Re: [ga] Has there been any progress on a .REL gTLD?

[Jeffrey Williams <jwkckid2@xxxxxxxxx>]

Matt and all,

  Thank you so much for your response.  .REL might counter balance .XXX
depending on the contract requirements
for registering a domain name in such a name space accordingly, which I
mentioned in my original post suggesting
same.   For instance prohibiting porn centric or porn content associated
with a .REL domain name.  Such would need
to be worded carefully and specifically of course.

  Yes errors in US tax law are indeed many and varied to be sure.
 Correction of same is and has been a monumental
task that is ongoing and often times problematic as has US FCC regulation
which is relevant to this thread.

  As now history has shown us, us.kids and .xxx have been significantly
unsuccessful in achieving the stated goals
by which they were promoted.    A .REL may indeed also suffer the same
fate, but also has a chance if done carefully
and diligently.  Is such not worthy of the effort and/or consideration?  My
answer is yes.  What's yours Matt?  If it is NO
as I suspect, than why NO?

  As you may know, I and my organization was opposed to .xxx for the very
reasons it has now shown to have failed.
That fact is well documented and recognized.  I may also be just as WRONG
as I was RIGHT with .xxx in respect to a .REL
for religious or religious organisations.  Still I fear not to tread on
this ground.  Seems you do, or do you?  It seems much
to my astonishment many churches and other religious denominations also
fear to tread here as well.  I have to wonder
and question why?  So I do so.

Kindest regards and god bless,
Jeffrey A. Williams
"Credit should go with the performance of duty and not with what is very
often the accident of glory" - Theodore Roosevelt

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B; liability
depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 4/18/12
CISO
Phone: 214-245-2647

On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 9:26 AM, Matthew Pemble <matthew@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

>
> Williams 2012. The candidate for domain purity?
>
> "No-one expects the Internet Inquisition!"
>
> Seriously, please. Never mid the errors in US tax law, are you suggesting
> that .tv should be restricted to organisations operating in Tuvalu and .me
> to Montenegro?
>
> The world has moved on and is now using the Internet in ways un-dreamt of
> by the pioneers. We need to make sure we work within the new business and
> operating paradigm, helping to make it robust and secure. Otherwise we'll
> be an irrelevance. Like RMS insisting that it shouldn't be called "Linux".
> Correct, but irrelevant.
>
> Oh, and for consistencies sake, Jeff. Why do you think a .rel would work
> any better than the .xxx you were castigating earlier.
>
> M (on the first of the Friday evening wine)
>
> ---
>
> Matthew Pemble
> Tel: +44 7595 652175
>
> Chained to the desk by iPhone(TM)!
>
>