crossdressers.com not allowed on Chick Fil-a wifi

[Courtney . J]

big surprise hmm ? :devil:,.. i was eating there the other day and one of my favorite things to do on my lunch hour is bring along my small cheapo lap top and browse the web to kill some time ,. and since this site is by far one of my favorite sites, i just love to hang out here and see whats going on ,. well i was not allowed to have that enjoyment the other day because they're server had blocked this site because it was a "adult themed pornographic website",.. yet i could go to goodle images and look at all the naked pictures i wanted to ,. wth ? :doh:


ive eaten at a number of other places and most of them allow this website ,. but not CF-A ,. like i said , big surprise huh

anywhoo i just had to rant a little bit and say that they lost my business with they're narrow minded business conduct ,. even though i luv them lil damn chicken sammaches :heehee:


maybe ill go in there this weekend as CJ and see how im treated :D:devil::heehee:

[Debglam]

Yup. No surprise. Go to Micky D's. Their chicken sandwiches are just as good and your not funding a hater when you eat there, which makes them taste even better!

[NathalieX66]

Yeah, lol! We post a lot of pornographic pictures. :heehee:

I can't say I've logged on to this site on my Ipad, mainly because I never bothered to enter the password like on my other computer. Most people will find me looking at Huffington Post or Youtube, and my Nathalie facebook page. I'm pretty much a regular at any given McDonalds, and also my favorite drive thru, Sonic. ..... I love their #7 Coney Island Chili Cheese dog and a lime limeade.

CFA, and Hobby Lobby (whose CEO flat out said " we don't serve Jews") are generally two places I refuse to patronize.

[Rogina B]

Don't give "Closed on Sundays" another dime...no one should!

[Allesandra Rhodes]

I'm with Rogina

:thumbsdn:

[Courtney . J]

woops i should have also mentioned that i was not eating there and i have'nt in almost 2 years for this very same reason ,. i actually just picked up some What-A Burger right across from CFA and went to they're parking lot to use the wifi :o


and while doing this the little > :devil: in me said "hmm i wonder if i can get on my fav website'' ,. and bam NOPE ,. not just a no either but a hell no ,. hahaha



so i was like forget it > :brolleyes:.. ill just go to google images and look at all the purdy gurlz that i want to :heehee:

[Tracii G]

Contact corporate and ask the to find porn on this site in fact dare them.LOL

[Tamara Croft]

PM me details of this place, address etc please... I'm going to give them what for!!

[Allesandra Rhodes]

Uh oh, now they're in deep s**t :devil:

[Annette Todd]

That is not cfa. their server obviously uses a web filter not unlike other places I have been like some truck stop that offers free WiFi. If you have to find someone to criticize, try looking in the mirror first or have you forgotten that little lesson? let those who are free of guilt cast the first stone.

[tiffanyjo89]

I think I was in a hospital (might have been a hospital, it was somewhere with free wifi, I remember that much) and tried to access this site and it was blocked there. It's probably a desire of Chick-fil-a's owners and operators to filter out adult content. They probably have a way of tracking traffic (probably useful in law enforcement scenarios, so they know who did what when, and I feel they have full right to do this if they do), as well as an automatically updated list of sites provided by a third party filter. Also, I think it's a lot harder to block particular Google Image searches without blocking the whole feature as a whole.

That being said, I do feel like it is a valid block, since this site does deal with "adult themes". If you want to be able to access it wherever you are no matter what, get a phone or a mobile hotspot, it's kinda pointless to complain about the free wifi provided by a company you refuse to give service to, since it is a service for their customers, not people who want to pull into the parking lot and use it without buying a sandwich.

[Tamara Croft]

let those who are free of guilt cast the first stone.Oh puh-lease, keep the bible quotes to yourself, it's wifi and it's NOT stealing if it's an OPEN network!! You have an open network, people are going to use it, end of story. When I was in Buffalo, the hotels internet security was terrible, I accessed their main system, it was OPEN, unsecured.... entirely stupid. So... plz be quiet!


Uh oh, now they're in deep s**t :devil:Blocking this site for porno?? damn straight they are... this site is about as pornographic as the Disney channel... (don't even go there... I mean it lol)...

