sortofageek
Premium,Mod
join:2001-08-19
Valhalla Dr
clubs:
 ·Comcast
Host:
Team Helix
Distributed Comput..
Linksys
Comcast HSI
Comcast Cable TV
2 edits |  reply to funchords
(topic move) comcast issued a letter to me part 2
Moderator Action
The post that was here (and all 4 followups to it), has been moved to a new topic .. »comcast issued a letter to me part 2
Bandwidth Limits discussion has moved here ---> »Comcast has new Acceptable Use Policy besides the 250GB cap
|
|
sortofageek
Premium,Mod
join:2001-08-19
Valhalla Dr
clubs: | reply to funchords
(topic move) comcast issued a letter to me
Moderator Action
The post that was here (and all 2 followups to it), has been moved to a new topic .. »comcast issued a letter to me part 1 |
|
wenter99
Alpha Male
Premium
join:2003-12-09
Albuquerque, NM
 ·Comcast Digital Vo..
 ·T-Mobile US
·Comcast
| reply to funchords
Re: WOW! Comcast cut off Dave Winer ... again
Yes Robb. I read your lawsuit the other day. I'm aware of the allegations made against Comcast in the case you're involved in.
I've also read the TOS that we all agreed to when we accepted the service. We agreed that the terms could be revised or modified without notice. We agreed that Comcast could regulate and oversee its network at its sole disgression. We agreed that it was our responsibility to keep up with their terms and conditions. We agreed that we could be terminated without warning.
Now, I don't like all of these kinds of seemingly ambiguous rules and regulations, but I agreed to them because I figured I could stay within any limit imposed, either 4.5 years ago, or now. If not, then I'd just have to get a higher capacity plan.
When anybody starts milking anything for all it's worth, day after day, month after month, it's got to come to a head. And when it comes to a head the biggest violators cry the loudest.
That has all been brought up at least a time or two here. No point in re-hashing it. We're all aware of the arguments both ways.
I'll keep out of this from now on. I have nothing more to add.
I'm probably being mean again. I'm not trying to be but surely someone will flag me, again, about what I've written and I'll have a little red envelope flashing over my IM button in the morning... 
--
"Sometimes all you can do is just hunker down and take it, like a jackass caught out in a hail storm". LBJ |
|
sturmvogel
Obama '08
join:2008-02-07
Houston, TX
1 edit | reply to funchords
Comcast said I was bad. Comcast is God. God will not be questioned.
No big deal here. Funny discussion overall, we all have a right to opinions or unfounded speculations  Improves my English.
--
Treason is a matter of dates |
|
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
 ·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype
2 edits | reply to wenter99
said by wenter99  :Your opinion of opinions is in fact flawed, in my opinion. Hahahahaha. Good one.
said by wenter99 :An opinion is unfounded without some sort of reasonable fact or evidence to back it up... if there are no facts or evidence to give substance to an opinion, it becomes speculation (at best) or (worst case scenario) pure fantasy and non-sense. The word probably has something to do with the word "foundation."
He said:
Just in the ISP industry I could spend hours recalling history: Mindspring promising their service would not deteriorate when they were bought by Earthlink (it did). Earthlink promising an "anonymous internet" (it wasn't). And on and on. One broken promise and outright lie after another. Comcast also has a well established record of lies and deceit. And when they're not busy lying, they're playing ridiculous shell games.
Those don't sound like opinions without foundations. We even accept faith or heuristics as a foundation. God, for example, is not unfounded. The notion that "people are inherently good" is not unfounded.
said by wenter99 :Anyway, like you said in an earlier post, the lawsuits against Comcast for whatever it is that they're actually being accused of, will tell the tale. Why not go read the suit before passing judgment on it? It sounds to me that you think there is more in the suit than is actually there. (And after all this talk about opinions based on facts, too) 
said by wenter99 :I've got a feeling that when these suits get kicked out of court, the justice system and the government will be the next target. You'll have to find somebody else to fault. Do you have any foundation for that opinion?
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More fun, more features, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
|
|
wenter99
Alpha Male
Premium
join:2003-12-09
Albuquerque, NM
·Comcast Digital Vo..
·T-Mobile US
·Comcast
4 edits | reply to sturmvogel
Your opinion of opinions is in fact flawed, in my opinion.
