So, I have been thinking about this Cambria Struggles in Senate Porn Hearings

[Bill]

The funny thing is, it is so fucking arcane I didn't realize you were joking til I was almost done reading, halfdeck. ;-}

Here's a real ICRA tag from one of my crappy old-as-shit domains:

<meta http-equiv="PICS-Label" content='(PICS-1.1 "&lt;http://www.rsac.org/ratingsv01.html&gt;" l gen true comment "RSACi North America Server" for "&lt;http://www.maidenheads.com&gt;" on "1999.10.05T02:09-0800" r (n 4 s 4 v 0 l 4))'>

Just look at all the junk in that tag. Does anybody see anything at all that looks like a browser command telling kids to stay off?

Why can't it be simplified to something like:

<meta http-equiv="PICS-Label" content="Adult">

Even "PICS-Label" is obtuse. It doesn't mean what it appears to mean. What ordinary person would have the vaguest idea what "PICS" means? This is stuff that was invented by the geekiest ubergeeks of the early internet, people who couldn't speak plain english if their lives depended on it.

We need a rating system that is crystal clear, obvious to even the most dimwitted parent and politician, universally understandable, ideally even to non english speakers, and quick and easy to use.

[Halfdeck]

Originally Posted by Bill

Here's a real ICRA tag from one of my crappy old-as-shit domains:

<meta http-equiv="PICS-Label" content='(PICS-1.1 "&lt;http://www.rsac.org/ratingsv01.html&gt;" l gen true comment "RSACi North America Server" for "&lt;http://www.maidenheads.com&gt;" on "1999.10.05T02:09-0800" r (n 4 s 4 v 0 l 4))'>

Just look at all the junk in that tag.

Bill, I repeatedly see this obsolete ICRA code on websites. The current tag looks like this:

<link rel="meta" href="/labels.rdf" type="application/rdf+xml" />

which isn't much longer than:

<meta http-equiv="PICS-Label" content="Adult">

Alex, your point regarding third parties is well taken, though personally that doesn't bother me.

[Surfn]

Now as I see it this thread has turned into |skyfall|

[Bill]

Halfdeck, I'd have to be the first to admit then that my knowledge of ICRA tagging is obsolete.

I've already admitted I have a personal antipathy towards ICRA. Back then, at least, the website said you had to generate a new tag for every page of every domain. Every page had to be entered and rated.

So, perhaps you can appreciate the source of my disdain for ICRA.

Apparently now you can generate one tag per domain which can be used on every page- tho I have yet to test it.

This tag, tho:

<link rel="meta" href="/labels.rdf" type="application/rdf+xml" />

Still looks like it does and says absolutely nothing. It certainly doesn't look like a "Kids keep the fuck off this is porn and your parents will fucking kill you if they catch you looking at this page!" browser control tag.

I gather it points to a labeling file you have to upload to the server. And the labeling file contains the meaningless crap you used to have to put on your page.

Could you write a scriptlet that quickly produces a universal "THIS IS PORN" PICS tag? What would such a tag look like?

[Bill]

Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha! Oh my fucking god!

That ICRA site is ridiculous.

This is their list of "XXX" depictions, automatically selected when you click the "XXX" button...

Exposed breasts
Bare buttocks
Visible genitals
Passionate kissing
Obscured or implied sexual acts
Visible sexual touching
Explicit sexual language
Erections/explicit sexual acts
Erotica
No violence
Profanity or swearing
Mild expletives
No potentially harmful activities
User generated content may be, but is not known to be, present

That's what they rate for.

Where's the entry for...

Hardcore Fucking
Ass Slamming
Midget Anal
Gay Cumshots
Facial Cumshot

I guess all we have to check is...

Erections/explicit sexual acts

Since even broadcast TV has...

Exposed breasts
Bare buttocks
Passionate kissing
Obscured or implied sexual acts

I guess everything is XXX nowadays.

[Bill]

I guess this is the current form of the ICRA label:

<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<rdf:RDF
xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#"
xmlns:rdfs="http://www.w3.org/2000/01/rdf-schema#"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/"
xmlns:label="http://www.w3.org/2004/12/q/contentlabel#"
xmlns:icra="http://www.icra.org/rdfs/vocabularyv03#">

<rdfescription rdf:about="">
<dc:creator rdf:resource="http://www.icra.org" />
<dcterms:issued>2006-1-29</dcterms:issued>
<label:authorityFor>http://www.icra.org/rdfs/vocabularyv03#</label:authorityFor>
</rdfescription>

<label:Ruleset>
<label:hasHostRestrictions>
<label:Hosts>
<label:hostRestriction>hot-latina-ass.net</label:hostRestriction>
</label:Hosts>
</label:hasHostRestrictions>
<label:hasDefaultLabel rdf:resource="#label_1" />
</label:Ruleset>

