Few matters facing the adult industry have generated opinions as polarized as the proposed .xxx TLD, touching as it does on hot-button issues from censorship concerns to distribution of “harmful matter” to minors. In countless conversations at Internext earlier this month, the question was raised: “Where do you stand on .xxx?”Many opponents of .xxx see it as an easy call; their gut reaction is that .xxx stinks of the first step in a zoning process, creation of a virtual “red light district,” with porn sites and associated speech segregated into an easily-filtered online ghetto where arbitrary limits and restrictive standards reign.

For some proponents though, it seems just as decisive a no-brainer in the other direction. The new TLD, they contend, represents an opportunity for legitimacy, a chance to improve the standing of the adult industry in the public eye via some judicious and timely self-regulation.

Neither viewpoint is illogical, nor are they necessarily mutually exclusive, or diametrically opposed. They also suffer a significant limitation in common; the subject of debate itself is not concrete, or even defined in any detail, rendering any discussion instantly and fundamentally speculative.

On the face of it, the concept of self-regulation and adoption of “best practices” sounds reasonable enough. It has a particularly strong rhetorical appeal for those in the industry who have long called on their peers to professionalize and scale back on aggressive, arguably unethical marketing practices.

The problem with self-regulation as it applies to the .xxx debate is that we have no way of knowing what the final “best practices” will be. In the abstract, the “responsible self-regulation” that IFFOR will promote sounds harmless enough, but what if one of the “best practices” amounts to an arbitrary prohibition of a given category of content?

While IFFOR’s charter contains vague assurances that the primary purpose of IFFOR is to “serve the needs of the global responsible online adult-entertainment community,” there is no assurance, explicit or implicit, that prevents content-based restrictions from being adopted.

This is precisely where being a “supporter” of .xxx in its current state gets tricky, in my opinion. Suppose you’re a paysite owner who operates sites that run the gamut, from solo nudes to extreme S&M, and when the final rules for .xxx sites are revealed, you find that half your sites aren’t even eligible? This hypothetical naturally raises further, related questions: Will the best practices be established before names become available for sale? If I purchase a domain that I intend to use, only to find that the content type is expressly prohibited by the .xxx rules, do I get my money back?

The primary response to such concerns, at least that I have encountered so far, is that the voluntary nature of the .xxx TLD renders such concerns moot. If you don’t want to or cannot abide by the rules, then you needn’t participate. Without getting into all the various problems of simply not participating in .xxx at all (someone else could end up with the .xxx equivalent of your .com and create brand confusion, there is no free-of-charge method to prevent use of .xxx domains you might have legitimate claim to, etc.), I find the voluntary nature of the TLD to be essentially immaterial to the question of whether to support the .xxx effort.

In my opinion, the only thing which should assuage such concerns on behalf of adult industry professionals is additional information and further details regarding IFFOR’s bylaws, best practices, and operational regulations for .xxx sites. In the absence of such data, the most conciliatory position I can offer to the “pro” side of the debate is one of wary open-mindedness, informed by a healthy dose of skepticism.

The .xxx debate is a discussion rife with speculation, mistrust, and more than the occasional foray into purely irrelevant tangents – an undesirable environment for discussion which I maintain is a function of the underlying uncertainties surrounding what .xxx is, and what it isn’t. Unfortunately, the best time for such clarifications has already come and gone, and would have been prior to ICANN reaching its final deliberations.

It is, of course, for each individual to decide for themselves what they think of .xxx. For my part, though, I find it logically and strategically suspect as a businessman to agree to something that I cannot, as yet, even define.