Hi,

Ted or anyone, do you know if the Library Board meetings are open to the public? A few of us might want to attend the next one.

There was an incident on Wednesday at the library involving a woman who stopped in to use the computers while waiting for her kid. Turns out there was a guy viewing very graphic porn in the computer area, right in front of her - (or any child who walked by for that matter.) The response from the library was pathetic. FYI- the guy is free to return to the library any time he wants.

Nice to know that your 12-year-old can be sitting next to some wacko who is watching porn while your kid types up his book report! I, for one, had no idea that there were no filters on the computers up there. It explains why we attract a certain element, while other communities have taken steps to discourage this from happening.

Please let me know about the meetings if you have info on them regarding time, place.
Thanks.

I'm a big fan of porn...but I don't believe that the library is a proper place for viewing. These things are better left for the workplace. I believe the Supreme Court sees it that way, also.

How the f*** do they not have filters?

Hi,

The do not have filters, and it is a CONCIOUS CHOICE on their part. I believe that the family involved has already begged them to reconsider but they will not. Thanks for the link.

Anybody have any ideas as to how we can get the library board to install even a basic filter to screen out porn?

I'm no longer on the library board, so I can't speak for them. But I can tell you that -- when Internet access was installed -- the library went on the side of the first amendment. In doing so, they installed the computer monitors under the desks, visible only through desktop glass windows designed for viewing only by the individual directly in front of them. Yes, it's possible for a passerby to see what you are viewing... but that passerby really has to make an effort to snoop over your shoulder to see exactly what you're looking at. It's not easy, and can't be done "accidentally."

"Gee, what a coincidence that the family that has openly dissented has fallen victim to the open showing of porn."

What does this mean, Mr. Fan?

Hi,

Sorry Ted, but you are incorrect. When someone reaches down to pick up a bookbag, purse, backpack or SMALL CHILD they have no choice but to see the screen in front of them. It's that simple and does not require a lot of effort.

Not sure if you are a parent. But it is a real tough sell to convince most parents that they should feel comfortable having their kid do homework or research at the library next to some guy who is viewing pornography a few feet away. Perhaps on this one, we can agree to disagree.

Mr. Fan I have no idea what you mean by 'dissented.' I must have missed that thread. But I think there is a reason why even with our library being a "Bastion of First Amendment Freedom" - we still think it wise to limit what is available to our kids. I don't think we have pornography on the library shelves, so why should it be on the computers?

How about a separate room for degenerate porn surfers...and filters for the computers that the kiddies work on? That room could be like the beloved late Bachelor's Library on North and 53.

Sorry to disagree Coveted, but the way the internet room is set up I have never had any difficulty avoiding looking at what others are looking at on their screens. I'm simply not interested and don't consider it any of my business, whether they are looking at porn or cruising the GEBB. This big first amendment fan suggests you work on controlling your wandering eyes - unless you don't mind seeing something you might not wish to see.

I think the downstairs computers should have filters - absolutely. That's the kids area. Otherwise, let freedom ring! The kids don't need to use the computers upstairs and if they do, I'm sure you could train them to ask a librarian to find an open and safe one before they go in. (In case the wacko left the screen up when he left to go to the bathroom and finish off his "issue".)

I'd assume that there are filters on the computers that aren't in the seedy Internet room? I think there are a couple that you can surf on out in the open areas near the Reference desk, etc.

IMO, I've no problem with porn filters at the library at all the computers as a community standards issue. We don't stock Hustler on the shelves for a reason, and it isn't for lack of an audience who'd like to see it.

quote:

we still think it wise to limit what is available to our kids. I don't think we have pornography on the library shelves, so why should it be on the computers?

Sure we do....kind of..Known as Erotica? I don't think we have anything with pictures, but we definitely have Anais Nin and Henry Miller on our shelves. What library doesn't?

If we are all going to have our personal preferences reflected in what is (and isn't) stocked on the public library shelves, I'd urge reconsideration of the amount of religious and newage crap that shows up in the new books section (as well as the classification of such material as non-fiction!)

When our forefathers were writing the Constitution and Bill of Rights, I am certain that they had no idea that in 2007, some guy would sit in a public library and view porn on a computer.

I think we'll all agree that porn is really cool, but even I have to admit that children should not be exposed to it in any environment. I don't think it's asking too much to do our best as a community to protect children from pornography in a public setting such as a library. Where do you draw the line? I think that's easy to answer...Catcher In The Rye...not porn. Men or women having sexual intercourse, oral sex or other types of sodomy...porn.

Anyone that thinks an 8 year-old child will simply avert his or her eyes from what somebody else is doing or viewing simply hasn't lived with an 8 year-old child. The simple answer...have the wankers view their really cool porn in a separate room. Perhaps it could be called the porn room and no minors would be allowed in the porn room. Areas where there are children...use the freakin' technology that God gave us to block porn.

Therefore...you want to watch porn, you can. You want to protect your children from some creepy 23 year-old homeless guy sipping Starbucks while he is sporting an erection...you can. No freedom of speech issues here, just common sense.

BTW, I guess it's best not to let your little ones use the bathroom by themselves in the library. All that porn viewing that is rightfully protected by the Constitution might make the viewer do something that is illegal.

In my opinion, you are missing the point:

1. The guy was alledgely looking at "kiddie" porn
2. Kids are all over at the library
3. Do you want your kids in a situation where some guy who is evidently interested in little kids (he is alledgely looking at "kiddie" porn afterall) in the same environment with your kids?

