Message-Id: <firstname.lastname@example.org> Date: Mon, 26 Jun 1995 10:13:08 -0400 To: Brian Behlendorf <email@example.com> From: firstname.lastname@example.org (Kee Hinckley) Subject: Re: Criticism of Kidcode (was Re: KidCode: Next steps ) Cc: R Martin Roscheisen <email@example.com>, firstname.lastname@example.org At 8:26 PM 6/25/95, Brian Behlendorf wrote: >On Fri, 23 Jun 1995, Kee Hinckley wrote: >> I have a question about SOAPs. >> >> The problem is what to do with unrated sites. >[summary: saying "allow unrated sites" would allow unrated obscure >'naughty' sites to still go through, and "disallow unrated sites" would >most likely prevent valid places.] > >The latter would probably be the only acceptible choice for those >protecting their young'ins. The problem then becomes a lack of data >points - a demand - which could be solved by market forces. Ideally the My concern is that it's not clear to me that any demand will exist. What will drive a parent to spend more money or do more work in order to allow their kids to see more web sites? We believe there's a benefit, but will someone who doesn't live so intimately on the net? Kee Hinckley Utopia Inc. - Cyberspace Architects=81 617/721-6100 email@example.com http://www.utopia.com/ I'm not sure which upsets me more: that people are so unwilling to accept responsibility for their own actions, or that they are so eager to regulate everyone else's.