .info, .net, .com,
.org,<BR>all already have a huge number of domain names registered
that<BR>provide various types of porn. so parents simply blocking
.xxx<BR>domain names will do little, if anything at all in preventing<BR>their
children from viewing porn. Yet I can also see how ICANN<BR>is kind of
"up against it" as it were, with this delema. Dammed<BR>if they approve it, and
dammed if they don't. But will $$ trump<BR>principal or which principal
has superior consideration?<BR></BLOCKQUOTE>
<DIV><BR>I agree with Jeff's argument entirely - I just wonder about
'principle' as opposed to 'fairness' and Hugh's 'prurience' - porn is with us,
regardless.<BR><BR>M. <BR></DIV></DIV>
<P><BR clear=all><BR>-- <BR>Matthew Pemble<BR>Technical Director, Idrach
Ltd<BR><BR>Mobile: +44 (0) 7595 652175<BR>Office: + 44 (0) 1324 820690<BR></P>
<P class=MsoNormal><SPAN style="FONT-SIZE: 10pt; COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY:
'Calibri','sans-serif'"><SPAN style="COLOR: black; FONT-FAMILY:
'Calibri','sans-serif'">Regards,<BR><BR>Jeffrey A. Williams<BR>Spokesman for
INEGroup LLA. - (Over 294k members/stakeholders and growing,
strong!)<BR>"Obedience of the law is the greatest freedom" -<BR>
Abraham Lincoln<BR><BR>"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not
with what is very<BR>often the accident of glory" - Theodore
Roosevelt<BR><BR>"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the
burden, B; liability<BR>depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied
by<BR>P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."<BR>United States v. Carroll
Towing (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir.
1947]<BR>===============================================================<BR>Updated
1/26/04<BR>CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security IDNS.
div. of<BR>Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.<BR>ABA member in good
standing member ID 01257402 E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<BR>Phone:
214-244-4827<BR></SPAN></SPAN><SPAN style="COLOR: black"><?xml:namespace prefix
= o /><o:p></o:p></SPAN></P></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY>
<<<
Chronological Index
>>> <<<
Thread Index
>>>
|