I agree with codemastr because he's not seeking censorship just exclusion of the URL and I can't see why that can't happen. The 'Net should be a place where we help each other, not pass the buck. I don't care whose moral responsibility it is to protect children from the world's woes. (Fact is, liberally minded do-gooders whose chorus of "Children have rights" are the cause of most of the problems anyway) The fact remains that if someone is able to assist with keeping the 'Net safe for all users then they should provide that assistance. I, for one, contribute by refusing to offer advertising space on my site for adult services and it is no doubt costing me in terms of site exposure and the chance to make an income from the Web. I also refuse to link to sites that I find objectionable, regardless of whatever the main purpose of the site is. The biggest cause of all the problems society faces today is liberalism and if it means that whatever I do becomes the last bastion of civil communications in the world then I will proudly be able to say that I did my bit to provide an alternative to what some people in the world do/see/watch/hear simply because they are told it's 'cool'.
My own personal opinion is that IRC related websites should be kept clean as IRC is an activity clearly used by people of all ages. Of course people have the option of leaving a site if they don't like it but does every site in the world have to be plastered with filth simply because the owner is able to do it?