RE: Porn Lists (Maybe Off Topic)

Removing the ACL blocking capability of Squid would result in some of us no
longer being able to use it (or simply sticking with an older version which
does).

David

-----Original Message-----
From: Allen Smith [mailto:easmith@beatrice.rutgers.edu]
Sent: Saturday, 24 July 1999 14:11
To: Dancer
Cc: Olivier Tourchon; squid-users@ircache.net; Daniel.malmgren@lund.se
Subject: Re: Porn Lists (Maybe Off Topic)

On Jul 24, 12:08am, Dancer (possibly) wrote:
> Agreed. I'm anti-censorship myself, as well. However, if the customer
> wants to have themselves censored, then the customer can _have_
> themselves censored. They're paying for the service, and if they want ot
> pay money NOT to see some websites, I'm not going to argue with 'em.

Are they imposing this on those who don't wish it and don't have any
choice on the matter, e.g., children?

> Besides, despite my email address, I'm in Australia. Internet censorship
> is now law here.

So? Why should the rest of us help it?

        -Allen

P.S. Given that nlanr is using government funds, a lawsuit to stop
incorporating any block-useful features into squid would be quite
possible...

-- 
Allen Smith				easmith@beatrice.rutgers.edu