Offered $200,000 for adult names by dnpowerful..

[DomainNameFactory]

Set your clock. The pendulum will swing.

yea...what he said!

 

[President Gringo]

so how do you think they will regulate this industry? Heavy fines? Strict code of practice? Total ban?

 

[DomainNameFactory]

Strict code of practice is my vote

 

[DnPowerful]

Originally posted by President Gringo
so how do you think they will regulate this industry? Heavy fines? Strict code of practice? Total ban?

Hard to know, but given my full-time subscription to chaos theory, I think that feeble attempts to restrict adult content on the Web will mostly fail, and then things will get nasty and hysterical and they'll start going after ISP's and parties with differing degrees of "guilt".

When Larry Flynt, resident greaseball and a man mostly dedicated to pushing boundries, starts telling the industry to cool it, you know something's in the wind.

The mere fact that a single state is now trying to legislate an .xxx ghetto for porn means it's out there, and people are talking about it. Those in the adult biz who keep chuckling and saying "Hey, we'll just move ownership offshore and keep doing what we're doing" are kidding themselves. The current crises with Visa forcing adult owners to pony up $1500 up front, and having U.S. ownership of the business means that it's forseeable that Visa will not allow companies not owned in America to bill through Visa America.

PayPal as an alterative solution? Gone. eBay just stopped that.

It just goes on and on.

Things are uncertain. Of course porn will come out ahead. But will that pricey adult .com be worth 2-5 years revenue from this day forth?

Who knows. The sun might be setting on that certainty.

 

[DomainNameFactory]

I hope the .xxx mandate goes through...I have:

MILF.xxx
DIVAS.xxx
ROUGH.xxx
HARLOTS.xxx
HUMMERS.xxx
NYMPHOMANIACS.xxx

By far my best adult names

Although my site http://www.cumonus.com gets a few thousand people a day (AdultBouncer site), my membership had dropped. I had planned to use it to expose another adult site with a $39.99 membership fee (which would be all mine), but the exclusive content was too expensive.

 

[Fearless]

All porn sites should be mandated to move to www.huh.com.

 

[ReignDomain]

Originally posted by DnPowerful


I don't think it has anything to do with moral crusades or PC-ism. It has to do with the fact that young children are bombarded with explicit porn email and porn website traps all day long, despite the middling success of blocking software. Whatever your feelings about porn, this is just plain wrong, and I personally think pornographers *should* be spanked for it.

The concept that a 10 year old child should open his or her Hotmail address to find 100 pitches to "Cum all over my ****" is outrageous. The fact that this same child types in an innocent URL and is redirected to penetration hidden only by little starbursts is also outrageous.

Regulations and "strong measures" will make matter even worse. Cigarette tax hike has already produced enormous underground activity.

Misdirected (as always) regulations simply shift the public attention away from real problem (which in this case is irresponsible parenting ), and concentrate it on "villains of the day". For what? For political gains only.

"Protect us from tobacco! Protect us from porn! Protect us from making our own decisions! Regulate our lifes so we wouldn't have to think for themselves! "

Well, there are many bad and ugly things in this world. And parents have the responsibility to protect and educate. Without relying on government.

 

[NameBox]

Originally posted by gregr
All porn sites should be mandated to move to www.huh.com.

Would that be the GregR & Crazy Joe Chang co-venture?

I sense another conspiracy ....

 

[NameBox]

Originally posted by ReignDomain


Regulations and "strong measures" will make matter even worse. Cigarette tax hike has already produced enormous underground activity.

Misdirected (as always) regulations simply shift the public attention away from real problem (which in this case is irresponsible parenting ), and concentrate it on "villains of the day". For what? For political gains only.

"Protect us from tobacco! Protect us from porn! Protect us from making our own decisions! Regulate our lifes so we wouldn't have to think for themselves! "

Well, there are many bad and ugly things in this world. And parents have the responsibility to protect and educate. Without relying on government.

I agree with our about a parent's reponsibilities. However, DnP is correct in stating the the industry is shooting itself in the head by allowing scumbags to spam explicit content indiscriminitely.

You now anything about Spam Filtering? Few solutions are effective, so a typical Hotmail, etc., user would have an inbox swarming with porn comeons.

How are you going to effectively protect someone from receiving an email touting 'barnyard sex" or incest, rape, etc. Revolting really.

As for tobacco, if PM, RJR et al, weren't pumping 400 + chemicals into their cigs to really kick start someone's addiction, all the while claiming that cigs really AREN'T addicitive and DON'T cause cancer, then maybe I'd agree with you. But a smoker's selfish self distruction affects society, through higher premiums and health care costs.

BTW, why should anyone have the right to blow smoke in my face, while I'm enjoying my sushi Kill yourself if you want if you want to suck back those cigs in self denial, until you get lung cancer and then sue the Tobacco companies for $$$ Billions for not STOPPING you from smoking all the while ...

Funny litigious culture in the USA I must say ... that and Charlton Heston ranting ... Guns don't Kill People, People Do ....

