Your IP:

Our Forums Have Moved!

Visit our new forums at to post on topics and read the latest content. These forums are now read-only archives.

K-12 Forums

Talk with other K-12 network administrators in your state.

Or see all states.


Vanilla 1.1.4 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

This discussion has been inactive for longer than 30 days, and is thus closed.
    • CommentAuthorauthentic8
    • CommentTimeJul 4th 2012 edited
    I often come across the phrase "Tagging is used to tag the primary purpose or intended use of a domain" in discussions about whether a site should be placed into a filter category or not.

    However, I don't find this concept - "primary purpose of a domain" - a very useful concept in forming policy given the number of websites that either do not have a single "primary purpose" or the sites appear to be multi-purpose, each of which are equally significant.

    There are a large number of websites that whose "primary purpose" is not adult content but where adult content is a significant part of the content - enough in my view, to warrant tagging it as such. According to the above principle/policy statement these would not be blocked.

    Also, given that OpenDNS allows multiple tagging, surely this contradicts the very notion of tagging according to primary purpose ("primary purpose" being essentially singular).

    I have, in the past, submitted, tagged or observed a site that a tag rejected for adult content on the basis that it was not its "primary" purpose even though the site had a significant proportion of its content as adult/sexual/nudity and even had clear navigational links to this adult content in its menu system. The website was a general video-sharing site but also had a category called "Sexy" which contained nudity of a sexual nature. This site was later re-tagged correctly but it was the use of the phrase "primary purpose" that led to the incorrect rejection of tags in the first instance.

    I understand the problem with tagging some sites such as YouTube, which contain adult content and nudity, but that tagging the sites as such would block of a significant part of the web that many would feel this categorization as unhelpful, that OpenDNS is not really set up to handle all cases, and that some cases will have to fall down to individual blocking and parental/network owner responsibility. However, in many cases the principle of "primary purpose" is hampering legitimate tagging and filtering for many users who wish to block adult/pornographic content from their networks.

    As a solution, I suggest that OpenDNS employees and top users/moderators drop the reference to "primary purpose" in discussion about tagging and use the more practical and realistic "major purpose" (or similar) to describe sites that have significant adult content and/or deliberate linkage to such content in their navigation systems. This alternate phrase mirrors the actual practice of how OpenDNS works in reality and how tags are (in most cases) actually submitted/approved and would remove the confusion between moderators and taggers/users alike over the meaning of "primary purpose", particularly as it relates to nudity/pornography.

    Thank you.
    • CommentAuthoremtunc
    • CommentTimeJul 5th 2012
    I agree with you and actually from my observations and as a moderator my self, this is how it works right now.
    Domains are not only tagged against their 'intent' but also against content hosted on the domain.

    Even if a domain hosts mainly category X, if there are incidents of inappropriate content of category Y, it should (and is) tagged under category Y also.

    Obviously there are always some exceptions - You gave an example of one (Youtube) - Not only would it have a negative overall impact for a lot of OpenDNS users but there is also evidence that filtering takes place (Youtube staff) and it is explicitly stated in their terms that inappropriate content is not permitted.

    Hope that helps.
    • CommentAuthorauthentic8
    • CommentTimeJul 25th 2012
    Thanks for your input emtunc. Hopefully, moderators will settle on a useful terminology and policy for categorizing domains that fits the reality of the Web and OpenDNS users' needs.

This discussion has been inactive for longer than 30 days, and is thus closed.