South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
What's your objection?
Precisely Sabrewolfy,
You can keep that SSH connection open for a year if you like and if you use it to transfer some data back and forth that's really not a concern either. However when you start pushing gigabytes of data through the tunnel at maximum line speed for extended periods of time and its clearly visible that you're using it as a primary mechanism for bulk data transfer on a regular basis then you are risking 'the call'![]()
Makes perfect sense! If someone is using these services to get passed shaping then good riddance I say! well done MWeb on keeping the service usable for the rest of us. It is the few greedy fsukers who always try and spoil it for the majority and you, and the rest of us, are better off without them.
+1
I enjoy having snappy, responsibe HTTP browsing and email access, for example![]()
Poor show MWEB.
Very poor show of you.
Responsible? This is an 'uncapped' service. Responsible does not come into it. You a paid shill?
Responsible? This is an 'uncapped' service. Responsible does not come into it. You a paid shill?
The described behaviour is clearly in contravention of the T&C of the account in question and places the stability, reliability and performance of the entire network at risk. How can you support the intentional misuse of the network?
So I take it you feel people should be able to use and abuse their accounts as they see fit with total disregard for how it affects other users on the network?
The stupid thing with this entire argument is that you have another service freely available to you at MWeb (the business accounts) if you have an issue with these terms![]()
Why isn't there a cap placed to solve this whole mess, this adding of a "fair usage" policy is more a bit of hogwash IMO. If people are giving their limits in terms of the amount they are allowed to download in a month they wouldn't have much to complain about. Then again what would be the point of advertising a service as "uncapped"...? More of a marketing ploy is what I'm seeing here. Hmmm...
Ha ha hold on, is this argument going full circle here now? Most companies came out with fair usage limitations and there was bitching and complaining. Now MWeb merely states they will not accept cheating to bypass their shaping protocols and there is bitching and complaining.... damn, one can never win in this country.
ROFL! Exactly! There really IS no argument which can be made to support misusing the network. It really is as simple as that. I think some people are being willfully obstinate and ignorant.
I'm sorry but it is possible to DL >500GB on MWEB without 'cheating'.
It is also prudent to use proxy services for privacy protection. Privacy is fair.
Uncapped = Uncapped.
VPN use is not abuse. It is not customers' problem that MWEB does not shape that.
I'm sorry but it is possible to DL >500GB on MWEB without 'cheating'.
It is also prudent to use proxy services for privacy protection. Privacy is fair.
Uncapped = Uncapped.
but like I mentioned already...they can't really get a call because they didn't comply with the T&C's...the same bloody T&C's applies to the Internet Addict's package which encourages people to do heavy downloading. So what's the difference?
The unshaped is meant to handle all protocols equaly while the shaped is not, circumventing the system to basicaly bypass shaping is in contravention of the account.
We are however well aware of the fact that there are numerous tunnelling services, utilizing vpn’s (or darknets as they are sometimes called) and commercial news and seedbox providers which utilize SSL traffic for the express purpose of allowing their users to unshape their traffic. The use of these services for sustained unshaped data transfer is not allowed on our shaped products and it will be addressed when discovered. This holds true for other unshaping techniques which may not be covered in the above definition, such as for example SSH tunnelling.