Slashdot Mirror
Citibank Cancels Bank Account of Objectionable Blogger
Keith found this story about Citibank blocking a website's bank account after deciding that the site's blog contained questionable content. I guess it's up to a bank to decide whom to do business with, but this is pretty crazy.
Citibank is the bunch that *can* require seven days time for you to CLOSE out the account. They did not say they freeze accounts and anytime.
Argh why am i responding to Anon...
I'm interested- if I click "contact us" on Amazon, what will I see?
Will it be a "customerservice@amazon.co.uk", or something along those lines? Actually, you don't even get that, only an embedded comment system. I've just had a quick look and I can't find anywhere that says Amazon's office address, or phone number, and I also can't find any names of any executives, founders, board members, or anyone else. I presume I could find all that information elsewhere on the internet, but it isn't on their main website.
What, basically, is your point?
Well it is not that far off track for Citibank. In the 90's I showed up at a branch and wanted to open a savings account. The teller called over the branch manager and he told me that they would not open a savings account for me. I didn't know why I couldn't have a savings account so I asked, the answer was a little shocking. "It's a character issue." I guess unfortunately for me long hair and slayer t-shirts are not a protected class under the Constitution. Anyways, now they always want to gimme credit cards and whatnot but they lost my business for life.
All points of time and space are connected.
Assuming that the problem is even real, or even related to content (I have my doubts, because this seems like a great marketing ploy)... Is it because it's a gay site or because it's a "hookup" site? As i read the front page, this is about meeting someone for a "hookup". From what I've heard, postings in such forums are often deceptive and/or fronts for other sorts of "opportunities". If that's the case, Citibank might legitimately wonder whether this is a good business for them to be involved with, if only because of the opportunity for chargebacks.
"He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere. " -- John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1
I am treating him, his site, and this story the same as I would any other.
So, you automatically jump to the defense of large corporations, by pulling out obscure arguments that you have no evidence of? You could have simply said you were skeptical of the claims, but instead you made the argument that this was definitely about "compliance checks" even though you had no evidence of that whatsoever.
So, why are you skeptical about the website owner, but not equally skeptical of the bank? In fact, you were not just un-skeptical about the bank, you went out of your way to make positive arguments for them, that even the bank never made. It's really weird.
... and then they built the supercollider.