in 1973 miller vs.california, 413 US 15, dissenting justice douglas wrote on the application of "community standards:" We deal with highly emotional, not rational, questions. To many the Song of Solomon is obscene. I do not think we, the judges, were ever given the constitutional power to make definitions of obscenity. If it is to be defined, let the people debate and decide by a constitutional amendment what they want to ban as obscene and what standards they want the legislatures and the courts to apply. Perhaps the people will decide that the path towards a mature, integrated society requires that all ideas competing for acceptance must have no censor. Perhaps they will decide otherwise. Whatever the choice, the courts will have some guidelines. Now we have none except our own predilections. i'd urge that the TOS be tabled and further consideration be given to the final wording - not because of what it tries to do in specificity but because of the implications it holds for the further development of a "community" standard for a virtual environment of multiple standards and tastes.