Mike South, step inside... - Page 4 - GoFuckYourself.com

JFK · 07-16-2010, 04:22 PM

One Fitty..................threads gone South

epitome · 07-16-2010, 05:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

Mr. Helmy and Mr. South are masters of generating publicity and interest.

I wish somebody of import would "feud" with me so I could get a little extra talk about the things I'm doing. Arguing with guys like "fris" doesn't do anything.

I signed up for Claudia-Marie.com after I saw you arguing with GideonGallery. All is not lost!

Robbie · 07-16-2010, 05:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by epitome

I signed up for Claudia-Marie.com after I saw you arguing with GideonGallery. All is not lost!

That warms my heart to think that gideongallery inadvertently made me money

NinjaSteve · 07-16-2010, 05:25 PM

Sounds like somebody needs to take a chill pill

epitome · 07-16-2010, 05:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

That warms my heart to think that gideongallery inadvertently made me money

I forgot to mention that I charged back. I was highly upset that I could not share your quality content with all of my friends through my tube site.

Major (Tom) · 07-16-2010, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nikki_Licks

Me too!

Alec,

It seems this is not the first time it has been mentioned about you supporting the .xxxtld movement.

So then I gather that the ASACP is on board with pushing .xxx through?

If so, what is in it for the ASACP?

I would love to know how the ASACP can donate "X" amount of dollars for each .xxxtld sold with out any return, after all, this is a business and no one does anything for the "good will of it"....... it's all about return.

+1 (8chars)
ds

Major (Tom) · 07-16-2010, 05:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HELMY

Founder yes, but I do not earn a single penny from ASACP.

Do you have an expense account?
I'd like to know
Define "earn" as that is a loose term too.
ds

Robbie · 07-16-2010, 05:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by epitome

I forgot to mention that I charged back. I was highly upset that I could not share your quality content with all of my friends through my tube site.

That's ok. I timeshifted your chargeback

GonZo · 07-16-2010, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DukeSkywalker

Do you have an expense account?
I'd like to know
Define "earn" as that is a loose term too.
ds

Does a consulting firm count as earning if you own it?

DWB · 07-16-2010, 11:17 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Robbie

That's ok. I timeshifted your chargeback

I was going to write something long winded here, talking about how big a douche Helmy looks like in this thread, but Robbie's comment made me laugh so hard that all the hate just shot out of my nose with my morning coffee.

Brilliant Robbie.

Major (Tom) · 07-17-2010, 04:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GonZo

Does a consulting firm count as earning if you own it?

When I was in college, I had to volunteer for a non profit group. No one took earningst but they made money. You can write off almost everything. Here I thought I was doing good and honest work and the directors are all driving benz's and everything was quite lavish. I mean, it basically paid for the staffs, well, everything. So to say he didn't earn anything from that entity, I can only respond with this: I was born at night, but it wasn't last night.
best,
duke

GonZo · 07-17-2010, 08:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DukeSkywalker

When I was in college, I had to volunteer for a non profit group. No one took earningst but they made money. You can write off almost everything. Here I thought I was doing good and honest work and the directors are all driving benz's and everything was quite lavish. I mean, it basically paid for the staffs, well, everything. So to say he didn't earn anything from that entity, I can only respond with this: I was born at night, but it wasn't last night.
best,
duke

Wow. All of this from just asking a couple of "simple" questions.

GonZo · 07-17-2010, 08:29 AM

Man I thought we were being tough with Alec here but Diane Duke is laying the smack down to Stuart in that other thread.

Fri, Jul 16, 01:38 pm
I wanted to respond to a few of the comments posted earlier.

Dave and Tom did not lie. Deals were proposed to FSC and others in 2004.
It's a fact and there are NUMEROUS individuals who will attest to that.

Stuart also told me, prior to my trip to Brussels during a conversation in
which he was trying to gain FSC support, that part of that $10 going to
support "charities" could go to support FSC's programs. He also told me that
he would offer whatever "comfort" we needed. As you can imagine, that
suggestion fell flat with FSC.