Gotta have limits somewhere ... I say the .xxx ghetto is good (failing that the global huh.com porn monopoly, as long as I can share in the profits with my good friend GregR .. )

 

[ReignDomain]

Originally posted by NameBox



I agree with our about a parent's reponsibilities. However, DnP is correct in stating the the industry is shooting itself in the head by allowing scumbags to spam explicit content indiscriminitely.

You now anything about Spam Filtering? Few solutions are effective, so a typical Hotmail, etc., user would have an inbox swarming with porn comeons.

How are you going to effectively protect someone from receiving an email touting 'barnyard sex" or incest, rape, etc. Revolting really.

As for tobacco, if PM, RJR et al, weren't pumping 400 + chemicals into their cigs to really kick start someone's addiction, all the while claiming that cigs really AREN'T addicitive and DON'T cause cancer, then maybe I'd agree with you. But a smoker's selfish self distruction affects society, through higher premiums and health care costs.

BTW, why should anyone have the right to blow smoke in my face, while I'm enjoying my sushi Kill yourself if you want if you want to suck back those cigs in self denial, until you get lung cancer and then sue the Tobacco companies for $$$ Billions for not STOPPING you from smoking all the while ...

Funny litigious culture in the USA I must say ... that and Charlton Heston ranting ... Guns don't Kill People, People Do ....

Gotta have limits somewhere ... I say the .xxx ghetto is good (failing that the global huh.com porn monopoly, as long as I can share in the profits with my good friend GregR .. )

Ok, so what do we do about drunk driving that kills thousands every year. Oh I know, we should ban beer.

 

[NameBox]

Originally posted by ReignDomain


Ok, so what do we do about drunk driving that kills thousands every year. Oh I know, we should ban beer.

Let's not get rash now ... ban beer ... no way!

You can pry my Pint of Guiness out of my Cold Dying Hand! (with credits to Chuck Heston).

No one is suggesting that Tobacco should be banned, only that its use is circumscribed by its damaging effects on others. You can't drive drunk after all .... so why should you be able to puff away in public, forcing others to inhale your toxins if they don't want to? Is that your Right? Not enshrined in the Constitution last time I checked (although the Right to Bear Arms certainly is ... but then again, it was 1783 or there abouts) ....

 

[Fearless]

I'm with NameBox on this one. I think cigarette smokers should be forced to live together far away from the rest of the population. Like a Leper colony. Then they can breathe their own second hand smoke and save money on cigarettes.

 

[ReignDomain]

Originally posted by NameBox


Let's not get rash now ... ban beer ... no way!

You can pry my Pint of Guiness out of my Cold Dying Hand! (with credits to Chuck Heston).

But drunk driving kills, and results in higher auto insurance premiums. Right? So beer should be banned.

But seriously. DN Powerful for example is so "touchie-feelie" about children being subjected to porn spam. Well, I guess he simply has a choice to stop being a part of "smut industry". How about that? Cause his grandstanding on this matter is kinda laughable.

 

[Kazam]

I also have a batch of names turning out $$$ I will take NO amount for it simply because it prints money and why should I sell up if I'll make (Whatever I was offered) + MORE in the future. The internet can only grow and so will my monthly paycheque. SELL, HELL NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :razz: Don't sell ebess.

 

[DnPowerful]

Originally posted by ReignDomain
[/B]

But seriously. DN Powerful for example is so "touchie-feelie" about children being subjected to porn spam. Well, I guess he simply has a choice to stop being a part of "smut industry". How about that? Cause his grandstanding on this matter is kinda laughable. [/B]

No, my best bet is to steer clear of guys like you who think it's 'touchie-feelie' to protect children from porn spam.

Since the caves of Lascaux, men and women have looked at sexual images of themselves. Pornography, in all of its forms, is an expression of life and sexuality. But clear gates should be put around what adults are exposed to, and what children are exposed to. Sexualizing young children is one of the most destructive things a society can do.

Only an idiot--or perhaps an infantile pornographer--would disagree with that.

Reign, which are you?

 

[Fearless]

Yeah, we discovered a new niche, caveman porn. And yes, cavemanporn.com is available.

 

[beatz]

"Protect us from tobacco! Protect us from porn! Protect us from making our own decisions! Regulate our lifes so we wouldn't have to think for themselves! "
Agree 100%.
As for restricting porn to some kind of .xxx extension - why yall think it would be only a matter of US law?
I mean i can reg .com names through a german(ICANN acc.) registrar and if i put up porn i guess in that case it would be a matter of german law rather than US law.
So actually i don't care for any american senators or stuff - it's not like the US owns the internet.

 

[DnPowerful]

Originally posted by BigFart


Protect us from Beatz

:laugh: I'll second that.

 

[ReignDomain]

DnPowerful, frankly all your ramblings remind me of "Yes, I did kill. But I simply obeyed the orders. Besides, everybody did it."

Want to change the world? Begin with yourself.

 

[ebess]

DnPowerful, frankly all your ramblings remind me of "Yes, I did kill. But I simply obeyed the orders. Besides, everybody did it."

Want to change the world? Begin with yourself.

That kind of talk is just ridiculous -- it makes NO distinction between people who promote legitmate porn in legitimate ways VS the scumbags who promote illegal things like child porn and bestiality, and who send spam with explicit imagery to everyone and their mother.

There is a BIG difference.