EAS:

In view of the discussion of the possibility of PICS being required by law, plus that about the CyberAngels, I thought people might find it interesting that the CyberAngels home page has on it as one of their "responsibilities" making sure that all pages with sexual content - that pornography fetish again - have PICS or other (such as Safesurf...) ratings that would permit censorship of them. If parents want to keep their children from seeing sexual material, that's the problem of the parents - it shouldn't be the problem of anyone else. If something I put out offends someone (e.g., some political speech I've made), that's the problem of the person it offends. Sexual material is no different.

this seems to suggest a misunderstanding of PICS either by you or the "CyberAngels". PICS does not require any particular action by page owners and is entirely based on that principle (there is a pretty good argument it would be unconstitutional, impractical, idiotic, etc. if it didn't). it defines a standard by which ratings servers and queries are constructed and formatted. anyone can rate any information. if the CyberAngels want to rate all kinds of pages in cyberspace and set up their own rating service, more power to them. the ratings do not restrict those who do not choose the restrictions. I hope we can get a new conventional wisdom going, in which people who rant about saving children from the evils of cyberspace are told to shut up and go start their own rating service. they can blacklist as many sites as they want. but the real test will be whether anyone CARES what they think.