 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
2005-12-05, 01:37 PM
|
#26 | |
|
You can now put whatever you want in this space :)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 525
 |
Quote:
I will do some research on the subject and post tidbits I find, but does anybody know if there is acrimony between FSC and ACLU? Seems they would/might be involved in this issue if only as a "friend of the court"? Guess they have their hands tied (pun intended) with civil rights of the "patriot" kind. Finally, I've noticed a kind of undercurrent of unhappiness with the FSC, not just here but at other boards too. Nothing specific just a general kind of disregard. Maybe people could post here as to why or what they think about how the FSC has done so far? |
|
|
|
|
2005-12-05, 01:48 PM
|
#27 |
|
If you don’t take a chance the Angels won’t dance
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Earth on occasion
Posts: 8,812
|
 |
|
|
|
|
2005-12-05, 02:17 PM
|
#28 | |
|
Jim? I heard he's a dirty pornographer.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 2,706
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-12-05, 02:35 PM
|
#29 | |
|
Jim? I heard he's a dirty pornographer.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 2,706
|
Quote:
I think in general us free wheeling webmasters don't like corporate types and many think that everything should be free. Many submitters bitch about paying for listings so why shouldn't they bitch about someone wanting money to save thier ass? As far as I can tell the organization only recently got enough funding to do much of anything. It will probably take a couple of years before they have thier communication shit together. I wish it was different but do you want them to pay a full time employee about $50k a year to handle that? Would you rather that $50k went into lobbying and legal fees to fight those that hate freedom? They are not a non-profit and they are not a charity. They need to make money just like you do. Surfers wish we would give away all porn for free so why don't we? I'm tired of people bitching about the FSC. I've yet to hear anyone that's bitching come up with a better option. There only seems to be 3 options right now. 1. Support the FSC either through joining or at least donating. 2. Freeload off of those of us that are paying for the fight. 3. Let those that hate freedom take it away. Once it's gone it's gone. I'm sure if anyone wants to donate thier time to handle the communications and manage the web site that the FSC will be happy to put you to work for free. |
|
|
|
|
|
2005-12-05, 04:43 PM
|
#30 | |
|
You can now put whatever you want in this space :)
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Atlanta,Ga
Posts: 893
|
Quote:
Lens posted that he thought it was a good idea too. All the sheep at the Zoo were rapid to suck his dick over it too. Funny though he left the room in San Diego when the topic came up and I wanted to ask him to explain to us all how .xxx was a good idea. Wonder what Playboy thinks? |
|
|
|
|
|
2005-12-05, 05:10 PM
|
#31 |
|
Took the hint.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,597
 |
Gonzo, when it comes down to it, the big guys with the big names will do well. The rest of us would suffer because the domains would be more expensive, the existing domains that you have would become worthless in about 10 seconds, and all the traffic you have built over the years would become totally, completely worthless.
In my mind as soon as the .XXX thing came into place, Visa and Mastercard would be on the horn announcing new worldwide rules for adult sites requiring that they are all on domains in the .XXX tld. More importantly, they could require companies likes CCBill and others to refuse or bounce traffic that came from .com domains. Imagine all those .com, .net, org, and .everythingelse domains suddenly becoming worthless. The big get bigger... the big love regulation. The small suffer. Alex |
|
|
|
|
2005-12-05, 06:00 PM
|
#32 |
|
Selling porn allows me to stay in a constant state of Bliss - ain't that a trip!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,914
|
As I understand it, .XXX is a nonissue at the moment.
