From: Bill Lucy 

Out of darkness, Richard B. says...
lucyandi{at}spamcop.net>
> wrote:
>
> >I read the opinions. In her dissenting opinion, Justice Ginsburg notes some
of the
> >filtering products and their inability to provide good experience.
>
> She is incorrect and I doubt has any real experience from which to
> draw such a conclusion. The filters are extremely flexible and whereas
> they are not perfect (again, I ask what is?) they do the job.

I'm not a believer in such filters, personally. The editorial process should be one
of limiting access to the machines themselves. I prefer the case that
Justice Breyer made -- we already do that kind of filtering in libraries
already -- why not
continue in that fashion?


> >You didn't read my original post, did you? I am arguing that porn should be
allowed
> >in libraries. Please preach to another choir.
>
> Sure I did, I was expressing my mmho, er, testimony, brother. Cheer
> up, the weekend is almost here and summer is there.

I noticed an "oops" anyway. The second sentence should read
"I am not arguing..."



--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-4