Quote:
Originally Posted by Hell Puppy
ICRA doesn't require a logo, just have to put the right stuff in meta. I put ICRA on all of my sites. Works with every blocking program or content control method I'm aware of.
I dont know about this other one from ASACP, how does it work? Do I have to fly their logo? Cost? Does everything support it?
|
RTA doesn't require a logo either and it's just a simple META tag that is the same on every site and page you put it on. I only put the logo on my warning pages, and that is completely voluntary.
I've been through this whole discussion already, when RTA went live last November. So I'm going to cheat a little a quote myself...
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Toby on GG&J Nov 7,2006
The difference between RTA and ICRA is in the complexity. ICRA requires a complex customized tag for each domain. RTA is a simple meta tag that is the same for every site you use it on, and you don't need to register or fill in any forms to use the tag.
Now, you could argue that ICRA and the Rating Meta are already in place (content="restricted"), as defined by W3C years ago, why do we need another? Those tags have existed for some time, and the Government is still saying, "...we’ll mandate it, if you don’t." ICRA and W3C are not going to spend any time or effort trying to get the adult webmaster community to voluntarily self-label. When is the last time you saw any kind of press release from ICRA (now FOSI) directed at webmasters?
Sure ASACP could have just used the existing W3C rating meta label, but a new specific label of their own lets them create a Terms and Conditions of Use.
If ASACP can get the SE's involved, then it levels the playing field by providing incentive for ALL webmasters to self-label, not just those of us in the good ol' U.S.A. |