>> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Programs like this, designed to protect
>> the average user seem like a good idea, considering how much of the
>> internet these days is p*rn or scam/spam in nature. Does anyone know
>> why ICANN has always steadfastly refused to consider top level domain
>> names of .spam , .scam , and .p*rn which would enable most users to
>> do a rather good job of filtering? PAT]
> Sure would, if the spammers, scammers, and pornsters would
> cooperatively run their operations from those top-level domains. But
> how many do you think would volutarily register there?
> George Mitchell
> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Probably none of them would voluntarily
> move into the proper category. They'd probably have to be forced into
> the proper categories, i.e. if you want connectivity with the net,
> you need to be in (whatever) category. It happen that way now with the
> top level domains .edu , .mil and .gov . If you are not an EDUcational
> or a MILitary or GOVernment entity you do not get in those categories.
> Of course this would require some policing efforts by ICANN and its
> registrars. I am sure there would be a lot of wimpering and whining by
> some folks, but thats' life around the net. PAT]
You obviously fail to grasp the fundamental difference between "you can't get in here unless you are ...." and "you must be in here if you are ...."
Yes, you cannot get an '.edu' unless you are an educational institution. *HOWEVER*, nothing _prevents_ an educational institution from getting a name in another TLD, and many *do*.
Heck, even the U.S. ARMY uses .com domain names.
"In theory", things like '.scam', '.spam', or '.xxx' are a 'wonderful idea'. In reality, however, due to the perverseness of human nature, they are simply *unworkable*.
Among other 'minor' flaws with the idea is the simple fact that providers don't ask 'what domain names will you be using' when they sell connectivity. I've *never* seen an ISP contract that requires you to notify the ISP if you start using different (or _additional_) domain-names.
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Let me ask you this: _Why_ cannot I get into the EDU or the MIL or GOV domains? Why cannot I insist upon and recieve
Then _why_ are they so perfectly happy and willing to dump anyone and everyone -- including all the trash in the world -- into the domains known as .com and .net and .org (particularly .com)? I get so tired of the wimpering and carrying-on about (1) 'how decisions such as domain assignment are not the responsibility of ICANN (what a lot of bologna!) and (2) 'we cannot dictate to other sites what they can or cannot do with their sites' (more bologna, and possibly even more insidious than even excuse (1) above. Of course we can dictate! We do it all the time in the instances of .edu .mil and .gov where one must at least come close to 'hitting the mark' in order to being accepted therein.
I think it would really be hilarious if a class-action lawsuit was started naming ICANN and its registrar-agents as the defendant, and the general computer-using public as the plaintiff-class. The complaint would be ICANN has misused its trust as the caretakers of record of the net by allowing all the trash to be dumped into the category .com, causing the general devaluation of the net by causing effective filtering of undesireable material (you fill in the blanks as desired; spam, scam, p*rn, etc) to be largely ineffectual, especially when filtering could be so simple: .spam, .scam, .p*rn . And listen to no more of their excuses; either reform the net in general, or get out of the business and let others do it. I think a class-action against ICANN would feel _so good_ don't you? I now understand they are off on another one of their international vacation trips at present; is it Morocco? PAT]