

CLOTHING /
CORSETS & PETTICOATS /
FOOTWEAR & LEGWEAR /
HAIR & MAKEUP /
JEWELRY & ADORNMENT/
MISCELLANY/
Pictures
I don't want to go off on a rant here, BUT:
I have made this page because one of the vendors I have linked to has gotten me rather upset. Please understand, this page contains my OPINION and the opinions of a few other readers of the alt.gothic.fashion newsgroup. This page also includes copy/pasted emails between myself and the company Barrington Brolly who makes parasols. The named signature on the emails from the company have been omitted for owners privacy, as the problem I have had is with the company, Barrington Brolly, not any particular individual.
The story thus far.....
I orignally had a link on my "Miscellany" page under "Parasols" that read as follows:
"Barrington Brolly
A variety of parasols made of Solarweave fabric for protection from the
sun."
I then received an email from the company :
"
> Hello Lauren. I am sending this e-mail to ask if you would please
remove my site from your links page (under parasols). I know you asked
permission some time ago and I agreed, but I realize that our target
markets are not the same.
I do appreciate you including us on your site over the past months, but
I have decided to focus on other areas.
Thanks again, Lauren, and best of wishes for the holiday season and into
the new year."
Since she no longer wanted the link, I deleted the direct link and put instead:
"Barrington Brolly
A variety of parasols made of Solarweave fabric for protection from the
sun. I have removed the link per their request as they state "our target
markets are not the same" You can visit them at www.barringtonbrolly.com
tho if you still want to, I just can't link to them :) "
Why didn't I remove the reference entirely? Because I felt, and still do feel, that visitors to my site are interested in such products, and I do think that they make a nice product from what I have seen on their site. I felt that it would be a disservice to visitors to the site to not list a site that offered something they would be interested in. Additionally, I have read previous glowing reviews on the alt.gothic.fashion newsgroup about this company.
I made the change removing the direct link and promtly forgot about the matter.
About a month later, I recieved this email from the company:
"> Hi Lauren. Thanks for removing the direct link to our site. However, what
I intended was to have any reference to Barrington Brolly removed from your
site.
I apologize for the misunderstanding. However, this business decision is
important to us and, as such, I would appreciated it if you would completely
remove any reference to Barrington Brolly from your site."
Okay...... hrm. Well.... How is one to take that? I have been accused of being too sensitive, and perhaps that is true, but to me these very politely worded emails implied, in my OPINION that this company did not want to do business with the sort of folks that would visit my website. In my opinion, this company wanted to be removed because they did not wish to be associated with those that had a gothic lifestyle, or costuming interest. Well, guess what, I got a bit miffed. Perhaps a more "professionally" worded email to the company would have been recieved more favorably, but at this stage, I felt I was dealt a thinly veiled insult to my lifestyle choice, and as such, I penned off a hasty email to Barrington Brolly:
"You are a retail site are you not? If you don't want people to come to your site, why do you have one at all? I'm terribly confused. The internet is not like a telephone you know, like with unlisted numbers and such. If you put something out there for public consumption, you should expect traffic and links and so forth. The Costume Site gets over 10GIG of traffic a month, and from what I'm hearing, you do not want any of those customers. That is extremely strange. I provide a directory service to help put people in touch with the products they are looking for. Many of them look for parasols for historic costuming, which you provide, which is why you are on the site.
Anyhoo, if you want your site to be a private or subscription site, I suggest you make it one. That way you can prevent people from visiting it. "
At this time, I also posted to the alt.gothic.newsgroup as to what I perceived had happened, and asked for opinions from the readers:
I got the weirdest email. The woman that owns Barrington Brolly Parasols at
www.barraingtonbrolly.com sent me an email asking me to remove the direct
link from my website (The Costume Site... a big ole link site with a nice
goth section as well.. plug.. plug)
Anyhoo, she basically says she doesn't want business from our "target
market" and to please remove the direct link from my site. Basically
fluffed up the letter and all, but to me it reads :"We don't take kindly
to your sort of folk 'round here.." And frankly, I got a little miffed. So
what I did was remove the "direct link" so you cant get there by clicking
and I added this text instead:
"Barrington Brolly
A variety of parasols made of Solarweave fabric for protection from the
sun. I have removed the link per their request as they state "our target
markets are not the same" You can visit them at www.barringtonbrolly.com
tho if you still want to, I just can't link to them :) "
Now I get a letter from the owner stating that I misunderstood her
request, and that it is important to them as such, that any reference to
Barrinton Brolly be removed.
