On Wed, Jan 17, 2001 at 04:38:31PM -0800, Jen Hamilton wrote:
> > Then we're back to control at the level of the filtering company
> > individual libraries as you'd stated. I think you might be surprised at
> You've already proven that this statement is false when you
> said you entered the pornographic URL's into your database. Ultimately,
> the control of what is filtered and what is not is in the hands of the
> individual library or school, not at the level of the filtering company.
Yes, the administrator has the final say -- I never claimed otherwise.
However, the majority of categorization is done, as you say, at the level
of the providing company. Implementing granular control at the level of
the individual administrator is simply not feasible, as is made evident by
the fact that even N2H2's full-time employees are unable to correctly tag
all sites reviewed. Thus, I think that your claim that "what is filtered
and what is not is in the hands of the individual library or school" is
misleading at best.
> 'underpaid' is an opinion, not a fact. I have no idea what the rate of
> pay is for our employees that review the sites,
My statement that they are underpaid is based on information I was given
that stated a rate of pay that is, in my opinion, low. It would be
tactless to discuss it in specific, I think.
> but I do know that they
> must throughly search through all aspects of each site in the database and
> categorize it based on the content. This includes sites that have pictures
> of beastiality, child pornography, snuff photos, and any other nasty
> text and imagery you can think of that may be on the web.
I'm sorry, but I fail to see the point of this statement. I know that (at
least when I was administrating a Bess server) not all sites are reviewed
before categorization. I have in my old email archives a request I filed
for http://ufies.userfriendly.org to be reviewed. For those unfamiliar
with it, it's a fan/community site for the User Friendly online comic
strip. I found that the Bess server was blocking it, even though all I
had set to block were pornography, graphic violence, and similar topics.
Upon review, an N2H2 employee unblocked it. This says to me that the site
was never human-reviewed before (inaccurate) categorization. What are you
trying to say here?
> N2H2 admits that they use bots. However, each URL that is found by a
> bot, must also go through human review in order to ensure it's content.
This is what we were told when we were sold the service, but my experience
with it tells me otherwise.
--
Aaron Malone ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
System Administrator "Of course I'm crazy, but that
Poplar Bluff Internet, Inc. doesn't mean I'm wrong."
http://www.semo.net -- Robert Anton Wilson
_______________________________________________
issues mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.linux.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/issues
