North American Network Operators Group|
Date Prev | Date Next | Date Index | Thread Index | Author Index | Historical
Re: Is the .to (Tonga) domain completely rogue and should be removed?
On Wed, Sep 30, 1998 at 05:22:57PM -0400, Barry Shein wrote: > If .com were used, for example, only for Slobbovian Universities, were > being managed by one to the exclusion of other uses, etc, then perhaps > it would be a good reason to consider decommissioning .com. > > And if the .to domain is not in any way being used as a TLD for the > Kingdom of Tonga, but instead is being used only as a safe harbor for > what appear to be malicious activities, then perhaps it should be > decommissioned. > > Is that simple enough? I've already given you one example of a domain not used for porn. Here's another one: bounce.to, another redirection service. I'm sure I can find others. Of course, according to you, the TLD is rogue unless there are absolutely no bad apples. By this logic, I can argue for UUNet to turn off their circuit to you if I have solid proof of *ONE* of your customers spamming. Yes, I know, your argument is that a majority of the domains are porn domains (not that that, in itself, is hard evidence of criminal activity) and are used to spam. Prove "a majority." > non-governmental regulation of the internet. Yet any suggestion that > we do this is met with these sort of sneering, uncalled for, > tangential, childish remarks made by individuals who obviously > shouldn't be involved in regulating anything. You're being flamed because you said something very foolish. Deal with it. Happens to everyone. > I think it's beginning to become obvious, to me anyhow, that any claim > that the internet is better regulated by those who are involved in its > engineering is a total failure as a concept. Yes, Barry, you're setting a bad example. -- Anyone who spams me will be subject to torture by Jake, my killer attack hedgehog, and/or Lizzy and Junior, my man-eating iguanas.