Vivid says no to porn

[gonzo]

Originally Posted by Toby

I currently employ three such tags on my sites.

1. Old School Meta rating that has been in place for years
< META NAME="rating" CONTENT="restricted" > (some use "adult" instead of "restricted", although "restricted" is more correct per W3C)
2. ICRA
3. RTA (Restricted To Adults)

I also place a very visible link on my warning pages telling parents where to go to get free software to block adult sites. http://parentalcontrolbar.org/

I have no problem with such tags becoming mandatory, although I'm sure the Internet Illiterate in Congress would attempt to come up with some completely new convoluted and uneffective tag system.

I used to use the tags years ago.
WHen it became apparent that Joan and Helmys little non profit wasnt about helping the indsury but more about raising money I guess I quit doing it.

All these years millions of dollars and how many kiddie porn sites have they got taken off line?

Personal I think the whole thing has been nothing more than a scam.
She preys on guilting companies into a large donation so they can say they are doing something about it.

All the while she goes to shows...gets drunk off her ass and will show her tits to anyone that wants to look.

Funniestthing is 2 years ago we got off of a boat cruise [you remember the one that I was a guest of Shellees and not Marks] and MAx Hardcore and his gal were taking pictures in he fountain.

And like Micheal Im no fan of Max. So His girl is shooting pretty tame topless shots and over rushes this european family. Junior who looks about 12 years old is snapping away the pictures.

Joan runs over and makes this HUGE scene.

The family pretty muh flips her off and ges the model to pose with the entire family nude right beside them.

Kinda an illustration of how effective Joan has been doing ANYTHING over the past several years.

I guess it looked good to potential contributors.

[Toby]

Yeah, most not for profit org's are more about providing an income for the organizers than actually getting anything accomplished.

I do have to agree with Joan on one point though. If/when Congress does try to enact manditory tags, no amount of lobbying will make a difference unless this industry is able to demonstrate that it can effectively tag pages voluntarily.

My main motivation for using the tags is more CYA than anything else. Should shit hit the fan I can at least demonstrate that I have mechanisms in place that would allow the pages to be filtered by the end user with readily available software.

[TheEnforcer]

That lady Max brought with him to the last two Hollywood FL shows has some of the most amazing legs I have ever seen.

[RawAlex]

RTA isn't a tagging system as much as an attempt for the ASACP to interject itself into a political issue that just wasn't part of it's initial mandate. ASACP isn't suppose to be about keeping children from seeing porn, but rather keeping them from being IN porn. However, getting into the filter business is a slick way to try to get yourself into the political process, and Joan has never been shy about that, right or wrong.

Tagging is also pointless without support. All the tags in the world won't stop a single child from visiting an adult site if their parents don't take their responsibilities and set up their home PCs to use obey the tags.

It comes back to the basics of the problem, it isn't us, it's them.

[tony404]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

RTA isn't a tagging system as much as an attempt for the ASACP to interject itself into a political issue that just wasn't part of it's initial mandate. ASACP isn't suppose to be about keeping children from seeing porn, but rather keeping them from being IN porn. However, getting into the filter business is a slick way to try to get yourself into the political process, and Joan has never been shy about that, right or wrong.

Tagging is also pointless without support. All the tags in the world won't stop a single child from visiting an adult site if their parents don't take their responsibilities and set up their home PCs to use obey the tags.

It comes back to the basics of the problem, it isn't us, it's them.

if it was made universal not just in the us .You need a cc to look at any porn, that would solve the problem it wouldnt 100 percent but better then what we have now.

[RawAlex]

Originally Posted by tony404

if it was made universal not just in the us .You need a cc to look at any porn, that would solve the problem it wouldnt 100 percent but better then what we have now.

that one never works out because it is a denial of free speech rights. It just won't happen.

The concept is actually simple: Browsers should be shipped with the blocking activated, and the parent must dis activate the blocking if they so wish. Legally it would make it the computer owners problem at that point, not anyone elses.

[TheEnforcer]

Originally Posted by RawAlex

that one never works out because it is a denial of free speech rights. It just won't happen.

The concept is actually simple: Browsers should be shipped with the blocking activated, and the parent must dis activate the blocking if they so wish. Legally it would make it the computer owners problem at that point, not anyone elses.

No, that would not work becasue that would be an active mandatory denial by the government that people wuld have to take down. A better idea in my opinion would be to havethe end user ave to activate it. You could either do that where they have it on their computer and then have to "flip the switch" so to apeak to activate it or have a program that autolaunches the first time they connect to the net that allows to chose what setting they want.