[LINK] Survey Finds Support for School Filters (USA)

[Danny Yee]

stephen loosley wrote:
> Why do you and Danny think of school filtering in such *absolute* terms?
>  
> That is, you would appear to believe if "some" students do manage to access
> "some" net porn websites from school, then this must mean that school filtering
> "clearly does not achieve its objective."  Who said that effective school filtering
> must completely block ALL porn websites or else it doesn't meet its objectives?

Your earlier post seemed to suggest that there were no problems
at all, and I think that's probably what we were reacting to.
I'm quite prepared to accept it's not a big issue or problem, heck
I know schools have other things to worry about.

But there's also the question whether there would be any real problem
_without_ censorware.  The fact that some schools manage fine without
suggests it's not necessary -- but then I'm prepared to believe there's
considerable variation between schools, and that what works for one
may not work for another.  (An academically oriented selective girls
school is likely to be rather different to more typical state school,
for example.)

> As far as many teachers are concerned, I'd guess, kids are the only issue and that
> nothing else (eg School / EdDpt reputation, or whatever) really matters one little bit.

So schools publicise the failures of censorware whenever they happen?
That seems prima facie unlikely to me.

> By the way .. our email filtering resources for incoming (only) email also works well.
 
Including encrypted attachments?  (Or indeed any kind of non-standard
format attachments...)

Danny.