SLUG Mailing List Archives
RE: [SLUG] Squidguard and other filtering proxies
- To: "Slug" <slug@xxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: RE: [SLUG] Squidguard and other filtering proxies
- From: "Raul" <rauly@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Fri Feb 1 16:31:02 2002
- Reply-to: <rauly@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Have we lost the point here? If they want one then give them one! Just make
them well aware that if they want a total ban then it is impossible, and
maybe a means of maintaining the rules for themselves and that is that.
No point giving up because it is impossible.. (I actually would almost be
more concerned if we could censor everything)
I've been looking into that for someone who has requested though still am
looking for a better solution. Dan's Guardian look ok, though I know there
must be better.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: slug-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:slug-admin@xxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of
> Alan Vink
> Sent: Friday, 1 February 2002 11:23 AM
> To: Slug; David Fitch
> Subject: RE: [SLUG] Squidguard and other filtering proxies
> > Yes, several Internet centres for youths have turned off their networks
> > because they can't stop kid from looking at pr0n.
> I'm not a list administrator, but remember:
> (*cough* slug-chat *cough*) - by Jeff Waugh
> >>IMO you/they are doing it wrong.
> >>Ignoring the fact I don't think it's bad for kids to see porn
> It's somewhat difficult to ignore when written down as a statement!
> It may be a fact that YOU do not think it's bad for kids to see porn, BUT
> for the rest of us, it is just another opinion that is clearly not related
> to the subject of this list!
> If you want to flame, please do it offline -