1997-08-05 - Re: “A new battle over keeping the Net clean,” by J.Weber/LATimes

Header Data

From: bpettigrew@usa.net
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 30a6c452f5ff3237ca5303aab792ea5ac68492b2b6ffae21e49c0c5d6a4f3ff9
Message ID: <ww01-BHeVX12341@netaddress.usa.net>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1997-08-05 21:48:37 UTC
Raw Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 05:48:37 +0800

Raw message

From: bpettigrew@usa.net
Date: Wed, 6 Aug 1997 05:48:37 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: "A new battle over keeping the Net clean," by J.Weber/LATimes
Message-ID: <ww01-BHeVX12341@netaddress.usa.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



>At the moment, moreover, it doesn't appear that there are a variety 
of 
>ratings systems under development representing different values. In 
fact, 
>a system being created by the Recreational Software Advisory Council, 
a 
>Microsoft-led industry group, is quickly emerging as a de facto 
>standard. 

The problem isn't with PICS, or with ratings, or even with RSAC.  The
problem is that nobody else is making the effort to set up alternative
rating systems.  This leaves RSAC as the only option, by default.

Let the free speech organizations demonstrate their commitment to 
their
cause by creating their own ratings.  Rank sites on the basis of their
support of freedom, or on how privacy-friendly their policies are.
Even formalize the geek code.  Do something, anyway.

The solution to bad speech is more speech.  Don't suppress, ban,
or oppose RSAC.  Provide alternatives.

Bubba






Thread