From: Damaged Justice <frogfarm@yakko.cs.wmich.edu>
Date: Tue, 18 Jul 95 16:48:14 PDT
To: stewarts@ix.netcom.com (Bill Stewart)
Subject: Re: SurfWatch for employees (ugh)
In-Reply-To: <199507182255.PAA06275@ix5.ix.netcom.com>
Message-ID: <199507182354.TAA20153@yakko.cs.wmich.edu>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain


Bill Stewart writes:

> >its list of interesting (err, forbidden) sites priced at $1,500. 
> Wow!  Folks have finally found a way to get paid for looking for porn on the
> net! :-)
> Surfwatch doesn't make it's censored list easily available (otherwise it'd
> probably get pirated, or used as an "interesting sites" index...), but
> apparently
> it blocks access to things other than just pornography - does Webster
> indicate what categories of stuff they're blocking?

I think there's a definite need here. If some obliging soul can "blow the
whistle" by posting to the net 1) Surfwatch's list of banned sites, and/or
2) the criteria Surfwatch uses when determining what sites to block, it
would certainly be beneficial. At the very least, it would allow everyone
to see what sort of information they believe is "harmful to minors".

-- 

 frogfarm@yakko.cs.wmich.edu | To ensure ABSOLUTE FREEDOM, take RESPONSIBILITY
    imschira@nyx10.cs.du.edu | Encrypt! Encrypt! All-One-Key! Complete Privacy
             Damaged Justice | through Complex Mathematics! God's law PREVENTS
Need net.help? I'm available | decryption above 1024 bytes - Exceptions? None!