> intent has a lot to do with it I don't really see how we can expect that to scale from policies inherited by adversaries. We quietly do this kind of censors

> intent has a lot to do with it I don't really see how we can expect that to scale from policies inherited by adversaries. We quietly do this kind of censorship all the time -- the government sends fines to public broadcasting channels that use curse words, and limit their stories to those that are generally G or PG rated content. I am a free speech absolutist, and again, I agree with your position, but I can't find any reason why (ignoring whose list you prefer) a list of preferences that included "family friendliness" would not be just as utile or effective at assisting the surely difficult job of curation as literary value or whatever libraries are using themselves now (which I assume they can still use to exclude books not currently covered by this policy.) It would be easy to say that the government should have no control over the libraries, but they're public libraries, ergo are functionally just little tendrils off the arms of government already.