However, I do tend to think that Joan Irvines's support of it is a valid mark against her. Yet, at the same time, ASACP hasn't been a negative force in the industry, and I can see arguments that an ASACP representation in the FSC is a good thing. I figure the negative attitude towards the FSC among onliners is because the FSC is an old-school retail and movie production organization that has more or less ignored or exploited the onliners. I can't say I especially like the FSC. I tend to think they would turn against the online sector in a minute to protect their retail and video sales business. But, they accomplished _something_ for us, wether they did it for the onliners or not. I can't see anybody else even pretending to act on our behalf. I think I'll add a letter to this ballot complaining about the lack of a better online presence for the FSC. |
|
|
|
|
2005-12-05, 06:10 PM
|
#33 | ||||
|
You can now put whatever you want in this space :)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 525
|
Quote:
See now I'm learning alot Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
RawAlex, there's no point in even quoting you 'cause I find that we generally agree on a lot ie. "the big love regulation". I'm afraid that over the long term .xxx is an inevitablility. If many bible thumpers and right wing groups hadn't come out against it too I think it would have been a done deal already and everything you project would be on the way toward happening. BTW, today announced that the stay on 2257 for FSC members extended to Dec30. Slightly off topic but does anybody try NOT to read "All of 'Em" because if they did there would be no time to do anything else  Last edited by DJilla; 2005-12-05 at 06:41 PM.. Reason: Add More |
||||
|
|
|
|
2005-12-05, 06:54 PM
|
#34 | |
|
You can now put whatever you want in this space :)
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Atlanta,Ga
Posts: 893
|
Quote:
My first one was for free back in 1993. .net and org is crap if your basing it totaly on the domain market value. I only own .coms. Regulation is coming in one form or another. Ive already posted what Bill Margold is proposing. If I was to have to guess Id say it will come from the billing companies. They have the missing and most important piece. |
|
|
|
|
|
2005-12-05, 07:32 PM
|
#35 |
|
Took the hint.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,597
|
Gonzo, I don't mean the value of good .com real estate, but rather that the admission price to the game right now is low. For +- $10, you can pick up lesbian-girls-movies-porn-sexy.com and you too can be in the porn business.
With .XXX, that will move up, maybe upwards to $100 per domain. If the processors move to only accept traffic from .xxx domains, then all that real estate you bought is suddenly worth very little. Alex |
|
|
|
|
2005-12-05, 07:50 PM
|
#36 |
|
Jim? I heard he's a dirty pornographer.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 2,706
|
If .XXX goes into effect then corporations with $100,000s and even $1,000,000s of dollars will register domains in groves within the first hour of availability or even before it's they're available to the general public. Then if we want the .XXX version of our own domains, then we'll have to fight them in court. Sure we can trade mark the names that we've spent year promoting but someone else will have the .XXX version until we win it back in court. Most webmasters won't have enough money to get a US, Candian and International trademark on every .com they own much less fight it in court against a compnay backed with big bucks.
Suddenly Internet porn will be controlled by just a few. A few that will donate heavily to the party that allowed them to steal other people's hard work. |
|
|
|
|
2005-12-05, 08:26 PM
|
#37 |
|
You can now put whatever you want in this space :)
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Atlanta,Ga
Posts: 893
|
News Flash guys.... Icann has punked out any .xxx discussion in the near future.
Translation.... they tabled the .XXX discussion until some undiscoled time in the future. I think we all can agree.... we need to keep our eye on this in the future. |
|
|
|
|
2005-12-05, 10:09 PM
|
#38 | |
|
Eighteen 'til I Die
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 2,168
|
Quote:
As I recall it, the bitching was about a few board members encouraging folks to join or go to jail over 2257. Frankly, many of them were preaching to existing members and did not have a clue.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-12-06, 08:12 AM
|
#39 | |
|
Jim? I heard he's a dirty pornographer.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 2,706
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-12-06, 10:00 AM
|
#40 | |
|
Took the hint.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,597
|
Quote:
""It was impossible to get sufficient time for consideration by the Government Advisory Committee members and therefore the board, the chairman decided to postpone the consideration," CANN president Paul Twomey said. "Within the first quarter of next year is my expectation when it will come back up," he said." http://www.techspot.com/news/19662-i...ex-domain.html So we could still be looking at an implimentation of this deal in 2006... which may be the end of the line for many small and midsize webmasters. Alex |
|
|
|
|
|
2005-12-06, 10:13 AM
|
#41 |
|
If you don’t take a chance the Angels won’t dance
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Earth on occasion
Posts: 8,812
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-12-06, 10:17 AM
|
#42 | |
|
Jim? I heard he's a dirty pornographer.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Washington, DC
Posts: 2,706
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-12-06, 01:06 PM
|
#43 |
|
Internet! Is that thing still around?
