Why Does KlearGear Say It Is TRUSTe Validated When It Isn't?

93 Responses

  1. Ian Bagger says:

    Hell hath no fury like an internet scorned. Tough break, KlearGear. Time to reap the whirlwind, or whatever mixed metaphor applies.

  2. Apparently bad press is still good for business. The kleargear.com web site has banner up claiming Standard Shipping orders will ship in 48 hours due to "an unexpected and sharp increase in recent order volume."

  3. Jamie says:

    Hi – i pretended to fill an order – when i got to the final check out page, this image appears on the screen – LMFAO… https://p.secure.hostingprod.com/@site.kleargear.com/ssl/kleargear-bbb.jpg

    edit – it says this underneath it – (alongside the etrust jpg) "as of 11/18/2013"

  4. JWH says:

    What is an "Etailer Ratings 5-star merchant?"

  5. jackn2 says:

    Standard shipping orders will ship in 48 hours due to "the fact KlearGear is a vaporous company that depends on drop-shipping from real suppliers….."

  6. jackn2 says:

    an image search on the 5 Star eTAILER Ratings shows that the only place using that seal is KLEARGEAR.

  7. SarahW says:

    In 48 BUSINESS hours, that is.

  8. azazel1024 says:

    Don't forget that they are only open one business hour per day.

    Good luck!

  9. Charley says:

    is the etailer ratings 5 star thing actually the BBB, or did they change the BBB image without changing the name of the file?

    <img border="0" src="http://site.kleargear.com/ssl/kleargear-reviews-ratings-bbb.jpg" width="296" height="102" align="left">

  10. Elwood Blues says:

    I suspect that KlearGear will be retroactively adding mandatory arbitration to their terms of sales so that it can try to retroactively block a class action case.

  11. rsteinmetz70112 says:

    Could TRUSTe sue for copyright infringement?

  12. Jim Tyre says:

    It's amazing what the astute Popehat bloggers and commenters sometimes miss. TRUSTe is based in San Francisco, but its principal operating facility is in the Phillippines. Clearly, taking into account the massive typhoon, there must be a problem here with TRUSTe, not with KlearGear.

    (The factual part of what I just wrote is true. The rest is whimsy.)

  13. Chris says:

    How is this not just plain, ordinary, fraud? They're claiming to offer something they do not offer (accredited transactions, secure transactions, and whatever else those two symbols imply) in order to entice you to buy their products. It seems like a prosecutor somewhere should be able to put the kibosh on that reasonably quickly?

    And surely there's something trademark-y the BBB and TRUSTe can do. This doesn't seem like a "caveat emptor" situation; it seems more like a criminal enterprise.

  14. Roger Strong says:

    How dare you question a company endorsed by the Bible, the US Constitution and Jor-El's message to Superman?

  15. JC says:

    Why? Canine hygiene. It licks its balls because it can.

  16. James Burkhardt says:

    @rsteinmetz70112 No. I doubt the seal is covered by copyright. However it is misuse of a trademark likely to cause confusion. as the purpose of those seals is to establish specific affiliation and standing with an independent company, publishing those seals without that affiliation/standing and without indicating that they are being used for illustration purposes, is very likely to cause people to assume the non existent affiliation actually exists.

  17. Joe Pullen says:

    Somehow I imagine this is how the “privacy disclosure” would read on their site:

    Information collected

    When you shop on our site, we collect personal information from you such as your name, e-mail address, billing address, shipping address, telephone number, product selections, credit card, the URL you came from, IP address, domain types (e.g. .com or .org, etc.), your browser type, the country & state where your server is located, the pages of our site that were viewed during a visit, search terms that you entered on our site, lab results from your colonoscopy, the rating you gave that last porn flick you watched, and the blood types of your entire family.

    How information is used

    We do not sell or rent your personal information to others. We use customer information we collect only for the purposes of filling orders, contacting purchasers to inform them of their order status, and making sure we know where to send the lawsuit paperwork if one of our customers gets uppity and decides to write something unflattering about us.

