Necuno
Court Jester
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2005
- Messages
- 58,566
- Reaction score
- 3,437
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: How impressed have you been with the 2026 Amazon Prime Day deals?
OpenBrowse ASASA ruling - 9734
- Thread starter Necuno
- Start date
- Status
Very interesting, thank you Necuno.
Yes, we indeed updated our OpenBrowse website with a detailed FAQ a week after the ASASA contacted us.
It was a simple matter of informing the ASASA of this, and they did not rule, due to our updated site.
We are still awaiting the ruling of the Uncapped Complaint, which Mr Ryuji Theunissen lodged.
I feel that is important that a company receives such complaints, as it keeps us on our toes. It also draws our attention to items that aren't properly documented, like with the OpenBrowse section of the site. Luckily we addressed this before the complaint came in.
The OpenBrowse section of the site now contains a detailed FAQ, which explains how the product works, as well as its limitations.
Moderator: Kindly correct the title of the thread. OpenBrowse contains a 'w'.
Kind regards
MrBEEP
Yes, we indeed updated our OpenBrowse website with a detailed FAQ a week after the ASASA contacted us.
It was a simple matter of informing the ASASA of this, and they did not rule, due to our updated site.
We are still awaiting the ruling of the Uncapped Complaint, which Mr Ryuji Theunissen lodged.
I feel that is important that a company receives such complaints, as it keeps us on our toes. It also draws our attention to items that aren't properly documented, like with the OpenBrowse section of the site. Luckily we addressed this before the complaint came in.
The OpenBrowse section of the site now contains a detailed FAQ, which explains how the product works, as well as its limitations.
Moderator: Kindly correct the title of the thread. OpenBrowse contains a 'w'.
Kind regards
MrBEEP
huh?
Also flaunting that the ASA didn't rule because you made the changes quickly isn't entirely positive, if you didn't it's not hard to tell what would have happened, it shows only that you are quick to change things once an authority gets involved. Why should something have to be taken to the authorities in the first place.
I also dissagree "that is important that a company receives such complaints", why can't companies simply be open and honest to begin with, by stating any limits catches and strings from the onset.
huh?
Also flaunting that the ASA didn't rule because you made the changes quickly isn't entirely positive, if you didn't it's not hard to tell what would have happened, it shows only that you are quick to change things once an authority gets involved. Why should something have to be taken to the authorities in the first place.
I also dissagree "that is important that a company receives such complaints", why can't companies simply be open and honest to begin with, by stating any limits catches and strings from the onset.
Maybe it's because it was something that wasn't thought of? ISP's are run by humans, who do occasionally make mistakes.
Secondly, many people are very quick to jump up and down and b!tch and moan to anyone who's willing to listen (you know those type of annoying attention seeking, everybody pay attention to me idiots?) instead of engaging with the ISP and try and open some kind of constructive dialog
ernstn
Expert Member
Yes, if an ISP is willing to listen, then I see no point in taking the case elsewhere. Although I am not an openweb customer, the interaction on these forums seem to be very positive and complaints are addressed.
It is where the rules are blatantly broken everytime, such as Telkom, that other avenues should be used.
It is where the rules are blatantly broken everytime, such as Telkom, that other avenues should be used.
The mistake, of not clearly stating requirements smacks more of incompetence than an occasional mistake.
I also agree if an ISP is willing to be reasonable and helpfull then there is no need to take the "case" elsewhere such as an authority, infact it would be senseless, unproductive and moot to take it futher if the ISP cooperates, don't you think?
I do presume Necuno contacted them before going to the ASA as he's a resonable person from what I know. Yes presumption is the mother of all bollocks but I know Necuno as someone that would contact the ISP before resorting to the ASA.
I do like Openweb, all dealings (except for email correspondence with one person there who wasn't helpfull and was snide about simple and polite question) I've had with them have been pleasant. On the whole I think Openweb is probably the friendliest option that I know of. I just hope they can keep it that way because I won't praise someone because their past actions have been good if their current one's aren't.
Also stereotypically labeling someone that speaks their mind or enters a debate as an attention seeker is, at best, equally constructive as those that moan senselessly.
I also agree if an ISP is willing to be reasonable and helpfull then there is no need to take the "case" elsewhere such as an authority, infact it would be senseless, unproductive and moot to take it futher if the ISP cooperates, don't you think?
I do presume Necuno contacted them before going to the ASA as he's a resonable person from what I know. Yes presumption is the mother of all bollocks but I know Necuno as someone that would contact the ISP before resorting to the ASA.
