Re: [ga] Google's SafeSearch is overzealous, blocks innocuous domains

[Jeff Williams <jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Nainil and all former DNSO GA members or other interested stakeholders/users,

 Your exactly right here Nainil.  And what you suggested here again,
is what I had essentially suggested two days ago on this thread as well.
But thank you for yet again repeating same...

nainil@xxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

> Hi -joop-,
>
> This could be one solution. But how many humans can handle the enormous amount of error requests. If you consider, the number of sites affected by this act of GOOGLE, it is practically impossible for it to keep humans. Also, what if there is an error done by the people hired by Google, "Manual data entry sytem could be a big issue". Plus --> Google would need to design a new interface for it's people to address the issue and make changes in the database.
>
> The database of google is so big that writing a small code also requires lot of manpower and a very efficient code. Better than that: 1. Google changes it's current SafeSearch code to a more efficient one 2. OR Google for the time being stops SafeSearch option. It would just need to disable the SafeSearch Module.
>
> Thanks.
>
> ==================================
> Best Regards,
> Nainil Chheda.
> Eliteral - A Web Site Hosting Co.
> Founder & Ex-Proprietor.
> http://www.eliteral.com/
> Addr: 3900 City Line Avenue Apt,
> D827 - Madison Bldg,
> Philadelphia, PA. 19131, USA.
> (H)Phone: 1-267-295-5470.
> (O)Phone: 1-215-204-2029.(10AM - 3PM)
> FAX: 1-215-204-3101
> Email ONLY: nainil.c@xxxxxxxxxxxx
> Email ONLY: nainil.c@xxxxxxxxxx
> MSN: nainil@xxxxxxxxxxx
> YAHOO: nainil@xxxxxxxxx
> ==================================
> (SEO - Search Engine Optimizer)
> Web Hosting Pennsylvania
> ==================================
>
> How many cares one loses when one decides not to be something but to be someone. - Coco Chanel
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Joop Teernstra
> Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2004 9:02 PM
> To: ga@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: RE: [ga] Google's SafeSearch is overzealous, blocks innocuous domains
>
> At 04:54 p.m. 24/04/2004, Nainil Chheda wrote:
>
> >SafeSearch also marked as unsafe for children JewishSussex.com, a
> >religious Web site; EssexCountyBeeKeepers.org of Topsfield, Mass.;
> >BluesExcuse.SouthBurnett.com.au, an Australian blues band's site;
> >BassExpert.com; and the Anglo-Saxon history site RomansInSussex.co.uk.
>
> Looks like teething trouble of the new service, rather than "the code
> becoming the law".
> As long as the code is not smarter, what Google needs to do is set up a
> complaints' address with a few humans who check the sites over.
>
> -joop-
>
> ---
> Incoming mail is certified Virus Free.
> Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
> Version: 6.0.664 / Virus Database: 427 - Release Date: 4/21/2004
>

Regards,

--
Jeffrey A. Williams
Spokesman for INEGroup LLA. - (Over 134k members/stakeholders strong!)
"Be precise in the use of words and expect precision from others" -
    Pierre Abelard

"If the probability be called P; the injury, L; and the burden, B;
liability depends upon whether B is less than L multiplied by
P: i.e., whether B is less than PL."
United States v. Carroll Towing  (159 F.2d 169 [2d Cir. 1947]
===============================================================
Updated 1/26/04
CSO/DIR. Internet Network Eng. SR. Eng. Network data security
IDNS. div. of Information Network Eng.  INEG. INC.
E-Mail jwkckid1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
 Registered Email addr with the USPS
Contact Number: 214-244-4827