<label:ContentLabel rdf:ID="label_1">
<rdfs:comment>Label for all/most of website</rdfs:comment>
<icra:na>1</icra:na>
<icra:nb>1</icra:nb>
<icra:nc>1</icra:nc>
<icra:sa>1</icra:sa>
<icra:sb>1</icra:sb>
<icra:sc>1</icra:sc>
<icra:sd>1</icra:sd>
<icra:se>1</icra:se>
<icra:sf>1</icra:sf>
<icra:vz>1</icra:vz>
<icra:lb>1</icra:lb>
<icra:lc>1</icra:lc>
<icra:oz>1</icra:oz>
<icra:cz>0</icra:cz>
<rdfs:label>Exposed breasts; Bare buttocks; Visible genitals; Passionate kissing; Obscured or implied sexual acts; Visible sexual touching; Explicit sexual language; Erections/explicit sexual acts; Erotica; No violence; Profanity or swearing; Mild expletives; No potentially harmful activities; User generated content may be, but is not known to be, present; </rdfs:label>
</label:ContentLabel>

</rdf:RDF>

[Jim]

Originally Posted by Surfn

Now as I see it this thread has turned into |skyfall|

Normally I would agree but with this law already on the books and the only thing stopping it from being enforced is a decision from a non-liberal Supreme Court, you are 100% wrong.

[Surfn]

Originally Posted by Jim

Normally I would agree but with this law already on the books and the only thing stopping it from being enforced is a decision from a non-liberal Supreme Court, you are 100% wrong.

Time will tell

[SirMoby]

Originally Posted by Surfn

Now as I see it this thread has turned into |skyfall|

That may be the case but shouldn't we be working on a rating system any way? At the core it's a good idea so why shouldn't we make up a working proposal?

[Toby]

Originally Posted by SirMoby

I don't agree as I think there should be many rating levels for "Adult Content". There are many levels of sexuality, hate, religeon, violence, etc.... that all need to be addressed.

We need to make a strong front and start asking news agencies why they aren't using labels when we are. We have a chance to do something good here.

What purpose will a multi-level system serve if it will never get implemented widely enough to be useful. And just who is going to determine these various ratings and how they're blocked? Just way too complicated to ever be effective.

Keep it simple. One rating, "adult", to define content not suitable for minors. Adult content filtering either ON or OFF. That has a far better chance to get implemented.

[walrus]

Originally Posted by Toby

Keep it simple. One rating, "adult", to define content not suitable for minors. Adult content filtering either ON or OFF. That has a far better chance to get implemented.

You have a content filtering system that is defined by w3c and implemented by IE....and it takes just little more time to go somewhere, check a couple checkbox's, get the code and then cut and paste that into your pages that you cant use it but...if it were a simplier tag that you could cut and paste into all your pages, that somehow would be easier?

[RawAlex]

Originally Posted by Halfdeck

Bill, I repeatedly see this obsolete ICRA code on websites. The current tag looks like this:

<link rel="meta" href="/labels.rdf" type="application/rdf+xml" />

which isn't much longer than:

<meta http-equiv="PICS-Label" content="Adult">

Alex, your point regarding third parties is well taken, though personally that doesn't bother me.

Halfdeck, just taking the content out of the meta tag and sticking it into a file that has to be loaded really doesn't change the workload very much. It doesn't change the amount of crap being loaded on my pages.

It is like putting style sheets into a .css file as opposed to having the code on your page. It is neater, I agree, but the amount of code is still there. As Bill has just shown, the actual content of the tag is huge and long... and really, not much of it will actually stop children from visiting the site.

I don't want to give a detailed list of everything on my site, I just want to keep the kiddies out. My site is for adults. Adults can handle creast fondling, erections, and other things, I don't feel the need or the desire to list them out on each domain.

Worse, as I build subfolder sites, I would be required to add new tags each time to handle whatever the latest new folder site contains. It would be pointless.

Alex

[Halfdeck]

Lol, Bill, no one said ICRA tag is perfect -- then again, what is? The question is what better alternative do we have in our little box of tools to keep kids off our sites?

When faced with a choice between two evils -- A. an imperfect solution that keeps X% of minors off my sites and B. Doing nothing about the problem because I don't like my options --- I'd have to go with A, the lesser of two evils.

Originally Posted by RawAlex

It is like putting style sheets into a .css file as opposed to having the code on your page. It is neater, I agree, but the amount of code is still there.

One advantage of creating a .css file is it doesn't load every time you visit a new page on the same domain. For free sites, one css file will cover multiple pages in one folder; for bigger sites, one css file will take care of an entire domain.

Originally Posted by RawAlex

Worse, as I build subfolder sites, I would be required to add new tags each time to handle whatever the latest new folder site contains.

Alex, all you need to do is generate one catch-all ICRA file/tag and install it on your domain root. There's no need to visit ICRA 200+ times to generate a unique tag for every domain / subfolder you own.

I do agree that labels.rdf file is way bigger than it has to be. I'd also like to see things like "ass slamming" in the tag instead of "Erections/explicit sexual acts", but then I'd have to tag every page on my site with a unique tag, which would be a serious pain in the ass.

[DJilla]

Originally Posted by Bill

Why can't it be simplified to something like:

<meta http-equiv="PICS-Label" content="Adult">

IMHO I agree... this is the answer... just that simple. Self regulation is always more desirable. AND the big SE's could step up and easily enforce it by stating a policy that any porn sites without the meta tag won't get indexed. Just as spam is now reported on a voluntary basis so could adult sites be reported that got through filters, etc. because the meta tag was missing.