An opinion is unfounded without some sort of reasonable fact or evidence to back it up... if there are no facts or evidence to give substance to an opinion, it becomes speculation (at best) or (worst case scenario) pure fantasy and non-sense.
Anyway, like you said in an earlier post, the lawsuits against Comcast for whatever it is that they're actually being accused of, will tell the tale.
I've got a feeling that when these suits get kicked out of court, the justice system and the government will be the next target. You'll have to find somebody else to fault.
--
"Sometimes all you can do is just hunker down and take it, like a jackass caught out in a hail storm". LBJ |
|
sturmvogel
Obama '08
join:2008-02-07
Houston, TX
1 edit | reply to wenter99
//Really? Examples?
Credit card industry.
///
An opinion is an opinion. It cannot be flawed just because it is unfounded, because it is just an opinion, does not have to be based on facts. It could be proven wrong based on facts, but it cannot be automatically dismissed because no facts are shown to base it on.
--
Treason is a matter of dates |
|
wenter99
Alpha Male
Premium
join:2003-12-09
Albuquerque, NM
·Comcast Digital Vo..
·T-Mobile US
·Comcast
1 edit | reply to sturmvogel
said by sturmvogel :Re:And just because it don't specifically say ya can't doesn't necessarily mean ya can. /// And just because it doesn't specifically say you can doesn't necessarily mean you can't. There, sounds a lot better. Busted on that one... Got it bass akwards, didn't I...  Either way though, it works out in this scenario.
--
"Sometimes all you can do is just hunker down and take it, like a jackass caught out in a hail storm". LBJ |
|
sturmvogel
Obama '08
join:2008-02-07
Houston, TX
| reply to wenter99
Re:And just because it don't specifically say ya can't doesn't necessarily mean ya can.
///
And just because it doesn't specifically say you can doesn't necessarily mean you can't.
There, sounds a lot better.
--
Treason is a matter of dates |
|
wenter99
Alpha Male
Premium
join:2003-12-09
Albuquerque, NM
·Comcast Digital Vo..
·T-Mobile US
·Comcast
| reply to ELRefugee
said by ELRefugee :Oh please. Consumer rights and protections in the U.S. have been gutted since 1980, and we've reached the point where corporate despotism is not only common, it's the freaking norm! We see proof of this fact every day. Really? Examples?
Truth is, you just can't get away with as many clever "Beat the System" schemes as ya would like to anymore.
said by ELRefugee :Just in the ISP industry I could spend hours recalling history: Mindspring promising their service would not deteriorate when they were bought by Earthlink (it did). Earthlink promising an "anonymous internet" (it wasn't). And on and on. One broken promise and outright lie after another. Comcast also has a well established record of lies and deceit. And when they're not busy lying, they're playing ridiculous shell games. That's all just your opinion. And it's basically flawed, in fact, because it's unfounded.
said by ELRefugee :So spare us the sanctimonious crap about how spoiled we are. If this were 40 years ago at least a few Comcast execs would be sitting behind jailbars by now. I've got news for you. Far more (still not enough though) corporate execs have been prosecuted and imprisoned the past ten years than in recent prior history. That's a fact!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- --------
"I Want it All, I Want it All, I Want it All and I Want it Now!" :
Not just spoiled... Entitled, greedy, undisiplined, know it all, criminal, stupid, etc...
And just because it don't specifically say ya can't doesn't necessarily mean ya can.
--
"Sometimes all you can do is just hunker down and take it, like a jackass caught out in a hail storm". LBJ |
|
sturmvogel
Obama '08
join:2008-02-07
Houston, TX
| reply to CleanGene
said by CleanGene : By this logic, if McDonald's (Comcast) is the only restaurant (ISP) in town, and I want a steak-and-lobster dinner (uncapped, unthrottled service), then McDonald's is somehow obligated to provide it to me, whether it's on the menu or not. I don't have the "freedom" to choose that entree with another restaurant, so Mickey D's should have to cough it up. The restaurant advertised access to food that they could pick for you from anywhere you want. When you find the item you want, the restaurant lies that the item is not available and kicks you out.
That is what "unfettered" access means. If they said that they offer a menu with HTTP and email items only limited to 250 GB/mo, then of course you could not ask for P2P with unlimited transfers.