Stuart tells mainstream media that the $10 of the $60 will go to protect
children. He tells the adult industry that the $10 will go to protect the
adult industry. Stuart, we don't have any children in the adult industry so
which is it?

You want Reader's Digest?

.XXX will harm the adult entertainment industry through:
* Probable .XXX mandate that will facilitate censorship and attacks from
anti-industry extremists
* Reduction of industry profits as ICM purports to make $200 million
ANNUALLY off of the industry through its existing online market. We know
that if companies register they are doing so defensively thus throwing
dollars down the drain to protect the brand and traffic they already enjoy.
* Damaging the reputation of the adult industry and its .com presence by
marking the industry and those entities that are not .XXX as irresponsible.

ICM/Stuart is misleading ICANN and the Adult Industry about:
* Support he has from the industry
* Promises and deals that have been "suggested"
* The IFFOR Board its make-up and mission
* That the application is a "Done Deal* it is NOT!!!!!

The next steps in the process will be to block the application acceptance.
There are two avenues for doing that.
1. To show that their application is no longer valid today
2. To support GAC in its opposition to the .XXX sTLD

If you are interested in GAC's position on .XXX you can read their last two
statements on the subject at the links below:

http://www.icann.org/en/committees/g...ue-28mar06.pdf
http://www.icann.org/correspondence/...rf-02feb07.pdf

will76 · 07-17-2010, 08:33 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Barry-xlovecam

If Stuart Lawley's motives were truly those to create a safer Internet, not that I in any way support .xxx ? I don't, the domains would be $10.00 per name so that the "community" would want them ? they are $60.00 per name for what reason?

I think the reason is rather obvious.

As far as who apart from ICM would be the recipient of any part of the $60.00 per registered name ? ICM will not function as a publicly traded company so no audited financial disclosures will be made except as ICANN might require as part of the granting of authority for the registry of .xxx as a sTLD.

Since ICM and Mr. Lawley have told us of all the wonderful benefits of his scheme, ICM should be required to make financial disclosure as to where these "fees" are really going to ? to some organizations of societal benefit or to the enrichment of the creators and operators of .xxx

Then, we would have more than undocumented accusation and conjecture. Perhaps, that day may come.

He could have put them at $10 a domain and still made millions. $60 per domain = pure fucking greed. Which is his only intention with this whole process, to make as much money as he can, it has nothing to do with benefits to the industry, customer, children or whatever.

davecummings · 07-17-2010, 08:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GonZo

Man I thought we were being tough with Alec here but Diane Duke is laying the smack down to Stuart in that other thread.

Fri, Jul 16, 01:38 pm
I wanted to respond to a few of the comments posted earlier.

Dave and Tom did not lie. Deals were proposed to FSC and others in 2004.
It's a fact and there are NUMEROUS individuals who will attest to that.

Stuart also told me, prior to my trip to Brussels during a conversation in
which he was trying to gain FSC support, that part of that $10 going to
support "charities" could go to support FSC's programs. He also told me that
he would offer whatever "comfort" we needed. As you can imagine, that
suggestion fell flat with FSC.

Stuart tells mainstream media that the $10 of the $60 will go to protect
children. He tells the adult industry that the $10 will go to protect the
adult industry. Stuart, we don't have any children in the adult industry so
which is it?

You want Reader's Digest?

.XXX will harm the adult entertainment industry through:
* Probable .XXX mandate that will facilitate censorship and attacks from
anti-industry extremists
* Reduction of industry profits as ICM purports to make $200 million
ANNUALLY off of the industry through its existing online market. We know
that if companies register they are doing so defensively thus throwing
dollars down the drain to protect the brand and traffic they already enjoy.
* Damaging the reputation of the adult industry and its .com presence by
marking the industry and those entities that are not .XXX as irresponsible.

ICM/Stuart is misleading ICANN and the Adult Industry about:
* Support he has from the industry
* Promises and deals that have been "suggested"
* The IFFOR Board its make-up and mission
* That the application is a "Done Deal* it is NOT!!!!!

