I'm getting some complaints about the ad-blocker HOSTS file I implemented on the proxy server. I have clearly stated to my users that if they're having trouble navigating a particular site because of the block, simply send me the URL and I will fix that site for them.

Since implementing it, I have only recieved two specific requests to unblock sites.

However, there seem to be complaints surfacing, complaints which never reach me directly. I only hear the complaints third-hand. I suspect it's because the users don't want me to know what sites they're surfing (I guess they don't know about proxy server logs) and that if they specifically requested to ublock a site, they would be embarassed if it became known what the site was.

In any case, I'm anticipating that I'll get some sort of class-action "Take It Down" request from the users soon, and I'm composing a defense in advance, just so I can have it ready.

I already intend to include the following benefits:

- Reduced bandwidth usage on the shared DSL line (ad graphics and code are not downloaded). Overall speed slightly improved because of this.

- Reduced hard disk usage in the users' local disk drive cache.

- Users not exposed to as much commercial advertising on company time.

- Certain sites that are clearly prohibited by the company are blocked, such as X-rated content.

- Some pop-ups, pop-unders, and other similar nefarious ad techniques are blocked, increasing overall productivity.

Anyone have any other benefits I can list?