Gordon and all,
I can think of about 98k others that agree with you that it is questionable
that Esther Dyson is telling the truth. She has deceived us before.
One more time won't make a hell of a lot of difference.
Gordon Cook wrote:
> let's hope she is telling the truth. I for one don't b
let's hope she is telling the truth. I for one don't believe that she is.
>I found Esther's written critique of content "self-regulation," as distributed
>on Farber's list, to be wonderfully on target--and a great relief.
>
>Esther Dyson wrote:
>
> > FWIW, the first thing I said when I stood u
Milton and all,
I agree with you Milton. Unfortunately I have great reservations as to
it sincerity given the already well know actions that the DNSO and
the ICANN has taken in filtering, which several on this an other lists
have subjected to just recently on the part of ICANN and the DNSO
via
I found Esther's written critique of content "self-regulation," as distributed
on Farber's list, to be wonderfully on target--and a great relief.
Esther Dyson wrote:
> FWIW, the first thing I said when I stood up was that I was speaking for
> myself and not for ICANN, since ICANN is not and shou
Esther and all,
In this, we completely agree. ICANN should not be involved in the rating or
filtering business. However this makes me amongst others why the
various DNSO mailing lists are involved in filtering of various sorts and
utilizing several methods? Any insight on that Esther? As
FWIW, the first thing I said when I stood up was that I was speaking for
myself and not for ICANN, since ICANN is not and should not be involved in
the rating or filtering business.
Esther Dyson
At 09:30 am 09/10/1999 -0700, Mark C. Langston wrote:
>
>Since Esther's at the global meeting for est
>>Since Esther's at the global meeting for establishing mandatory net
>>content ratings, and seems to be chafing a bit over it, I'd like to
>>point something out:
>>
>>Domain names would probably have to be rated as well.
>>Since Esther *is* at this conference, and is the de facto face of ICANN,
>
Mikki and all,
I have wondered when ICANN and was going to get around
the the "Content" issue with respect to DN's and their related
information that they contain. As I recall we had some lengthy
discussion about this some time ago now. I also have wondered
what "Excuse" ICANN was going to us
>Since Esther's at the global meeting for establishing mandatory net
>content ratings, and seems to be chafing a bit over it, I'd like to
>point something out:
>
>Domain names would probably have to be rated as well.
>Since Esther *is* at this conference, and is the de facto face of ICANN,
>should
Since Esther's at the global meeting for establishing mandatory net
content ratings, and seems to be chafing a bit over it, I'd like to
point something out:
Domain names would probably have to be rated as well.
Since Esther *is* at this conference, and is the de facto face of ICANN,
shouldn't so
10 matches
Mail list logo