The next steps in the process will be to block the application acceptance.
There are two avenues for doing that.
1. To show that their application is no longer valid today
2. To support GAC in its opposition to the .XXX sTLD

If you are interested in GAC's position on .XXX you can read their last two
statements on the subject at the links below:

http://www.icann.org/en/committees/g...ue-28mar06.pdf
http://www.icann.org/correspondence/...rf-02feb07.pdf

I find Diane to be a sharp, hard-working, and always-honest person.

LAJ · 07-18-2010, 08:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by will76

He could have put them at $10 a domain and still made millions. $60 per domain = pure fucking greed. Which is his only intention with this whole process, to make as much money as he can, it has nothing to do with benefits to the industry, customer, children or whatever.

I've been saying that since the start.

JFK · 07-18-2010, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by davecummings

I find Diane to be a sharp, hard-working, and always-honest person.

I Like Diane

will76 · 07-18-2010, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DukeSkywalker

Do you have an expense account?
I'd like to know
Define "earn" as that is a loose term too.
ds

Shouldn't it be public record how much the people who work for "non profits" make? I know someone who ran a local charity and made 100K a year. Something about that just doesn't seem right. Sure you should be paid if that is your full time job, but to be paid 3x more than what an average person makes in that city and you working for a "charity"??? Just doesn't seem right. Especially if you are paid well and you don't spend that much time involved with a charity.

The people who work for charities and go on and on how its a not profit kill me laughing. Who needs to be a share holder making profit when you pay yourself like a CEO of a decent size business.

Qbert · 07-18-2010, 05:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by will76

Shouldn't it be public record how much the people who work for "non profits" make?

All that info should be listed on their tax returns, which are indeed public record. Quite often you can download such documents from an organization's web site. I don't find such a link on the ASACP site, but if you submit a request they're required to provide the documents.

spazlabz · 07-18-2010, 08:07 PM

yeah, I am going to bump this thread in hopes some answers are forthcoming

Nikki_Licks · 07-19-2010, 05:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by spazlabz

yeah, I am going to bump this thread in hopes some answers are forthcoming

Here's another early morning bump!

Nikki_Licks · 07-19-2010, 05:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Qbert

All that info should be listed on their tax returns, which are indeed public record. Quite often you can download such documents from an organization's web site. I don't find such a link on the ASACP site, but if you submit a request they're required to provide the documents.

Thanks for the information, I wasn't aware of this.

raven1083 · 07-19-2010, 05:38 AM

quite interesting

Nikki_Licks · 07-19-2010, 11:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GonZo

Man I thought we were being tough with Alec here but Diane Duke is laying the smack down to Stuart in that other thread.

Fri, Jul 16, 01:38 pm
I wanted to respond to a few of the comments posted earlier.

Dave and Tom did not lie. Deals were proposed to FSC and others in 2004.
It's a fact and there are NUMEROUS individuals who will attest to that.

Stuart also told me, prior to my trip to Brussels during a conversation in
which he was trying to gain FSC support, that part of that $10 going to
support "charities" could go to support FSC's programs. He also told me that
he would offer whatever "comfort" we needed. As you can imagine, that
suggestion fell flat with FSC.

Stuart tells mainstream media that the $10 of the $60 will go to protect
children. He tells the adult industry that the $10 will go to protect the
adult industry. Stuart, we don't have any children in the adult industry so
which is it?

You want Reader's Digest?

.XXX will harm the adult entertainment industry through:
* Probable .XXX mandate that will facilitate censorship and attacks from
anti-industry extremists
* Reduction of industry profits as ICM purports to make $200 million
ANNUALLY off of the industry through its existing online market. We know
that if companies register they are doing so defensively thus throwing
dollars down the drain to protect the brand and traffic they already enjoy.
* Damaging the reputation of the adult industry and its .com presence by
marking the industry and those entities that are not .XXX as irresponsible.

ICM/Stuart is misleading ICANN and the Adult Industry about:
* Support he has from the industry
* Promises and deals that have been "suggested"
* The IFFOR Board its make-up and mission
* That the application is a "Done Deal* it is NOT!!!!!

