Just sent my second email to ICANN
 

Suggesting that if they really want to protect children on the internet, they should create an extension for kids, such as .kids, and use the same type of criteria that they use for a .edu. Obviously only a school can get a .edu, so why not create a .kids and make it so only sites for kids can get one?

I heard Dave Cummings mention this in something I read by him, and I thought it was a good idea.

I am opposed to mentioning .kids for the simple reason that 98% of ppl emailing ICANN mention it so it doesnt look natural.

And in fact, ICANN has no real influence over .kids - well theoretically they could propose it, but recently it has been that independent organisations propose the extensions - in this case its the ICM Registry.

They have to convince ICANN that they have community support and demand for a particular new extension and that they are able to run the whole reristry ( solid business plan and technical criteria meet ).

And ICM Registry has obviously no links to the adult industry and they even admit to be profit driven in this case.

Would .kids be a good solution? Perhaps. But first we need to agree that there's a problem and Im not convinced that there's a problem with how the web is right now...

doesn't really sound that good

I agree that kids surfing the internet should be protected by a white list, not a black list. This .xxx proposal would essentially be a means of blacklisting adult. But this does not solve the problem of all the other inappropriate content online that kids are curious about.

.Kids would be a whitelist, so parents could block out all other TLD's without having to wonder what their kids are doing. Technically speaking, this makes a lot more sense.