Vote on .xxx pushed back a month

TalkBack 16 of 58:

Next »

« Previous

• Thread View
• Flat View

But again, that doesn't make sense

"Personally I think the domain should be established and it should be made mandatory (so it'll actually be useful)."

And yet, if the Bush administration proppsed the exact same thing, what would you do? What you seem to be saying is that the rest of the world doesn't like the fact that a US-based entity (ICANN) makes unilateral decisions regarding new domains. That would explain the other countries objecting to the new .xxx domain. Yet, when the Bush administration steps in to protest it also, you complain that the administration is interfering. Was ICANN accting unilaterally when it proposed the new domain, or was the Bush administration acting unilaterally when it protested (hint: the protest wasn't unilateral). Other countries don't want it either, precisely because it represents the "unilateralism" that you are decrying. So should the new domain be stopped, or shouldn't it?

Other countries besides the US don't want the new domain, so stopping it should be a Good Thing. Even the ACLU has reservations about it.

So once again, where's the problem?

Carl Rapson

Posted by: rapson   Posted on: 08/17/05 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use

Alert moderator to an offensive message

Subscribe to this discussion via Email or RSS

SponsoredWhite Papers, Webcasts, and Downloads

• Building the Virtualized Enterprise with VMware Iinfrastructure VMware VMware virtualization software has been adopted by over 120,000 enterprise ... Download Now
• Reducing Server Total Cost of Ownership with VMware Virtualization Software VMware VMware virtualization enables customers to reduce their server TCO and ... Download Now
• The True Costs of Virtual Server Solutions VMware In an economic environment that is repeatedly heralding the message "do ... Download Now