    IMPORTANT: This information is intended for the use of the individual(s) purchasing our products and may contain information that is confidential privileged or unsuitable for overly sensitive persons with low self-esteem, no sense of humor, or irrational beliefs about being able to freely voice their opinions. Posting negative reviews of our company, products, executives, or our executives prize poodle is not authorized (either explicitly or implicitly) and constitutes an irritating social faux pas. Customers with an overwhelming fear of the unknown will be gratified to learn that there is no hidden message revealed by reading this disclosure backwards, so please ignore the fact the TRUSTe logo is merely copy/pasted onto our website, you can trust us . . . promise. But just to be sure, we also suggest pouring a complete circle of salt around you and your computer to further assure that no harm befalls you and your pets. If you have received any threats of a lawsuit from us regarding posting a negative review, please add a pinch of cinnamon and egg whites, whisk and place in a warm oven for 40 minutes until it rises to the appropriate level of censorious douchbaggery.

  18. SarahW says:

    One of the collection agents of the purported Kleargear "legal department" signs himself Stephen Gutman, of Fishman group attorneys (see one collection letter referencing a Sep. 2012 purchase at the site Ace linked above). He is listed with the Michigan bar here:

    http://www.michbar.org/memberdirectory/detail.cfm?PID=14480

    He's the only Stephen L. Gutman licensed to practice law in Michigan. The contact information on the letter is that of the "The Fishman Group" however, though it does not match his bar info.

    Fishman group is related to THIS guy: http://www.avvo.com/attorneys/48304-mi-steven-fishman-739702.html

    How much should they be expected to know about their clients?

  19. SarahW says:

    Arg. Edits "marked as spam" – I guess because of links to lawfirm's info.

  20. jackn2 says:

    @charkley

    I don't think they are same graphic. I was referring to the multi-colored, rectangular graphic that reads '5-Star Merchant ETAILERratings', not the BBB one. I guess it is just saying they have many (more than one) 5 star ratings, but I think its placement is meant to deceive.

    At any rate, it doesn't seem that any other site has they same seal — including someone to issue it, so I think it is bogus.

  21. Lizard says:

    I find it surprising/interesting that KlearGear has not jumped into the fray with public comments/lawsuit threats/denials/excuses. It's rare that any company stupid enough to try to pull this crap in the first place would be smart enough to just stay quiet about it. It's like finding someone who believes the moon landings were a hoax, but that Kennedy was killed by Oswald acting alone, and that the 9/11 attacks were carried out by a bunch of pissed-off Muslims.

  22. Charley says:

    re: I was referring to the multi-colored, rectangular graphic that reads '5-Star Merchant ETAILERratings', not the BBB one.

    the html I posted is the html that produces that '5-Star Merchant ETAILERratings' … the file itself is named "kleargear-reviews-ratings-bbb.jpg"

    it's like they had a BBB image, and hastily changed it to look like something else without changing the file name.

  23. jackn2 says:

    @Charley

    oh, I see. that makes sense. I didn't look at the code. I just saved the image locally, and then uploaded to google search.

  24. SarahW says:

    Strange, though. The Fishman Group website (www.fishmangroup.com) has been defunct since about 2011 at least. Here is the internet archive link: http://web.archive.org/web/20110415000000*/http://www.fishmangroup.com

    Mr. Fishman and others from the former Fishman group are now with a firm of another name (Bodman PLC) and Gutman in the bar records has his own PllC.

    Is there even a Fishman group now? Could whoever is running the Kleargear retail scheme have lifted names of attorneys, too?

    That's so weird to me. That dunning letter is 2012. The website was already scrubbed by then. Does the Fishman group even exist anymore?

  25. SarahW says:

    Ok, I should have checked here first using search term Fishman Group http://www.incparadise.net/incorporation/michigan/name-search/

    A "Fishman Group PC." entity exists today.

    But "The Fishman Group,PC"

    Of which Steven J. Fishman was a registered agent, has not since 2011.

