Dear Webguard:
I have just gotten off the phone with Lucas W. (he would not disclose his last name), T-Mobile ID # 1241773, floor manager for customer service, and cancelled my WebGuard service.
The reason is that both RefugeeResettlementWatch and FrontPageMag were blocked as inappropriate content by Webguard at all levels: Child, Teen, and Young Adult.
However, both sites are simply news and commentary sites critical of the Obama administration. They are not porn sites. There is no issue of child protection involved.
Lucas told me the process by which sites are chosen to be blocked is known only to WebGuard, and that I would have to ask you for the explanation. He said he could not forward a complaint from T-mobile to Webguard, even though T-Mobile had a contract with WebGuard.
So please be advised that I found the categorizations and blockage as age inappropriate to be damaging, defamatory, false and fraudulent regarding the websites...and bad for business for T-Mobile--because on its face the blockage appears to be based on political correctness rather than child protection, and leads to the loss of customers.
For example, I cancelled WebGuard because of this problem, and told T-Mobile they should look for another provider of web-filtering services.
Therefore, I respectfully ask that you tell me why these sites were blocked, provide me a list of criteria used by WebGuard to block sites, and explain the methodology for site evaluation, including steps taken by WebGuard to insure against political censorship.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Laurence A. Jarvik, Ph.D.
Sent from my iPad
UPDATE July 2nd 2013. This just in:
I have just gotten off the phone with Lucas W. (he would not disclose his last name), T-Mobile ID # 1241773, floor manager for customer service, and cancelled my WebGuard service.
The reason is that both RefugeeResettlementWatch and FrontPageMag were blocked as inappropriate content by Webguard at all levels: Child, Teen, and Young Adult.
However, both sites are simply news and commentary sites critical of the Obama administration. They are not porn sites. There is no issue of child protection involved.
Lucas told me the process by which sites are chosen to be blocked is known only to WebGuard, and that I would have to ask you for the explanation. He said he could not forward a complaint from T-mobile to Webguard, even though T-Mobile had a contract with WebGuard.
So please be advised that I found the categorizations and blockage as age inappropriate to be damaging, defamatory, false and fraudulent regarding the websites...and bad for business for T-Mobile--because on its face the blockage appears to be based on political correctness rather than child protection, and leads to the loss of customers.
For example, I cancelled WebGuard because of this problem, and told T-Mobile they should look for another provider of web-filtering services.
Therefore, I respectfully ask that you tell me why these sites were blocked, provide me a list of criteria used by WebGuard to block sites, and explain the methodology for site evaluation, including steps taken by WebGuard to insure against political censorship.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
Laurence A. Jarvik, Ph.D.
Sent from my iPad
UPDATE July 2nd 2013. This just in:
Hi Laurence Jarvik,
WebGuard.com, has nothing to do with T-Mobile.
WebGuard.com does vulnerability scans of websites
Please contact T-mobile directly.
If you need a great scan on your website, try our free scan.
thanks
WebGuard support