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 3
|
Howdy... interesting discussion about the FSC going on here. I figured I'd drop in any offer to answer any questions anyone might have...
Although I'm not really surprised by it, and probably would wonder what the FSC was up to if I were not on the Board, for what it's worth I can pass on that my own experience with the FSC has been pleasantly positive. For quite a while I was VERY concerned about whether the FSC had the interests of the Internet community in mind... and frankly, back when Bill Lyon was Executive Director I don't think it was very concerned with the Internet community at all. Things have changed over the past two years... a LOT has changed, in fact. With a couple of exceptions (and no, I won't name them here) I believe that the current FSC Board is a very good group of people who have the best interests of the industry in mind. What you need to understand is that FSC Board members do NOT make any money and do NOT get any benefit from serving other than perhaps the opportunity to make contacts with other Board members and a chance to influence the direction of the organization. Yet there are cheaper ways to make friends. FSC Board members pay for the expense of participating with the FSC out of their own pockets. It takes time, money and energy to sit on the FSC Board, and despite what was suggested here by one person, yes most of us DO make this decision out of the goodness of our own hearts.  In my case, it's just a matter of feeling so strongly that something needs to be done to counter the anti-porn zealots and to minimize the damage they do to our businesses... and anything I can do to fuck with them brings a smile to my face! If any of you ever get the chance, make it a point to meet and chat with Jeffrey Douglas and Reed Lee, two attorneys that sit on the Board. These are two of my favorite people in the industry, and both of them put a TREMENDOUS amount of time into protecting this industry... and by sitting on the FSC Board, they actually lose out on the opportunity to be lead attorneys in FSC cases like the 2257 challenge or the Utah Spam Law challenge.I'd also encourage everyone to also find a chance to meet Michelle Freridge, the new Executive Director of the FSC. She has done fantastic things for the organization since she was hired... and again, I think that those of you who meet her will be impressed. She will be at Internext. Communication is an issue of course... Tom is doing a lot of very good work for the FSC, but he's only one person. He gets calls from media companies all day long, helps develop position papers, has to coorditate with attorneys on both court challenges... as you can imagine, he doesn't often find time to visit every single message board in the industry. In fact, he generally doesn't have time for message board posting at all. But that doesn't mean the FSC isn't doing a lot to communicate with members. In fact, a new version of the website is pretty far along with the hope of better communicating... but this is a two way street. For those of you who are interested in what's going on with the FSC, sometimes you have to swing by the website and read the press releases... the FSC can't always take the news to you directly. There are also regularly scheduled membership meetings. That said, I think many of you will be very pleased over the next year with efforts that are being implemented right now to INCREASE the communication with members and INCREASE opportunities for members to speak out about what's important. Finally, I would encourage everyone to be VERY wary of anyone who seems to show up with an anti-FSC agenda and tries to pass on some sense that there's widesperead discontent with the FSC. Sometimes these posters are genuinely expressing their sentiments, but sometimes they are simply using a very common "divide and conquer" technique that, frankly, infects the online message boards at times. The "divide and conquer" tactic isn't just used on the FSC but is also used on companies. It works pretty well: people from a competing group start talking on message boards about how this or that company is having problems, about how people are down on them, about how their efforts are suspect, etc, etc. They repeat it so often that eventually it starts to seem like reality. So I am VERY pleased to see a lot of kind comments about the FSC here on this board. BTW, in terms of more Internet people on the FSC Board... I certainly would have welcomed more people from the Internet on the ballot to back me up in looking out for our unique interests, but nomination ballots were mailed out not long ago and nobody stepped up. People from the video and retail side did step up... nobody from the Internet. I even tried to recruit a few people myself, but at the end of the day when they find out that it takes WORK to be on the Board, few people are seriously interested. Others backed out because they were concerned that their image might take a hit if they lost the election. If anyone is interested in participating, hit me up... I can put you in contact with Michelle, and I'm sure there are ways you can get involved. And if you want to run for the Board, there's an election every year, so you will get a chance again in 2006. I'll try to check this thread as often as I can if there are any questions... |
|
|
|
|
2005-12-06, 01:36 PM
|
#44 |
|
Eighteen 'til I Die
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Mississippi
Posts: 2,168
|
Did anyone here receive a nomination ballot? I am sure most would have been mailed back with Useless Warrior's name inserted.
