From: Greg Broiles <gbroiles@darkwing.uoregon.edu>
Date: Fri, 26 Jan 1996 17:15:02 +0800
To: williams@va.arca.com
Subject: Re: "This post is G-Rated"
Message-ID: <199601260719.XAA00770@darkwing.uoregon.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 02:06 AM 1/26/96 GMT, Jeff Williams wrote:

>Maybe nobody would use the flag, but I don't see how it could hurt. If I had
>kids, I would appreciate having the option of sorting out all the stuff that
>is "NIFK" by the author.

My concern about such a flag is that if it was implemented widely, it would
be a small step from being optional to being mandatory. As things stand,
were some legislature to adopt a "mandatory labelling" statute tomorrow,
we'd end up with a complex and pointless mess of conflicting and
incompatible attempts at compliance, rendering the labelling scheme
effectively useless; and, likely, "industry" (e.g., the big service
providers + AT&T & MCI & Sprint etc) would oppose the legislation on the
grounds that compliance would take several years and complex design to bring
about. So we'd get some sort of grace period to argue against it, prepare
good test case(s), establish offshore mailing lists/servers, and so forth. 

But if we let the market do an efficient job of developing and deploying a
labelling standard, over the course of the next few years, we're an
afternoon's sorry debate and a few bought-and-paid-for committee meetings
away from a market standard turning into a statutory duty. 

This makes me think that if development of a labelling standard is imminent,
it's time to find ways to subvert it, misuse it, avoid it, and otherwise
treat it like an enemy. It's not necessarily an enemy until it's coopted
into service by a coercive force (be it big brother^h^h^h^h^h^h^hgovernment or 
big brother^h^h^h^h^h^h^hcorporation) but it's a potential threat. 

Are you sure that your relatively moderate "less NIFK material is a good
thing" stance is a good reflection of others' positions? My impression is
that many people are dissatisfied with anything less than a "zero tolerance"
position re kids & porn or kids & drugs or kids & sexual choice or whatever. 
Your view of a partial-cooperation world isn't especially draconian, but do
you really think that others will be as tolerant of other positions re
labelling? 
--
"The anchored mind screwed into me by the psycho-  | Greg Broiles
lubricious thrust of heaven is the one that thinks | gbroiles@netbox.com
every temptation, every desire, every inhibition." | 
	-- Antonin Artaud		   	   |