  26. Ken White says:

    Ace: Are you searching on BuySafe for KlearGear.com? When I search for that it comes up as approved.

  27. @Ace:

    The link on neer-do-well-hall-of-infamey.blogspot.com to buySAFE's validation page looks like the output from their checker. It's not actually doing anything intelligently server-side.

    If you browse to that WebsideInvalid.aspx link, there is a form on buySAFE's page inviting you to check another URL. Entering kleargear.com there does indeed show that they are endorsed by buySAFE.com.

    Mind you, I think they are scumbags and absolutely deserving of whatever bad karma comes as a result of their actions. But their buySAFE seal is, for whatever small amount of cred it's worth, legitimate.

    You can also reach it by clicking the buySAFE link in the lower-left corner of kleargear.com. If anything, I'd say that buySAFE's website is a bit rickety with too many redirects, creating confusion.

  28. SarahW says:

    Ace: I think your pic is of someone with the same name, but who is not the Michigan lawyer.

  29. @Ace:

    It's just crappy server-side code on buySAFE. The old "do a bunch of server-side logic and then redirect to something pretty" is what most experienced (outside of the web) developers do when confronted with their first web-based projects. Then they learn not to do that.

    For a firm that is pretty much solely in the business of vouching, that's a little… disappointing.

  30. SarahW says:

    Ace, the Stephen L. Gutman practicing in Michigan was licensed in 1967, and is likely to be the 70 yo gentleman you can find with an Intelius search.

    I am wondering if someone has borrowed his name.

  31. soRob says:

    Ace,

    without looking at the link you provide, let me say that it’s not uncommon for someone to register a domain to which it might appear they have no connection. For instance, I set up a website for a friend who is not at all technically inclined. He’s more than happy to have me take care of all the details, so the domain is registered in my name, even though his name is in the domain name.

  32. SarahW says:

    Ace, what if he already did (retire)? If he's responsible for sending out that dunning letter and/or crafting unethical collections and/or reputational management "fines" he'd deserve to called out on his participation. But maybe he isn't. Maybe someone used his name without his willing participation.

  33. Jack says:

    @ Ace
    Computer companies (like JW Tek) purchase domain names at the behest of customers who purchase hosting and/or web design. It is standard practice. Of course, they are supposed to make themselves the Technical Contact or Administrative Contact and show the actual owner as the Registrant, but many don't do that to ensure they get paid at the end of the year and that if a customer leaves, they don't get their domain name if they have any outstanding balance.

    Don't read too much into a tech company registering a domain for a laywer (or anyone else for that matters). All the names associated with that are most likely completely unrelated to any of this.

    Slow down and do the proper research before naming and shaming anyone – especially since many are innocent… You would be just as big of a scumbag as Kleargear if you went and mistakenly shamed innocent people.

  34. Christenson says:

    @Jack
    You never know when you might find another Alan Cooper!

  35. Ken White says:

    Ace has sent me an email inviting me to commit an act upon myself which my poor conditioning and sub-optimal flexibility do not permit. He will not be joining us again. We wish him well at therapy.

  36. Jack B. says:

    Ace has sent me an email inviting me to commit an act upon myself which my poor conditioning and sub-optimal flexibility do not permit. He will not be joining us again. We wish him well at therapy.

    11/18/2013: A day that will live in "infamey".

  37. Ken White says:

    From my inbox:

    You damn sickening hypocrite scumbag.

    OF COURSE you don't like the truth being told about OTHER coksucker lawyers.

    Stay tuned Sir, you are NEXT.

    p.s. got any nice pictures? LoL

  38. Roho says:

    Boy. That escalated quickly!

  39. Ken White says:

    Dude's got a point. Everyone knows how protective of and deferential to lawyers I am around here.

  40. Bob Brown says:

    As I look into my crystal ball*, I see that Ace will be looking for pro bono help after someone tries to stifle his First Amendment rights by suing him for libel.

