 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
| View Poll Results: What internet content label do you think should be the standard and promoted as such? | |||
| ICRA label (or another existing system) |
   
|
8 | 10.67% |
| A simple <content="adult"> meta tag |
  
|
45 | 60.00% |
| A more complex tag with varying content levels but still one that is just inserted in the html (much like current TV or MPA ratings) |
  
|
11 | 14.67% |
| A meta label combined with V-chip type system |
  
|
5 | 6.67% |
| No label |
  
|
6 | 8.00% |
| Voters: 75. You may not vote on this poll | |||
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
2006-02-13, 02:37 PM
|
#11 |
|
You can now put whatever you want in this space :)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 525
 |
BULLETIN!
Hope you're not all getting wore out talking about this but here's something that might affect the dicussion. I've found out that the official position of the FSC is to be against and fight ANY mandatory tagging standards. WHY? Because mandatory tags could somewhere down the line allow the blocking of materials at the ISP level. Can you imagine a "Christian" or "Parents Network" ISP company starting up to address this perceived market need based on mandatory tagging? Initially I was a bit skeptical of this but in the last twenty four hours I've completely changed my mind to be in agreement. WHY? I know you've all heard on the news today that cable and phone companies are floating the idea of making Google/Yahoo et al pay for access to the subscribers. This is outrageous of course but take the possibilities to their logical conclusion and its not a pretty picture. Things that make you go Hmmmmm! |
|
|
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|
Threaded Mode