ADSL accounts cut off

1tb or 100000tb, if you offer data for FREE until otherwise stated, you bind yourself.

Did Mweb mention they would cut the users who exeeded a specified amount in their Terms of Serivce prior to these individuals signing up? If not then it is in the right of the users to demand their fees payed to Mweb back.
 
Last edited:
@killadoob - the reason why mweb offered uncapped local is to draw in customers. it is a form of advertising. Its the same as the whole virgin mobile unlimited smses. What a great 'feature' to advertise. especially in a growing market and as a fairly new company. I know lots of people that have joined virgin just because of that offer. just like the only reason to really be with mweb was the uncapped local (at a fixed cost) - their international cap prices are really high in comparison to other ISPs. If a company offers uncapped or unlimited and is getting a customer increase because of this then they should expect to have some high usage people. they cant just advertise uncapped and not give it or get angry when people supposedly abuse it.
 
@killadoob - the reason why mweb offered uncapped local is to draw in customers. it is a form of advertising. Its the same as the whole virgin mobile unlimited smses. What a great 'feature' to advertise. especially in a growing market and as a fairly new company. I know lots of people that have joined virgin just because of that offer. just like the only reason to really be with mweb was the uncapped local (at a fixed cost) - their international cap prices are really high in comparison to other ISPs. If a company offers uncapped or unlimited and is getting a customer increase because of this then they should expect to have some high usage people. they cant just advertise uncapped and not give it or get angry when people supposedly abuse it.

You understand what false advertising means? And if left to perpetuate too long, what devastating effects it can have on a company? I think giving out a bit of truth bending advertising is a nice way to Hook new customers, but having a lie like that linger for so long can, as it proved, be damaging to the company's reputation.
 
I can only imagine how many unhappy mweb subscribers are filling out that cancellation forms right now

Seems like those are the minority. Most people posting here seems to still have their accounts and just complain
 
Picard 100-150gb but some people cannot take a good deal and look after it, instead they feel the need to take a good deal and rape the crap out of the deal, then moan when the deal gets revoked.

I do not think mweb expected people to pull 1tb a month, that is flippin crazy.

IKE free uncapped which is what you got right? I think you all know the bandwidth limitations in this country yet some still felt 1tb was a reflection of our bandwidth situation, you guys need to admit that a few people abused a free uncapped service and are more than likely the reason mweb is doing this. Of course it is easy to blame mweb but the sad fact is downloading close to a 1tb is nothing more than crazy and not in keeping with the spirit of mwebs deal, i think the people downloading those kinds of figures a month know they are going overboard but typical of Africa they just do it anyway. It you can rape something, rape it mindset is so typical of this country, no wonder companies screw us because the moment they do something half decent we try and screw them.

This is like telling your domestic she may take some food home and she leaves with majority of your food, you did tell her she could take food!!! Did she need to take all of it? So blame mweb all you like but when you have people abusing a system you need to stop said system.

All good and well except that when you offer such a product, u should expect that a certain small percentage of users are going to use it to the extreme. Those guidelines are set in the product analysis. That's undoubtedly what they catered for anyway. Otherwise it would have been just as easy to limit the local bandwidth promotion to 70-100gigs and guaranteed they would've still attracted more or less the same number of new customers. Im sorry but its just ridiculous to now make an example of those who took full advantage of their offer.
 
Bye bye MWEB.

If I want to download 1TB of stuff I will do so, overseas people can download MUCH more than this in a month, 24 meg lines, uncapped for 25quid. Screw MWEB, screw Telkom. We need real broadband, not this pathetic excuse we called broadband. I still can't understand how these companies think that 3 gigs is fine? I use like 6 gigs just for WoW in a month with Ventrillo.. Gah I'm going to pull what's left of my hair out again.

/needs meds
 
Did Mweb mention they would cut the users who exeeded a specified amount in their Terms of Serivce prior to these individuals signing up? If not then it is in the right of the users to demand their fees payed to Mweb back.
there is no amount specified in the terms of service. they added another thing to the terms but that is only to become in effect on the 1st of May. They are legally not allowed just terminate you instantly unless they show you what specifically you what part of the contract you 'broke'.
 
there is no amount specified in the terms of service. they added another thing to the terms but that is only to become in effect on the 1st of May. They are legally not allowed just terminate you instantly unless they show you what specifically you what part of the contract you 'broke'.

So then you can sue them amirite?
 
I have a question...

That guy who dloaded over 1TB a month... what was he doing with it?
Far as I know, there's isn't a local video streaming service.

That must be a K@K load of emailing :rolleyes:

Hmmmm... *scratches head*
Maybe they should look into that... I'm sure it wasn't one of those naughty bit-whatzit sites...

As I'm sure all the rest of you guys moaning about your accounts being cut off because you can't surf the web and send/receive email

*cough cough*

I'd think twice about making a lot of noise... just now someone actually asks that question.
 
Does it really matter what people do with their bandwidth? They can use it do to whatever they want to.

*edit*

Perhaps he was backing up data somewhere, or using a VPN to transfer large amounts to and from a company?
 
Last edited:
No, hopefully it WONT snow in Camps Bay tomorrow. Leave us alone damnit! :D

As I said before, I moved away from MWEB 3 years ago thanks to their high prices and crappy support. So I have no vested interest in the "you abused the service" theory.

When someone gives you "free, uncapped bandwidth", that means you can use as much as you want and not be charged. If they did not want users to download more than 100GB/month, they should have called it "free 100GB local bandwidth", same applies to the rest of the figures they gave.

Now that they've actually inconvenienced the so-called "abusers" (which could be businesses too backing up/transferring over VPN, etc etc) by cutting them off, and are not even able to give reference to the exact rules that the "abusers" broke, I will no longer just recommend an alternate ISP to new ADSL clients. I will actively explain this whole MWEB situation to all of my clients. I will make sure the REAL picture is fully communicated to them. I will then leave it up to them to decide whether they'd like to stay with an ISP that has done this to their clients. I seriously doubt they will.
 
