Hi Nicholas..
I don't think that there is a level of CV based on quality of CV in this
group, my CV will be the lowest or under ground position:).
Please keep in mind that I never say that I don't like porn, even I never
state that I will reject .xxx as sex site, not at all. I'll support .xxx
as sex/porn site if .xxx can guarantee that it is become the center and
the only one known site for sex/porn. Indeed, they have term and condition
for people to access it. For me, if this world have one known site for
porn things is better than have many illegal & unknown porn files that up
load in many websites.
But, perhaps I am now wrong.. as andrew said .xxx is not sex/porn site,
but it is for openness and freedom. Thanks for andrew to up date
information. I wait for legal paper that state and proof it.
my regards,
Dwi
Hi Nuno, all
> I can assure everyone that only my CV would be in contact with the
> ground. I agree with you on the rest, and with Andrew's take on .xxx.
> Dwi, i see that you don't like porn and what it represent, but
> unfortunately for all the world woes and problems, finding a way to ban
> internet porn would not help resolve any of them.
>
> Nicolas
>
>
>> I am not sure I did understand what Dwi said, but I'm pretty sure I
>> don't suport or accept this kind of attitude. Dwi, please moderate
>> yourself. If everyone of us starts pulling out its own merits, I'm
>> pretty sure that your CV would be on the bottom part of the list
>> (maybe along with mine).
>>
>> So please let us keep the sanity and humility and proactive learning
>> attitudes that have always been cherished by us all in this list.
>>
>> Andrew, thank you for stating a position that is consisten with the
>> group long agreed positions on freedom and human values.
>>
>> I agree with Andrew, and by contrast disagree with opinions that are
>> contrary.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Nuno Garcia
>>
>> On 12 January 2011 13:04, Dwi Elfrida Martina S
>> <[log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hi andrew..
>>
>> I am new member of NCSG but not new member in ICANN. I have been 2
>> years
>> involve within ICANN and exist in GAC meeting from the fist time
>> GAC start
>> to Draft MOPO. I was replace DG of ICT and Director of
>> e-government of
>> Ministry of ICT of Indonesia who are representative in GAC.indeed,
>> I am
>> fellowship of ICANN. So please.. watching your words!
>>
>> As I know, from beginning .XXX is site that intended for sex. .xxx
>> is
>> inspire from .xxx.com <http://xxx.com> that known as site for sex
>> activities. But as they
>> propose counter to court of USA and make openness and freedom
>> become their
>> justification, so the court ask ICANN to review their .xxx
>> proposal. But,
>> if you have new issue that .XXX is not site for sex, you have to
>> announce
>> that thing to all participant in ICANN meeting, because as I know,
>> from
>> Cartagena meeting, most of participant still have the same point
>> of view
>> with me.
>>
>> Beside,my question to you, can you guarantee that the content of
>> .XXX is
>> not site for sex? what kind of and openness and freedom that they
>> asked
>> for? what is the proof that .XXX as TLD is nothing to do with
>> .XXX.COM <http://XXX.COM>?
>> Yes.. I you are not Policy maker in NCSG, so please don't make any
>> conclusion before its not an agreement between members.
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>>
>> Dwi
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Dwi,
>> >
>> > Before posting on any topic, I suggest you familiarise yourself
>> with the
>> > current issues by reading through the mailing list archives.
>> There you
>> > will
>> > find that the creation of .xxx is settled NCSG policy and the
>> reasoning
>> > behind it has nothing to do with sex and everything to do with
>> openness,
>> > freedom and the following of existing rules rather than exactly
>> the kind
>> > of
>> > knee-jerk blinkered moralism that the MAPO proposals represent.
>> >
>> > I do not make NCSG policy, but I'm well aware of it, and of the
>> reasons
>> > for
>> > it.
>> >
>> > The MAPO issue has also been well-discussed by the existing
>> membership.
>> > While
>> > I welcome new members, I do not welcome them making personal
>> attacks on
>> > the
>> > basis of not understanding anything about the existing situation
>> when they
>> > join.
>> >
>> > --
>> > Professor Andrew A Adams [log in to unmask] <mailto:[log in to unmask]>
>> > Professor at Graduate School of Business Administration, and
>> > Deputy Director of the Centre for Business Information Ethics
>> > Meiji University, Tokyo, Japan http://www.a-cubed.info/
>> >
>>
>>
>
|
