[url]http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17759008/wid/11915829&GT1=9145[/url]
[QUOTE]Online pornographers and religious groups are in a rare alliance as a key Internet oversight agency nears a decision on creating a virtual red-light district through a ".xxx" Internet address.[/QUOTE]
That was just the summary. I'm not going to quote it all, but I will comment on some of it...
[QUOTE]"One of the criteria is that it (must) have general support among the industry it's supposed to serve, and it does not," said Mark Kernes, a board member with the industry trade group Free Speech Coalition. "I have not met one single webmaster or adult video producer that is in favor of `.xxx,' and I've met a lot of them."[/QUOTE]
That's because they know how to use web-filters.
[QUOTE]Given its voluntary nature, ".xxx" is unlikely to have much effect on parents' ability to block porn sites.[/QUOTE]
Because we all know parents don't know how to use the wild-card to block an entire domain suffix (in this case, block *.xxx)
[QUOTE]"They will keep their `.com' domains, and I have no doubt they will buy their `.xxx' as well," said Patrick Trueman, special counsel for the Alliance Defense Fund, a Christian public-interest law firm. "There will be twice as much pornography on the Internet."[/QUOTE]
It would be redundant, so it doesn't count. Just like Missouri and 'Missoura'. As said earlier in the article, "a domain name serves merely as an easy-to-remember moniker for a site's actual numeric Internet address." Besides, domain costs will double so they'd probably dump the '.com', '.net', etc. suffixes. And that's a grave accent, not a single open quotation-mark.