Re: [ga] Re: The battle over .xxx again...
Stephane and all former DNSO GA members or other interested
stakeholders/users,
Stephane Bortzmeyer wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 23, 2004 at 09:12:22PM -0800,
> Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote
> a message of 32 lines which said:
>
> > Seems to me in the .xxx specific case, depending on how it is
> > handled, it would be a good idea to have such a sTLD.
>
> Read RFC 3675 ".sex Considered Dangerous" first.
ROFLMAO! Well .sex might be dangerous in Some
African countries, which may have been the IETF's motivation
for the RFC you reference. .XXX is a different matter, yet
perhaps such a "xTLD" has some merit "contracted" correctly.
However given ICANN's lack of reasonable legal expertise
I would advise strongly against taking any contractual determination
of such an "xTLD/ Adult TLD" without independent stakeholder/user
review, as it would almost certainly be a magnet for under age
stakeholders/users and thereby have it's own moral and cultural
implications on a global scale..
As our friend and fellow stakeholder/user often told me,
"there is no sex/.sex in Vietnam"... >;)
Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
Pierre Abelard
"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 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827