On Wed, Sep 30, 1998 at 05:22:57PM -0400, Barry Shein wrote:
If .com were used, for example, only for Slobbovian Universities, were being managed by one to the exclusion of other uses, etc, then perhaps it would be a good reason to consider decommissioning .com.
And if the .to domain is not in any way being used as a TLD for the Kingdom of Tonga, but instead is being used only as a safe harbor for what appear to be malicious activities, then perhaps it should be decommissioned.
Is that simple enough?
I've already given you one example of a domain not used for porn. Here's another one: bounce.to, another redirection service. I'm sure I can find others. Of course, according to you, the TLD is rogue unless there are absolutely no bad apples. By this logic, I can argue for UUNet to turn off their circuit to you if I have solid proof of *ONE* of your customers spamming. Yes, I know, your argument is that a majority of the domains are porn domains (not that that, in itself, is hard evidence of criminal activity) and are used to spam. Prove "a majority."
non-governmental regulation of the internet. Yet any suggestion that we do this is met with these sort of sneering, uncalled for, tangential, childish remarks made by individuals who obviously shouldn't be involved in regulating anything.
You're being flamed because you said something very foolish. Deal with it. Happens to everyone.
I think it's beginning to become obvious, to me anyhow, that any claim that the internet is better regulated by those who are involved in its engineering is a total failure as a concept.
Yes, Barry, you're setting a bad example. -- Anyone who spams me will be subject to torture by Jake, my killer attack hedgehog, and/or Lizzy and Junior, my man-eating iguanas.