James Love <love@cptech.org> writes:
Paul Bradley wrote:
[Pissing, Fisting and beastiality!]
55% http://adult.mdc.ca/free/xratedp.html (Size 4.5K)
We can clearly come to no agreement here as I cannot see any material listed above which would be harmful in any way to a viewer, child or not.
Paul. Do you *have* any children? Jamie
I have children. My views are generally liberal. I could probably come up with a few things I think would not be appropriate viewing/reading at this stage (4 year old?) However, and this appears to be a point being missed here, it is pretty much irrelevant what I think should be appropriate for my children, because the person you are proposing to rate the site is the site's author. It is inevitable that the site's author will have different views about what is suitable for children than any particular parent. Pick 10 people, you'll have 10 different sets of what is suitable. Even if government were to insist that everyone self rated, it would be damn near meaningless. If you as a parent are too lazy to observe what your children read, you could use a third party rating service. I believe that there are several on the market right now. You should attempt to evaluate the rating services to see what they block. Perhaps you would go on the advice of a ratings service rating service. Perhaps you would obtain demonstration versions and form your own opinion. Clearly government mandated self-rating is moving towards thoughtcrime. Third party rating services are services. If you don't like the service, don't buy it, or start up your self in competition. Now where does the need for government come into this picture? General rhetorical question: indeed why have governments at all? Adam -- Have *you* exported RSA today? --> http://www.dcs.ex.ac.uk/~aba/rsa/ print pack"C*",split/\D+/,`echo "16iII*o\U@{$/=$z;[(pop,pop,unpack"H*",<> )]}\EsMsKsN0[lN*1lK[d2%Sa2/d0<X+d*lMLa^*lN%0]dsXx++lMlN/dsM0<J]dsJxp"|dc`