 sbrookPremium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa
kudos:4 | reply to dirtyjeffer
Re: [ Extreme] Has Rogers ever shut any one down for overusage? Sorry, but why should you care what he's downloading. Rogers implicitly implies that he can by setting a limit on the overage charges. |
|
 dirtyjefferAnons on ignore.Premium
join:2002-02-21
London, ON | said by sbrook:Sorry, but why should you care what he's downloading. Rogers implicitly implies that he can by setting a limit on the overage charges. meh, i disagree...Rogers puts a cap to prevent people with $10,000 internet bills (like Bell had back in the days)...and if you are downloading 100's of GIGS per month over the amount you are given, surely there is some "questionable" content being downloaded (stolen or piracy).
also, for a mod (especially in the Rogers forum), you really seem to have a hate on for them...i would have thought the mod would have to be a little more impartial. (just my two cents)
--
Today's motto: Dearly beloved, We are gathered here today to bid farewell to personal responsibility and accountability. |
|
JAC70
join:2008-10-20
canada | Again, it's none of your business what anyone else downloads. If Rogers chooses not to enforce a hard cap, that's up to them. |
|
sbrookPremium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa
kudos:4 Reviews:
 ·TekSavvy Cable
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| JAC70 has it exactly correct. It's between crazlunatic and Rogers, unless you live on the cable segment and it's interfering with your performance ... then it's up to you to complain to rogers about your performance and let them work out who's soaking up the bandwidth. Personally, I think it's wrong to consistently exceed the caps by a high margin, but it's up to Rogers ... I get my speed here, so I have nothing to complain about, other than maybe their pushing the price of my service up - which I've done.
You should know by now (after being told many times) that being a mod has nothing whatsoever to do with the ISP and everything to do with the site / forum. My love/hate of rogers or bell has nothing to do with the moderation of these forums. If I let that interfere with my moderation of the forums, I should quit.
If Rogers really wanted to enforce caps, then they'd set a hard limit above the pay as you go exception. So far they haven't done that. |
|
dirtyjefferAnons on ignore.Premium
join:2002-02-21
London, ON | reply to JAC70
said by JAC70:Again, it's none of your business what anyone else downloads. If Rogers chooses not to enforce a hard cap, that's up to them. but when you get a lot of excessive downloaders, you can affect the performance of the network for all the people in your area...perhaps as a way to curb the degradation of performance, the company spends lots of money to upgrade the network to handle the increased loads...multiply that many times for many areas and you have a lot of money spent, when really a small amount of the people have caused this...that means a price increase comes along to help pay for all the extra costs...so all of us pay for the reckless use of the network by a few.
i am still curious about the amount of LEGAL material being transferred through "HUNDREDS OF GIGS EVERY MONTH"...you know, you could always purchase the stuff you need instead of stealing it. 
--
Today's motto: Dearly beloved, We are gathered here today to bid farewell to personal responsibility and accountability. |
|
sbrookPremium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa
kudos:4 Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| Again, it's absolutely irrelevent whether it's legal or illegal. Remember that Canada's view on legal and illegal in the realm of copyright is NOT the same as that being promoted by the US or the *AAs.
You say if you get a lot of excessive downloaders then you affect the performance. True. But that is between Rogers and the downloaders. Not us here in this forum. IF you feel YOUR performance or the service you are getting (say you may feel that you're paying more than you should because of the cost in satisfyling heavy downloaders), then it's up to you to complain to Rogers and let them work it out, not to go pointing random fingers. |
|
dirtyjefferAnons on ignore.Premium
join:2002-02-21
London, ON | said by sbrook:
Again, it's absolutely irrelevent whether it's legal or illegal. Remember that Canada's view on legal and illegal in the realm of copyright is NOT the same as that being promoted by the US or the *AAs.
i know, but the fact that our society is in a state of moral decay is still saddening.
quote:
You say if you get a lot of excessive downloaders then you affect the performance. True. But that is between Rogers and the downloaders. Not us here in this forum. IF you feel YOUR performance or the service you are getting (say you may feel that you're paying more than you should because of the cost in satisfyling heavy downloaders), then it's up to you to complain to Rogers and let them work it out, not to go pointing random fingers.
but you can be sure if the users were kicked off, all hell would break loose and people would be complaining about how it isn't illegal and they weren't doing anything wrong, then you wind up with some stupid class action lawsuit (or whatever)...perhaps you have a short memory...several years ago, thousands were dumped off Bell for downloading too much and every one them bitched and moaned about it, because, technically, the service was unlimited, so there was no reason why they shouldn't be allowed to consumer 500 GIGS a month.
--
Today's motto: Dearly beloved, We are gathered here today to bid farewell to personal responsibility and accountability. |
|
sbrookPremium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
Ottawa
kudos:4 Reviews:
·TekSavvy Cable
·Rogers Hi-Speed
| Off topic ...
You know, it's an interesting observation that our society today is in no worse a state of moral decay than societies before it. We often compare life with the Victorians ... but in fact the Victorians were every bit as corrupt. The major difference is that in days of yore, people and politicians were far better able to sweep their moral transgressions under the carpet.
---
Back on topic ... what Rogers must then do is to set and publish hard caps allowing a reasonable bit of elbow room above the pay more cap. Make sure every body knows they're there, AND enforce them consistently. Then there are no legit complaints about legality or class action suits etc.
Yes, Bell did eject users with hard caps AFTER Rogers indicated they were going to go with hard caps. Rogers DIDN'T implement caps, so all those Bell users flocked to Rogers. Now, both Bell and Rogers have implemented caps and are facing the same kind of issues. The problem at that time was the caps that were set were quite unreasonable (Rogers was planning 5GB and Bell 5up/5down which became 10 combined and then abandoned. The general concensus of users at that time was that 20GB would have been a far more reasonable cap.
So, all hell probably wouldn't break loose this time with reasonable caps. After all, even with pay extra caps, all hell hasn't broken loose. Where there is hell is the rest of the companies' business practices (all the major ISPs) on top of caps. |
|
JAC70
join:2008-10-20
canada | reply to dirtyjeffer
said by dirtyjeffer:but when you get a lot of excessive downloaders, you can affect the performance of the network for all the people in your area...perhaps as a way to curb the degradation of performance, the company spends lots of money to upgrade the network to handle the increased loads...multiply that many times for many areas and you have a lot of money spent, when really a small amount of the people have caused this...that means a price increase comes along to help pay for all the extra costs... LOL. You took that right from your Rogers playbook, didn't you.
IF heavy users were as much as a problem as Rogers claims, they would have booted them off the network by now. They'd also be slowing everyone down instead of increasing speeds.
The fact is, they want to rape us as much as they can, bandwidth overages included. I once heard that bandwidth costs them $0.15/GB. If that's true, the $25 overage charge pays for up to 167GB past the cap before they're losing money. What percentage of people do you think use that much? |
|
|
|
dirtyjefferAnons on ignore.Premium
join:2002-02-21
London, ON | said by JAC70:What percentage of people do you think use that much? very few...my point is, there are often many people who criticize the "ethics" of the ISP's who do take actions, all the while they download DVD's and CD's they didn't pay for...one who lives in a glass house, shouldn't throw stones.
--
Today's motto: Dearly beloved, We are gathered here today to bid farewell to personal responsibility and accountability. |
|
