GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum - Will ICANN Ignore/Burden This Industry If....

GoFuckYourself.com - Adult Webmaster Forum (https://gfy.com/index.php)

- Fucking Around & Business Discussion (https://gfy.com/forumdisplay.php?f=26)

- - Will ICANN Ignore/Burden This Industry If.... (https://gfy.com/showthread.php?t=961722)

davecummings

04-03-2010 09:48 AM

Will ICANN Ignore/Burden This Industry If....

we don't start posting our opposition to Mr Lawley's ICM pending matter activating .xxx?

I see far too few opposing comments from TRUE stake-holder (US folks!) at the ICANN public comments board, something which might possibly/FALSELY connote to ICANN that the vast majority of us welcome .xxx--YUK!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Please go to http://www.icann.org/en/public-comme...options-report and scroll to the bottom and click on the link to "Add a Comment"; after submitting, ICANN will later send you an email to confirm that you indeed posted it; and once you reply back confirming it, your comment will post and be considered by ICANN.

Because there are so many right-wing religious postings, and what seems like some ICM supporters, please identify yourself in your posting/comments as being an actual and true stake-holders in the matter.

Don't put it off, just do it. It's easy!

If we don't muster our opposition, we might find a stake in our hearts, wallets, and businesses?

u-Bob

04-03-2010 09:49 AM

already mailed.

bump bump

davecummings

04-03-2010 10:21 AM

Thanks, u-Bob; I hope everyone else will also see the need to prioritize this:-)

baddog

04-03-2010 10:24 AM

It is my understanding that every time someone registers a domain they have to "agree" to the .xxx cause, which is why he has 1,000's of letters of support.

SpongeBub

04-03-2010 11:57 AM

Does it really matter if it is created? It won't be mandatory, so just don't register anything there and the guy will go out of business.

woj	04-03-2010 12:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SpongeBub (Post 17003604)

Does it really matter if it is created? It won't be mandatory, so just don't register anything there and the guy will go out of business.

creation of it is probably just phase 1 of his whole plan... phase 2 is probably pressuring politicians to make .xxx mandatory for adult content...:2 cents:

u-Bob

04-03-2010 02:00 PM

back to the top.

fatfoo

04-03-2010 02:05 PM

.xxx

Not all people welcome it. Good luck.

DamnGoodRatio

04-03-2010 02:17 PM

If they make it mandatory who gets preference? The guy that owns abcxyz.com or the guy that owns abcxyz.net, etc. interesting thought ???

tony286

04-03-2010 04:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by woj (Post 17003633)

creation of it is probably just phase 1 of his whole plan... phase 2 is probably pressuring politicians to make .xxx mandatory for adult content...:2 cents:

I would bet on that one. That happens he can charge even more because it would be the gateway into adult online.

u-Bob

04-03-2010 04:59 PM

http://www.gofuckyourself.com/showthread.php?t=961772

HandballJim

04-03-2010 06:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by woj (Post 17003633)

creation of it is probably just phase 1 of his whole plan... phase 2 is probably pressuring politicians to make .xxx mandatory for adult content...:2 cents:

I doubt that since all current adult domains would be dropped worldwide .com, .net, .org, .info, .biz....you get the message.

This would mean that the registers would lose millions...since only the .xxx would be allowed to use for adult...which means the rest of the extensions are worthless. Sex.com would be now be worthless.

But the scenario that would happen is that Americans would get fined for using other extensions....but the rest of the world would get away with promoting porn anyway they like. The internet is worldwide and it seems only Americans get in hot water and harassed regarding the internet. Meanwhile 99% of internet crime is committed overseas on Americans. :321GFY

JFK	04-03-2010 08:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by woj (Post 17003633)

creation of it is probably just phase 1 of his whole plan... phase 2 is probably pressuring politicians to make .xxx mandatory for adult content...:2 cents:

wouldnt surprise me a bit:2 cents:

ThumbLord

04-04-2010 06:32 AM

get rid of it, what Dave said, period.

davecummings

04-04-2010 02:11 PM

It's Important!

Let's get this back to the top!

u-Bob

04-04-2010 03:01 PM

bump !

davecummings

04-05-2010 09:41 AM

Here's a copy/paste of what I sent to ICANN:

__________________________________________________ ____

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Adult Industry Stake-Holder STRONGLY AGAINST .xxx
To: <icm-options-report@xxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Adult Industry Stake-Holder STRONGLY AGAINST .xxx
From: <dave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 2 Apr 2010 23:19:09 -0700

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I am a Hall of Fame performer, a producer and director, and a U.S. Army Lt
Col (ret) with over 15 years in the Adult Industry. The HUGE majority of
stake-holders I know in the Adult Entertainment Industry are totally against
.xxx. Please do NOT be fooled into thinking that we TRUE stake-holders are
anything other than ABSOLUTELY against .xxx.

