Talk:Secure Web SmartFilter EDU

message: Just trying to justify the edit about Bess blocking WIkipedia.  According to Bess' website, Wikipedia.org is in the Education exception category and is not blocked.  Is this true on every system which uses Bess?
No it is not.
-You're right, as I am using Wikipedia from my school's system(which uses Bess).
To make the article more accurate, I have changed "Note that Wikipedia is blocked by Bess." to "Note that Wikipedia is blocked by Bess on some systems.".- Emerald 00:36, 7 February 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: The Bess system allows administrators to block sites of their choosing.  Wikipedia is blocked on some Bess systems, depending on local decisions.
- I think it's funny how everytime i try to go to a site that opposes bess, the site is blocked for "p2p/loophole" Hawaiianchief
proxify.net is used to bypass bess
As of 6.15.06, proxify.net is blocked by Bess (under their category: anonymizers)
most of your school internet accounts are blocked by the local area network connection. The local area network section(lan) is set to use the proxy server of there choice. By removing that then you bypass the server and can go onto the internet. Most schools have blocked students from accessing those features but by pressing F1 on the keyboard then going to options and then internet options, connection, lan settings the settings can be changed
Bess blocks Wikipedia on my school's system, as it contains "personal pages", though it only blocks the English and Spanish versions; and for the reason (I am assuming though correct me if I'm wrong) that they are the two Wikipedias with the most content. Quite a shame, as Wikipedia really is the best source for school reports, and I trust most of the content relating to science, history, etc., topics I'd typically have to write about. --Wikiwøw ­­ 22:09, 7 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Wikipedia blocked by Bess?

message: Censorware is in my opinion a derogatory term, which violates WP:NPOV. I believe that the use of 'internet filtering software' is a better usage and a more neutral one. I'd like to start a poll on whether the page should be moved. ~crazytales56297.chasing cars//e 12:13, 13 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: *Thanks Wikiwow. I only really grouped support/oppose/comment because I know that's used on RfA, I'm not an expert on talk page polls. ~crazytales56297 O rly? 20:00, 10 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  move to [[Bess (internet filtering software)]] 

message: This article is bias it only gives a point of veiw from the bess company everyone that has ever had to deal with bess knows of its scandals in the past and its censure issues with organizations like peacefire. I believe That information should be included in the article so that it is no longer bias.
-- danieljackson (tlk) (cntrbtns) 06:10, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you that this should definitely be included.  I don't know if everyone who has used Bess knows about the scandals, but most users probably do know about how damaging its blocking procedures are to education and to sanity.  I don't think anything in the article is biased towards the Bess company but it would be much improved if it had a section on conflicts with organizations and more specific examples of critique besides what is listed. -- Peedl 00:55, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm interested.  But tread carefully.  A quick Google search produced for me only pro and anti Bess sites, nothing unbiased.  One site was called "The Official Anti-Bess Site," for example. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 03:20, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: The Bias opinion

message: Folks, this must be moved to Bess (content-control software) and references to censorware must be removed based on, and because the issue is already addressed in, Content-control software.  The wording there and in the Talk pages applies here as well.  Someone please do this.  Thank you. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 06:14, 24 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: When this gets done, the phrase "(often referred to as censorware)" ought to be removed as well as this will no longer be needed to reference the title. --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 20:05, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll do this soon seeing no other comment for well over a month.  Anyone want to say anything? --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 06:08, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I don't think that is a bad idea, if after careful consideration Wikipedians agreed to redirect as discussed above.  However, I think we need to keep a  reference of some sort in the article about censoring.  Many of my teachers and administrators outright called the system a form of censorship and were not at all happy with it.  There is some wishy washy mentions of these opinions in the article right now but it should be fleshed out if we are to give the Bess program a politically correct name such as "content-control software." Peedl 22:52, 13 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay, but it is not a "politically correct" name.  It's the name wikipedians have arrived at as the least POV.  --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 03:09, 14 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I don't want to start an argument but I do want to make it clear that I chose the word carefully.  I think 'content-control' is a euphemism for 'censor'.  However, I understand that that is my own opinion and is POV, so I would not want it to remain in the main article.  I was trying to convey with my comment above both the necessity to rename the article to be NPOV and my reluctance to do so. Peedl 04:46, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

text: I just did this. Peedl 03:17, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks.  I've put it off for so long! --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 12:37, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Peedl, what do you think of ? --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 15:19, 21 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: As I've said, I really believe that these products should be referred to as censorware, as that is what they appear to be doing by every definition I've ever known.  I re-read the discussion page on content-control software and I do appreciate the citations of newspapers, which suggest that "filter" is the least POV.  However, I do not feel strongly enough about the issue to pursue any changes in the censorware category list, or to argue that it should remain how it is.  If you feel really strongly about it though, I'm sure you could make the same case you made in this article in order to get it changed. Peedl 06:40, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay.  Thanks.  --LegitimateAndEvenCompelling 12:41, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Move to Bess (content-control software) 

message: This may be a dumb question but, as I was searching the Secure Computing website attempting to update the categories section of this article I noticed an utter lack of the product "Bess."  I am aware that they merged and changed things around and that there's now "SmartFilter, Bess Edition". (I thought I read this somewhere on Wikipedia but now I can't seem to find the article.)  Anyway, my main question is if this product still exists in schools and libraries or if it has been changed over.  Even if it hasn't been changed over, is it still using the old categories (which I listed before Bess disappeared/was absorbed) or is it using this? --Peedl 06:57, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: It was renamed to "Secure Web SmartFilter EDU". Mike R (talk) 19:21, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Does Bess exist anymore? 

message: When i was in high school we would go to regedit and just delete all the bess files... the system would reinstall them every reboot so the admin never knew. 99.238.236.206 (talk) 16:49, 14 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Another Bypass