1) A version that didn't involve a yearly subscription, just a flat fee for people who know what websites they want to allow/block, and want to keep transcripts and have computer/internet usage schedules.
2) A version that blocked certain e-mail addressess
3) A version that blocked certain IM names.
Hi hemlock,
Thanks for the suggestions. I'll put them to our enhancement list.
Thanks,
Katie
A way to block chat on websites would be GREAT.
Thanks
Pmel
You can block chat on websites, just add the specific web site to the block list.
Also you can block specific IM handles, go to Settings / IM and you should see the list of IM handles, just set the one you don't want to "block".
Matt
The current method of viewing and then INDIVIDUALLY "blocking" undesirable visited websites is tedious if there are several you want to block in the future.
1. Is there any way to implement a summary "checkbox" system so that a user does not have to expand a website entry, view the entry, and click on the "block" button?? Ideally, it would be similar to those used in e-mail programs where a user can check the applicable messages and delete/move them all together, etc.
2. The current display method makes it very easy to lose track of what has been viewed, or already "blocked" or otherwise resolved. The display simply dumps you back to the same page you were on and then you either have to "guess" what you last looked at or have to have noted your last "location" on the page. This gets very confusing because you cannot "see" what actions you have already performed and where, so you are likely to have to repeat the procedure "just to be sure" you did not miss it the first time. If a site has already been blocked, then highlight it somehow for ease of reference....without having to drill-down into the settings and expanding the line item display.
3. Is it possible to also display the numeric IP address in addition to the DNS translation? This helps to note BLOCKS of addresses belonging to the same server/website, which then makes it easier to identify and target undesirable sites.
4. Is it possible to use "wildcard" characters when listing websites you want to have blocked??
Great product and service! I am recommending it to other friends with children. And please always have a "free" version available.
Thank You!! :-D
Topspy,
Thank you very much for your thoughtful input. I like to get a little more details on your feedback, so when I put them in the enhancement list, your suggestions are presented properly.
1. You mentioned “a user does not have to expand a website entry…delete/move them all together”… Please explain under what circumstances that parent don’t need to check the site individually, but want to block them all together.
2. Got the point. I’ll put it to the enhancement list.
3. I would think reading DNS is much easier than reading numeric IP address to know blocks of address belong to the same website…please give me an example so I can understand the scenario better.
4. Please give me some details on how the “wildcard” function blocks websites.
Thanks,
Katie
Hi [KatieQ] --
Thanks for your response.
In hindsight, I think the issues I mentioned are related for 1, 3, & 4.
[1] individually expanding and marking sites to block
Personally, I dislike looking at all of the various ads on some websites. I also think they often detract from any educational/learning/entertainment experience for my child.
Often, just by quickly scanning the summary list of websites visited/linked to, I can determine which of the many URLs are likely to be ad-servers simply based upon their names/addresses. It would be great to be able to "check them off" quickly and then move on to other tasks without having to manually and individually drill-down into each listing to block it.
The method or solution I envision would be similar to when you quickly scan an e-mail Inbox and quickly "check off" the messages that are likely to be spam/junk and then are easily deleted so that you can then proceed with reading the other messages.
[3] numeric IPs
Sometimes when researching the pedigree of websites I find out details via a [whois] search. That then often leads to a listing of RANGES of IPs associated with that address. It would be easier to simply enter a range of IPs to block in such an instance than to manually input each IP or translated domain name.
Of course, this would also mean that SafetyMinder/OnlineFamily would have to be able to use numeric IPs in addition to translated names.
[4] "wildcard" function
This is somewhat related to [#1 & #3] above. A "wildcard" function for either numeric IPs or translated names would be very useful. In the example of ad-servers, they often use groups or ranges that are very similar. For example, [ad1.adserver.com], [ad2.adserver.com], [ad3.adserver.com]; etc... Instead of having to individually mark each one to block it, using a "wildcard" of [*.adserver.com] would take care of all of them. This scheme would be useful for blocking all sorts of unwanted, unsavory or inappropriate content. It would also make blocking a numeric IP range easy.
I understand some of these issues may be solved by using the standard built-in "filters" for types of content, but sometimes the filters fail or are not up-to-date, or the website doesn't properly identify itself, or only certain ones would be allowed (by using the "exceptions"). It is simply another method that provides some more flexibility and power in achieving control over the usage of our individual computers.
Thank you for your kind attention and consideration.
topspy,
Thanks for sharing the information with us. I'll put them into our enhancement list for the management team to consider.
Thanks,
Katie
Another suggestion....
When manually blocking a URL, provide a checkbox and/or buttons to allow propagation of the newly created rule to ALL or SELECTED other family members on monitored account(s). Some websites may need to be blocked for all other members, while some may only need to be blocked for certain members of the family. Currently, if it should be blocked for more than one member, then it would have to be manually replicated on to each monitored account individually.
Thanks!! 
topspy,
Thanks again for your suggestions. I'll put it to our enhancement list.
Thanks,
Katie