__________________
|
|
|
|
|
2005-12-06, 02:04 PM
|
#45 | |
|
Took the hint.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,597
|
Quote:
I could see companies like Google and Adbrite and whoever only accepting adult paid listings from .xxx domains, and I can even picture search engines like google filtering adult keywords to return only .xxx results, potentially banning or blacklisting .com domains in the process. The end result is that the big guys will get MUCH bigger, remove the affiliate model almost entirely from the game, and keep all the pie for themselves (which in many cases would take marginal business into huge profit businesses overnight... all that affiliate money not getting paid out...) Alex |
|
|
|
|
|
2005-12-06, 02:40 PM
|
#46 |
|
Selling porn allows me to stay in a constant state of Bliss - ain't that a trip!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 3,914
|
Connor, thank you very much for stopping by and writing.
One of the weaknesses of the online adult business community is that we are so used to being able to do EVERYTHING online, that when online communications are missing, it just doesn't seem natural to us to pick up phones or write letters. A lot of our dynamic towards the FSC is based on this. At a critical time, when we were all very interested in the FSC, we felt shut out by an older school organization that was built on phone calls and letters. When I joined, I had to make a phone call and give my credit card info over the phone. I think that was the only phone call credit card order I've made in the last 3 years. We are craving a better online experience with the FSC. There are a lot of people ready to give more money for lobbying and legal war. I think there are a lot of people who would help pay for a better online presence, including board spokepersons whose job it would be to visit the boards, post updates, and try to answer questions. I guarantee you we appreciate your stopping by and telling us something about your experiences and opinions. |
|
|
|
|
2005-12-06, 03:12 PM
|
#47 | |
|
If there is nobody out there, that's a lot of real estate going to waste!
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 2,177
|
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
2005-12-06, 04:17 PM
|
#48 |
|
Took the hint.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 5,597
|
Tickler, it would be very hard to move protected free speech into a situation where it can easily be blocked or restricted by third parties. Imagine all adult sites on port 81. Imagine all "christian" ISPs and bandwidth providers refusing to carry port 81 traffic. It would only take one or two of the big backbone providers to pull this and the adult internet would effectively be unavailable in large parts of the world - or the routing to get there would be entirely too slow to make it functional.
Any move that restricts constitutionally protected free speech (even the DoJ has admitted that some adult material is legal) would almost certainly meet up with a legal challenge that would lock this thing up in knots for a long time to come. I wouldn't expect ASACP to be leading the charge on that one, so I was confused when they came out with a stand and opinion on .xxx when it was announced. FSC should have one, that is for sure, but a company protecting against CP isn't exactly on the front lines of that deal. Alex |
|
|
|
|
2005-12-06, 05:05 PM
|
#49 | |
|
Internet! Is that thing still around?
