[LINK] Police raid home of Wikileaks.de domain owner over

[stephen at melbpc.org.au]

Leah writes,

> I don't think ANYONE objects to the Blacklist being kept secret from 
> the perspective of the URLs themselves.
> 
> The issue is "What's in the list" to prevent abuse of the list 
> listing Dentists and Opposing Political Views and so on.


Yes, that is one *major* issue, along with 'mandatory' and net speed.

So, independent blacklist maintainence, such as by the Judiciary, for
example, would ease much of that drama. A panel of Judges with agreed
criteria for list inclusion would surely be simple and effective. How
long would it take them. Thirty minutes a month to check proposed new
additions, maybe. People might not mind the 'secret' bit so much then.


> I feel that if instead of arguing about exposing the list, which then 
> makes URLs (that probably change every 48 hours anyway if they are 
> porn or child abuse) visible to people to be curious about "to gawk" 
> and "rubber neck", why can't everyone focus on a method of giving 
> Title to the URLs that are being listed.
> 
> A Public Database that lists the:
> - DATE of entry into the database,
> - classification it would receive (because the URLs are NOT 
> classified officially through application, they are just 'presumed to 
> receive' a specific classification)
> - Title of the page (or site)
> - Description of the page or content.  "Bestiality" or "Child 
Pornography"
> - The Geographical location (may be assumption too) of the site
> - Reason for Listing  (5 multiple choice options perhaps, I can't 
> imagine there would be many variations, but they can always be added.)
> 
> I'd then recommend, that any domain name that does not contain 
> obvious keywords related to inappropriate sexual content or weapons 
> or terrorism or whatever, be provided in the listing.  In most cases 
> on the 2nd level and TLD will be required.  Looking over the 
> published list I'd feel fairly confident this would be satisfactory.
> 
> The result is that people can then check their domain names to see if 
> they are listed - by accident or otherwise, and the reasons.  Then a 
> Speedy remedy can be applied to have the entry removed from the list.
> 
> Domain names like MANY of the ones on the published list are 
> blatantly obvious and really don't need to be displayed as they serve 
> no purpose to anyone genuinely concerned about social protection.
> 
> Social Protection includes not only the Viewer, but the children, 
> women, men, animals, and lives of ALL people who could be affected by 
> the creation or, action upon or the use of the material published 
> under the banned URLs.
> 
> Does this make sense or what?
> 
> It's simple to activate.  In fact the original complaint for a URL 
> could also be anonymously published in the database so we can all see 
> the process is in fact working.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Link mailing list
> Link at mailman.anu.edu.au
> http://mailman.anu.edu.au/mailman/listinfo/link


Message sent using MelbPC WebMail Server