Where is the list of protocols Comcast supports again ?
--
Treason is a matter of dates |
|
sturmvogel
Obama '08
join:2008-02-07
Houston, TX
2 edits | reply to CleanGene
said by CleanGene :said by funchords :No. "Free to cancel" means that there is an actual freedom there. For example, if I don't like the fact that ZeriTel Wireless doesn't have roll-over minutes, I'm free to choose Allzon Wireless instead. In much of Comcast's footprint, there are no reasonably similar alternatives. A "reasonably similar alternative" service is certainly something you might want, but there is no concomitant obligation upon the rest of the world to provide that to you. As a result, you always have another alternative - do without. Furthermore, your notion of "freedom" borders on the ridiculous. By this logic, if McDonald's (Comcast) is the only restaurant (ISP) in town, and I want a steak-and-lobster dinner (uncapped, unthrottled service), then McDonald's is somehow obligated to provide it to me, whether it's on the menu or not. I don't have the "freedom" to choose that entree with another restaurant, so Mickey D's should have to cough it up. The restaurant comparison is easy to dismantle with a 3 argument approach.
ONE. In the case of a restaurant that either: advertised as a buffet with no portion size specified or took over a franchise that did so and has no clear verifiable ways to show what it sells or does not sell but strongly implies that the servings are as much as the customer desires, when the customer orders a beef steak and the restaurant replaces it with donkey meat (as in the RST packets debacle) I am sure the restaurant would run afoul of various regulatory entities as the Food and Drug Administration. Now, since restaurants have been around for a while while high speed Internet not so long, the FDA has rules and safeguards that the FCC does not have still, but will develop in time. Mind that the "residential user usage" clause has no real meaning since the customer cannot "see" this traffic to make a comparison what usage/food serving he should eat.
TWO. Delivery carrier argument. If I purchase from a vendor a number of items and the delivery service just decides to either throw them away or not pick them up due to some non disclosed usage limit and then lie that the items were not available (RST packets again), the carrier's actions could be construed anywhere from negligence to theft.
THREE. Availability. Cable Internet should be regulated as an utility, not as a optional luxury service. While I could eat at home instead of the only restaurant in town, these days high speed internet access at affordable rates is becoming a necessity as electrical power and running water evolved from being a luxury to daily necessities, therefore the need for regulation to prevent the excesses we see today on the part of some carriers.
--
Treason is a matter of dates |
|
NormanS
Premium,MVM
join:2001-02-14
San Jose, CA | reply to sturmvogel
In the Terms of Use. |
|
CleanGene
Premium,MVM
join:2008-04-09
Manassas, VA
2 edits | reply to funchords
said by funchords :No. "Free to cancel" means that there is an actual freedom there. For example, if I don't like the fact that ZeriTel Wireless doesn't have roll-over minutes, I'm free to choose Allzon Wireless instead. In much of Comcast's footprint, there are no reasonably similar alternatives. A "reasonably similar alternative" service is certainly something you might want, but there is no concomitant obligation upon the rest of the world to provide that to you. As a result, you always have another alternative - do without.
Furthermore, your notion of "freedom" borders on the ridiculous. By this logic, if McDonald's (Comcast) is the only restaurant (ISP) in town, and I want a steak-and-lobster dinner (uncapped, unthrottled service), then McDonald's is somehow obligated to provide it to me, whether it's on the menu or not. I don't have the "freedom" to choose that entree with another restaurant, so Mickey D's should have to cough it up.
The entitlement mentality on display is, frankly, quite disturbing. You may stamp your feet and declare the surf-and-turf to be your natural right as a human being, but your declaration does not make it so. |
|
funchords
Hello
Premium,MVM
join:2001-03-11
Washington, DC
·Verizon Online DSL
·Skype
| reply to rody_44
said by rody_44 : if anyone doesnt like what they deliver they are free to cancel. No. "Free to cancel" means that there is an actual freedom there. For example, if I don't like the fact that ZeriTel Wireless doesn't have roll-over minutes, I'm free to choose Allzon Wireless instead.
In much of Comcast's footprint, there are no reasonably similar alternatives. Why? Because of the Brand X decision for one and the resulting misclassification of broadband as an Information Service. (Calling Comcast HSI an Information Service is about the same as calling Evian bottled water a river.)