Hmmmm... *scratches head*
Maybe they should look into that... I'm sure it wasn't one of those naughty bit-whatzit sites...

....

*cough cough*

I'd think twice about making a lot of noise... just now someone actually asks that question.

Uhm, their data is their business. What they do with it is none of my, your or the ISPs business. We don't need to bring back the moral/though police ala apartheid era where they put stars on nipples.
 
I don't think they were talking about a guy downloading 2 terabytes in a month. I think they mean total since the trial started. In Mweb and Telkom's thinking nobody in their right mind would ever download 2 terabytes in year.

When asked what misconduct the users are these users guilty of, MWEB said that “...one of the users has used 2 terabytes of data, others over 100GB in one month.”

so they are distinguishing between the two. One guy downloaded a total of 2 terabytes... and others have been using 100 Gb in a month.
 
Letter to Oxford English Dictionary: Redefine 'unlimited'

I've decided to write an open letter to the Oxford English Dictionary to suggest it adds an extra definition to its entry for 'unlimited', so consumers can realise that 'unlimited' also means 'limited'.

I, along with pretty much everyone in the tech industry, am sick of companies advertising 'unlimited' bandwidth, downloads and the such, only to impose stringent 'fair use' limits.

Since the Advertising Standards Authority isn't willing to force telecoms companies to stop using the word 'unlimited' when, in fact, they should use 'limited', it's time to take a more drastic interim measure.

The full letter is below, and for further reading, be sure to check some of our previous coverage of 'unlimited' claims made by companies.

1) Unlimited broadband may 'disappear'
2) They call it unlimited, but it really isn't
3) ISPs reject uSwitch 'unfairness' claims

Dear Sir/Madam,

For over a century, the Oxford English Dictionary has stood as an authoritative, comprehensive and complete written record of the English language. Revisions to the text have compensated for the literary evolution that takes place throughout our lives, and the inclusion of new words and emerging definitions have accurately reflected the language's growth as it moves with us through our modern world.

So it is with great respect for the work undertaken by the editors -- both current and past -- that I suggest an amendment to the existing definition of the adjective 'unlimited'. I believe I'm in a position to appreciate that this is a word that modern linguistic evolution has had a profound and confusing effect, which may have escaped the attention of those who reside outside the consumer technology industry.

The existing definition of 'unlimited', as ascribed by OED, is as follows:

un{sm}limited, ppl. a.
---

1. Not limited or restricted in amount, extent, or degree:
a. Of power or authority, a rule, etc.

b. In other applications.

2. Not limited in number.

3. Math. (See quots.)

4. Of a hydroplane: having no limit placed on its engine capacity. Also absol. as n. U.S.

'Unlimited', however, has been subject to evolution via common verbal usage, into an adjective that describes the properties of, in fact, 'having a limit' and being of 'exhaustible supply'. This evolution has taken place inside the vernacular language of telecommunications advertisers in the 21st Century. But as this directly affects the entire general public, both native speakers of English or otherwise, I feel an additional definition is required to allay confusion:

5. Surreptitiously limited in quantity

While I appreciate it is not customary to change or alter definitions as a result of isolated usage, I believe it is worth you being made aware that the nature of competitive advertising is forcing some companies to redefine words for their own benefit. The repercussion is that the general English-speaking public is forced into confusion over what should be a simple English word.

Your thoughts on the matter are most welcome, and above all valued.

Yours sincerely,

Nate M. Lanxon

source: http://reviews.cnet.co.uk/natelanxon/0,139102300,49297063,00.htm
 
2tb of data equated to 167gigs a month across the trial. Not really as bad as they make it out to be, I know some people who do more than that on 30gig local accounts.
 
To me it boils down to this. The service said that you get "unlimited" local bandwidth. That to me says that i have the permission to download whatever local content i want to 24/7. Now, according to that definition of unlimited ...the guy who did 2Tb (although theoretically that isn't possible on a single 4Mb line in a month, a year maybe) was entitled to that bandwidth since he made an agreement with Mweb for unlimited bandwidth.

Now the problem for me starts when during the last month of the trial, you become branded as an abuser of the service (im not sure if this spoils your reputation for getting other accounts)? And during a time when local data is still unlimited? I'm sorry, but i can't be an abuser if i signed up for "unlimited" bandwidth and no argument can justify me being an abuser of unlimited bandwidth. If i made an agreement that im entitled to 50Gb of local bandwidth then im an abuser and i will say so myself, but not under these conditions.

My other problem is the very business ethics of Mweb. Sure you can cancel your service, but there are good ways and bad ways of doing things. Trying to invoke a local cap out of nowhere is clearly a bad thing as was proven last month. Trying to claim that your local "unlimited" bandwidth can still be used but yet you label people as abusers if they try is also clearly a bad thing. Even worse is phoning already infuriated customers telling them that they are abusers of unlimited bandwidth even worse, actually its quite insulting (i never got my call yet). I can almost guarantee that if Mweb sent a normal email 2 months before the saying something like "We cancelling in two months, if you want out you can use next month to cancel" i am dead sure that nobody would of commented and everybody would of accepted it. I would of even said good things about mweb if i really think about it. But instead people have to deal with unethical business strategies in order to cancel an agreement.

So my view is that we shouldn't complain about local bandwidth ending. We should rather focus on Mweb having explicit underhanded business tactics which is the real thing that shouldnt go unnoticed in my mind. I really hope that this type of business behavior gets what it deserves.
 
Last edited:
Underhanded business tactics, something which Mweb are becoming the masters at.
 
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X