[ME2.0]

I'll admit, I show a little bit of leg on my avatar and profile pic, but I've never considered myself "porn" before. Wow, kinda makes me feel a little frisky...LOL

Hugs from a porn queen...

Staci

[Tamara Croft]

Aren't they those asshats that are against gay marriage or something?? I just vaguely remember something like that... if so, makes more sense why we're blocked... makes me mad... porn... PORN... I'll send them some :censor: porn that will make their hair curl :eek:

[Brooklyn]

Probably you've seen Willam Belli, Detox, and Vicky Vox in this spoof - but ICYMI: http://youtu.be/sO-msplukrw

[Tamara Croft]

:lol: I've not seen that no, that's pretty funny... :)

[LeaP]

Of COURSE it's Chick Fil-A, Annette ... Do you follow the news? Do you think they would unblock the site when they found out what it REALLY is?


"Oh, it's only about crossdressers, genderqueers, and transsexuals! OK, then! Right-o!"

Uh-Huh :lol:

[Tamara Croft]

Well, apart from alleged wifi theft, anti gay etc... this site still is NOT of a pornographic nature, if they are going to block us, they should have the balls to tell us why, which is why, when I get the information, I'm going to email them!

And LeaP... did you really have to use that avatar?? I'm going to have nightmares now... /no likey wizard of oz :sad:

[Rachael Leigh]

Chik Fil la is a fine company and bashing them is wrong, they have their beliefs and they have as much right to them as everyone on here has to theirs. To many people assume Chiistians are haters. I've got news for you I am a Christian and I try not to hate anyone but I am a sinner just as we all are. Many places to block websites for any adult content. I work for a company that's very gay friendly but I can't go to certaint sites online.

[LeaP]

I'm glad I didn't use that other witch, then ...

[Tamara Croft]

Chik Fil la is a fine company and bashing them is wrong,Is it? so it's ok for them to block this forum and stating a false reason for blocking it then? This isn't a gay site, this is a CDing support forum, there is a huge difference and we certainly do NOT have porn on here. They are anti-gay, how is that not bashing others...

[Rachael Leigh]

Tamara I don't understand why is it when someone stands on their faith and have a beliefs it bashing but when someone criticizes someone's religious beliefe it's ok. The blocking software is usually not site spacific it usually looks for certain words and themes and has been stated this is and adult site. I would not want a young child or teen on here. But you are entitled to your opinion as am I but as I said my faith is stong and I don't hate gay people or any such thing I just want to show them how God loves them just like anyone in this messed up world we live in.

[Eryn]

[Moderator hat on]

Religious discussion is not allowed as it rapidly becomes divisive. This thread is about the WI-fi policy of a particular business. Let's stick to that.

[giuseppina]

Chik Fil la is a fine company and bashing them is wrong, they have their beliefs and they have as much right to them as everyone on here has to theirs. ...

The owners of this company are reported as being heterosexist. I'm afraid I cannot support such an organisation, as sexuality and gender are not as malleable as they think they are.

As things stand, this company has no stores in Canada to my knowledge, so I cannot express my displeasure by not patronising their establishments. That is as far as I'm prepared to go, as I don't have the funds to take them to court over their policies, the only other legal way to call them to account for their actions. Going to the news media requires me to tell the world I'm a crossdresser; I'm not ready to be out as it may affect my employment.

[Simone.B]

Is it? so it's ok for them to block this forum and stating a false reason for blocking it then? This isn't a gay site, this is a CDing support forum, there is a huge difference and we certainly do NOT have porn on here. They are anti-gay, how is that not bashing others...

I won't say it is ok, but it is their right. Just as it is the rights of the Administrators/Owners of this site to place whatever limits they want, such as what subjects can't be talked about.

[Rachael Leigh]

Sounds good Eyrn so we should not be bashing a company on a thread either just because they don't fit or believe in this website. We could be here all day doing that to many places of business that don't agree with this lifestyle. This is a place for support and friendship conversation. I do know for a fact that there are many gay folks who actually work for Chik Fil la

[Nicole Erin]

Seems weird how a business would allow their beliefs to hinder their income. I mean if they want to get nit picky about right and wrong then they should not allow credit card use either. To keep my post from getting moderated I will leave it at that.

