From: IN%"vznuri@netcom.com" "Vladimir Z. Nuri" 6-MAY-1996 15:47:46.22
but you still don't understand what I stated. the above does not make any sense relative to the PICS system. it would be like saying, "we are going to report anyone who doesn't have a SMTP that bans dirty email". SMTP does not ban dirty email by definition. PICS does not censor material by definition. please read the PICS proposal (sorry the URL is not handy, could someone post it?)
See below; I had read this _before_ posting on the CyberAngels and PICS.
PICS *doesn't*involve*the*page*designer*. this is an absolutely key component of its design. it exists indepedent of page creators. if page creators are suddenly being pressured to format their pages in some way, then PICS has failed in some of its key design goals. there are some *optional* ways that page designers can invoke PICS principles as I understand, but they make no sense to me. (it would be equivalent to someone rating their own material, something I think is going to be far from the main use of ratings in the future)
From: IN%"frantz@netcom.com" 16-APR-1996 20:19:13.88
... PICS specifies three ways to distribute labels. The first is to embed labels in HTML documents. This method will be helpful for those who wish to label content they have created.
The second method is for a client to ask an http server to send labels along with the documents it requests. The server would most likely offer the publishers' labels, but a server could also redistribute labels from third parties that it cooperates with. [Client sends URL of label service to browser which responds with that service's label. bf]
The third way to distribute labels is through a label bureau that dispenses only labels. A bureau could distribute labels created by one or more labeling services. A client asks the bureau for certain services' labels of specific resources. This is most likely to be used for third-party labels.
In other words, the CyberAngels want to eliminate any pages that contain material they think minors shouldn't see that aren't self-rated with a PICS self-rating (the first of the three types) intended to block minors from seeing it. Yes, this is an abuse of the market oriented variety of PICS; they obviously don't know and/or don't care. If you want to convince them otherwise, start cc:ing your messages (and forwarding mine, on this I give you permission) on PICS and the CyberAngels to angels@wavenet.com. Incidentally, their pressure (especially the legal variety - acting as informants) could also include against an ISP that doesn't do the second for material the CyberAngels don't like. -Allen