From: "Vladimir Z. Nuri" <vznuri@netcom.com>
Date: Sat, 11 May 1996 18:30:56 +0800
To: "E. ALLEN SMITH" <EALLENSMITH@ocelot.rutgers.edu>
Subject: Re: Publicity on PICS
In-Reply-To: <01I4ID8CLHOK8Y5B50@mbcl.rutgers.edu>
Message-ID: <199605110425.VAA28304@netcom20.netcom.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



>>At the same time, providers will be urged to rate their pages by filling out
>>an electronic questionnaire resulting in a "grade" for each site, on a scale
>>ranging from zero, the most innocuous, to four for each category.
>
>	What was I saying about pressure to rate?

this is really horrible. I hope that no precedent of having internet
providers involvement in ratings is *ever* established. this proposal
reeks. separate ratings from content and delivery.

>>The system depends for its ratings on voluntary compliance by Internet
>>providers.

ugggghghghghg. not my ideal use of PICS. I hope that people don't
begin to believe that PICS is this system.

>>But there is no way to use the system to seek out pornography or violence on
>>the web, officials insisted.

I don't know why that would be a problem.

>>"To content-providers, I would say, 'Rate your sites' To parents I would
>>say, 'Set the levels for your children.' And to governments, I would say
>>humbly, 'Think again before censoring the net,"' Stephen Balkam, executive
>>director of the Recreational Software Advisory Council, told a news
>>conference.
>
>	Note again the pressure for self-rating.

"content-providers" != internet providers. that former is OK. the
latter is a horrible nightmare. please, please, please, 
I hope this system is not asking/demanding people who run hardware 
& communication services to get into the rating business.
 such a thing is atrocious and odious
and exactly what should be avoided.

>>A strength of PICS is that "it allows as many countries as would like to set
>>up a rating system," said Jim Miller, a research scientist who helped
>>develop the system. Adhering to the system would still be up to individual
>>households, however.
>
>	Whatever became of market-ratings? Admittedly, they may mean that each
>country will be encouraged to given an example system... but I still don't
>like the idea of government involvement.

the government becomes just another rating agency. I don't like it either.
but as long as we emphasize, "the individual always has the ultimate
decision", which fortunately this press release does,
little can go awry, hopefully.