I probably shouldn't have, but I emailed her and said if she wanted a
private site, she should make it private. As such, it is a retail
establishment, and there is no provision for an "unlisted number" when you
have a public website. I just got flaming ticked off that she didn't want
our sort of business....
BTW... their parasols are really nice, like really block the sun like
they're supposed to and come in lots of lovely colors and pretty
affordable too...
So what do you think??
Should I leave the listing up just cause I can?
Or should I remove it?
There were quite a few responses to the post on the newsgroup, as well as additional topics spawned from it. If you would like to read the original thread, go HERE. New threads started for the same matter can be found: #2, and #3and a few others, you can search for them via Google/Deja search
One of the newsgroup readers, sent a copy of the post to Barrington Brolly with her own letter:
I have recently been made aware of your request to
remove references to your business from a site of
gothic fashion references, stating that your target
audiences are not the same. I am disappointed that
you would find that necessary, as the site in question
was giving you what amounts to free positive
advertising. As a consumer and a merchant, I would
urge you to reconsider such a crass move. Enclosed is
a copy of a very frustrated post she made:
(above newsgroup post was inserted here)
I'm sure you are well aware of the strife that our
country suffered with the civil rights movement, and
frankly your refusal to accept business for a certain
"type" of people makes me very very sad. You are
snubbing a client base that includes people ranging
from youngesters all the way to established
white-collar professionals. I have been interested in
purchasing parasols for the sole purpose of protection
from UV-radiation, but I am sad to say that I will no
longer be considering your product due to your narrow
view of clients. I would also urge you to consider
that God has made human beings a wonderfully,
beautifully diverse species. Along with our
diversity, our Lord also urges us to see each other as
his children and not just as a black, white or young
person with odd dress.
Yes, I proudly consider myself part of the "gothic"
aesthetic. I also am a devout Catholic, upper middle
class mother of 2, RN, heirloom sewing enthusiast,
classical music and opoera fan and vaganova trained
ballet dancer. Im also 27 years old and have lived
through the excision of a pre-cancerous skin lesion.
If you saw me on the street, you would most likely
find me a suitable client, as I tend to dress very
conservative and plain.
Please realize that your negativity towards the gothic
community reaches farther than just those kids who
wear silly looking clothing and listen to absurd
music.
Regards,(name omitted for privacy purposes)
No little chickadees, sadly, the story does not end here. I recived another email from Barrington Brolly. Please keep in mind when reading this one, that I sent them only 1 previous email myself. It was probably sent though after they received the letter from the other newsgroup reader. Here it is for your viewing pleasure. Only the signature & email headers have been altered to protect privacy and help prevent SPAM (which we all hate!) :
">Lauren. I have asked you politely to remove our name from your site. I
expect this request to be carried out by Monday of next week (January
14, 2002). If you persist in ignoring this request, the next
communication will be from my lawyer.
Sincerely
(name omitted for privacy purposes)
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Business Matters
Date: Thu, 10 Jan 2002 17:30:58 -0500
From: (name omitted) <(name omitted)@barringtonbrollyNOSPAM.com>
To: (name omitted)<(name omitted)@milieuxNOSPAM.com>
Lauren:
Barrington Brolly is conducted as a business. I am the owner of that
business. Decisions I make for the business are made with the business'
best interests in mind. Nothing else comes into play or consideration.
The decisions are taken in order that the business continues its growth
and success along the business path chosen, and not (repeat, NOT) to
showcase personal likes or dislikes. Ironically, this would also
include your personal dislike that I want to decline your interest in
listing our site.
Because you have made my business decision 'personal' and attacked me
personally, I feel I have been put into a position where I must justify
our business decisions. However, I am extremely concerned that an
innocuous and I thought polite request, has been so twisted out of
proportion that I have no other choice.
An aside here: If you have been reading up to this point so far, you probably noticed that I have not "attacked " this person or this business from my one email, or from my one newsgroup post. I have said nothing but complimentary things about their products. And while this person states I have so "twisted out of proprotion" the request, they do not at any time attempt to explain what they meant by " our target
markets are not the same" if I interpreted it incorrectly.. Now, back to their email message...
I do not like to repeat, but this is a business. In the business
environment, you make decisions only after considering and weighing all
relevent aspects of the business that will be affected by any decision
taken. If you do not make decisions that way, you are not managing your
business and you may as well throw your goals and focus out of the
window...... followed thereafter by the business itself. There are
many facets to a business - personal likes and dislikes is not one of
them.
I am truly sorry that my request, identified as a business decision (see
previous e-mail sent to Lauren, below) has been twisted into some kind
of reflection of (very very wrong perception) my personal likes or
dislikes. In fact, the very accusation (and I see this as an accusation
and an affront to my integrity as a business person and as a human
being) that how I choose to run my business is a reflection of my likes
and dislikes is absolutely absurd and reprehensible.