    * If I had an actual, working crystal ball, I could see Wednesday's Wall Street Journal on Tuesday, and I would soon have all the money there is.

  41. Jeff says:

    Ruben S. Corvalan and Patricia Corvalan seem to be real names associated with Havaco Direct, Inc. which has been shown to be associated with Kleargear.com

    I have a link, but it would include a possible home address

  42. Bob Brown says:

    Oh.

  43. Dave Mays says:

    TRUSTe has a form you can use to file a complaint for abuse of their trademark. https://feedback-form.truste.com/watchdog/request

  44. AlphaCentauri says:

    Kleargear has no SSL certificate. (If you try to load "https://kleargear.com," you will fail.)

    That's not necessarily an indication of fraud. Vendors often have the shopping cart part of their store on the domain of another company that is more experienced in running that sort of operation.

    In this case, you can try to create an order until you get to the page where you would have to enter personally identifiable information, and you can find out which domain actually has the SSL certificate — and you find that their orders are actually processed through https://us-dc1-order.store.yahoo.net.

    Yahoo's been on hard times lately (and their disastrous abuse reporting system is the gift that keeps on giving from the point of view of Nigerian scammers), but don't they still do satisfaction surveys with the customers of the vendors that have stores on their site?

  45. Ken White says:

    From the inbox:

    You are bald

    I bet if you had hair you wouldn't be such a flaming scrotum.

    Dude's been touchy since he woke up in a pool of his own urine:

    In 2009, he launched a lawsuit against Hudson's Bay Company, claiming that he was tortured by store security. He complained that while he was at the company's store in Brentwood Town Centre on Dec. 10, 2008, a security guard detained him and refused to allow him to go to the bathroom, which he urgently needed to do. Rather than suffer the humiliation of urinating himself, he chose to knock himself out by banging his head on the wall, the suit stated. His next memory was waking up in a puddle of urine (which he claims was not his own, but that of some other person security had detained). He was then escorted from the store by an RCMP officer. He was not charged. He later agreed to drop the suit on undisclosed terms.

    Strike that, urine of person or persons unknown.

  46. Jack B. says:

    Strike that, urine of person or persons unknown.

    To paraphrase, you can't really dust for urine.

  47. SarahW says:

    Oh dear.

  48. Roger Strong says:

    I wonder how long it'll take them to come back under a new name. (Kleargear that is, not the Pissant Avenger.)

    I'd bet they've already registered a new domain name.

  49. Kevin says:

    Rather than suffer the humiliation of urinating himself, he chose to knock himself out by banging his head on the wall

    I'm not sure why, but something about this one particular piece of information makes me laugh uncontrollably. I mean, I like to think of myself as a pretty empathetic kind of guy, who can put myself into just about anybody's headspace and understand where they're coming from. But when I try to work through the thought process that would lead to this decision… try as I might, I just…. can't.

    "Oh man, I really need to piss… I need to piss SO BAD!! But I'm handcuffed!! And pissing my pants would just be so… so.. HUMILIATING! What can I possibly do to resolve this dilemma? Hey! Wait a second, I have an idea! It's a crazy idea, but it just might work!!!"

  50. norahc says:

    I'm not sure why, but something about this one particular piece of information makes me laugh uncontrollably. I mean, I like to think of myself as a pretty empathetic kind of guy, who can put myself into just about anybody's headspace and understand where they're coming from. But when I try to work through the thought process that would lead to this decision… try as I might, I just…. can't.

    "Oh man, I really need to piss… I need to piss SO BAD!! But I'm handcuffed!! And pissing my pants would just be so… so.. HUMILIATING! What can I possibly do to resolve this dilemma? Hey! Wait a second, I have an idea! It's a crazy idea, but it just might work!!!"

    So maybe it was another person's urine he woke up in….

    the security guard laughed so hard he pissed himself.