You go public with hate towards a group and you tend to lose that sector's business. They should have stayed neutral.

In their defense - whatever server or filter they use probably didn't single out a few sites (like this one) just to discriminate. Too many TG sites out there ARE porn so this one probably just got mistakenly lumped in. A computer program doesn't have a clue what is porn and what isn't. OK put it this way -
At work our Internet has filters of course and there is a lot of blocked things that one would be like "WTH?" I mean just silly crap. When I am working at one of the stations that has a computer, I often like to surf the web like we are not suppose to be doing, maybe searching images of "living room" or whatever and 1/2 the images are blocked.

In the bigger scheme of GLBT rights, chick-fil-a really has little to no influence. Who gives a damn about some greasy chicken sandwich dump hole fast food place? Give me a big greasy cheeseburger instead.

[ME2.0]

I believe that Chik Fil la is entitled to do what they want with their business. I am also entitled to boycott their business if I feel like their bigoted view of a piece of my personality doesn't fit my image of a friendly place to eat.

Just my opinion.

Staci

[Jenny Green]

Oh puh-lease, keep the bible quotes to yourself, it's wifi and it's NOT stealing if it's an OPEN network!! You have an open network, people are going to use it, end of story. When I was in Buffalo, the hotels internet security was terrible, I accessed their main system, it was OPEN, unsecured.... entirely stupid. So... plz be quiet!


Trying to justify theft by saying "It was open" doesn't hold up. Commercial businesses provide services and products for their clientele, for profit, for the benefit of the business, officers, employees, and shareholders. Taking their services or products without permission or without payment of some kind is theft, plain and simple.

[edith]

Yeaaah if we're going to bash Chick-fil-A let's do it for the owners' politics, not for a reasonable public wi-fi policy. Pornographic or not, there is plenty of sexual content on this site.

[Leona]

Chik Fil la is a fine company and bashing them is wrong, they have their beliefs and they have as much right to them as everyone on here has to theirs. To many people assume Chiistians are haters. I've got news for you I am a Christian and I try not to hate anyone but I am a sinner just as we all are. Many places to block websites for any adult content. I work for a company that's very gay friendly but I can't go to certaint sites online.

NO company has the right to make health care decisions for their employees. Health care is an individual right to decide.

Furthermore, chik-fil-A doesn't have the right to decide what's too adult for people and what isn't. There are accepted societal norms, and unless they decide they're Disney (hah!), they don't have that right. Even Disney doesn't have that right (and they've failed anyway). If they don't like people accessing certain websites on their property, that's purely ideological. You can argue they contracted with a third party for that work and it's a fine argument that ignores all the other businesses that don't give a flying eff about what people look at.

Someone, somewhere, has blocked this site for ideological reasons, and Chick-fil-A agrees with it.

Tamara: We're surprisingly on the same page. If you want some carefully crafted "I hate you, but I'm saying it in a nice way" prose, PM me and I'll deliver.

[Rachael Leigh]

Well I'm sure if that's the case they don't have those rights than is this some kind if dictatorship we live in. Companies make decisions everyday business related or not it's there money and we or you don't have to eat there. There are plenty of other places to go. I just get tired of the one way street when it comes to bashing someone for their beliefs. This is still a free country. Last time I checked

[Stephanie47]

I suspect this site is blocked because of general word associations. How many times have I read on this site that the member should guide their wives or girlfriends to this site so they do not "Google" cross dressers and have the entire page fill up with numerous pornographic sites or at a minimum sites of a really lesser class.

[Tamara Croft]

I just get tired of the one way street when it comes to bashing someone for their beliefs.Have you even read any of this thread, because quite honestly, I don't think you have. This thread has got NOTHING TO DO WITH THEIR BELIEFS, READ THE BLOODY THREAD!!!

