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/ >> > >> >> >