The next steps in the process will be to block the application acceptance.
There are two avenues for doing that.
1. To show that their application is no longer valid today
2. To support GAC in its opposition to the .XXX sTLD

If you are interested in GAC's position on .XXX you can read their last two
statements on the subject at the links below:

http://www.icann.org/en/committees/g...ue-28mar06.pdf
http://www.icann.org/correspondence/...rf-02feb07.pdf

Good to see others with some morals

Bump

GonZo · 07-19-2010, 12:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nikki_Licks

Good to see others with some morals

Bump

Looks like Diane Duke is a little more open with communication than Joan.
I guess now you can see why I would asked Alec the orignal question.

Sly · 07-19-2010, 12:53 PM

What I've learned from this thread is that I need to start a NPO.

bdjerk · 07-19-2010, 01:00 PM

xbiz needs this money. the new space doesn't support their revenue model of ad sales. no one has or wants to spend money on ad sales to affiliates anymore. there's no need for them.

Nikki_Licks · 07-20-2010, 06:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GonZo

Looks like Diane Duke is a little more open with communication than Joan.
I guess now you can see why I would asked Alec the orignal question.

It seems as though Joan is no better than Helmy when it comes to defending their position of selling everyone's ass and this industry down the river.
And their silence speaks volumes......on that note, I am finished with the ASACP.

LAJ · 07-20-2010, 09:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Qbert

All that info should be listed on their tax returns, which are indeed public record. Quite often you can download such documents from an organization's web site. I don't find such a link on the ASACP site, but if you submit a request they're required to provide the documents.

Is anyone doing this?

TSGlider · 07-20-2010, 10:02 AM

Are there really people out there who think the ASACP is running around with bags of money?

MaDalton · 07-20-2010, 03:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GonZo

Maybe this sheds some light on the entire debate and some of Mike Souths comments

http://forum.icann.org/lists/stld-rfp-xxx/msg00061.html

<<< Chronological Index >>> <<< Thread Index
ICM

To: stld-rfp-xxx@xxxxxxxxx
Subject: ICM
From: Joanasacp@xxxxxxx
Date: Mon, 17 May 2004 03:52:05 -0400
ASACP (asacp.org) is the organization that helps the adult site industry
make a difference in the battle against child pornography. ASACP recognizes
sexual child abuse as a heinous crime committed against children. As a major
deterrent to such abuse, ASACP was formed in 1996 and is dedicated to
eliminating child pornography from the Internet. ASACP also provides a
self-regulatory vehicle for its membership through a Code of Ethics that
promotes the protection of children through responsible, professional
business practices. Over 4,700 adult sites have joined our cause in raising
awareness about this subject.

ASACP investigates and assists the F.B.I. and the National Center for
Missing and Exploited Children (NCMEC) in enforcing anti-child pornography
laws against thousands of child pornography sites. To date, ASACP has
received and reviewed over 100,000 reports of suspect child pornography, of
which more than 25,000 valid child pornography sites have been reported to
the F.B.I and NCMEC.

ASACP has been in negotiations with the International Foundation for Online
Responsibility (IFFOR) and ICM for it to serve as a hotline for reviewing
reports of suspected child pornography and to carry out the secondary
monitoring of .xxx sites for child pornography.

I applaud IFFOR and ICM Registry's initiative to integrate tools and
technology of finding and reporting child pornography websites into their
proposed registry application to the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names
and Numbers (ICANN).

I also support the online adult industry developing their own credible
business practices in conjunction with other impacted stakeholders and
support the IFFOR initiative to create a line of communication between the
adult industry and the global community.

Sincerely,

Joan Irvine
Executive Director
ASACP

i have not read every post but this one somehow raised an eyebrow...

selena · 07-20-2010, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by will76

Shouldn't it be public record how much the people who work for "non profits" make?

Are they a non profit? I didn't see anything alluding to them having that IRS status on their website.

Edit, I stand corrected. According to the site:

ASACP is a non-profit 501(c)(4) Social Welfare Organization

selena · 07-20-2010, 04:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LAJ

Is anyone doing this?