This thread is discussing why this company has blocked this website for supposedly having pornography on it, when it does not. There might be mild sexual content, but like the OP said, all she needed to do was go on google and get access to 'purty girls' (her words) without it being blocked, THAT IS THE POINT OF THIS THREAD.... It's pretty damn obvious it is being blocked for being a cd site, but the actual reason given is false, which is why I said I was going to make a complaint. They can block us all they like, that isn't the issue, the issue is, this does NOT have pornography on it!!! IS THAT CLEAR FOR YOU!!! gosh!

[MissJoanne]

I believe that Chik Fil la is entitled to do what they want with their business.

Indeed. Personally, having some experience of the technology, I seriously doubt if they went out of their way to block this site. The contractor who installed it would have been remitted to "block adult content" - there are a number of proprietary products out there to do that, all of which use a very "broad brush" approach. In my opinion, if I may quote the Bard, "Much Ado About Nothing".

[Tamara Croft]

"block adult content" .and you'd find you were wrong had you bothered to read the rest of the OP's posts in this thread :rolleyes:

[Persephone]

Indeed. Personally, having some experience of the technology, I seriously doubt if they went out of their way to block this site. The contractor who installed it would have been remitted to "block adult content" - there are a number of proprietary products out there to do that, all of which use a very "broad brush" approach. In my opinion, if I may quote the Bard, "Much Ado About Nothing".

Agree. Not much of a user of free wi-fi at restaurants, etc. but I have had this site blocked in hotels and have complained loudly and forcefully to their management.

I think there was an incident where aol, or perhaps one of the other major ISPs, tried to block porn or something and blocked the word "breast" which, for a day or so, meant that their subscribers couldn't access information on breast feeding or breast cancer.

Think I'll try to arrange lunch tomorrow at Chik-Fil-A, en femme of course, and bring my laptop and see if it happens at my local one.

Meanwhile, go get 'em Tamara!

Hugs,
Persephone.

[Vickie_CDTV]

They get those site blacklists from various sources, and they often blacklist things they shouldn't and do not block things they are supposed to, it is the nature of those shared blacklists. They often just blacklist anything that sounds like it is about crossdressing, because they are like much of the general public and still think anything about crossdressing has to be adult in nature. (TG Forum is probably blocked too, among other sites.) I doubt Dan Cathy actually sent out some kind of executive memo ordering all their stores with wifi to blacklist this site specifically or something.

[Angela Campbell]

Chik fil a has every right to block whatever they want. I also have a right to decide if they are telling me they do not like me and where to spend my money. Too bad to because they have the best chicken biscuit in the world. Ok so I stopped eating biscuits for weight reasons...but still I know where I am not wanted.

If it was something that fell between the cracks it is still a reminder of some statements they have publicly made that show ignorance and blind negativity towards something that never hurt anyone. Gay marriage never hurt a single person and who are they to tell me who I can love?

[Annette Todd]

The owners of this company are reported as being heterosexist.

Well then I am a hetrosexist then... The whole big to do with the views of the owners of CFS is not in whole or part in the policies of their corporation. The haters are the ones who continue their bigotry against a company that exists to make a profit just as any other. If you want to live in your own universe where you are always right, fine! You don't have the right to dictate what everyone is allowed to believe in mine.
Do you really believe the owners of CFA would go to the effort of banning this forum when they most likely have more important issues to deal with than such a petty issue as this.

Egad! why did I allow myself to get sucked into this petty bs in the first place?

Y'all go forth and be petty, it reflects so well on the rest of us.

eryn, ban me please so I won't be tempted to come back anymore...

[Angela Campbell]

It may not be part of their policies as a corporation, but they have made a public statement. Would it be petty if they said that they believe a woman's place is in the kitchen? Or that black children should be segregated into separate schools? They supported the use of government force to stop something that hurts absolutely no one because of blind bigotry.

[Beverley Sims]

I had trouble convincing T-Mobile to let me access this site until I said it was for educational and therapeutic reasons.
Remember they are the ones that had a big production number with girls in pink singing "Home for the holidays."
I believe some girls from this site took part in the promo.
This was Dec 2011.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2gwHx_LhdWA

[Rogina B]

"Closed on Sunday" has voiced their opinion on social issues quite strongly.The Italian pasta maker recently did the same. They can do as they want but they both have lost more than a few customers from stating their positions on life issues"as they see it". I suspect the WiFi filter is as tight as they could have it,knowing their corporate views...