That is what you need to be thinking about.

quote:

Originally posted by mom:
In my opinion, you are missing the point:

1. The guy was alledgely looking at "kiddie" porn
2. Kids are all over at the library
3. Do you want your kids in a situation where some guy who is evidently interested in little kids (he is alledgely looking at "kiddie" porn afterall) in the same environment with your kids?

That is what you need to be thinking about.

Stopping access to the porn site is not going to remove the pedophile from the library. In fact, one might argue it is safer for the kids to be in his presence if he can view the stuff on the computer instead of looking for the real thing.

quote:

Originally posted by mom:
In my opinion, you are missing the point:

1. The guy was alledgely looking at "kiddie" porn
2. Kids are all over at the library
3. Do you want your kids in a situation where some guy who is evidently interested in little kids (he is alledgely looking at "kiddie" porn afterall) in the same environment with your kids?

That is what you need to be thinking about.

Wait...the guy was looking at kiddie porn*...or is this quickly spiraling into urban legend?

*the knowledge that kiddie porn exists in no way implies that the author views or is interested in this type of porn.

[QUOTE]Originally posted by GE Fan:
Further, I don't want my punk *** kid (if I ever have a boy) [QUOTE]

Now, hold on there TEX! I really don't want to threadjack here but, don't you think girls can be punk*** kids too? In my experience the frequency of punk*** kids is more prevalent in boys but girls usually have a much nastier degree of punk***-ness when they actually are punk***es.

Now back to our regularly scheduled program: I don't really understand why kids are using the internet area and I guess I can't imagine why my kids would go to the library to do their internet work when we have it at home. If my kids do go to the library, it is usually to study or find a book they need/want.

IF, in the case in question, the man was viewing kiddie porn, that would be a whole different issue since kiddie porn is illegal anywhere and under every circumstance!

Hi,

No, it is not an urban legend. The person involved was not TRYING to interfere with anyone's personal space as has been suggested. Nobody (that I know of at least) wants to ban books, stop free internet use, negate the first Amendment, or any of the hypotheticals that have been mentioned. What did happen was a Mom went into the computer room to use the internet while she waited for her kid. When she bent over to pick up her purse she ended up looking square into the screen behind her and what she thought was child porn. To Ted's point, the screens are not directly in front of you, so whether or not it was kiddie-porn or adult porn is between her and the person she is/was accusing. She made a scene at the library and yelled at the guy. So my guess is she felt pretty strongly that something was just not right about the situation. Perhaps you would have reacted differently, who knows. I'd rather give her the benefit of the doubt than a guy who is watching porn at the local library.

I do know that the library has suspended this mans computer privileges. Do you think they'd do that if there weren't a problem? For those of you who still think she was out to get the poor porno-viewer, I suggest you go over to the library and take along your 7-year-old. Stop in the computer room and log in. Have your kid sit next to you and see just where his line of sight ends up. Or better yet, send your 12-year old over there. When he finds out that the guy next to him is viewing porn (and he WILL) see how long it takes before he decides to give it a try.

ALL that has been suggested by the parties involved is that the library consider taking some additional steps to ensure that this does not happen again. Stuff like this:
1. Perhaps a warning/notice to parents so that they know the upstairs computers do not have filters.

2. Some sort of separate area for adults-only users. I think someone else suggested that on this BB.

3. A filter that at least blocks out graphic pornography. We may never know if the guy was viewing child-porn or whether it was just adult porn. I for one do not want my child sitting near either. Do you?

Since we currently have none-of-the-above, I think anything would be an improvement. However, for those who feel any of these things would be too restrictive, we can agree to disagree.

As for telling our kids to study and use the internet at home, that is and will continue to be my policy for our family. However, not everyone has a computer at home. Some kids do research at the library because it is preferrable to working at home. There are many reasons why this could happen again. Look no further than the original reason this lady was online at the library. Her own computer was down, and she opted to check email at the library while she waited.

quote:

Originally posted by CovetedLakeEllyn:
The person involved was not TRYING to interfere with anyone's personal space as has been suggested. ... What did happen was a Mom went into the computer room to use the internet while she waited for her kid. When she bent over to pick up her purse she ended up looking square into the screen behind her and what she thought was child porn.

Well, we know she obviously wasn't TRYING to respect the other computer users' privacy by averting her eyes or minding her own business.

quote:

... I suggest you go over to the library and take along your 7-year-old. Stop in the computer room and log in. Have your kid sit next to you and see just where his line of sight ends up. Or better yet, send your 12-year old over there.

If I am worried about my children being exposed to something I consider inappropriate, then I don't take them there. The easy solution is to have sensitive people keep their 7 and 12 year olds out of the internet room. Of course, my kids were able to handle a trip to Nawlins several years back, staying right on Bourbon Street, without being permanently scarred.

quote:

1. Perhaps a warning/notice to parents so that they know the upstairs computers do not have filters.

This does not necessarily offend me. Post a sign to let people know that if they are easily offended, they may either wish to keep their eyes away from other people's screens, and/or keep their kids away. Will also remind folks that busybodies will be looking over their shoulder.

I'm not sure you'd be able to get clear agreement on what everyone in our community considers "offensive." And I'm not sure of any filters that are effective enough to - say - allow someone to research breast cancer, but not surf Playboy. Or to do a research on Germany during WWII, but not look into neo-Nazi hate groups. Hell, who's to say someone is not researching porn or skinheads for a sociological study? Gonna block satanism but not christianity?

Nope - I'm not gonna agree with you. I'm a huge fan of openness. The dangers it imposes trouble me FAR less than the hazards of censorship. It's all a matter of where each person individually wants to draw the lines.

Folks who are easily offended might want to toughen up a bit before they venture out into the big cruel world. Or else stay at home.