Natural Fashion | Review

Over the last week or so I’ve been dealing with a crappy Australian company selling organic clothing in Australia. They asked me to review one of their t-shirts and I agreed without thinking too much about it. Surely it would be advantageous to do a proper review of a product. Advantageous for me readers. This is the stuff they want to know. My site is all about organic products, after all.

The company is called Natural Fashion and they are based in Sydney, although their organic cotton products come from Brazil. You can read the Natural Fashion review which I wrote in about 5 well thought out minutes.

So I wrote a couple of posts about them, one of which got picked up by the top site in my niche. That was great exposure which drove quite a bit of traffic to my site and gave me a PR 7 link which will really help my overall rankings. Quite a coup in fact.

So then I wrote the Natural Fashion review. I mentioned the quality of the fabric, how it washed, how it ironed, that kind of thing. Then I made the mistake of mentioning that I didn’t really like the colour. Well, it was a mistake if I wanted to continue to be in business with them. It’s that natural, undyed colour which probably only suits half the population. It doesn’t suit me and I said so. I then mentioned the crappy, old fashioned designs. I tried to be nice about it and did mention that not all the designs were rubbish but I was in trouble.

I never promised them a postive review but obviously that is what they were expecting. I didn’t really mean for it to be negative, it just kind of came out that way. I never expected them to go over the deep end like a couple of nutters. Well I was dealing with Doug Giles, more than his wife Renata. Some of the emails were signed with her name but I don’t think she had much to do with it.

When I showed them the review, they emailed me analysing each paragraph I had written, highlighting in red all the negative things I said. I was pretty pissed off by that. Did they really think they could get away with that. Didn’t it occur to them that my website ranks much better than theirs so I can write whatever I like about them and loads of people will read about it. LOL.

So naturally I decided to have a bit of fun and updated the post with everything they said to me. That sure made them angry. LOL. They then demanded I remove all the images and logos about their site, including the banner ad they had paid for, that I remove all links to their site (meaning they would lose all traffic I was sending them; yes they are stupid), and that I remove all mention of their trademarked name, Natural Fashion. My pleasure I said. Well except for the point about their name. How stupid do they think I am?

The brilliant thing is now if you search for natural fashion, the second listing is my review post. LOL (again). So most people searching for them and see all the crap I wrote about them. Don’t you just love the internet. Didn’t it occur to them that I would write about what they said to me? Did they think I would apologise for writing an honest review? Didn’t they think that their potential customers will read the crap I wrote about them? They’re surely not going to get new customers out of this.

The other great thing is that it doesn’t affect my business in any way. There are other organic clothing suppliers around after all. The last thing I need is to work with morons like those at Natural Fashion.

Planting Trees is Good for Environment

Treehugger on the claim that planting trees isn’t that good at reducing carbon emissions:

In a letter to the Guardian, which we unfortunately cannot find on their website, Ken Caldeira of the Carnegie Institute put forward the following clarification:

“I was aghast to see our study reported under the headline “Planting Trees to Save the Planet is Pointless, Say Ecologists” (December 15). Indeed, our study found that preserving and restoring tropical forests is doubly important, as they cool the earth by removing the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide from the atmosphere and by helping produce cooling clouds. We did find that preserving and restoring forests outside the tropics does little or nothing to help slow climate change, but nevertheless these forests are a critical component of the earth’s biosphere and great urgency should be placed on restoring them.”

He goes on to argue that stopping climate change will require great steps in developing renewable sources of power and, possibly, nuclear energy, but he also insists that “we must concurrently take action to preserve our forests so that we have an environment worth preserving.” We certainly won’t argue with that!

Russia Wants Global Warming?

Treehugger on this ridiculous statement:

The Economist is running yet another inane article, this one suggesting that global warming is good for Russia. It starts off with the bad- “This is bad for local wildlife. All over the world, species are edging towards the poles as their habitats change. But Arctic and Antarctic creatures have nowhere colder to go. Pity the polar bears. ” and “Rising polar temperatures also mean bad news for many human beings—notably the 150,000 Inuit of Alaska, Canada, Greenland and Russia. Frozen ground is turning mushy, making it hard for hunters to travel. Mosquito infestations have driven their main quarry, caribou, into the hills.”

However it goes on to say ” The shipping industry will be able to use new short-cuts along the north coast of North America and the north coast of Russia. A newly navigable Arctic could cut thousands of miles off the journey between the Atlantic and the Pacific.The biggest beneficiary is likely to be Russia itself, which encircles almost half the Arctic Ocean. Currently uninhabitable areas will become more hospitable; currently inaccessible energy resources will become more exploitable. ” The Economist suggests that “However the sea is divided up, warming is likely to make Russia richer rather than poorer. ”