“The new filters would not have prevented the August incident” – So, this “solution” would have done nothing to prevent the situation it’s a response to? That’s the definition of a project unworthy of undertaking.

What’s more, the person involved in the incident (who apparently was not even viewing pornography) could have requested a filter override since he was 22 at the time and the library would be legally obligated to oblige him with no questions asked.

According to the article, this library has had a total of 6 incidents over the course of 1.6 million library visits, including 400,000 computer sessions. Just looking at the computer sessions, that’s 0.0015% of the time, or once every 66,667 transactions. This is not a real problem. The solution imposed, may be a problem, however.

Escalating the filter levels always means escalating the extent to which you over-filter. Depending on how this is handled, it can also open the door for lawsuits (consider all the cases of over-filtering preventing access to health information and LGBT community sites leading to successful suits against school libraries).

The good news? It’s still illegal to do illegal things, even if you do them in a library. Hence, the dude being arrested. Public display of obscene materials is illegal. It’s almost certain to be a violation of this library’s internet access policy, as well.