[stephNE]

I agree with a lot of the other girls, I won't support CFA.

[Kali]

It would appear that most of the people in this thread don't understand how web content blocking works. Almost no one goes and blocks sites explicitly; they pick a category, such as adult content or weapons or religion and click a check box on their filter device/service/software. That product then blocks everything it has put on the blacklist for that category. CFA is unlikely to have put any specific sites on the list, very few vendors do.

The blocking is by URL, not by actual content scanning, which is why Google images brings up the porn. A firearms related web site I'm active on has two alternate URLs which seem to be on different topics; most web blocking software stops the primary URL but not the secondary.

Feel free to hate CFA for the owners religious beliefs; after all, you are human and you are entitled to the same beliefs as CFA, if from the other side, but dial down the paranoia on topics that are unrelated.

[Laura28]

As much as i disagree on there policy they are a private buisness and have every right to block what ever they want to. After all they are offering you there internet acess. You have the right to not fequent the place. Even as a crossdresser i support their right to block this sight or any other they choose. Just like i support my right to shop and eat were ever i choose.

[Marleena]

I guess it's my turn. This thread has nothing to do about religion. It's about blocking this website and is a legitimate complaint. Yes I know it may be blocking based on key words. The company has history though.

It's also about a business owner that spends millions of dollars from profits earned by his business to promote hate. Some of those dollars have come from LGBT patrons prior to this knowledge. He may even be indirectly responsible for hate crimes against those minorities because of his stance. Here's who he donates to.

http://www.policymic.com/articles/12219/all-the-anti-gay-companies-you-fund-when-you-spend-5-25-on-a-chick-fil-a-sandwich

[NicoleScott]

It's also about a business owner that spends millions of dollars from profits earned by his business to promote hate. Some of those dollars have come from LGBT patrons prior to this knowledge. He may even be indirectly responsible for hate crimes against those minorities because of his stance.

Here come the bomb-throwers. If you don't agree with another's ideology, accuse them of being haters. That's outrageous. It's their business and they can set the policies they want. You can choose not to go there. They pay for the wi-fi, you can use if for free, but you use what they provide.
At least once I have read "if you don't like the forum rules and how it's moderated, start your own CDing site." Same thing. Start your own chicken joint, and provide all the unfiltered wi-fi you want.
For every person who chooses to stay away from Chick Fil-A because of their policies, there are others who give them their business for the same reason.

[Marleena]

Here come the bomb-throwers. If you don't agree with another's ideology, accuse them of being haters.


Sorry but I just hate haters (which he is), it does not matter about religion or the lack of. Yes, they are allowed to set their own policies and express their views because it is a free country. LGBT are struggling because of narrow minded views like his, you are part of that umbrella. If you met this man enfemme in person you can be sure he'd be appalled by you.

*edit*
Here is a list of hate groups in the U.S. and the definition of a hater: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hate_group

Oh and sorry mods I've taken us off topic..

[LeaP]

Time for a change-up ...

The time is coming - not tomorrow, not next week, but eventually - when publically-accessible wi-fi in places like malls is going to be looked at from a public accomodation standpoint. There is increasing interest in looking at internet access from a rights standpoint as the world becomes more and more dependent on it.

Should public wi-fi be treated as a "place" of public accomodation, religion-based blocking will lose (in the US, anyway), just as you can't block, say, a muslim from entering a mall.

I know a great deal about blocking, having been responsible for deploying web server infrastructure (among other things) globally. And while filtering runs *mostly* on rules and algorithms, the cabability always exists to filter or allow selectively at many levels and in many ways. There is NO sense in which a company is not fully responsible for their filtering approach - and resulting effects. There is case law on both the blocking and access sides of this, though the details vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. Google it if you like.

[suchacutie]

Hmm...aren't we aiming at the wrong target? Hasn't this site been blocked because of adult content? If that's the case then I just don't see an issue. We do have adult content. Their filter doesn't work well it seems since porn gets through. Bad filter.