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 3
|
Quote:
Thanks for the kind words. And yup, I was pretty amazed that online credit card services hadn't been set up... but turns out that was partially because of new FSC staffers who weren't up to speed yet on the website, and partially because what they thought initially would turn out to be a solution was not in fact a solution. Eventually CCBill stepped up to help, but it was very unfortunate that online credit card payments weren't set up back in, say, June. I saw the design of the new website... it's a step in the right direction, but there's still some refinement that needs to be done before it will be ready for prime time, so to speak. |
|
|
|
|
|
2005-12-07, 06:32 PM
|
#50 |
|
You can now put whatever you want in this space :)
Join Date: Sep 2005
Posts: 525
|
Welcome and thanks for your informative and well written response. I was wondering if we were going to tease somebody from FSC here to respond to the many questions and comments posed. Its obvious that you are in touch with most of the concerns and undercurrents that WM's have been sharing amongst themselves and seem to be willing to push FSC in the direction of adressing them and getting us more involved. That's Great! Thanks! We want to be involved and active.
I'm one of the posters that said it was my impression that there was a general feeling of negativity toward FSC and I still think that there was no particular "divide and conqouer" action going on. My take on the matter was there exists a frustration and suspicion from the LACK of information and inclusion as to what the heck is going on. The Old School vs New School dynamic is seriously at play here. You also made a strong statement when you pointed out that no great numbers from the so called "new school" have really stepped forward to take on the grunt work of what must be numerous tasks and matters that could be done and this most definitely needs to change! There are a couple of points to make here which I'm sure you probably already realize such as the online community is HUGE and growing exponentially both in dollars and reach. Were 24/7, all time zones and continents. We never close and our gross will eventually easily overwhelm global mail order/retail if it isn't already. We are thousands, and have thousands and thousands of friends and associates. Most of us will never attend meetings in California. We get all the press releases already though our many and varied online media. We don't need the FSC website to check out the latest release. Any junior clerk with a little experience in Outlook could easily (almost easily) be sending us real updated information, or how about an RSS feed. I have never gotten an email asking for five more dollars, or giving me the contact of a particular legislator who may be on the fence and requesting that I send him an email about my feelings or even (yeck) make a call. I know its largely a court matter now, but I'm seeing new admendments proposed all the time. With regards to the boards, having someone spend time on the boards such as you just did here is EXACTLY what you need to marshall the additional strength, resources and money that you could get from a lot of really smart people with lots of contacts on a global reach. We want to know. We want to participate. We want to win. Our livlihood is on the line too! Your single, reasonable, sensible, post here I guarantee has gotten peoples attention. Imagine what a steady stream of information and call outs would do. You've got people here that can put together a wiz bang website in 72 hours and we're looking at you like "what the heck are they doing"? Strictly as a personal opinion but from someone who's had a little experience in the PR field, your PR stinks (language changed to protect the innocent). After the lawyers, and the fundraisers, a professional PR person is THE most important person in the organization. Lobbyists are important but unless he's got Tom Delay's phone number PR is written direct for the public and the public will do as much lobbying for you (see: Librarians March On Washington Over Records). Most of your present PR seems to swim only in the the adult community. My take on the public pulse is that they feel that the 2257 issue probably isn't a bad idea.... hey right now they're accepting that maybe torture is not a bad thing either in the right circumstance. You must move the public body to the cause more effectively. The virtual world is one way you can do that. You put your info "out there" don't expect them to come to you and if they do give them something to READ besides PR, like links to the history of censorship, scholarly papers, research, notable quotes, etc. Finally, I know that you are involved in a lot of things not just 2257 and come to the aid of many on the state and local levels too. You guys (and girls) are busy and committed and stretched and harried and overwhelmed and I appreciate the efforts you’re a making. Open the doors and we'll come in? Though I'm not sure what I could do and I already work 14-16 hours a day, I would be willing to put something aside to help... PM me if you have any suggestions or I'll drop you a line. There have to be tasks besides board member or stamp licker that can be done in the virtual world. Thanks and good luck, you've got my vote! Come back soon. PS: How 'bout scanning the legal brief and putting them online? Not the preliminary motions, just the main brief? PSS: .xxx is an inevitability IF ONLY because the rest of the world (they have executed pornographers in China) who has no where near the respect for concepts of free speech, etc. et al that the west does will demand it. Big change can always represent big opportunity! |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Linear Mode