I found some of their returns online. The most recent one that I found is 2007.

kristin · 07-20-2010, 04:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sly

What I've learned from this thread is that I need to start a NPO.

I'll organize the golf tourney!

Nikki_Licks · 07-20-2010, 04:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kristin

I'll organize the golf tourney!

Any chance of getting on as a caddy....

Nikki_Licks · 07-20-2010, 06:34 PM

It seems Diane is still working to get this stopped and needs your help!!!....... found this to be of some importance. I posted this in davecummings thread too ;)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diane
Hi Folks,
We need your help. I have been doing a number of interviews and some interview panels as the opposition to Lawley and his lawyers. Lawley keeps talking about the number of pre-registrations ICM has for the .XXX sTLD. He is stating the number as a show of support for .XXX. We know that these registrations are defensive registrations to protect Brand and traffic.

If you have pre-registered and you did so defensively, would you send an email to ICANN care of my email address stating that you pre-registered to protect your Brand and traffic and in your own words what you think of ICM's .XXX sTLD. Please include the domain names registered. I will keep these confidential just using them to take to ICANN to show that our industry DOES NOT WANT Lawley's .XXX sTLD!

If you have not pre-registered, please send ICANN an email care of my email address stating in your own words what you think of ICM's .XXX sTLD. Including the name of your company would be helpful.

I will gather this information and use it to counter Lawley's claims of support from the adult entertainment industry.

My email address is:
[email protected]

THANKS!!!!!
Diane

baddog · 07-20-2010, 07:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nikki_Licks

It seems Diane is still working to get this stopped and needs your help!!!....... found this to be of some importance. I posted this in davecummings thread too ;)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diane
Hi Folks,
We need your help. I have been doing a number of interviews and some interview panels as the opposition to Lawley and his lawyers. Lawley keeps talking about the number of pre-registrations ICM has for the .XXX sTLD. He is stating the number as a show of support for .XXX. We know that these registrations are defensive registrations to protect Brand and traffic.

If you have pre-registered and you did so defensively, would you send an email to ICANN care of my email address stating that you pre-registered to protect your Brand and traffic and in your own words what you think of ICM's .XXX sTLD. Please include the domain names registered. I will keep these confidential just using them to take to ICANN to show that our industry DOES NOT WANT Lawley's .XXX sTLD!

If you have not pre-registered, please send ICANN an email care of my email address stating in your own words what you think of ICM's .XXX sTLD. Including the name of your company would be helpful.

I will gather this information and use it to counter Lawley's claims of support from the adult entertainment industry.

My email address is:
[email protected]

THANKS!!!!!
Diane

This needs to be seen. So, bump.

GonZo · 07-20-2010, 11:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MaDalton

i have not read every post but this one somehow raised an eyebrow...

The internet is forever.

Nikki_Licks · 07-21-2010, 06:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by selena

I found some of their returns online. The most recent one that I found is 2007.

I have 2008 ;)

LAJ · 07-21-2010, 11:48 AM

So, are they running around with bags of money? LOL ;)

selena · 07-21-2010, 12:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nikki_Licks

I have 2008 ;)

I found that one a few minutes after I had posted. The Form 1023 would give clearer info on who gets what, I think.

GonZo · 07-21-2010, 02:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LAJ

So, are they running around with bags of money? LOL ;)

The bags of money have stopped washing up on the shore.... ask Ron.

TBS_Andreas · 07-22-2010, 01:06 AM

Interesting thread so far

Nikki_Licks · 07-22-2010, 05:07 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by LAJ

So, are they running around with bags of money? LOL ;)

Well, they aren't broke from what I saw.

Nikki_Licks · 07-22-2010, 05:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by GonZo

The bags of money have stopped washing up on the shore.... ask Ron.

The money will be rolling in if .xxx is pushed through with lies from lawley and the ASACP willing to do almost anything to get their hands on it ;)

Truly pathetic individuals

GonZo · 07-22-2010, 07:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TBS_Andreas

Interesting thread so far

What do you find interesting?