[Tamara Croft]

How many times do I need to repeat myself???

For those of you who keep saying they've blocked us for being an adult website, you are incorrect.


"adult themed pornographic website"

That is the reason. In Courtneys 2nd post, obviously NONE of you are reading it, which is really annoying....


ill just go to google images and look at all the purdy gurlz that i want to

So she can find pornographic images that aren't blocked, but we are blocked, for being something we are not, what's not to understand?? :hd:

[NicoleScott]

Should public wi-fi be treated as a "place" of public accomodation, religion-based blocking will lose (in the US, anyway), just as you can't block, say, a muslim from entering a mall.

We should be careful what we wish for. There may be some irony coming our way. If what you say is true, LeaP, Chick Fil-A won't be allowed to filter the wi-fi they pay for and provide to their customers, because it's "public". Their opposition to allowing access to sites with sexual content won't be honored because some say it's "religious-based". So there go the filters, and we'll all get to see the hate spewed by Muslim extremists calling for the killing of the infidels, with maybe an extra bullet for the homosexuals, crossdressers, pork-eaters, Christians, and anyone else not like them.
But hate is OK is you just hate the right people for the right reasons. Right, Marleena?

[Rachael Leigh]

I don't really pretend to know the intent of why CFA blocked this site. We all understand how they stand on issues as they were in the forefront of the news. I myself am most likely in the minority here as I do support them for having the right to do as they wish. Im sure Im also in the minority for not being ashamed for being a Christian and expressing to all of you who I am in that part of me as Im not afraid of expressing my CD side. I apologize to anyone here that Ive offended for any reason in this thread. I just hope that when it comes to such issues of blocked sites for whatever reason that we just move on and don't try and make a big deal out of why or what made them do it. There is a lot online that can be quite offensive to many and if they choose to block it so be it.
Everyone have a great day.

[Marleena]

But hate is OK is you just hate the right people for the right reasons. Right, Marleena?

Whatever you say Nicole. It is a free country. Back to topic: The internet should be completely open so we can continue to choose what sites to visit or ignore.:)

[RachelB.]

Responsible websites that restrict membership to 18 years old and older are often caught in web filters. My local restaurant blocks this site but just refers to not allowing adult only web sites. While I may or may not agree with their stand on some issues I do respect their right to their beliefs. If I'm in their "house" I respect their wishes. By a mifi and not have to worry about someone elses filters.

[NicoleScott]

OK, back to topic. Doesn't Chick Fil-A (or any other company or individual) have some right to decide what internet content is viewed (and importantly, may be viewed by others including kids) in their place, on their wi-fi that they pay for? In the name of free choice, do we want to see someone on a porn site while we eat a chicken sandwich?
If they are required to remove all filtering, I think they would stop offering wi-fi for their customers. What power that gives to people who have no stake in the company to say " you'll do it MY way or not at all". Gee, that sounds familiar nowadays, doesn't it?

[Tamara Croft]

Rachel that's fair enough, we are an adult site because we allow only members aged 18 years or over, but that is due to USA laws (which I find silly).

I think the point is really, getting to the real reason this site is blocked by a company that has been in the media for being hateful to others. No one has the right to be hateful to anyone, they can block us, that is up to them, but we are a support forum, nothing more.

Yes a company has the right to block whatever content they want to block, that isn't the point Nicole, you seem to be missing it.

[Marleena]

I'm just happy certain individuals don't have the power to block or censor websites on the internet itself. I'm quite certain they would make sure nobody knew people like us exist. Luckily they don't and we can have these discussions with our friends.:)

[Veronica27]

It is getting rather difficult to distinguish between the haters and the hated, both here and elsewhere.

Marleena, did you read the comments to your link about CFL's contributions? They are hardly in agreement with the article.

The OP is about whether or not CFL has a right to block this site, and indirectly whether or not a non-customer has a right to tap into their WiFi. However, the initiator of the thread left no doubt about his thoughts by the wording of the piece, and it invited a lot of supporting comments spewing reverse hatred at both CFL and its CEO. These were followed by some more reasoned responses by those explaining the blocking process and how this site could fall victim to the methodology of those servers. There were also some posts dealing with the ethics of tapping into WiFi provided by others. However the attacks on the opinions and beliefs of others has continued throughout the thread.

