TELECOM Digest OnLine - Sorted: Re: Not so Fast! 'xxx' Startup Put on Hold

Re: Not so Fast! 'xxx' Startup Put on Hold

DevilsPGD (spamsucks@crazyhat.net)
Sun, 21 Aug 2005 01:41:32 -0600

In message <telecom24.378.10@telecom-digest.org> TELECOM Digest Editor
noted in response to DevilsPGD spamsucks@crazyhat.net>:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Where did you get this idea that there
> is going to be an en-masse removal of sites from one domain to another?
> I do not recall ever saying that ... those web sites who are willing
> to and gracious enough to take up residence in .xxx will be permitted
> to do so, just as sites took up residence in .info, .biz, .aero, and
> .museum ... and those of us Moderators and others who do not give a
> shit about dubious information, biz-iness ventures, museums or
> aeroplanes would be free to filter it out. But we won't be permitted
> to filter out .xxx which I suspect will be the rudest, crudest and
> lewdest of all because (name the red herring of your choice) is likely
> to happen as a result. Oh, we will able to filter .xxx -like material
> in a sort of half-assed way using the tools we are given, but that is
> all, not .xxx domains in their entirety.

I'm not against the creation of .xxx -- I'm only pointing out that
making it mandatory won't work. If we make it optional then all that
has been done is to open up more domain space (Which isn't a bad
thing, but .biz and .info haven't exactly been successful, and how
many .name domains have you seen?)

Post Followup Article Use your browser's quoting feature to quote article into reply
Go to Next message: Steven Lichter: "Re: Last Sad Laugh! new.site.p0rn0..ch|ldren$ 4601527"
Go to Previous message: jmeissen@aracnet.com: "Re: Yet More on FiOS"
May be in reply to: News Wire: "Not so Fast! 'xxx' Startup Put on Hold"
TELECOM Digest: Home Page