NCSG-DISCUSS Archives

NCSG-Discuss

NCSG-DISCUSS@LISTSERV.SYR.EDU

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
7bit
Sender:
Non-Commercial User Constituency <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
David H Bailey <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 20 Mar 2009 12:46:43 -0700
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
MIME-Version:
1.0
Reply-To:
David H Bailey <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (14 lines)
This discussion is a bit tiresome, and more than a little bit inappropriate.

Can't we return to answering the questions posed last week in the CSC 
response to version 6 of the NCUC proposal?

DHB

My position of online safety is that ICANN should only protect against 
fraud and not free speech. Porn is a slippery slope. If we were to take 
the Mormon position against porn, do we then take the Catholic position 
against birth control or condom use? Do we take down criticism of Islam? 
Do we protect children from "cults". ICANN is not in the law enforcement 
business. We aren't here to police the Internet - just make it work.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2