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/
>     >
>
>