Phil and all,

  Ahhh!  Good point here Phil.  I hadn't actually thought of this.
thanks for the heads up here.   >;)

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> There was this one quote in the article that was NOT properly attributed:
>
> | Its similar to a states Department of Motor vehicles allowing drivers to
> | apply for obscene vanity license tags.
>
> Actually I think it is the reporter slipping in a bit of editorialism
> into the article.  Shame.
>
> It's not the same and not even similar.
>
> With a vanity license tag, the obscene words are placed in front of
> anyone who happens to be driving behind the car with those tags, or
> anyone who happens to be walking near that car when it is parked.
>
> With a domain name, the mere fact that it is registered does NOT put
> that name in front of you at all (unless you happen to be downloading
> the zone file it is in).  You'd never know that domain name even exists
> unless you (or your browser) specifically asks for it.  If the name
> does come to be seen by you, it's due to other means, like an earlier
> web page you looked at, or maybe your teenager wondering what might
> happen if he types that in.
>
> If I do a DNS query to a server for "fuck.com" and get a packet back,
> why would it matter if that packet tells me that the server failed or
> the packet gives me an IP address?
>
> The only reason I can think of that NSI did have the policy was so that
> many of their staff would never have to see those words.  Can you imagine
> working at the phone bank and having someone calling up and complaining
> that <insert some creative twist of several vulgur words here>.com is
> not registered right.
>
> Jeff Williams wrote:
>
> > All,
> >
> >   FYI!
> > http://www.abcnews.go.com/sections/tech/DailyNews/sweardotcom990716.html
> >
> > Excerpts:
> >
> > Ken (The Control freak) Stubbs says,
> > \223There\222s confusion out there. No direction,\224
> >   complained Ken Stubbs, executive chairman of the
> >   Council of Internet Registrations. \223They\222ve pushed
> >   dealing with the problem out to each and every
> >   registrar everywhere in the world.\224
>
> I suppose he's trying to come across as suggesting that the many
> registrars can't figure out how to deal with it themselves.  Or
> perhaps he realizes that while many registrars may well refuse
> such names, others will certainly allow them knowing there is a
> market there.  Characterizing him as a control freak does seem
> to be accurate.
>
> > Joe (Virus laden web page expert) Simms states,
> >  \223A cynical person might say they saw this as
> >   another opportunity to portray this as complicated and
> >   messy if opened to competition,\224 lawyer Joe Sims
> >   said. \223If NSI was trying to do the right thing, as
> >   opposed to creating as much commotion as possible,
> >   it would have simply maintained its old policy until or if
> >   an ICANN policy was adopted.\224
>
> NSI do the right thing?  The only right thing for _any_ business
> to do (and this is the way business works) is to ensure their
> financial bottom line is growing over time.
>
> > And...
> >
> > Miss Monique (Virgin Drawers) Nelson, quips:
> >  \223It\222s outrageous this is happening,\224 said Monique
> >   Nelson, chief operating officer of Enough is Enough, a
> >   group pushing for protection of children on the
> >   Internet. \223It will make it easier and easier for children
> >   to find these types of sites.\224
>
> Aha!  So children really _are_ typing those names into the browser and
> would now start getting actual web pages.
>
> Has she ever thought that having domain names like this would actually
> make it _easier_ for nanny software to function?
>
> > Than a more sensible voice chimes in:
> > Mr. Gary Cohen states reasonably:
> >
> >  \223They can\222t police the world,\224 said Gary Cohn of
> >   Northbrook, Ill., who previously registered for a Web
> >   address so filthy it can\222t be printed here. \223It\222s none of
> >    their business to be telling people to be the morality
> >    police.\224
>
> It never has been, and never will be.  When someone thrusts vulgarity
> on you that you do not want, that's a different issue.  But when it is
> a matter of free choice, it should be fully open (spam is an example
> of having it thrust upon you).
>
> --
> Phil Howard | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>   phil      | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>       at    | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>   ipal      | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>      dot    | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]
>   net       | [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman INEGroup (Over 95k members strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Contact Number:  972-447-1894
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


Reply via email to