You make it sound so easy. Leaving aside the complicated legal question for determining what is and isn't considered pornography* , how would you go about actually doing it? Is internet filtering perfectly reliable? Would hiring several extra library employees specifically to watch the internet stations suffice? Library staff are already trying to prevent people from viewing pornography on the public computers, working within the resources available. Sheesh.

* At the library system I worked at, it was a matter of staff judgement.

I reread my comment after it had been downvoted and realized I was probably not clear at all. I don't care about the downvoting, but I wanted to clear it up so no one reading it felt persecuted or unappreciated.

When I said .1 cents I actually meant a small amount but not a trivial amount per paycheck multiplied by the tax paying population. So around 7 million per year. Not sure if that's significant enough, but it was just a figure off the top of my head meant to demonstrate that by paying a small amount individually we could help the issue.

Anyways, I've over-explained it now... but I felt like a douche when I checked my threads this morning.

I understood where you're coming from. Unfortunately, tax increases for any library services can be a hard sell.

Mainly, I just wanted to point out that it's a quintessential "Small Matter of Programming" (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Small_matter_of_programming) issue in library policy, and people who have never worked for a library can easily underestimate the difficulty. My response was a bit over-bristly, though, sorry.

I'm perfectly happy with staff judgement. If they need it then I vote we pay them for their extra time or another resource to help (well I'm Canadian so my vote only counts up here).

Didn't mean to say it was easy, jus worthwhile.