  51. Another anonymous NAL says:

    Count me among those unimpressed by KlearGear's announcement of "increased order volume", since an increase in orders won't mean much if you don't plan to ship anything…

    And what is it about these companies with supposedly geek-oriented business models that don't understand how the Internet works when it comes to publicity? Inaccessible customer service, hide-and-seek Facebook and Twitter….seriously?

    I do like the idea of sending Prenda and KlearGear after each other, though. Maybe Steele's mother-in-law can get a bit of on-line shopping done.

  52. Anony Mouse says:

    Apparently bad press is still good for business. The kleargear.com web site has banner up claiming Standard Shipping orders will ship in 48 hours

    …or they're lying about that, too.

  53. Jack says:

    @ Christenson
    Yeah, but this isn't a case like that. You can simply go to JW Teks website and see they are a tech company that provides Hosting, E-Commerce, Web Design, etc.

    Obviously, my judgement that he is a scumbag was correct. He didn't do the research and is a nutter. Shaming innocent people (and companies) is NOT cool.

  54. SirWired says:

    The idea of going to the FTC is pretty much futile. Assuming they took action (and even blatant scams usually go unremarked), the standard settlement involves the FTC accomplishing absolutely nothing. The scammer will have to disgorge whatever ill-gotten gains he/she has not already shipped offshore or otherwise hidden (the rest of the amount is suspended) and sign an agreement to no longer do the blatantly illegal things they weren't supposed to be doing to begin with.

    On a second offense, the penalty will be much the same, but the agreement will be to leave the industry you seem to be incapable of honestly participating in. The same useless financial "penalties" apply to round 2.

    On a third offense, after you steal money for years on end and making millions and laughing at the feds all the while, they might, if they are really feeling aggressive, charge you with the life-ending charge of criminal contempt. Kevin Trudeau has been scamming people for 20 years and only now is he getting charged.

    You walk out the door of the grocery store once without paying and they generally don't let you get off by just returning whatever groceries you haven't eaten yet. But if you steal millions of dollars for years on end through fraud there's no real penalty at all.

  55. Lizard says:

    So, somehow, we've gone from discussing a generically sleazy e-tailer to discussing someone knocking themselves out while handcuffed, with urine also somehow involved.

    I have my monitors set up, as my wife puts it "Like a NASA control room". To my right, handcuffs and urine. To my left, code marked with comments such as "//TODO: This is broken. Fix it.", said comments written years ago by long departed employees with no further documentation.

    I am not sure which direction I should be looking in if I want sanity. I think I'm going to go to zooborns or something, and look at baby tigers.

  56. Rachael says:

    Looks like this site is trying to help Kleargear get more customers:
    http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/24008648/winterize-your-cubicle-at-kleargearcom

    Who wants to fill them in on what a bad idea that is?

  57. Elwood Blues says:

    Today's Kleargear trick appears to be sending out it's advertisements as press releases.

    http://www.hawaiinewsnow.com/story/24008648/winterize-your-cubicle-at-kleargearcom

    Edit: Looks like Rachael already posed this while I was typing up my comment.

  58. Jon says:

    Ah, but the interesting part of those press releases is the appearance of yet another shell company: "… Christophe Monette, CEO of Kleargear parent Descoteaux Boutiques… during the first two years under the DBS banner." (thus suggesting they changed owners 2 years ago) — so all the investigation of Chenal, Havaco, and Bermender may no longer apply (except as background).

    The contact information for DBS is in Paris, France. No explanation of what the "S" stands for. The KlearGear PR contact name is Margaux Banet.

  59. I was Anonymous says:

    Ken, have you received the bill for $3500 yet?
    I'm sure they're retroactively changing their TOS to claim just reading their site means that ANY disparagement of them is "fine-able".

  60. SarahW says:

    It's on like James Cameron.

    It doesn't feel pity, or remorse, or fear. And it absolutely will not stop.

  61. Jon says:

    Now that I've had a chance to rummage a bit more: There is no Google footprint for DBS outside of the press release. There also appears to be suspiciously little footprint for Monette; most of the hits I found were for people living in unlikely places (Quebec, New Hampshire). There is a minimal footprint for Banet, but it's all surprisingly narrow for people involved with an Internet company.