Dave Cummings
http://search.yahoo.com/search?p=dav...s&ei=UTF-8&fr=
yfp-t-701

__________________________________________________ ________

davecummings

04-06-2010 04:44 PM

Why aren't very many forum readers posting their opposition to .xxx???????????

davecummings

04-07-2010 03:37 PM

IMO, in it's initial decision to allow .xxx, ICANN might have possibly relied upon flawed/incorrect/biased info submitted to them by the proposing agency, namely concerning the REAL-and-Correct-and-Verifiable number of actual .xxx pre-registrations along with proof that the pre-registrations were actually REAL stake-holders in the Adult Entertainment Industry; ICANN, assumedly, relied on that possibly flawed proposal when they ruled on the .xxx INITIAL proposal/request.

IMO, the subsequent Lisbon disapproval of the proposal allowed some of the egg (i.e., ICANN not doing a 100% verification of alleged stake-holder "support") to be washed off of ICANN's face.

Now is the time for ICANN to decide to go back to step one, namely the initial proposal, and insist on actual and objective proof to back up their contention of Adult Industry stake-holder support for .xxx.

Perhaps this will give ICANN an "out" to get this matter thoroughly re-looked-at before any more voting on the present proposal??????

Comments anyone????

WalkerTR

04-07-2010 04:21 PM

. . . . . . . . . . . bump

KillerK

04-07-2010 04:46 PM

I support this now, so that Helmy can get rich.

WalkerTR

04-08-2010 05:38 AM

. . . . . . . . . . . bump

Matt 26z

04-08-2010 06:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by woj (Post 17003633)

creation of it is probably just phase 1 of his whole plan... phase 2 is probably pressuring politicians to make .xxx mandatory for adult content...:2 cents:

You win the prize.

For what they have invested into this, I can't see how they will be happy just selling them at $70 a pop to a relatively small number of webmasters.

Take a look at the bottom 5 TLDs:

.ASIA 211,044
.TRAVEL 42,930
.PRO 38,756
.AERO 16,397
.COOP 5,950

I don't see .xxx reaching .pro status, which would make .xxx a failure unless they can secretly press for mandatory use.

pornguy

04-08-2010 06:11 AM

Mailed them the other day. Thanks for posting,

mopek1

04-08-2010 06:34 AM

If .XXX was mandatory then ....

- All adult domains will have to be dropped and registrars would lose millions.
- The domain name market would come crashing down - for adult - and people who just spent $200k on bigboobs.com or whatever are out all of their money.
- Hosting companies would lose a huge chunk of business and some would move offshore.
- All porn paysites would lose their SE positions that had been there for years.
- All affiliates would lose thousands of indexed pages in the serps that took time and $$$ to build.

It would be like starting from scratch for everyone.

Is that really likely?

u-Bob

04-08-2010 06:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mopek1 (Post 17016124)

That's exactly what we are trying to prevent, so pls take 2 minutes of your time to mail ICANN.

mopek1

04-08-2010 06:41 AM

already did ...

Klen	04-08-2010 06:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mopek1 (Post 17016124)

Actually to be correct,se positions wont be lost since that can be fixed with 301 redirection.Unless you wont have ability to do 301 redirection.

u-Bob

04-08-2010 07:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by KlenTelaris (Post 17016155)

Actually to be correct,se positions wont be lost since that can be fixed with 301 redirection.Unless you wont have ability to do 301 redirection.

redirecting a .com to a site with adult content would be considered "using the .com for adult purposes"....

Quentin

04-08-2010 09:28 AM

Quote:

The dissenting opinion of the Panel?s Declaration concluded that ICM never satisfied the sponsorship requirements and criteria for a sponsored TLD, and that the ICANN Board denied ICM?s application for the .XXX sTLD "on the merits in an open and transparent forum." The Board could vote to adopt the dissenting opinion of the Panel?s Declaration on the basis that the Board thinks that the Panel?s majority opinion was wrong and that the Board?s conduct was consistent with ICANN?s Bylaws and Articles of Incorporation.

So, instead of merely stating that you are a stakeholder and expressing opposition to the .XXX concept, if you are against .XXX being established, I think the thing to do is to restate the IRP's dissenting position that the ICM never satisfied the sponsorship requirements, and then state that the requirement ICM specifically failed to satisfy was demonstrating that they had the support of the "sponsoring community."

At that point in your comments, you can state your case against .XXX (or simply state that you don't want/support it).

That's the approach I'm taking, at least, because I think that unless you invoke the IRP decision specifically, and endorse the notion of adopting the IRP dissenting member's position, ICANN might just skip right over your feedback as irrelevant. :2 cents:

davecummings

04-08-2010 09:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quentin (Post 17016485)

My understanding is that the current public comment period is designed for people to comment on what ICANN should do with regard to the Independent Review Panel's (or IRP, as it is abbreviated in many of the ICANN docs) decision that ICANN had violated its own protocols in rejecting ICM's application, and not necessarily to comment on ICM's .XXX concept/proposal as a whole.

I'm working on my comments now, and the approach I'm taking is to endorse "Option 3," the option for ICANN to adopt the findings of the dissent in the IRP decision.

Here's how that option reads in pertinent part in the ICANN document entitled "ICANN Options Following the IRP Declaration on ICM?s .XXX Application."

