A rail-ridin' fantasy-football fan reports via e-mail that the WiFi on his commuter-rail line this morning blocked him from accessing any information about his pastime:
You can now no longer log on to any sports news site that deals with fantasy football information. ESPN? Sporting News? Sports Illustrated? ESPN? No problem going to their home pages. You just can't access any of their articles dealing with fantasy sports. Instead, you get the following message:
Web Protection
Reason:
The Web site http://games.espn.go.com/frontpage/ has been blocked by your organization's content filtering policies.Web pages that offer online games and related information such as cheats, codes, demos, emulators, online contests or role-playing games, gaming clans, game manufacturer sites, fantasy or virtual sports leagues,and other gaming sites with out chances of profit. Gaming consoles, such as Microsoft Xbox® and Sony PlayStation®, are included in this category.
He fumes:
Now I can understand that the MBTA may want to shut off access to certain sites (like gaming sites using emulators) that are bandwith hogs, but why oh why are they blocking articles based on subject matter?
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
Not cool
By Pete Nice
Fri, 12/09/2011 - 9:04am
This is playoff time too.
Damn MBTA!
(There are ways to get around fantasy filters on ESPN.com. If you have a log in name you can log in and go to your content without it getting filtered. Just don't click on the words "fantasy". Works on other filters I have encountered anyway)
Grrrrr...
By Ice-9
Fri, 12/09/2011 - 9:45am
As I mentioned to Adam, based on the new log-in screen it appears that a new WiFi system was installed today. It's never blocked my fantasy football sites before today.
It was the Fitchburg line, BTW.
So the T feels it necessary to "improve" the WI-FI
By roadman
Fri, 12/09/2011 - 10:42am
service for that small percentage of passengers that use it. How about putting that effort into improving the actual transportation service, which all the passengers use, first?
This is just one more reason why they don't deserve a fare increase.
Whoa! Slow down! Improve
By elias
Fri, 12/09/2011 - 11:51am
Whoa! Slow down! Improve the service? Absolutely unheard of (lol). Oh, and maybe someone here can help me out. I’m looking for a good online stats tracker… When I watch the games at home I stick to the RedZone for my updates but as DISH employee I sometimes work on Sundays so I’d like to have something online I can check on my lunch break. RedZone has some pretty sweet integrated features, and I get to see all the big plays before they hit the highlight reel, but online I just need something simple, but hopefully real time. Anyone have any suggestions? Thanks in advance for any help!
Broken Record
By anon
Fri, 12/09/2011 - 3:03pm
Or a parrot with OCD.
The Horror, The Horror
By anon
Fri, 12/09/2011 - 9:06am
it is a strange thing to block. The only possible reason i can think of is that they dont want the kids on the way to school to access these sites. Does not make any sense though.
Bandwidth might be the issue, or there is some sort of moral crusader at the T not wanting to expose the public to fun.
Fun is the Devil's tool. Just
By riggssm
Fri, 12/09/2011 - 4:36pm
Fun is the Devil's tool. Just say no.
Gambling Sites
By Suldog
Fri, 12/09/2011 - 4:46pm
It could be an attempt to block illegal gambling. There may be enough similarities between the fantasy football sites and on-line bookies.
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogspot.com
At least you can log in!
By MassMouse
Fri, 12/09/2011 - 9:46am
By the time I'm finally connected, it's time to get off the bloody train anyway!
Are they using the same
By pierce
Fri, 12/09/2011 - 10:43am
Are they using the same filters that are in place for their employees? I can totally understand an employer blocking fanstasy sports sites.
All aboard the hate train!
By Cutriss
Fri, 12/09/2011 - 12:20pm
All right! Another MBTA thread! I'm totally psyched up to lay some blame on the MBTA for censoring Internet content!
Wait...what's that? The Internet connectivity is provided by a third party? I don't care, it's still the MBTA's fault!