  62. William says:

    [link deleted by Ken] was reporting on what was found (in an extreme amount, not sure he should be posting everything he found) in regards to Kleargear. Today he posted an attack on Ken White for defending Kleargear's lawyer? Can't seem to find where he did that. Is this the guy who sent Ken such loving emails?

  63. Ouch. says:

    Did you know you can report sites to TRUSTe for trademark violations? It's not that obvious, but you can.
    Step 1: https://feedback-form.truste.com/watchdog/request
    Step 2: Fill out the "Website" field.
    Step 3: Press Enter. It will tell you that "This URL does not have a license with us"
    Step 4: There is a link to report trademark violations

  64. Ken White says:

    @William:

    Yep, that's my new arch-enemy, Namor the Urine Sub-Mariner.

    This is his latest email to me:

    You are as bald as chit

    Damn dude. Why don't just shave the small remainder off?

    You look, seriously, like a dipchit. Try the whole baldy look.

    THANK GOD my hair is here and I can get laid. I suspect that's your problem … your ONLY possible constituency are other bald homos.

  65. Ken White says:

    And for the record, I'm not defending anyone associated with KlearGear. I asked Namor to stop posting because he had become very agitated, posted a clearly incorrect accusation (about one of KlearGear's certification logos) through nuttery or incompetence, and was generally flailing around making accusations. His attitude was captured by this statement:

    I am examining EVERYBODY INVOLVED with this horrid joke with a jaundiced eye, and why not? In my experience nothing happens in a vacuum. In a single day we have identified the ringleader and the dirty lawyer that made it happen. More will be exposed … bank on it. If I temporarily shame anyone innocent I will apologize and remove the offending instantly. I doubt I will need to.

    That sort of approach potentially helps KlearGear and anyone responsible for its bad conduct. It's certainly possible, as I said in my first post about KlearGear, that a lawyer is involved and bears legal and moral responsibility for this bad conduct, but I'd like to see that analysis from a responsible source, not Namor.

    This is apparently a habit for Namor:

    The counterclaim comes in response to a lawsuit Stockhouse launched against Mr. MacAskill in the Supreme Court of British Columbia last month seeking a court order that would bar him from the website. The suit complained that he had become a substantial drain on the site's resources by creating numerous accounts, at the rate of up to 184 per day. He used the accounts to post material that was either defamatory, inaccurate, threatening or inflammatory, Stockhouse claimed.

  66. Glen says:

    184 per day? Damn Namor, get a real job!!!

  67. CJK Fossman says:

    @Lizard

    To my left, code marked with comments such as "//TODO: This is broken. Fix it."

    That's what you get for allowing comments in the code.

  68. norahc says:

    While I am sitting here munching on my popcorn, I am forced to wonder if KlearGear is related to RMZ Fire Safety in any way….

    Too much to hope for, I guess.

  69. Christenson says:

    @Jack: The trouble with text is my tone went AWOL. Innocent third party Alan Cooper in Prenda-land is WHY careful research is essential and I should have said it with a grin — I was reinforcing you.
    @Ken: You mean you aren't that cute, super limber young kid with lots of hair in your avatar at huge risk of the pony menace???? Who'da thunk!!!!

  70. Tali McPike says:

    Oh my…Namor the Urine Sub-Mariner is quite a piece of work, although his post about Ken is almost tame compared to Tara Carreon's stuff. I shutter at the thought of what he'd do if he came across Tara's & Crystal Cox's writings…he'd probably pee himself (sorry, couldn't help myself) then post a link saying SEE I TOLD YOU KEN IS A FAT BALD SCUMBAG HERE IS PROOF FROM OTHER MENTALLY UNSTABLE BLOGGERS

  71. Jack says:

    @ Christenson
    Ah I see what you are saying now – makes much more sense! I thought you were saying something completely different. Stupid internet comments with no tone and minimal context!

