We only provide network admins with the tools to block content on their networks, we as a company do not block anyone for any reason. If this user (i.e.business) chooses to block a particular type of content on their network, we cannot interfere.Interesting. And I want to be clear. I never mentioned a boycott. That was them. Waiting to hear from Coffee Bean themselves.
You however, as a consumer, have every right to boycott their business for the way they choose to block content on their networks.
If you have any other questions or need further assistance, please don't hesitate to ask - we are more than happy to help!
This post generated a bigger response than expected, from Facebook, Twitter, comments here and email. I'm glad to see I'm not alone when experiencing "technical discrimination." (Naturally, I never thought I was, hence my ranting.)
I will keep you posted on development. As Jeffrey posted under comments here, hopefully with a friendly request, we can rectify the situation and have one less place that blocks genuine LGBT content.
Hi UTF Readers,
Unfortunately, I'm experiencing internet problems and am unable to post as usual. But here's a quick story.
As a result of AT&T failing me on my internet connection, I went to a Coffee Bean where free wi-fi is advertised as a reason to come and sit around and drink their coffee.
Kind of. As I am going through my news feed and clicking on different blogs, I get this message:
If you can't read it, it says that Pam's House Blend is blocked due to "sexuality." (Same thing for Towleroad among others.) Click on it to enlarge.
Sure, this shouldn't be anything new to us - we experience "technical" discrimination all the time when we try to visit newsworthy sites issuing stories on LGBT issues, while at work or at the library, simply because the word "gay", "lesbian", the dreaded "homosexual" and other similar key words are detected. As a result, we're immediately blocked for the reason, as described above by OpenDNS, the wi-fi source for Coffee Bean, of "sexuality."
Naturally, I wrote a rather angry email telling them they need to do a better job determining what is porn or "adult" and from what is a news or editorial blog. If I typed in "heterosexual", would the sites pulled up be blocked?
I doubt it.
I've heard the excuses before from techies about how hard it is to filter porn out while still trying not to block non-adult LGBT sites.
But then we reach a deeper issue. Is the LGBT population feeding the popularity of LGBT porn, thus making the "homosexual" key word more equivalent to porn than a description of who we are (though many of us hate that word), thus justifying the wingnuts arguments against us about being simply a sexually driven population? Or is it simply so many people are in the closet and make these LGBT porn sites and their corresponding key words so much more popular than we possibly could on our own? (Again, another issue there.) Or is it just downright discrimination?
Or is it all these things?
I don't know. What I do know is that I'm trying to continue to blog on LGBT issues - just bear with me as I weed through "technical" discrimination.