Instead of such vitriol, and taking actions such as boycotting the business, has anyone taken the time to write to their head office, explaining what this site is about and asking in a nice way whether their policy could be changed? In all likelihood, they have never heard of the site. If they do not wish to make a change, then the decision would be a purely business decision, despite what anyone here wants to think. There is no evidence of anyone being denied employment or service at CFL over such issues. If you strongly disagree, then don't patronize them, and certainly do not make use of their WiFi. My wife refuses to use the washroom in a donut or coffee shop unless she is making a purchase. It costs the establishment to provide any service and imposing becomes an ethical issue, even though there are laws in place requiring such businesses to provide such things as washrooms.

The direction of this thread is one of the reasons why I am not comfortable being a spokesman for the TG community or overly supportive of transgender rights. There is a mentality among many of self-importance that marginalizes the opinions and beliefs of others, and regards the slightest opposition as hate.

I don't know if this thread can really remain on topic as any discussion tends to involve personal beliefs.

Veronica

[NicoleScott]

Seriously, Tamara, no sarcasm here, I thought the thread was about a company's right to restrict content they felt was inappropriate (to them, who pay for it and want to provide the atmosphere that best serves their customers.) To my thinking, wi-fi is provided so customers can do things like check e-mail and current events while eating a chicken biscuit on their way to work. If I'm missing the point, what is it? If the point was that this site shouldn't be blocked, I agree, but it went beyond that.
If the point is about some people's contention that Chick Fil-A is hate-driven, then the thread really is about politics and religion, and sure enough, that's where it went. If that's where the OP was headed, how did it get this far?
If it's about Chick Fil-A in the media, isn't there a forum for that?

[Marleena]

The thread went off topic because of me, I admitted it. I was showing past history as a reason why people might be suspicious of the company website blocking policies.

Oh...and I have the perfect solution. If you want a chicken sandwich go ahead and get it if you want. Then go to MacDonalds and get a coffee so you're not loitering and use their wifi (if it's not blocked).

[Barbra P]

I don’t have Chick-Fil-a restaurant near me so I can’t check the reason given for blocking this site but which probably has more to do with their Internet provider than it does Chick-Fil-a. Crossdressers-dot-com is an adult themed site and the first topic listed under “Rules/FAQ” has to do with people under the age of 18 are banned from the site.
Skip down to the third topic “Banned or Spammer Email Addresses” where more than 120 Email addresses are listed including AOL, Yahoo-dot-com.cn, sbcglobal-dot-net (AT&T), Comcast-dot-net and Cox-dot-net, those last two are two of the largest cable & Internet providers in the United States. I can’t use my regular Email address because it is a cox.net account. Cox and many of the others on the list subscribe to various services that supply lists of sites known to carry adult content, pornography, or spam. If you own a business that supplies free Wi-Fi your attorney may suggest that you subscribe to such a service to avoid legal hassles and possible law suits from parents.

I’d prefer to use my Cox Email but I have to use Yahoo, Gmail, etc. Now before you ask why I don’t change my Internet provider I’ll tell you. In the county where I live there are basically three providers and if you live north of I-8 you use Time Warner Cable and if you live south of I8 you use Cox. The two companies are licensed and given exclusive access to areas by cities and the county. AT&T is also available but being DSL the farther you live from the switching station the worse (slower) the connection. Well I live at the end of the local main-line which means a connection somewhere between 768 Kbps up to 1.5 Mbps but I currently get better than 25 Mbps with Cox and that is being upped to 100 Mbps in the next couple of weeks.

Both Time Warner and Cox block some sites for both Internet and Email.

Courtney, you say you haven’t bought anything from Chick-Fil-a for almost two years due to some issue, but it isn’t against your morals to park in their lot and use their Internet connection; seems a bit inconsistent. Now if it was me, I also wouldn’t trade at What-A-Burger either because they don’t offer any Wi-Fi of any sort, neither filtered nor unfiltered.

