cryptoanarchy.wiki

Arise, you have nothing to lose but your barbed wire fences!

1997-07-27 - Re: Yet another self-labeling system (do you remember -L18?)

Header Data

From: Paul Bradley <paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk>
To: James Love <love@cptech.org>
Message Hash: 203c5f14c77bad39d3a858860f4a5866ff6f9f51b38ee07c808fbe6d8fe9af75
Message ID: <Pine.LNX.3.91.970726180542.4363C-100000@fatmans.demon.co.uk>
Reply To: <33D8E731.8A663470@cptech.org>
UTC Datetime: 1997-07-27 18:02:07 UTC
Raw Date: Sun, 27 Jul 1997 11:02:07 -0700 (PDT)

Raw message

From: Paul Bradley <paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk>
Date: Sun, 27 Jul 1997 11:02:07 -0700 (PDT)
To: James Love <love@cptech.org>
Subject: Re: Yet another self-labeling system (do you remember -L18?)
In-Reply-To: <33D8E731.8A663470@cptech.org>
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.3.91.970726180542.4363C-100000@fatmans.demon.co.uk>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain



> Tim, if you think that no web site are unambiguously inappropriate for
> children, then you are in a state of denial. 

Please clarrify this for us: What sites would you classify as unsuitable 
for children? What would you define as being a child? What justification 
do you give for supposing certain material to be unsuitable for viewing 
by a certain class of people?

> are a mistake, and should be resisted.  However, I do favor a far less
> ambitious and less informative system (less is more, as far as I am
> concerned), which involves a simple, single voluntary tag, selected by
> the web page publisher, at their discretion, of the nature of 
> 
> <META NAME="Rating" CONTENT="adult">

Would your vision of this be a mandatory system, or totally voluntary? 
Would clearly rating a site incorrectly be punishable in any way?

        Datacomms Technologies data security
       Paul Bradley, Paul@fatmans.demon.co.uk
  Paul@crypto.uk.eu.org, Paul@cryptography.uk.eu.org    
       Http://www.cryptography.home.ml.org/
      Email for PGP public key, ID: FC76DA85
     "Don`t forget to mount a scratch monkey"

Thread