 funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5 | reply to fAcEtIOUs
Re: Yep... business as usual said by fAcEtIOUs:said by Karl Bode:Yes Tom, it's consumers who demand clarity and accountability that are the problem. Clearly.  It wasn't the average consumer demanding it. They weren't affected and were not aware of any problem. It was the well above average abusers demanding the clarification and a hard cap. Well now they get to pay for what they wanted and got. Dave Winer was an abuser? How so?
There's absolutely no evidence whatsoever that anyone who has been kicked off of the service abused it.
It was the top 1,000 users of bandwidth. This list was from across the system, not just from nodes with trouble reports, or highly-congested segments, or from observed complaints from other systems to the abuse@comcast desk! The only thing that kind of system protects is Comcast's loss from such a consumer -- and that's perfectly fine, but it has to be disclosed.
There was nothing in the TOS that covered kicking off users for being one of the top 1,000 users of bandwidth. Comcast didn't even check if they interfered with or impacted anybody == so they can't use that excuse.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
|
|
| reply to NOZIREV
said by NOZIREV:what is a "a decent broadband policy!" in your eyes just curious since you seem to be a fairly intelligent human being? 25 TB's for 42.95$?? there are ways to push the stagnation we're in. In addition, there are also ways to enforce the contracts the businesses have with their customers. My suggestion is not fines (because the consumer pays that), but go after licenses. It's not the consumers fault that Comcrap doesn't like the contract that they themselves wrote! |
|
 espaethDigital PlumberPremium,MVM
join:2001-04-21
Minneapolis, MN
kudos:2
 ·Clear Wireless
| reply to funchords
said by funchords:Dave Winer was an abuser? How so? He was warned weeks before they cut him off, and he's clearly tapped into online news to have drawn a reasonable conclusion about what the caps were.
True, Comcast official comments to him about usage were vague, but he would have needed to have been living in a cave (which is contradictory to his tech-savvy persona) to have not seen enough data to reasonably estimate the caps.
IMO, this one is a stalemate. |
|
Reviews:
 ·VOIPo
 ·Comcast
| reply to espaeth
Then it sounds like the company need to improve it's shared infrastructure.
Fortunately I'm with an ISP that doesn't cap.
--
»www.wwiivehicles.com
World War II Vehicles and Advanced Squad Leader |
|
funchordsHelloPremium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Yarmouth Port, MA
kudos:5 | reply to espaeth
said by espaeth:said by funchords:Dave Winer was an abuser? How so? He was warned weeks before they cut him off, [...] IMO, this one is a stalemate. I agree that a warning does help, but it doesn't color Dave Winer as an abuser.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More features, more fun, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
|
|
 RobIn Deo speramus, God Bless the USAPremium
join:2001-08-25
Kendall, FL
kudos:2 | reply to csiemers
said by csiemers:Then it sounds like the company need to improve it's shared infrastructure. Fortunately I'm with an ISP that doesn't cap. This post made me chuckle. Is your ISP Earthlink? |
|
| reply to RadioDoc
Guess who will be paying the fine. 
--
Caddy |
|
|
|
| reply to splat1622
Damn Give me some of that 250GB cap.
My cap only goes 375MB a day  |
|
| reply to Karl Bode
said by Karl Bode:Your logic consistently both astounds and terrifies. »www.metacafe.com/watch/879688/pe···_fright/ |
|
 hopeflickerCapitalism breeds greedPremium
join:2003-04-03
Long Beach, CA
kudos:1 | OMG!!! stop the press.
TK posts a link to copyrighted material!!
Ohhh the humanity
--
You can call people morons, jackasses, or dumbasses here in these forums, but NEVER call them a troll. You will be warned by a moderator for Blatant flaming. |
|
| reply to Karl Bode
said by Karl Bode:It wasn't the average consumer demanding it. They weren't affected and were not aware of any problem. It was the well above average abusers demanding the clarification and a hard cap. A strawman point and completely irrelevant. A significant number of customers, the Florida Attorney General and the FCC have proven Comcast was lying to customers, yet here you are, claiming whatever happens is those customers fault for .... what .... demanding honesty? Your logic consistently both astounds and terrifies. Karl, you don't understand. You are being painted as 'elitist', by being a "well above average" user. It's the only way they can sell their goods, by fear. Fear of the elite. Fear of taxes. Fear of regulations. Fear of equality. Make the other guy scary. That's how decisions are made by some. 'I can't win by being right, I'll win with FEAR' |
|
| reply to fAcEtIOUs
said by fAcEtIOUs:said by Matt:This is not surprising at all and exactly what most people thought was going on. And the "WE THE PEOPLE" crowd are now getting what they demanded - an announced & marketed hard cap. And instead of 1,000/mo of the very worst abusers getting booted, Comcast gets to boot many many more within a couple months of Oct 1(new rules give an extra 30 days beyond 1st month before termination). So say around Dec 1 or thereabouts, we can start reading all the woeful stories about how "I was not an abuser, but just an advanced user backing up my terabytes of disk storage". Moral of story: "Beware of what you wish for - you may get it." The cap is by far better than kicking people without giving an explanation of acceptable usage. Nobody told me when I signed up with Comcast I could not use 6 petabytes a day if I wanted. Therefore they should not even have the right to kick them off in the first place. I hate all these TOS that are vague and give the corporation unlimited rights. "We can boot you because we shoved a dick up our ass and feel like it" should not be allowed period. At least now the consumers actually know about the limits and can choose whether or not to support that company. |
|
 dnoyeBFerrous Phallus
join:2000-10-09
Southfield, MI | reply to Caddyroger
Where there is sufficient competition, Comcast. If there is not sufficient competition, those citizens are hosed anyway. |
|
approval from:
fAcEtIOUs 
| reply to funchords
if he was using over 250gb he was abusing it |
|
| reply to csiemers
well keep going over 250gb and you wont have too worry about it anymore,because you might lose it |
|
fiberguyMy views are my own.Premium
join:2005-05-20
kudos:3 | reply to S_engineer
.. got a contract for us to read where you or anyone was guaranteed "unlimited broadband" for life? |
|
elray
join:2000-12-16
Santa Monica, CA Reviews:
 ·SONIC.NET
·RoadRunner Cable
| reply to espaeth
said by espaeth:said by csiemers:It always amazes me how some people want to dictate how I use my connection! I'm the one paying for it, NOT YOU!  Until you start using more than the break-even amount of bandwidth on shared infrastructure. Than my bill starts to go to subsidize your usage. It's like welfare, only we subsidize the greedy instead of the needy. Um, isn't that already standard practice at all cable companies?
I have to pay for your ESPN, even though I would never watch it, if I want to get any cable-tv channels at all.
Not that anyone "needs" cable TV or internet. |
|
 MattAll noise, no signal.Premium
join:2003-07-20
Jamestown, NC
kudos:12 | said by elray:Not that anyone "needs" cable TV or internet. Try telling that to me when I don't get my weekly Mythbusters fix. 
--
Linux Haters Unite! |
|