Again, no attempt made to correct the "very very wrong perception" in this very lengthy letter. If they felt they had to explain themselves, then why didn't they just simply state their reason in plain language? Back to the email:
From a professional and business perspective, I have tried to clarify
and respond to your misunderstanding of my request. I will even take
the liberty of recommending that, in the business community, it is not
wise to be so extremely sensitive and defensive. I have received
requests from other businesses to add our site, but they recognize when
we decline, it is a business decision - period.
Um.. Hello. I am not a business. I am a private individual who has a link site to things I like with sometimes my own reviews/opinions of their wares. Additionally, I never previously requested permission to link with them. I haven't requested this from anyone I've linked to. Its a hobby to list my personal bookmarks, and make them available for others to enjoy, okay?.. Back to the email:
I think you are providing an valuable service to your customers,
customers I would similarly welcome to our business. However, how we
reach those potential customers is a decision each of us must make.
(To reiterate: I'm not a business, I have no customers. )
From a personal perspective, I am truly insulted and hurt to be so
recklessly maligned by people who know absolutely nothing about me. We
are truly blessed to be able to live in countries where we can pursue
our dreams, and live our lives as we see fit, even down to how we
conduct our business.
How dare you even suggest that I judge you or anyone else. Another
twist - that is exactly what you have done to me.
Under the circumstances, since you have chosen to slander my name, my
business' name and me, which I take very seriously, I will be consulting
with my lawyer.
Sincerely,
(signature omitted for privacy purposes)
Again, the stuff at the end that they say I have suggested that they judge me or anyone else, or that I have slandered anyones name... Or the bit about being recklessly maligned? No idea where this has come from.....Dear reader, I have left nothing out of this narrative. In all fairness, the most I can be guilty of is jumping to an incorrect perception of the companys' statement of " our target markets are not the same" . And if this is the case, why the wordy letter from them instead of a simple explaination?
Additionally the company reponded to the other persons letter with:
"> Thank you for your e-mail.
Your e-mail is being answered as a courtesy for the
time and effort you
have taken to correspond with us, and to express
your concerns.
Customer service and customer satisfaction have
always been our top
priorities.
However, after carefully reading your message, it
has been determined
that the specific content of your e-mail does not
warrant a response.
Sincerely
(signature omitted for privacy purposes)
My final letter was in reply to the big long one:
The name of your company is gone from the website.
">I reread my email to you, and I don't see how you can say I attacked or maligned you in any way. It was very polite,expressed my confusion, and offered advise on how you may keep your clientle private. Nothing more. As to my post to the newsgroup that another reader posted back to you, I do state that I was offering my OPINION, as to what you meant in your previous email in terms of whom you would and would not like to do business with. Opinions are still protected under the first amendment, and I at no time stated my opinion was fact.
I've never had anything but complimentary things to say about your product at any time, if you also recall. Hardly maligning you or your companay.
I normally update my website only 3x per year,and que all requests for additions/deletions and make all the changes at once. I have made an exception in your case.
Also, I am inquiring to the ACLU. I don't know if you can legally prevent me from linking your site if I so chose. If I find that I am able to legally do so, I will. But the mention of your company is gone at present."
I received a lot of helpful email from other newsgroup readers and found out that Barrington Brolly cannot legally prevent someone from linking their site. There are many helpful organizations that help protect our civil liberties online including:
ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) and
EFF (Electronic Frontier Foundaton)
There are also some interesting articles and judgements protecting individuals in their right to hyperlink:
Internet Linking Law
2600 News :this one pretty interesting-upholds the right to hold an inflammatory webaddress such as "fuckgeneralmotors.com" and the 'court further strengthens the right to hyperlink by stating that "Trademark law does not permit Plaintiff to enjoin persons from linking to its homepage simply because it does not like the domain name or other content of the linking webpage."'
Linking and Liability
The Link Controversy Page
And 2 articles about rulings on linking at Wired.com:
"Big Stink Over a Simple Link "
"Attention Editors: Deep Link Away "
Additionally, I have submitted the emails from Barrington Brolly to the Canadian BBB at: http://easternontario.bbb.org/index_english.htm. Currently, this company had no listings with the BBB good or bad. The
form had a section for desired resolution of problem, and I stated :
"I would like this company to cease with threats of legal action for
providiing a web link to her retail home page. I would also like this
company to not discriminate against clientle based on their lifestyle
preferences."
If there are any further updates, I'll keep you all posted. Meanwhile, thanks for listening!
-Lucretia (on alt.gothic.fashion)