[uf-discuss] like that in xFolk?
chris.messina at gmail.com
Thu Oct 27 09:56:26 PDT 2005
On 10/26/05, Dr. Ernie Prabhakar <drernie at opendarwin.org> wrote:
> > Why would you choose those heavily regulated parallels as opposed
> > to say
> > *internet* parallels like email, netnews, instant messaging, mp3s,
> > etc.,
> > none of which have any kind of critical mass of official ratings.
> I'm not saying we *have* to use them. I'm saying that people who
> care will *want* to use something, and these will at least provide a
> specific well-defined standard that gives people some baseline.
> Look, I'm not trying to force anybody to do anything. However, I do
> believe there are content creators -- and aggregators -- who *would*
> like some simple way to tag content to enable and ease *consumer*
> level filtering. Because of that, I think the first large, credible
> group to come up with a reasonably useful rating scheme will be
> widely imitated.
> Perhaps most content creators won't, but I suspect many popular
> aggregators will require some such ratings, and it will be simpler to
> just standardize on something like this.
> -- Ernie P.
I can't wait until China picks up on microformats to censor
expression. That's where this is headed after all once you start
applying value- or moral-based ratings to content.
I mean, *I* know pornography when I see it, don't you?
More information about the microformats-discuss