[LINK] .sex considered harmful

[Adam Todd]

>Any kind of mandatory or "encouraged" .sex is a really bad idea for
>the same reasons RSACi is a bad idea.  (And if RSACi's shoehorning
>everything into 1 to 4 ratings in four categories is blunt, shoehorning
>everything into .sex and not .sex would be even worse.)

Actually, the issue isn't so much ...

>The big problem: Who decides what is or is not "sex"?  Saudi Arabia?
>The Australian Family Association with their labrador fetish?  Me?

But the fact that people who run the "referal credits" Adult Banner sites 
don't give a flying F*** what domain name their sites sit under, as long as 
the banners are displayed and users click them.

So the reality is, .sex will make no difference.