Re: Criticism of Kidcode (was Re: KidCode: Next steps )

Paul Grous (Paul_Grous.NOTES@crd.lotus.com)
24 Jun 95 18:52:15 EDT


Message-Id: <9506262146.AA16332@internet1.lotus.com>
To: www-mail <www-mail@crd.lotus.com>
Cc: rdaniel <rdaniel@acl.lanl.gov>, Darren New <dnew@sgf.fv.com>,
From: Paul Grous <Paul_Grous.NOTES@crd.lotus.com>
Date: 24 Jun 95 18:52:15 EDT
Subject: Re: Criticism of Kidcode (was Re: KidCode: Next steps )

I have a question about SOAPs.

The problem is what to do with unrated sites. Given the speed with which
the Web grows, most sites are likely to be unrated by most approval
organizations. Defaulting to "yes" for unrated sites only makes sense for a
conservative parent if they have reason to believe that all the sites they
don't like would be rated. Since most sites with kid-questionable content
don't want trouble - they'll probably be happy to be rated (besides which,
for people looking for purient content - it's a great advertisement).  But,
and here's the questio, what's the easy mechanism for a site to notify all
interested rating parties (who knows how many) that they shouldn't be
viewed by kids?  If that mechanism isn't well defined, then I predict that
organizations will recommend that parents use a "unrated equals off" access
mode, and that will dramatically limit children's access to very legimate
information. Furthermore, if means that rating authorities will be flooded
with requests from people who wanted to be rated positively, and there are
far more of them then there are those on the other side.  So the job of the
rating authority becomes that much more difficult.

I haven't read the SOAP proposal (a pointer please?). Am I missing
something fundamental?

Kee Hinckley      Utopia Inc. - Cyberspace Architects    617/721-6100
nazgul@utopia.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.