Wait...you mean the train isn't even operated by the MBTA? Well, I'm certainly not gonna let facts get in my way! DOWN WITH THE MBTA.
The Internet connectivity
By roadman
Fri, 12/09/2011 - 12:53pm
is provided by a third party through a contract with the MBTA. The commuter rail service is provided by a third party through a contract with the MBTA.
At some point during the process, it is MBTA managers who have to negotiate these contracts, which are then reviewed and approved by the MBTA Board of Directors.
So it is perfectly legitimate to lay the issues of the commuter rail WIFI site censorship, and the poor commuter rail performance in general, on MBTA management.
Assuming...
By Cutriss
Fri, 12/09/2011 - 2:58pm
Assuming that this was even within the purview of the MBTA and not done on MBCR's end (just because they say so doesn't mean it's true), is it reasonable to think that the MBTA has to sign off on all these small changes?
Odds are pretty good that AT&T did it without checking with MBTA first. They probably have all of these contracted semi-public wireless APs in the same usage class and they just regulated them all at once.
I'm obviously capable of sweeping generalizations as much as the next man, but I was primarily doing it for the purpose of hyperbole. Without knowing all the facts, it's very easy for people to jump to conclusions and I really think the MBTA gets saddled with an incredibly unfair amount of hate and loathing.
So you're saying that having the ISP that the MBTA hired
By roadman
Fri, 12/09/2011 - 3:15pm
arbitrarily changing the permissible content their passengers can access on their trains is a minor detail that the MBTA shouldn't be expected to have any control over whatsoever.
And do you really think having the MBTA and MBCR telling their customers "It's not our problem (even though the equipment is on our trains), talk to our ISP", when they're informed of this arbitrary and needless change, is an acceptable response.
Whoa there...
By Cutriss
Fri, 12/09/2011 - 9:49pm
Putting an awful lot of words in my mouth, aren't you?
As a signatory to the contract, I'm sure they have control over it. Does that mean that the responsible party *checked in* with them about it? It was probably just a casual mistake.
And as for the write-off, I never said that was an acceptable response either.
I guess when you're busy hunting witches, it's pretty easy to rope extra people in with them.
My, that's some rant there,
By Ice-9
Fri, 12/09/2011 - 1:46pm
My, that's some rant there, Cutriss. For the record, I asked MBCR what the deal was, and they told me to contact...wait for it...the MBTA. You know, the folks that you feel bear no responsibility for the new WiFi filter:
Not quite
By Cutriss
Fri, 12/09/2011 - 3:07pm
I'm not saying they bear no responsibility, but it's likely that this didn't happen with their knowledge, so the people that seem to think that the MBTA is busy fiddling with Internet access while the Orange Line burns might want to step back and rethink things.
I mean, it's not like I blame Menino if I get a parking ticket without actually breaking any laws. There's plenty of other crap to lay at his feet, sure, but let's start with Occam's Razor, people.
Generally these content
By AlertNewEngland
Fri, 12/09/2011 - 12:48pm
Generally these content filters are turnkey operations. When you need to limit internet at your business/school/coffee shop, the software comes preconfigured to block the things that people commonly want blocked. That way your IT guy/computer ed teacher/barista doesn't have to spend days typing in every possible website that might be objectionable.
I'm guessing the people who manage the MBCR wi-fi installed the software and checked the "default settings" box.
First World Problem
By Jeff F
Fri, 12/09/2011 - 2:02pm
.
Just Out Of Curiosity...
By Suldog
Fri, 12/09/2011 - 4:53pm
... which one do you live in?
OK, I suppose that's just snarky. Sorry. But, really, I'm curious. What exactly would you have people do here? Discuss nothing but what's happening in the third world? Or is it OK to discuss second world nations, too?
Seriously. Give us some guidelines.
Suldog
http://jimsuldog.blogsapot.com
This might help
By Dave
Fri, 12/09/2011 - 4:02pm
Here.
This might help.