|
ICRA apparently is an organization run by major ISPs and third parties not interested in our business, attempting to force a solution on the rest of us.
I am not arguing AGAINST tags, far from it. I am suggesting that putting up the wrong tags would be a waste of time, and giving in to the current half baked third party solution isn't going to help up to put forward things like simplifed tagging that would keep porn from being walled off from other adult materials (the current PICS / ICRA tags would allow companies like AOL to allow access to poker, example, or abortion information, but filter out and make porn non-existant to it's end users.
When we stand alone, seperated by mark from the rest of the world, we are and easy and simple target to filter and remove. Detailed page ratings will allow this to happen.
Meatpounder, I won't add much more to this discussion, I think I have made my points clear. I am for tagging, but not for complicated or detailed tagging that will (1) likely need to be replaced over and over again in time with better solutions, (2) is the solution at hand is supported by third party groups that don't really like porn, and (3) will allow sites of a sexual nature to easily be blocked at the ISP level so that surfers would have no chance to access the material, even if they wanted to.
Point 3 is important. What would happen if ISPs were required by law to block access to porn unless clients contact them and authorize access? Most people would not want to be marked as "perverts" so they wouldn't do it. They might not know how to unblock it. AOL, MSN, COX, and whatever adelphia is now suddenly all block porn. Can you imagine the effect on your business overnight?
Don't give people who would want to hinder free speech the chance to easily flag and remove us in a global fashion.
Alex
|
2006-02-15, 01:58 AM
Threaded Mode