Tamara I think you are taking “adult themed pornographic website” too literally. I see horrible grammar everyday on the Internet, heck a great many posts in this site and in this thread are difficult to read due to poor grammar and spelling. Pornography is generally thought to be adult oriented and to say “adult themed pornography” seems a bit superfluous. This appears to be a case where somebody may have meant “adult themed or pornographic” which would make a lot more sense.

[Lorileah]

Get a MiFi and use your smart phone. Let 4 others tap in if you want. Personally I would starve before I ate @ Chik-fil-a and several other corporate places (for a myriad of reasons..not just LGBT rights). The more I learn about all of them the less I eat there which would be good for my waist. IMO it isn't stealing if you offer it without restrictions (like having to buy which some companies do). Sort of like if you have a drinking fountain or a public restroom....or a TV that is broadcasting the Broncos game (which technically is illegal too if you use cable and don't pay for commercial use). The sign in the window says "Free WiFi" then it is free for as long as the grass grows and the rivers flow. I could not play online poker at the hospital because of their blocks. I got a thumb modem.

And PS, some here are showing their bigotry in many directions.

[LeaP]

... What power that gives to people who have no stake in the company to say " you'll do it MY way or not at all". Gee, that sounds familiar nowadays, doesn't it?

From a public accommodation standpoint, the government, absolutely. But that doesn't quite rise to "my way or the highway" either. A lot of tests are applied in making PA rulings. Among other considerations, community standards, scale, rules and law pertaining to protected classes, economic and community influence, legitimate purpose, organization type, etc.

Personally, I find the organization type interesting for corporations from a personal philosophical standpoint. Beyond the boundaries of a true family business - owned, operated by, and only employing members of the family - corporations should be assumed to have NO rights pertaining to individuals. What is allowable from a privacy standpoint today (and it is a matter of allowing) is far too broad.

Nicole, you are making an impractical argument. Whether or not someone uses WiFi is irrelevant as to whether or not someone may be viewing porn (or whatever). One might be using another WiFi system, public or not, using a cellular connection, or viewing stored content.

Oh, and given Tamara's increasing irritation on the actual topic - CD.com not truly being the site type assumed to be targeted by the filter ...

In before the lock ...

[Marleena]

Marleena, did you read the comments to your link about CFL's contributions? They are hardly in agreement with the article.




Yes I did! You do realize the LGBT (includes us MTF's) are severely outnumbered though, right? You know it's is a news article where trolls are known to comment, right? I used it just to show who the company owner sends millions of dollars to.


Anyways I just realized I'm a hater too because I hate Arby's roast beef sandwiches. I have nothing more to say about this or I'll look like I'm pushing an anti Chic-Fil-A agenda on LGBT people here.:doh:

[mikiSJ]

Chik Fil la is a fine company and bashing them is wrong, they have their beliefs and they have as much right to them as everyone on here has to theirs.

You do understand the contradiction in this statement - I hope!

The ownership or CEO of Chick Fil-A, Papa John's, Barilla have all come out against something not them - I say find a store that does express any hate!

You may want to visit these sites to get a list of companies who want to make anti-gay comments (these sites are not very current:

http://pinkpanthers.tumblr.com/post/618605551/boycott-these-anti-gay-companies-do-not-give-them-your
http://www.queerty.com/seven-companies-anti-gay-groups-are-boycotting-and-you-should-be-buying-from-20120702/
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/06/28/oreo-backlash-companies-anti-gay-boycott_n_1634767.html (included for its irony value)

[Tamara Croft]

I see horrible grammar everyday on the Internet, heck a great many posts in this site and in this thread are difficult to read due to poor grammar and spelling.This isn't school, this is a support forum, but if you're going to nit pick at spelling and grammar, perhaps look at the couple of grammatical errors in your own post first, before saying anything about others.

I think this thread has been beaten enough, those who got it, great, those who decided to throw religion, wifi stealing etc etc into the mix, well this thread wasn't about that. This thread for the final and last time, was about a company known for being anti-everything blocking this forum for the INCORRECT reason.

Thread done.