.xxx is a stupid idea

["Hog Entertainment" <hogentertainment@xxxxxxxxx>]

Nobody wants .xxx --it's a truly stupid proposal.

Christian and religious folk don't want it, and the online pornographers
don't want it. Nobody wants it.

It is an unconstitutional restriction of free speech and it will cause
mountains of litigation.

Before you establish it, consider the impossible administration:

Who decides what sites have to use it? Are staff needed to review each of
the millions of sites on the web? How about sex education? Is that adult
content? Vaudville shows? R-rated content? A site about girls in bikinis,
does that qualify? How about the text of Lady Chatterly's Lover?
Illustrated? Are 16th century nude oil paintings considered adult content?
Which pictures of Britney Spears qualify?

What if you have no images, only text, is that porn? What if you have no
adult text and no images, but hyperlinks to other pages that may have adult
content?

Consider all of the absolutely absurd consequences before you do this!

This proposal is completely unworkable.

It's unconstitutional.

It's ridiculous.

Sincerely,
Webmaster

http://milf.org
http://sextoys.org
http://naughtyrentals.com
http://naughtywarehouse.com
http://naughtypayperview.com
http://xxxpasswordfreaks.com