|
| quote: | Originally posted by Arbiter
The real worry is over-inclusive blocking, not under-inclusive blocking. In the past, censorware has blocked sites from as widely ranged topics as gay rights and youth soccer leagues, and there was substantial evidence suggesting that at least some sites were blocked for political views expressed therein. The real issue is: who decides what's blocked, and how do they decide it? To whom are they responsible? What procedures exist for sites to challenge their categorization as "pornographic"? |
These are good questions, Juanita. It's just that, as a guy, I tend to think of breasts first, because this is what the internet was originally made for (for breasts and science, that is... but we only make sparkly things with science in order to impress you girls).
I'm not sure this would become much of a problem in the long run, at least in the UK where Christianity is becoming less and less influential. It's just a matter of time until the atheist brigade comes out and slags the Christian conservatives off for this madness.
| quote: | Originally posted by Arbiter
As a practical matter, this kind of thing could wind up censoring a lot more than just porn. |
But it's for the children's sake! You can't expose them to gayness, lest they turn gay themselves! And you can't expose them to youth soccer leagues, otherwise they'll turn into chavs!
Is this what you want them to be? Gay chavs!? If that ever happens, Burberry will overthrow the Monarchy!
___________________
Indiana Clones Upcoming Sets
[ I May Upload Something Someday ]
|