John Moss' War Against Lakewood Library

[Bill Call]

Here is the editorial in today's Plain Dealer:

http://www.cleveland.com/plaindealer/st ... xml&coll=2

Here is my letter to the editor:

John Moss' recent editorial about the Lakewoood Library illustrates the disdain the ACLU has for community, public libraries and common decency.

I have noticed a quiet war against the Lakewood Library for quit some time. Apparently the existence of an independent Lakewood Library is an affront to the Cleveland Public Library and the Cuyahoga County Library system. John Moss has apparently volunteered to continue that war on a different front.

The people of Lakewood supported the $18 million dollar library expansion because of the library's central role in the community. We see it as a gathering place, a place for learning, a place for reading. It is a physical symbol of a community recreating itself.

People like John Moss see the library as just another peep show, just another place to troll for children on the internet.

I applaud Mr. Warren and the library board for taking a firm stand against those who would turn our library into just another porn palace.

If Mr. Moss is so eager to have a libary used as a porn portal I suggest he start at his own institution, the Cleveland Public Libary. At 25 cents a peep he could make some real money.

[David Lay]

When using a public computer or open wireless connection, it should be assumed that your traffic will be monitored.

[Danielle Masters]

Thank you for sharing that article with us.

I really don't understand the disdain that people have for our library. I am grateful that not only is our library a beautiful place on the outside, but it is also a wonderful place in the inside. I think instead of complaining about not being able to look up porn people should be grateful that our tax dollars are used to offer a place where computers can be used.

I just find these attacks ridiculous.

[Richard Cole]

People like John Moss see the library as just another peep show, just another place to troll for children on the internet.

I applaud Mr. Warren and the library board for taking a firm stand against those who would turn our library into just another porn palace.

If Mr. Moss is so eager to have a libary used as a porn portal I suggest he start at his own institution, the Cleveland Public Libary. At 25 cents a peep he could make some real money.

Trolling for children? Porn Palace? Peep Show?

Dare I say hyperbole?

[Bryan Schwegler]

Thank you for sharing that article with us.

I really don't understand the disdain that people have for our library. I am grateful that not only is our library a beautiful place on the outside, but it is also a wonderful place in the inside. I think instead of complaining about not being able to look up porn people should be grateful that our tax dollars are used to offer a place where computers can be used.

I just find these attacks ridiculous.

Danielle, I think you're being naive if you think people are upset "because they can't look up porn". It was to do with the understanding of fundamental privacy rights.

While I personally can see both sides of the argument, I'm disgusted by the fact that people on the pro-monitoring camp are painting everyone who disagrees as pornographers or child-haters.

Doing that really does add a hint of fanaticism to the argument IMHO, and weakens the moral imperative argument you think you have.

[Danielle Masters]

Danielle, I think you're being naive if you think people are upset "because they can't look up porn". It was to do with the understanding of fundamental privacy rights.

While I personally can see both sides of the argument, I'm disgusted by the fact that people on the pro-monitoring camp are painting everyone who disagrees as pornographers or child-haters.

Doing that really does add a hint of fanaticism to the argument IMHO, and weakens the moral imperative argument you think you have.

I guess my issue is that if I use a public computer or use a wi-fi in a public area I assume I have no privacy. So I don't understand the whole reason that people are offended that software and employees are monitoring the computers. If this was about monitoring in my own home I would feel differently. I believe it was Ivor that made the argument that schools use software to filter. The library isn't going that far, they aren't blocking sites, they are merely monitoring.

[Bryan Schwegler]

I guess my issue is that if I use a public computer or use a wi-fi in a public area I assume I have no privacy. So I don't understand the whole reason that people are offended that software and employees are monitoring the computers. If this was about monitoring in my own home I would feel differently. I believe it was Ivor that made the argument that schools use software to filter. The library isn't going that far, they aren't blocking sites, they are merely monitoring.

Oh I agree with you that every should assume no privacy when using public computers or wifi, it's just the nature of the internet. But that doesn't mean that people necessarily should or need to accept being actively monitored.

To be honest, I think to most people, filtering or site blocking is far less intrusive than active monitoring of their session.

My point is just that just because you disagree with the libraries policy doesn't mean you want to turn it into a "porn palace". Not everyone who thinks the policy is wrong wants to download child pornography.

[Jim O'Bryan]

Bryan

Wouldn't you say there is no real "privacy" left on the internet, cordless phones, cell phones, and even land lines?

This is one reason why I always laugh at the use of "handles."

To really get around the trails that is left everywhere we go, you would have to spend so much you are probably up to something illegal.

As for the war, it is being waged on many fronts, from within and without.

I was speaking with a couple from Medina. They were asking about moving up, though for now they will probably stay just north of Medina. She asked about the crime problem. She had seen the this old house site, and was amazed at how many Lakewoodites painted the town as out of control, and ghetto like on that site.

This was after seeing the Plain Dealer article and wondered allowed if the city was solid with a house for $8,200!

We have the "regional" groups that see Lakewood as a hold out, and a reason for others to doubt regional government. We have developers obviously trying to drive property values down, so that they can acquire more at a lower price.


FWIW

[Jim DeVito]

It is not your computer. It is not you internet connection. You have no kind of birth right to the LPL's systems. If you do not agree with the stated policy's so not use the system. The same thing goes on when I am at work. As I am sure many of you know when you sing on to a computer at work you are presented with a paragraph or two before you are allowed to log on. All that says is that you are using a PRIVATE computer system. You consent to be monitored and have your traffic recorded. The person who owns the internet connections is well withing there rights to say what you can and can not do on said connection.