  72. SarahW says:

    FWIW, the Descoteaux Boutiques address is at a building promoted by a leasing companies offering virtual office addresses.

    (Per Wikipedia, a "Virtual office gives you a chance to own a high profile reputed address in a city of your choice, at a fraction of the buying or renting cost of such an address.")

  73. Ken White says:

    DAMMIT MCPIKE STOP TRYING TO INTRODUCE SOME OF MY CRAZY STALKERS TO MY OTHER CRAZY STALKERS

  74. Tali McPike says:

    What can I say… I like to make things interesting ;)

  75. John SMythe says:

    The Paris FR address referenced in the PR release belongs to Regus shared office space – http://www.regus.com/locations/office-space/paris-biblioth%C3%A8que-nationale

    Perhaps unrelated, but there is precious little to be found on the Descoteaux company (des coteaux means 'slopes' in french). Not even a FB page. Don't they know that social media channels are important for business :-)

    Interestingly enough, there's the Christopher Monette law firm which "specializes in retrieving past due commercial accounts."
    http://thelawofficeofchristophermonette.com/ in Spring, TX

  76. Wick Deer says:

    Tali, I suspect you shuddered at the thought rather than shuttered at it. Unless, of course, you have figured out a way to photograph thought.

    Sorry, but it's a pet peeve.

  77. Tali McPike says:

    You are correct. I didn't even catch that I had used the wrong word. I'm usually a better proofreader than that

  78. Wick Deer says:

    Maybe Ken's proofreading issues are contagious.

  79. Tali McPike says:

    We probably hail (…I mean hale ;) ) from the same tribe

  80. Anony Mouse says:

    Tali, I suspect you shuddered at the thought rather than shuttered at it. Unless, of course, you have figured out a way to photograph thought.

    Well, there's also window shutters. So you could be closing a thought off from sight (or rather, further consideration). But I suppose that would be more "I shuttered the thought" than "I shuttered at the thought".

  81. Lizard says:

    "shuttered" vs. "shuddered". Well, for all intensive purposes, they're the same thing. It's a mute point.

  82. AlphaCentauri says:

    Yeah, I just took it for granite that Tali's grammatical skills are rock-solid.

  83. Jim Tyre says:

    Perhaps, when Ken has nothing better to do, he'll start a thread about trenchant Mondegreens.

    http://web.archive.org/web/20010208201152/http://www.sfgate.com/columnists/carroll/mondegreens.shtml

  84. AlphaCentauri says:

    Thanks for that, Jim, I'd seen most of them before, but still was laughing so hard I could hardly breathe!

    I just checked and http://kissthisguy.com/ is back up :)

  85. Tali McPike says:

    when I click on the link I get directed to a Mac & Cheese recipe

  86. Andy says:

    I saw on their homepage that they are "Upfront". So I clicked the link, which brought me to "The Find". I wrote to fine gentlemen at The Find and now they're not upfront anymore.

  87. The Man in the Mask says:

    TrustE certification is absolutely worthless, other than as an indicator of the stupidity and gullibility of those operating the site in question.

    I've been studying this issue for a very long time — roughly as long as TrustE has existed — and among other things, I've noticed that numerous (numerous!) spammers-for-hire proudly show TrustE certification. Oh, it's real: they really DID get one. But if TrustE will give out certifications to the filthiest scum on the Internet, that tells us everything we need to know about their vetting process: there is none.

  1. November 19, 2013

    […] KlearGear and the consumer non-disparagement clause that ate (or tried to eat) Chicago [Popehat and followup] […]

  2. November 20, 2013

    […] non-disparagement term wasn’t even part of site when Palmer wrote her negative review. Meanwhile, Popehat has raised important questions on whether KlearGear is misusing the TRUSTe and Better Business […]

  3. November 29, 2013

    […] and opened an investigation into its tactics. Its supposed Truste validation is nothing more than a "sticker" applied to the site without the approval of the validation company. As Ken White at Popehat puts it, KlearGear is reaping the […]