On Tue, Apr 17, 2001 at 11:15:52PM -0400, Michael Carmack wrote: > Are you concerned that the future of Freenet might be jeapordized > by people (mistakenly or otherwise) associating it with pornography? > I imagine the content seen on Freenet accurately reflects the > interests of its users. Should we be ashamed of ourselves? :-)
No. Just because the most common content on Freenet is porn doesn't mean that it reflects the interests of the users. There is far more music in the key indexes then porn. The problem is if you're interested in porn there aren't many categories of tastes, for the most part if it has tits or a dick it qualifies. If you're interested in music you've got thousands of genre's of music, hardly anyone is interested in the same industrial music I like while most males share my interest in members of the other sex. (though perferably perkygoths or ravers :)) Since Freenet content drops out if it's not requested stuff that isn't requested, like obscure music, will die out long before stuff with common interests, like porn. -- GCS d s+:-- a--- C++++ UL++++ P L+++ E W++ N- o K- w-- O- M V- PS+ PE+ Y+ PGP+++ t 5 X R+ tv-- b+ DI+ D++ G e- h! r-- y-- pete at petertodd.ca http://retep.tripod.com -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 232 bytes Desc: not available URL: <https://emu.freenetproject.org/pipermail/devl/attachments/20010418/fcc74ee7/attachment.pgp>