And then there's the whole value proposition in the first place. Being "free to cancel" means being an informed consumer and you can't be an informed consumer on Comcast because the service is secretly limited, a users communications are secretly interfered with, and when you do ask the company a direct question they do not give a candid answer.
--
Robb Topolski -= funchords.com =- Hillsboro, Oregon
More fun, more features, Join BroadbandReports.com, it's free...
|
|
rody_44
Premium
join:2004-02-20
Quakertown, PA | reply to funchords
if anyone doesnt like what they deliver they are free to cancel. sure you can complain but it comes down to they are not obligated to give you what you want and you are not obligated to use the service. its as simple as that. |
|
ELRefugee
join:2002-02-07
Scotts Valley, CA
·Comcast
1 edit | reply to wenter99
said by wenter99 :We live in a day and age when certain people put themselves above all others and above most rules, and believe in their own minds that they, somehow, exist outside the reality of the status quo. "I want It All, I Want It All, I Want It All, and I Want It NOW!" Oh please. Consumer rights and protections in the U.S. have been gutted since 1980, and we've reached the point where corporate despotism is not only common, it's the freaking norm! We see proof of this fact every day.
Just in the ISP industry I could spend hours recalling history: Mindspring promising their service would not deteriorate when they were bought by Earthlink (it did). Earthlink promising an "anonymous internet" (it wasn't). And on and on. One broken promise and outright lie after another. Comcast also has a well established record of lies and deceit. And when they're not busy lying, they're playing ridiculous shell games.
So spare us the sanctimonious crap about how spoiled we are. If this were 40 years ago at least a few Comcast execs would be sitting behind jailbars by now. |
|
sturmvogel
Obama '08
join:2008-02-07
Houston, TX
1 edit | reply to wenter99
said by wenter99 :said by sturmvogel :Certainly, let's see how the lawsuits play out, shall we ? Honestly, and I'm just a non-degreed GDI, I can't see how you guys could possibly win any lawsuits with the reasoning and arguments you've put forth here. We live in a day and age when certain people put themselves above all others and above most rules, and believe in their own minds that they, somehow, exist outside the reality of the status quo. A specific management group.
--
Treason is a matter of dates |
|
wenter99
Alpha Male
Premium
join:2003-12-09
Albuquerque, NM
·Comcast Digital Vo..
·T-Mobile US
·Comcast
| reply to sturmvogel
said by sturmvogel :Certainly, let's see how the lawsuits play out, shall we ? Honestly, and I'm just a non-degreed GDI, I can't see how you guys could possibly win any lawsuits with the reasoning and arguments you've put forth here.
We live in a day and age when certain people put themselves above all others and above most rules, and believe in their own minds that they, somehow, exist outside the reality of the status quo.
"I want It All, I Want It All, I Want It All, and I Want It NOW!"
--
"Sometimes all you can do is just hunker down and take it, like a jackass caught out in a hail storm". LBJ |
|
sturmvogel
Obama '08
join:2008-02-07
Houston, TX
1 edit | reply to tshirt
said by tshirt :said by sturmvogel :said by tshirt :from » www6.comcast.net/terms/use/ which is linked at the bottom of every ComCast page "The Service is for personal and non-commercial residential use only. Therefore, Comcast reserves the right to suspend or terminate Service accounts where bandwidth consumption is not characteristic of a typical residential user of the Service as determined by the company in its sole discretion." Sturm, as an inteligent nitpicker, I'm sure you always read and understand the fine print of any agreement you enter..........so what went wrong here? I never saw nor signed on that agreement. it is quite clearly referenced in the Comcast Agreement For Residential Services » www6.comcast.net/terms/subscriber/ which states General Terms And Conditions 1. Acceptance Of This Agreement You will have accepted this Agreement and be bound by its terms if you use the Services or otherwise indicate your affirmative acceptance of such Services. Standard boilerplate agreement terms, for any sort of service likely to be ordered by phone/over the internet, for which a physical signature is not possible/practical. You can play dumb, but whether you choose to read it or not, such agreements are binding on the user just as a EULA is. Your only option should you not agree to the terms any anytime is cancel service. Certainly, let's see how the lawsuits play out, shall we ?
--
Treason is a matter of dates |
|
