The .xxx panel is underway at The Phoenix Forum

[Qbert]

...I think there are a lot of people in this industry that have something of value to impart. It really has little to do with their job titles or descriptions, or even their industry history, but rather their intelligence, and grasp of the broad view of the current state of the industry.

I agree completely

The flip side of the same coin also holds true. Many with impressive titles and lengthy industry history impart very little of value, even though they have plenty to say.

[sextoyking]

Good thread.

If anyone has posted the whole video - please post a link

Hey Colin - long time no see....

[Evil Chris]

I'm still a little surprised that nobody asked about the "WHY?" to .xxx
Possibly because .xxx had already been accepted, and it became now more important to talk about how it would or could affect those who use it, or decide not to use it.

Originally, all we ever heard about was how .xxx was going to keep adult-oriented material away from the eyes of minors, and prevent CP, etc... Barely a word of this was mentioned throughout this entire seminar.

[DWB]

I'm still a little surprised that nobody asked about the "WHY?" to .xxx

Originally, all we ever heard about was how .xxx was going to keep adult-oriented material away from the eyes of minors, and prevent CP, etc... Barely a word of this was mentioned throughout this entire seminar.

Imagine that.

[Connor]

I'm still a little surprised that nobody asked about the "WHY?" to .xxx
Possibly because .xxx had already been accepted, and it became now more important to talk about how it would or could affect those who use it, or decide not to use it.

Originally, all we ever heard about was how .xxx was going to keep adult-oriented material away from the eyes of minors, and prevent CP, etc... Barely a word of this was mentioned throughout this entire seminar.

Isn't that basically what I asked at the very start of the thing? Or do you mean something else?

[Evil Chris]

Isn't that basically what I asked at the very start of the thing? Or do you mean something else?

I remember you asking about how or what would happen if they changed the "rules" in mid-stream. Like with a biller, for example.

Jay asked about the whole "protection of children" thing, and it more or less was pushed aside when CP started to get mentioned.

[will76]

I'm still a little surprised that nobody asked about the "WHY?" to .xxx
Possibly because .xxx had already been accepted, and it became now more important to talk about how it would or could affect those who use it, or decide not to use it.

Originally, all we ever heard about was how .xxx was going to keep adult-oriented material away from the eyes of minors, and prevent CP, etc... Barely a word of this was mentioned throughout this entire seminar.

It's to protect the kids of course

Here is the conundrum, for .xxx to be effective in "protecting" kids from porn then porn would have to be removed from all other tld's (.com,.net etc). If not, then there is the same amount of porn out there and the same amount of kids being exposed to it on the .com's so then .xxx does nothing to protect them.

The whole "protect" kids theory (which is what he was pushing as justification for .xxx) can only be accomplished by placing all porn on .xxx ONLY. Which I think is what Lawley's agenda really is. Obviously he wont say that now and might never admit to it, but he has every incentive in the world for porn to be mandated to .xxx. It would make him hundreds of millions of dollars more if it was mandated vs just another tld that some people were blackmailed into buying.

[JustDaveXxx]

I'm still a little surprised that nobody asked about the "WHY?" to .xxx
.

And Why so much?

[Connor]

I remember you asking about how or what would happen if they changed the "rules" in mid-stream. Like with a biller, for example.

Jay asked about the whole "protection of children" thing, and it more or less was pushed aside when CP started to get mentioned.

No my question was basically with all the possible nightmares... and I mentioned the unknown rules and board oversight issues as big ones... what benefits were there that would possibly counter that to make us want to use these domains.

It was probably lost in the shuffle because no such benefits were divulged in the answers, plus Greg Dumas jumped in before Vaughn could really address the question and tried to spar.

Anyhow, you'll see it when the video is posted. I tried.

[alias]

Thanks for posting the closing statements Chris.

[LAJ]

Yeah I asked the question about child protection and it was glossed over. Greg Dumas chose not to chime in about it. I wanted to know if .xxx was pushing the protecting children from accessing adult sites angle. Then someone brought up CP... which has absolutely nothing to do with whether a minor is able to access adult sites or not.

[DWB]

Here is the conundrum, for .xxx to be effective in "protecting" kids from porn then porn would have to be removed from all other tld's (.com,.net etc). If not, then there is the same amount of porn out there and the same amount of kids being exposed to it on the .com's so then .xxx does nothing to protect them.

Correction, it will double the amount of porn online if everyone goes for the same .XXX domains as there are .com domains.

sex.com + sex.xxx = two domains exposing kids to porn

And so on.

Why this simple fact hasn't been drilled into them into their eyes bled, is beyond me.

[DWB]

Yeah I asked the question about child protection and it was glossed over. Greg Dumas chose not to chime in about it. I wanted to know if .xxx was pushing the protecting children from accessing adult sites angle. Then someone brought up CP... which has absolutely nothing to do with whether a minor is able to access adult sites or not.

Of course they didn't answer, there is no answer other than they are wrong.

This is the biggest scam our industry has ever seen and surprisingly no industry attorneys were able to stop it. I have to wonder just how hard they tried, as this thing is full of pitfalls and does nothing to protect children.

IMHO, they are boiling frogs. This is just the beginning of something big. "Step One" was a huge success.

[alias]

Of course they didn't answer, there is no answer other than they are wrong.

This is the biggest scam our industry has ever seen and surprisingly no industry attorneys were able to stop it. I have to wonder just how hard they tried, as this thing is full of pitfalls and does nothing to protect children.

IMHO, they are boiling frogs. This is just the beginning of something big. "Step One" was a huge success.

This was part of a post on last monday over at xbiz by Joanne from FSC:

"? All registrants of .XXX must agree to third-party automated monitoring of their sites for compliance of IFFOR policies ? AND you will have to purchase your domain name before you even know what those policies are.

? Aliases (.XXX and .com going to the same site) require that related .coms adhere to IFFOR policies. "

Sounds lame.

[LAJ]

This was part of a post on last monday over at xbiz by Joanne from FSC:

"? All registrants of .XXX must agree to third-party automated monitoring of their sites for compliance of IFFOR policies ? AND you will have to purchase your domain name before you even know what those policies are.

? Aliases (.XXX and .com going to the same site) require that related .coms adhere to IFFOR policies. "

Sounds lame.

That was discussed as well during the panel and it turns out that a board of 9 people will make the rules and enforce policy. Of the 9 people, 5 will be "from the adult industry." If I heard that correctly?