So, instead of merely stating that you are a stakeholder and expressing opposition to the .XXX concept, if you are against .XXX being established, I think the thing to do is to restate the IRP's dissenting position that the ICM never satisfied the sponsorship requirements, and then state that the requirement ICM specifically failed to satisfy was demonstrating that they had the support of the "sponsoring community."

At that point in your comments, you can state your case against .XXX (or simply state that you don't want/support it).

That's the approach I'm taking, at least, because I think that unless you invoke the IRP decision specifically, and endorse the notion of adopting the IRP dissenting member's position, ICANN might just skip right over your feedback as irrelevant. :2 cents:

Valuable info--thanks:-)

davecummings

04-08-2010 01:45 PM

This is a bump -- some important info has been posted above:-)

Quentin

04-08-2010 02:16 PM

Here's what I submitted:

Quote:

To Whom It May Concern:

It is my opinion that ICANN should adopt the findings of the dissenting opinion of the Independent Review Panel?s declaration, which held that ICM never satisfied the sponsorship requirements and criteria for a sponsored TLD. Specifically, I believe ICM never demonstrated that it has the support of the prospective sponsoring community for its proposal.

As a stakeholder in the relevant sponsoring community for the proposed .XXX sTLD, I wholeheartedly oppose the establishment of this new TLD, and I believe that the vast majority of stakeholders in our community are similarly inclined. The evidence of support presented by ICM is outweighed by the stated opposition to the sTLD, and a significant amount of the evidence of support presented by ICM is now quite old, and may include individuals who have actually reversed their position in the months and years since they originally stated support for the TLD.

At the very least, I believe ICANN has a responsibility to the sponsoring community at issue here to consider ICM?s application de novo, given the substantive questions that exist as to the amount, nature and character of the sponsoring community support ICM has asserted that its proposal enjoys.

My own opposition to ICM?s proposal stems in part from the paucity of detail currently available about how the sTLD would be operated by its proposed governing body, IFFOR. Among other defects, the information that has been provided to the sponsoring community thus far concerning the eventual ?best practices? and rules of conduct for .XXX sites is woefully inadequate in detail. For example, there has been no specific information provided as to what manner of content will or will not be deemed acceptable by IFFOR, a body whose own nature and structure remain something of a mystery to this point.

Given the dearth of reliable information about the eventual nature of the .XXX-related policies and protocols, I can find no rational basis to support the establishment of this sTLD. Asking for me to support such an ill-defined proposal is akin to asking for me to support a political candidate who has not declared party affiliation, or published any meaningful policy platform whatsoever.

In my opinion, offering one?s support in this environment of imposed ignorance is a deeply irresponsible act, and I question whether my peers in the adult industry who have expressed support for this proposal have fully considered the potential ramifications, or even earnestly questioned what precisely it is that they have expressed support for.

For this reason, and for far too many additional reasons to address in a brief correspondence, I respectfully suggest that ICANN adopt the position of the IRP dissent, and ultimately either reject ICM?s application, or at a minimum, require that ICM provide further documentation of community support for its proposal.

Thank you and best regards,
Quentin Boyer
Director of Public Relations
PinkVisual.com/TopBucks.com

davecummings

04-08-2010 09:37 PM

Thanks, Quentin ---You DA Man!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

davecummings

04-09-2010 08:39 AM

This needs a bump so that forum readers might read it and become energized to submit their comments to ICANN -- silence by us could be suicide!

seeandsee

04-09-2010 08:44 AM

they will do it at the end, fucking crocks

davecummings

04-09-2010 12:41 PM

(Final Friday) bump!

davecummings

04-11-2010 07:34 PM

Final Sunday, 4/11/10 bump for an important matter concerning the future of this Industry!!

D Ghost

04-11-2010 08:55 PM

I voiced my opinion, bump and say NO to .XXX tld.

Nikki_Licks

05-04-2010 03:10 PM

Bump to the top for a good cause....

Get your comments in ;)

seeric

05-04-2010 03:13 PM

i have submitted my comments.

cashcows

05-04-2010 03:16 PM

I came here to post this exact thread I just sent my letter I own over 1000 adult domains I'd be out of business if I had to pay $60 for each one right now as many are not developed yet.

This is the first step in the process of banning the adult industry online, while making these people (the ones proposing this) rich and putting us all out of business at the same time.

spacedog

05-04-2010 03:47 PM

I doubt those comments of support are from anyone in this industry.

Isn't Lawley that scumbag that showed up at an Xbiz conference and showed nothing but contempt and loathe for this industry? Is he that same slimeball that said he will use .xxx to clean up "this filthy little industry"?

zabijaq

05-04-2010 03:48 PM

read panelists "smart" UDRP decisions and don't expect anything racional from ICANN (WECANN fuck you all over).

TheDoc

05-04-2010 04:17 PM

It's a very, rather extreme reach to think that the Gov would ever attempt to force us to .xxx and legitimize our Industry giving us permission to create Porn. It's not really an "if" they would try it, it's straight up technically impossible and wouldn't happen.

I have a feeling this is more about who owns it and is making money from it vs. what it actually means if anything.

Nikki_Licks

05-05-2010 09:51 AM

Back to the top!!!

All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:09 PM.