Now that said. I love how people are so up in arms as the the LPL's policy's. When all your traffic is being recorder and looked through on you PERSONAL internet connection by the DHS, NSA, or whatever the government agency feels like breaking the law this week. I feel we should be much more upset about this blatant disregard of our PERSONAL freedoms than about a business like any other trying to monitor their PRIVATE connection. You pay for you internet connection and as such you should not be spied upon by your own government under the guise of keeping you safe.

If the LPL were charging for the right to use there computer system then this would be a different story all together.

Now if you do not like the policy's of the LPL then simply not use the system.

[Jeff Dreger]

here's my letter:

John Moss would do well to reread the Internet & Computer Use policy at Cleveland Public Library for which he served as Vice President of the Board. It says in part that “Users should be aware that use of public computers is not a private or secure mediumâ€￾. It also states that “Patrons may not use library computers for any activity that is patently offensive, intrusive, disruptive, harassing, or creates an intimidating or hostile environment to staff and/or to other patrons.â€￾ I don’t understand Mr. Moss’ hostility toward Lakewood Public Library which is attempting to see that similar regulations are followed. Lakewood Public Library is an outstanding facility ranked number one in the nation by Hennen’s American Public Library Rating Index. I know of no case in which director Ken Warren is attempting to restrict anything legal as the article suggests. “Free thought, exploration and education can take place with virtually no restrictionsâ€￾ in Lakewood just as it can in Cleveland. Librarians regularly walk around the library. Why should they react any differently to a patron doing something inappropriate online than to a patron doing something inappropriate outside of the public computer area? The most ridiculous part of the article is that it refers to a computer monitoring tool that hasn’t even been used and may never be.

(end of letter)

I personally don't understand the article at all. All libraries have records of every book, magazine, CD, video, etc. that you've ever checked out. Where's the outrage that all these databases exist with your personal reading, listening and viewing habits? Why does this medium need different standards for folks like John Moss? The person behind you and beside you (and probably many others) can see what you're looking at and what you're typing. You're SSN, acct number, etc. aren't safe in that environment. If a librarian or patron walks around the tech center, they can see what you're looking at just as they can if you're in the grand reading room! I fail to understand what about a walk around the computers is so bad? And as for the monitoring software - it hasn't been used, correct? And if it ever is used it will be substantially different from a walk around in what way other than quicker/easier for the staff?

[Bryan Schwegler]

If the LPL were charging for the right to use there computer system then this would be a different story all together.

Now if you do not like the policy's of the LPL then simply not use the system.

Jim,
The public does pay for the right to use the LPL systems through tax dollars. The LPL is not self-funded; the LPL is a public institution.

As for your second statement, for lower-income people, the LPL is their only source of internet access available to them in most cases.

I think we just need to be more sensitive all around to people on both sides of the issue.

[Charyn Compeau]

Jim & Jim -

I am sure the fact that the library receives a far amount of funding from the taxpayers has a good deal to do with the feeling that they should answer to those taxpayers that are disgruntled by this policy.

As for privacy - there is a distinct difference from wanting to keep my information private versus wanting to keep it a secret. I might not feel it necessary to hide where I go on the internet; however, that doesn't mean I want to have every Tom, Dick & Harriet know that I spend vast amount of time at the Shoe Goddess dot com fantasizing about the latest Louboutin styles



Always,
Charyn

[Jim O'Bryan]

Jim & Jim -

I am sure the fact that the library receives a far amount of funding from the taxpayers has a good deal to do with the feeling that they should answer to those taxpayers that are disgruntled by this policy.

As for privacy - there is a distinct difference from wanting to keep my information private versus wanting to keep it a secret. I might not feel it necessary to hide where I go on the internet; however, that doesn't mean I want to have every Tom, Dick & Harriet know that I spend vast amount of time at the Shoe Goddess dot com fantasizing about the latest Louboutin styles



Always,
Charyn

Charyn

Always nice to see you pop up.

The overwhelming response to the library has been positive from all I have heard. It is also a very complicated issue. I was speaking with Nickie Antonio a couple weeks ago about it and she was upset by it. Then I asked if it could be considered a "hostile workplace" if people had to put up with
whatever on screens they could see walking by. This nis still a possibility.

The library has a mission and a board, they serve, and let's not forget that in a perverse way the Library is part of the school system. I would believe this would not even be considered upsetting in school surrooundings on school owned computers.

Besides if anyone knows there is no hiding on the net it is you.

Hope summer is going well for you, Mike and the family.


.

[chris richards]

Honestly, if you can't take criticism about a rather severe policy, then you shouldn't be using it.

I stated before that I do not agree with it, and other new LPL policies, and since then I have not visited the library, and will continue to no longer be a patron of the LPL until those policies are changed.

It is absurd for Mr. Warren to say "If you need privacy, you should get your own computer." That statement alone from a person holding a public position such as Library Director, should be offensive to everyone. It certainly is not a very public minded statement.

I do not understand why when the PD writes an negative article about the LPL, its supporters think this is some ploy tactic on the war for regionalism. I don't see the PD going after Rocky River, Westlake Porter, Cleveland Heights, Avon or any of the other independent libraries in the region. Perhaps these articles come from people who simply object to the practices of the LPL from a moral or ethical stance?

[Jeff Dreger]

Chris - responding to criticism is not the same as not being able to take it. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but what exactly is so "severe" about the existing public computer policy? What is it that you think library personnel will see that the person next to you or behind you can't? I think it's obvious that "if you need privacy, you should get your own computer"... even CPL acknowledges that. Even if you have your own PC and you use a public wifi you can't expect privacy or security... most that I've used require you to sign off on a statement saying just that. (and I don't know about the others, but Avon is not an independent library - it's part of the lorain system)