ICANN/DNSO
DNSO Mailling lists archives

[ga-full]


<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>

Re: [ga] Re: Names Council Resolution on Reform


Eric and all assembly members,

eric@hi-tek.com wrote:

> Dear Dr. Joe,
>
> How do we block this threat of kiddie porn, or should we?
> I stand high on the principle of choice but not to that degree.
> I do not think Jim is working to create a bad scenario.
> Thinking especially outside of ICANN what can we do to make it all better?
> My three teenagers have a hard driven sense of morality that is more conservative
> than mine but meets with general standards.  We speak frequently and indeed email
> frequently about right and wrong.  I do not think we can dictate morality or
> ethics to those who do not engage in discourse about life in general.

  Morality and ethics in many areas of life and professional organizations
is indeed dictated by laws or by oath as you should know.  So yes indeed
we can dictate such if the goal is to define the limits of an extreme..
Kiddy Porn on the Net is indeed one of these.

  If I read you comments above correctly you seem to be saying that
your teenagers are taught or allowed to be taught and learn that
some basic ethical and moral standards can be ignored.  I hope
that is not so, when it comes to Kiddy Porn on the Net...

>
>
> You normally stay the technical course but you have swayed into my area of
> ministry.

  May god help save us all...  The practice of the ministry should never
allow for Kiddy Porn.  And I don't believe it does given recent
events...  So good for Joe's very correct and strong ethical position..
We area all very fortunate to have him as a member of our
stakeholder/user flock as a good and wholesome minister...

>
>
> You speak now of facts but do not offer guidance.
>
> What is your suggestion?
>
> Eric
>
> Joe Baptista wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 2 Aug 2002, todd glassey wrote:
> >
> > > If the Chinese are half as smart as I usually give them credit for, what
> > > they will do is insist on two roots and an interoperability treaty. The
> > > point is that ICANN has no right to insist that there be only one root, or
> > > only one Internet. And what they (the Chinese Government) will probably tell
> > > the world is that China has an Information Control policy that is political
> > > rather than technical and that it must operate its own root to satisfy this.
> > > If it is really smart, China might also replicate the entirety of IPv4 space
> > > by simply implementing a set of Gateway NAT Bridges in and out of China.
> >
> > exactly.  and i support your view of the chiness position.  now i know the
> > chiness are twice as smart as we give them credit for.  so i would say
> > they would put some added catch 22 into the works that would favour them.
> > and possibly use a terrorist angle - which is all the fashion rage this
> > year i hear.
> >
> > > Now the world and the techies will jump up and down screaming gross
> > > oppression, and that they have a"right" (and I assume we will soon hear
> > > Cisco screaming about this too)... but the fact of the matter is that this
> > > is the ONLY way any country can impose eBorders, and that is something
> > > despite ICANN, that each and every country has the right and need to do.
> >
> > i don't know about the right and need to do.  in a perfect democracy no
> > eboarders are required.
> >
> > > The problem is that ICANN and its PSO's have made it almost
> > > impossible,without this type of compartmentalization, of having a judicial
> > > boundary for anything electronic... And this is based in no restraint or
> > > understanding of the global effects of new protocols on the Internet, and
> > > the ISP's and long haul carriers just blindly laughing and routing them.
> >
> > exactly and with satellite technology routing around governments is
> > elementary.
> >
> > > If The Internet was truly compartmentalized then Napster would not have been
> > > anything close to the problem it was since it could be addressed this way.
> > > Same diff with Kiddy Porn sites, and other illegal offerings.
> >
> > i have some bad news.  i have examined jim flemmings ipv8 and i would not
> > be surprised if that protocol ends up as kiddie porn heaven.  in fact
> > any group who does not want to be traced can use ipv8 to communicate
> > securly in secure user communities.  it would put the power of napster
> > into the hands of kiddy porn sites and of course anyone else with an
> > interest in privacy.  impossible to trace.
> >
> > we live in interesting times.  i understand thats a chiness curse too.
> >
> > regards ;)
> > joe
> >
> > --
> > This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> > Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> > ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> > Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html

Regards,
--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup - (Over 124k members/stakeholders strong!)
CEO/DIR. Internet Network Eng/SR. Java/CORBA Development Eng.
Information Network Eng. Group. INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@ix.netcom.com
Contact Number:  972-244-3801 or 214-244-4827
Address: 5 East Kirkwood Blvd. Grapevine Texas 75208


--
This message was passed to you via the ga-full@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga-full" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html



<<< Chronological Index >>>    <<< Thread Index >>>