'xxx' marks the wet spot

Comments

8 comments posted
who gets the xxx?

This is interesting. As someone who writes erotica on commission, I'm barred from a lot of listing services because I offer "adult" content; on the other hand, I'm nowhere near "hard-core pornography." I write erotica for men and women. My question is, in order to give out the xxx addresses, they're going to have to do some kind of policing of content. Someone is going to have to evaluate who gets it and who doesn't. And once they start evaluating xxx, I agree with you media girl, it won't be long before they start looking at org versus com versus net. We may all find ourselves in various ghettoes.

Enya's picture
Posted by Enya (not verified) on 20 June 2005 - 9:11am
The age of thought police

GoodThink is alive in this country. It's sad to see the First Amendment tossed away like so much garbage by so many.

media girl's picture
Posted by media girl on 20 June 2005 - 9:53am
The biginning of classifying

The biginning of classifying certain types of speech is the begining of restrictions on free speech. Also, if a person has to pay a lot more to have the .xxx than the .com they just may stick with the .com, making the .xxx a mere novelty.

Blue's picture
Posted by Blue (not verified) on 20 June 2005 - 12:24pm
XXX

Someone on another site also pointed out that "they" could "switch off" the entire XXX domain any time they want - or filter them in a certain country with a developing Taliban mentality.

Craig's picture
Posted by Craig (not verified) on 20 June 2005 - 5:53pm
Heaven forbid

Heaven forbid the men who gang raped Ms. Mukhtaran in Pakistan couldn't get their jollies looking at nekked Jessica Simpson pix. Oh, now that truly has me saddened and worried.

media girl's picture
Posted by media girl on 20 June 2005 - 6:30pm
The point being...

... that they could do it to any. I don't like the idea of a bureaucrat classifying my website and lumping it into any category. Suppose they decided political sites should end in .pol?

Craig's picture
Posted by Craig (not verified) on 20 June 2005 - 6:51pm
So the ICM is some all powerful body?

Because I'm confused. I wasn't aware that they even had the right to enforce what content goes on what sites. In fact, I wasn't aware that anybody had this kind of control... Well, save for the government through proxy with Microsoft, of course.

tas's picture
Posted by tas (not verified) on 21 June 2005 - 12:14am
I don't know

The fact that the question was even discussed is telling. But who knows? There do seem to be occasional surprises, such as the loss of confidentiality for .us domain owners that happened a few months ago. Who rules the jungle? The tiger? Or bacteria?

media girl's picture
Posted by media girl on 21 June 2005 - 8:20am