Doctor T · 07-22-2010, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nikki_Licks

It seems Diane is still working to get this stopped and needs your help!!!....... found this to be of some importance. I posted this in davecummings thread too ;)

Quote:
Originally Posted by Diane
Hi Folks,
We need your help. I have been doing a number of interviews and some interview panels as the opposition to Lawley and his lawyers. Lawley keeps talking about the number of pre-registrations ICM has for the .XXX sTLD. He is stating the number as a show of support for .XXX. We know that these registrations are defensive registrations to protect Brand and traffic.

If you have pre-registered and you did so defensively, would you send an email to ICANN care of my email address stating that you pre-registered to protect your Brand and traffic and in your own words what you think of ICM's .XXX sTLD. Please include the domain names registered. I will keep these confidential just using them to take to ICANN to show that our industry DOES NOT WANT Lawley's .XXX sTLD!

If you have not pre-registered, please send ICANN an email care of my email address stating in your own words what you think of ICM's .XXX sTLD. Including the name of your company would be helpful.

I will gather this information and use it to counter Lawley's claims of support from the adult entertainment industry.

My email address is:
[email protected]

THANKS!!!!!
Diane

Have an afternoon bump for that.

bdjerk · 07-22-2010, 02:55 PM

you all better keep an eye on that shitface xxx lawley loser in florida or he will come back to icann with "community support"

i think everyone should make sure he gets kicked out of the hotel if he sets foot there.

goodsites · 07-22-2010, 03:21 PM

I'm still waiting for my $18.34 check for the 450,000 hits i sent to my Helmy turnkey store back in 1999 or so? Is that about done processing yet?

goodsites · 07-22-2010, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doctor T

Have an afternoon bump for that.

No the .xxx doesnt scare me at all really, yes it's an obvious money grab, with the opening of relaxed tld restrictions, i think fighting .xxx is not the appropriate defense.. the answer is simply.. just add eight more of your own TLD's with no law bullshit applied to them to compete :D

for example
.porn
.anal
.gay
.les
.sex
.date
.cam
.nkd

for the smart one to actually do this.. please cut me a huge check for this idea that will send .xxx packing

07-16-2010, 04:22 PM	#151
JFK FUBAR the ORIGINATOR Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: FUBARLAND Posts: 67,382	One Fitty..................threads gone South __________________ FUBAR Webmasters - The FUBAR Times - FUBAR Webmasters Mobile - FUBARTV.XXX For promo opps contact jfk at fubarwebmasters dot com

07-16-2010, 05:25 PM	#154
NinjaSteve Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2003 Posts: 11,089	Sounds like somebody needs to take a chill pill __________________ ...

07-19-2010, 05:38 AM	#173
raven1083 Confirmed User Join Date: Jul 2007 Posts: 7,687	quite interesting __________________ Femdom Stories \| Bound BBW Blog and Videos \|Bondage Sex Videos and Pictures Hardcore Japanese Bondage \| BDSM Movies And Galleries Mistress Cuckold CBT

07-19-2010, 12:53 PM	#176
Sly Let's do some business! Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 31,289	What I've learned from this thread is that I need to start a NPO. __________________ Vacares - Web Hosting, Domains, O365, Security & More - Paxum and BTC Accepted Wanted: CCBill pay sites for sale

07-19-2010, 01:00 PM	#177
bdjerk Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 219	xbiz needs this money. the new space doesn't support their revenue model of ad sales. no one has or wants to spend money on ad sales to affiliates anymore. there's no need for them. __________________ bdjerk inc.

