Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Cains
.XXX is pitched as a tool to help parents, not a one-stop solution. IE and the other browsers will just add a simple yes/no option of blocking .XXX. Now that in itself is not going to do much to protect children, but it makes parents feel that little bit safer (even if it is somewhat naive). Now isn't that good for the industry?
|
so why can't websites just use an ICRA labelling to achive the same thing?
i realize that not too many adut sites do this "voluntarily", but it's the same situation about how many domain owners would actually "voluntarily" purchase the .XXX equivalents of their .COM
the argument that anti-.XXX posters have made about how visa "could" make .COM owners use .XXX can also go the other way, that visa "could" make ICRA labelling a requirement.
even IFFOR suggests the use of ICRA ratings...
so given that ICRA blockers already exist today, and its free, and achieves all the same "child protection" points you mentioned, why the need for .XXX then?
Fight the barbara wa-wa!