Vote on '.xxx' Internet Address Nears

Fri Mar 23, 2007 2:26 PM EDT
This article is over 14 days old and has been removed by requirement of the Associated Press.
  • 11 Votes
  • Enjoy this article? Help vote it up the 'Vine.

Back To Top

Published to:

What's this?
Who's leading the conversation?
This visualization below allows you to see the impact that each user has on the current conversation. The top row contains the group of users who have had the most impact, the 2nd row the group of users who have had the 2nd most impact (et cetera). Users with similar impact are grouped together, and the average score of the group is shown to the left of the group. The author of the article is also shown on the left, in their corresponding group. Each user's score is based on the number of comments the user has made plus the number of votes their comments have received. The scores are calculated relative one another, so while their absolute value is not particularly important, their relative difference does indicate a larger difference in impact on the conversation.
1.1
1.0
0.7
{"commentId":604121,"authorDomain":"Courtisin"}
Mr Do!

Nice article. well written. informative. you deserve a raise.

{"commentId":604121,"threadId":"87547","contentId":"629239","authorDomain":"Courtisin"}
    Reply#1 - Fri Mar 23, 2007 3:48 PM EDT
    {"commentId":604231,"authorDomain":"leftist"}
    Leftist

    i like the idea. if all content providers would stick to this, it would make it easy for parents to block out things... software to block out an extension would be easy to make and cheap to sell........

    {"commentId":604231,"threadId":"87547","contentId":"629239","authorDomain":"leftist"}
    • 1 vote
    Reply#2 - Fri Mar 23, 2007 4:24 PM EDT
    {"commentId":604651,"authorDomain":"razak"}
    Razak

    exactly leftist... .xxx is a great idea if we could figure out a way to actually get the porn sites off .com, .net, and .org and onto .xxx instead within 5 years.. however I doubt this will happen without legislative help (and because the religious right seem to be supporting the porn industry because they like porn, that'll never happen), all .xxx really does is create more domains for porn to use.

    I honestly wish we could seperate out all the domains to be appropriate for what they are, maybe we could get this as a start. (and yes this means McDonald's would ONLY get .com and none of the rest, as well as personal sites would be moved to .net or .blog, non-profits would be .org, television would be .tv, etc.) It would make the whole internet experience more organized and would also improve the number of domains available (we need to get rid of squatting too).

    {"commentId":604651,"threadId":"87547","contentId":"629239","authorDomain":"razak"}
    • 1 vote
    Reply#3 - Fri Mar 23, 2007 9:27 PM EDT
    {"commentId":605217,"authorDomain":"adamkemp"}
    Adam Kemp

    That's the problem, though. If it's voluntary it won't block out all porn. If it's not voluntary, then who decides what's porn and what's not? I wrote an article about this very topic in September 2005 (scroll down for my article; the first is the "pro" side).

    {"commentId":605217,"threadId":"87547","contentId":"629239","authorDomain":"adamkemp"}
      #3.1 - Sat Mar 24, 2007 1:44 PM EDT
      Reply
      {"commentId":604731,"authorDomain":"acoolie"}
      ACoolie

      Both sides seem to be confused on the issue. The religious leaders claim the amount of porn will double, as every .com porn site will also buy its .xxx site. But, chances are, that both of these web sites will deliver the same web pages, just under a different domain. The opposing argument is that, because domain names are simply redirected to an ip address, kids can just type in the ip instead of the domain. Of course, most current blocking software relies on people not doing this, and there have been no real issues.

      Basically, people will always find a way to get around all the barriers that the government might try to implement. Also, I do not agree with the idea of forcing certain types of companies into buying certain domains. There currently are reccomendations, but they are not enforced (although some of the tld's like .tv cost much more than .com or .info). I think the same type of system should be used for .xxx. But, to gain support by the porn web sites, some sort of benefit must be given. Something along the lines of prominence in search engines or no necessity for warnings of content.

      {"commentId":604731,"threadId":"87547","contentId":"629239","authorDomain":"acoolie"}
        Reply#4 - Fri Mar 23, 2007 10:31 PM EDT
        {"commentId":605086,"authorDomain":"biscuit"}
        biscuit

        Maybe these religious folk need a bit of technical education. The site owners can simply forward their .com. net, .co.uk etc domains to their .xxx domain, so whichever variation is typed in, it ends up at the one same site, therefore it can still be blocked/protected by living under a .xxx domain.

        To me, this seems like such a simple option, which if I were a porn site operator, I would be in favour of, knowing I could protect myself rather more easily from many minors viewing my content.

        {"commentId":605086,"threadId":"87547","contentId":"629239","authorDomain":"biscuit"}
          #4.1 - Sat Mar 24, 2007 11:04 AM EDT
          Reply
          {"commentId":604859,"authorDomain":"zaki"}
          Zaki

          I'm in favor of them making the jump to .xxx domain names. It will make it much easier for parental controls.

          {"commentId":604859,"threadId":"87547","contentId":"629239","authorDomain":"zaki"}
            Reply#5 - Sat Mar 24, 2007 12:41 AM EDT
            {"commentId":605211,"authorDomain":"tastypopsicle"}
            tastypopsicle

            I respectfully disagree. The .xxx TLD, as I read it, is not a replacement for the existing .com adult websites. It simply would create a place where new sites could register additional domains that would be more strictly regulated

            If approved, ICM would be required to help develop mechanisms for promoting child safety and preventing child pornography, and porn sites using ".xxx" would have to participate in a self-rating system, labeling sites based on such criteria as the presence of nudity and whether it is in an artistic or educational context.

            So what of the existing .com adult websites? What of Playboy.com which is a Commercial business? Should they be forced to use .xxx (despite the fact that this change could not force them to do anything).

            The counter argument to "It would be easier for parental controls" is that some could see it being easier for children to find these adult websites.

            To me, this is an idea that really does sound like a good idea - in theory. But I'm not convinced that this is the solution to online porn.

            {"commentId":605211,"threadId":"87547","contentId":"629239","authorDomain":"tastypopsicle"}
              #5.1 - Sat Mar 24, 2007 1:37 PM EDT
              {"commentId":605223,"authorDomain":"adamkemp"}
              Adam Kemp

              It's more like "it sound like a good idea until you think about it". If it's voluntary then it does no good for filters. If it's not voluntary, then it's a huge free speech issue.

              {"commentId":605223,"threadId":"87547","contentId":"629239","authorDomain":"adamkemp"}
                #5.2 - Sat Mar 24, 2007 1:48 PM EDT
                Reply
                {"canLink":false,"threadId":"87547","isPrivate":false}
                Leave a Comment:
                You're in Easy Mode. If you prefer, you can use XHTML Mode instead.
                Newsvine Privacy Statement
                As a new user, you may notice a few temporary content restrictions. Click here for more info.
                {"threadId":"87547","contentId":"629239"}
                Start TrackingStart Tracking
                Stop TrackingStop Tracking
                Back To Top | Front Page