07-17-2010, 08:29 AM	#163
GonZo Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: Atlanta,Ga. Posts: 3,180	Man I thought we were being tough with Alec here but Diane Duke is laying the smack down to Stuart in that other thread. Fri, Jul 16, 01:38 pm I wanted to respond to a few of the comments posted earlier. Dave and Tom did not lie. Deals were proposed to FSC and others in 2004. It's a fact and there are NUMEROUS individuals who will attest to that. Stuart also told me, prior to my trip to Brussels during a conversation in which he was trying to gain FSC support, that part of that $10 going to support "charities" could go to support FSC's programs. He also told me that he would offer whatever "comfort" we needed. As you can imagine, that suggestion fell flat with FSC. Stuart tells mainstream media that the $10 of the $60 will go to protect children. He tells the adult industry that the $10 will go to protect the adult industry. Stuart, we don't have any children in the adult industry so which is it? You want Reader's Digest? .XXX will harm the adult entertainment industry through: * Probable .XXX mandate that will facilitate censorship and attacks from anti-industry extremists * Reduction of industry profits as ICM purports to make $200 million ANNUALLY off of the industry through its existing online market. We know that if companies register they are doing so defensively thus throwing dollars down the drain to protect the brand and traffic they already enjoy. * Damaging the reputation of the adult industry and its .com presence by marking the industry and those entities that are not .XXX as irresponsible. ICM/Stuart is misleading ICANN and the Adult Industry about: * Support he has from the industry * Promises and deals that have been "suggested" * The IFFOR Board its make-up and mission * That the application is a "Done Deal* it is NOT!!!!! The next steps in the process will be to block the application acceptance. There are two avenues for doing that. 1. To show that their application is no longer valid today 2. To support GAC in its opposition to the .XXX sTLD If you are interested in GAC's position on .XXX you can read their last two statements on the subject at the links below: http://www.icann.org/en/committees/g...ue-28mar06.pdf http://www.icann.org/correspondence/...rf-02feb07.pdf

07-18-2010, 08:07 PM	#170
spazlabz Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Kentucky Posts: 6,548	yeah, I am going to bump this thread in hopes some answers are forthcoming

07-20-2010, 10:02 AM	#180
TSGlider Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 673	Are there really people out there who think the ASACP is running around with bags of money? __________________ BaDoink skype: tsglider

07-20-2010, 06:34 PM	#186
Nikki_Licks Confirmed User Join Date: May 2005 Location: Behind The Lens Posts: 6,323	It seems Diane is still working to get this stopped and needs your help!!!....... found this to be of some importance. I posted this in davecummings thread too ;) Quote: Originally Posted by Diane Hi Folks, We need your help. I have been doing a number of interviews and some interview panels as the opposition to Lawley and his lawyers. Lawley keeps talking about the number of pre-registrations ICM has for the .XXX sTLD. He is stating the number as a show of support for .XXX. We know that these registrations are defensive registrations to protect Brand and traffic. If you have pre-registered and you did so defensively, would you send an email to ICANN care of my email address stating that you pre-registered to protect your Brand and traffic and in your own words what you think of ICM's .XXX sTLD. Please include the domain names registered. I will keep these confidential just using them to take to ICANN to show that our industry DOES NOT WANT Lawley's .XXX sTLD! If you have not pre-registered, please send ICANN an email care of my email address stating in your own words what you think of ICM's .XXX sTLD. Including the name of your company would be helpful. I will gather this information and use it to counter Lawley's claims of support from the adult entertainment industry. My email address is: [email protected] THANKS!!!!! Diane __________________ Amateur Content ICQ: 292 356 077

07-21-2010, 11:48 AM	#190
LAJ Gingerific Industry Role: Join Date: Jun 2001 Location: Austin Posts: 5,568	So, are they running around with bags of money? LOL ;) __________________ YNOT.com - The original industry resource email jay at ynot dot com or skype LAJConsulting

07-22-2010, 01:06 AM	#193
TBS_Andreas Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2009 Posts: 1,163	Interesting thread so far __________________ * 16-19 September 2024, ViennaHouse Diplomat Hotel & Conference Center, Prague, Czech Republic

07-22-2010, 02:55 PM	#198
bdjerk Confirmed User Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 219	you all better keep an eye on that shitface xxx lawley loser in florida or he will come back to icann with "community support" i think everyone should make sure he gets kicked out of the hotel if he sets foot there. __________________ bdjerk inc.

07-22-2010, 03:21 PM	#199
goodsites Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2010 Location: Over the rainbows Posts: 538	I'm still waiting for my $18.34 check for the 450,000 hits i sent to my Helmy turnkey store back in 1999 or so? Is that about done processing yet?