dslreports logo
site
 
    All Forums Hot Topics Gallery
spc

spacer




how-to block ads


Search Topic:
uniqs
23197
share rss forum feed


NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:12
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC

1 edit
reply to WhosAbuser

Re: Comcast abuse phone call.

said by WhosAbuser :

If you agree it is not scientific. Don't make the number appear like the fact. Do you get it that the exact number is less relevant to me regardless it is 10%, or 0.001%. Do I need to make this any more clear.
This whole thread has been short on facts, and long on supposition. I haven't seen any objective facts posted in the complaints against Comcast.

Addendum

Except for the fact of receiving, "The Phone Call".

--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum


Morty7
Premium
join:2004-09-18
reply to AnotherGuy
said by AnotherGuy :

ping www.yahoo.com

Normally, 15 or 20 ms. During peak usage, I restrict my used bandwidth so as to not increase average latency from my modem to the other end more than 5 ms or so. If I have something large to D/L, I start it at bedtime and restrict it to 100 or 150 kbyte/sec. Spread it out a bit. I can tell when peak usage times are in my area by pinging something known and well connected. I make a conscious effort not to negatively impact my area.

Other than that, how is the average person supposed to determine if they are impacting the service of others? You can be D/Ling like an MF, and if you are still getting a round trip time to www.yahoo.com of 20 ms, you would have to assume that you aren't impacting anyone in a noticeable way.
WatchWAN 1.0.0.1


Morty7
Premium
join:2004-09-18
reply to NormanS
said by NormanS:

said by WhosAbuser :

If you agree it is not scientific. Don't make the number appear like the fact. Do you get it that the exact number is less relevant to me regardless it is 10%, or 0.001%. Do I need to make this any more clear.
This whole thread has been short on facts, and long on supposition. I haven't seen any objective facts posted in the complaints against Comcast.

Addendum

Except for the fact of receiving, "The Phone Call".

Even the "fact" people are claiming they're only downloading 200GB, whose to say they are telling the truth and aren't downloading 450GB? 600GB?

I personally don't care if you don't care if it's 1% 10% or 0.00001%, just don't troll over it. No where did I say it was scientific, or that there was margin of error or anything. However, the majority of people would agree that less then 1% of Comcast's customer base are getting a phone call. Nothing is implied by this.


NetFixer
Freedom is NOT Free
Premium
join:2004-06-24
The Boro
Reviews:
·Cingular Wireless
·Comcast Business..
·Vonage

1 edit

2 recommendations

reply to WhosAbuser
said by WhosAbuser :

Do you get it that the exact number is less relevant to me...

Do I need to make this any more clear.
I think it is quite clear to all that any opinion not in agreement with your assertion that Comcast is abusing it's customers is irrelevant to you.

I sometimes feel neglected, but if I actually felt abused, I would do more than just rant on this forum.
--
Outsourcing is not the same as Offshoring!
Test your firewall. | Smell the flowers.


WhosAbuser

@comcast.net
reply to NormanS
Can you challenge following facts:
Comcast has an invisible usage limit.
Comcast does not tell users what the limit is.
Comcast labels high usage users ¡°abuser¡±
Comcast can cut off the service any time
"abusers" are not all real "abusers"

My counter-argument would be if the issue at hand is just "the phone call", it sounds like there is no pain for users and abuse department did not accomplish much either. Therefore, Comcast can use the resources better.


Billyboob

@gte.net
reply to Morty7
said by Morty7:

said by NormanS:

said by WhosAbuser :

If you agree it is not scientific. Don't make the number appear like the fact. Do you get it that the exact number is less relevant to me regardless it is 10%, or 0.001%. Do I need to make this any more clear.
This whole thread has been short on facts, and long on supposition. I haven't seen any objective facts posted in the complaints against Comcast.

Addendum

Except for the fact of receiving, "The Phone Call".

Even the "fact" people are claiming they're only downloading 200GB, whose to say they are telling the truth and aren't downloading 450GB? 600GB?

I personally don't care if you don't care if it's 1% 10% or 0.00001%, just don't troll over it. No where did I say it was scientific, or that there was margin of error or anything. However, the majority of people would agree that less then 1% of Comcast's customer base are getting a phone call. Nothing is implied by this.
The majority of Comcast users do not have enough information to make an estimate of the number of people who have received the call.

