1996-01-28 - Re: “This post is G-Rated”

Header Data

From: Duncan Frissell <frissell@panix.com>
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Message Hash: 13ba9663a3637c00d3df9f4acfbf382c549d47ec2e5286886df4d3c600dc5345
Message ID: <2.2.32.19960127133024.0098f658@panix.com>
Reply To: N/A
UTC Datetime: 1996-01-28 14:25:53 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 28 Jan 1996 22:25:53 +0800

Raw message

From: Duncan Frissell <frissell@panix.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Jan 1996 22:25:53 +0800
To: cypherpunks@toad.com
Subject: Re: "This post is G-Rated"
Message-ID: <2.2.32.19960127133024.0098f658@panix.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


At 10:42 AM 1/26/96 -0800, Bill Frantz wrote:
>I think you have a very different view of rating than I do.  For example, I
>would be comfortable rating all the Sesame Street shows for sex and
>violence without seeing any more than I have seen, just based on the
>reputation of the show's producers.  Based on reviews in the newspaper
>(since the net has replaced TV for me), most of the current network shows
>can also be rated for all their episodes.  Remember also, there is an
>"unrated" catagory.  Some people will refuse to access unrated material. 
>Others, (I suspect you and I) may seek it out.
>

That's fine for "brand name" shows but who's going to rate the 50 years of
home movies Fred C. Schwartz has lovingly digitized and put up on *his* server.

DCF






Thread