Comcast's abuse department employees are the only people who know how many times the call has been made and they don't seem to be posting here.


WhosAbuser

@comcast.net
reply to Morty7
Good, now you made it clear that you don't care the exact number, which I have stated the same so many times.


WhosAbuser

@comcast.net
reply to NetFixer
If I said one thing is irrelevant, you can generalize to anything is irrelevant. What kind methodology are you using here? Inductive, deductive, or what-ducitve?


NormanS
I gave her time to steal my mind away
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA
kudos:12
Reviews:
·SONIC.NET
·Pacific Bell - SBC

1 recommendation

reply to WhosAbuser
said by WhosAbuser :

Can you challenge following facts:
Comcast has an invisible usage limit.
The facts that I have seen reported suggest that it is a "variable" limit, not an "invisible" limit.
Comcast does not tell users what the limit is.
Because the limit is "variable", there is no specific quantity which would be correct.
Comcast labels high usage users ¡°abuser¡±
Comcast is labeling violators of their AUP/TOS as abusive, not "high usage users".
Comcast can cut off the service any time
Aside from the fact that every ISP can do that, this only applies to violators of the AUP/TOS.
"abusers" are not all real "abusers"
This is most definitely not a "fact", but an opinion.
My counter-argument would be if the issue at hand is just "the phone call", it sounds like there is no pain for users and abuse department did not accomplish much either. Therefore, Comcast can use the resources better.
Quite the "counter argument". But hardly proving anything at all. "The Phone" call is a notice of violation of the AUP/TOS, and a request to come into compliance with same. If that fails, the next step is sanctions.
--
Norman
~Oh Lord, why have you come
~To Konnyu, with the Lion and the Drum


NetFixer
Freedom is NOT Free
Premium
join:2004-06-24
The Boro
Reviews:
·Cingular Wireless
·Comcast Business..
·Vonage

1 edit

1 recommendation

reply to WhosAbuser
said by WhosAbuser :

If I said one thing is irrelevant, you can generalize to anything is irrelevant. What kind methodology are you using here? Inductive, deductive, or what-ducitve?
A summary analysis of all your posts in this thread (including your anonymous pseudonym) seems to have a common thread that Comcast is abusing all it's customers through it's implementation of network abuse enforcement, and you have certainly rejected any opinions to the contrary.

You are of course entitled to your opinion, but as I said, if I felt abused, I would do more than just ranting and trolling in this forum.
--
Outsourcing is not the same as Offshoring!
Test your firewall. | Smell the flowers.


WhosAbuser

@comcast.net
reply to NormanS
The can you rule out an "invisible" limit exists.
Even the limit is a variable, there must be a function/formula/equation etc, which can be made explicit. If the function is degraded to a random function, the variable means invisible. So "invisible" and "variable" are exchangeable at certain condition.
You are telling that abusers we are referring to in those threads are not due to the usage. Then which part of AUP/TOS was violated.
Give me an IPS that chooses to treat its customers like criminals rather than to assist them to avoid violations.
If this is not a fact, then "abusers" ARE all real "abusers" must be true.
So you are telling warning and sanctions are only thing that Comcast can do. Do you really expect Comcast performs at that low standards.


WhosAbuser

@comcast.net
reply to NetFixer
I welcome different opinions. But it does not mean I have to agree. I agreed with many others opinions too, which is on the public record. So your summary is incorrect. If you feel abused but the abuse has not been seen yet especially you said you feel neglected, nobody can help you much. BTW, what is your point to bring it up that "if you feel abused" or just a threat?


sortofageek
Runs from Clowns
Premium,Mod
join:2001-08-19
kudos:23

1 recommendation

reply to NetFixer
The OP left the topic nearly five days ago.

Circles keep coming to mind ... even in my sleep. That always seems to be the case with this topic. Time to let it rest, nothing new to see.

I have said it before ... everybody has opinons ... this isn't a contest ... nobody needs to win.
--
My Folding@Home Farm * Join Team Helix? * I am praying for Rebekah.