I do like Openweb, all dealings (except for email correspondence with one person there who wasn't helpfull and was snide about simple and polite question) I've had with them have been pleasant. On the whole I think Openweb is probably the friendliest option that I know of. I just hope they can keep it that way because I won't praise someone because their past actions have been good if their current one's aren't.
Also stereotypically labeling someone that speaks their mind or enters a debate as an attention seeker is, at best, equally constructive as those that moan senselessly.
Browser, OpenWeb, like many other ISPs on this forum are still in their infacy. You can't expect everything to be 100% from the get go. Mistakes happen, no matter what business your in. However, you learn, build and move forward, which is what OpenWeb have done.
headstrong
Expert Member
- Joined
- May 10, 2006
- Messages
- 1,099
- Reaction score
- 0
Necuna did not submit the complaint.... Mr otto submitted the complaint and Necuna just inlightened the forum about it
Necuno
Court Jester
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2005
- Messages
- 58,566
- Reaction score
- 3,437
i was going to point that out - my surname isn't otto
...
theres mistakes and then theres doing something properly and well thought through from the beginning...
but it seems the norm for some companies to omit certain details to have the product sound 'cooler' and better than related and competing party's offerings out there.
which leads to the customer going through unnecessary steps and revelations.
-point is as browser put it :
why do a complaint need to be launched before something is revised and fixed if its necessary, is it not the initial company's responsibility to revise by themselves without babysitting ?
Sure enough we are all 'humans' so to speak, but you have it own your own accord if you have taken someone up and render them a service to make sure that the relevant things stay and is updated by yourself without having them run a round checking your shoelaces.
either you doing things correctly without causing your clients and future clients extra hassles or you don't do it at all ?
I do not think it is necessary for anyone to check my shoelaces. I wear the new 'self-tie' model.
Indeed I, MrBEEP, believe it or not, is a human. I too have made mistakes. Luckily, I recognised the mistake a week before Mr Otto posted the complaint to ASASA. It did not take ASASA to inform us to correct the mistake.
It was corrected exactly a week before the ASASA complaint reached my inbox.
I appreciate the fact that Necuno posted the ruling on My ADSL as it is public knowledge; and you have the right to know.
However, I do not think myself, nor my company can be labelled as 'incompetent'. I honestly provide the best possible service I humanly can to the ADSL community. I do not feel I am the least bit 'incompetent'. Both my staff and contracters share my passion for what we do. I have asked them, and they too do not feel they are 'incompetent'.
Its a harsh word. Easy to say, with harsh implications.
Indeed I, MrBEEP, believe it or not, is a human. I too have made mistakes. Luckily, I recognised the mistake a week before Mr Otto posted the complaint to ASASA. It did not take ASASA to inform us to correct the mistake.
It was corrected exactly a week before the ASASA complaint reached my inbox.
I appreciate the fact that Necuno posted the ruling on My ADSL as it is public knowledge; and you have the right to know.
However, I do not think myself, nor my company can be labelled as 'incompetent'. I honestly provide the best possible service I humanly can to the ADSL community. I do not feel I am the least bit 'incompetent'. Both my staff and contracters share my passion for what we do. I have asked them, and they too do not feel they are 'incompetent'.
Its a harsh word. Easy to say, with harsh implications.
i was going to point that out - my surname isn't otto
...
theres mistakes and then theres doing something properly and well thought through from the beginning...
but it seems the norm for some companies to omit certain details to have the product sound 'cooler' and better than related and competing party's offerings out there.
which leads to the customer going through unnecessary steps and revelations.
-point is as browser put it :
why do a complaint need to be launched before something is revised and fixed if its necessary, is it not the initial company's responsibility to revise by themselves without babysitting ?
Sure enough we are all 'humans' so to speak, but you have it own your own accord if you have taken someone up and render them a service to make sure that the relevant things stay and is updated by yourself without having them run a round checking your shoelaces.
either you doing things correctly without causing your clients and future clients extra hassles or you don't do it at all ?
Necuno
Court Jester
- Joined
- Sep 27, 2005
- Messages
- 58,566
- Reaction score
- 3,437
that was my intention.
as to my other points
- i am just asking should companies revise their products (advertisement, faq, wording etc etc) by themselves somewhere in its life span without having your customers doing it ?
another question off topic
- what do one consider a honest advertisement ? do i take what i see without hovering over certain parts and receiving further information in little cute popups that isn't just displayed as it is with the original advert without user interaction?, what if you as the end user don't hover around and take the advert at face value ?
specifically solmatrix comes to mind with their 3x 10gig saix accounts being resold as uncapped (Speaking if their light product). When you read the advert it says uncapped, but when you email/pm them you get told 1G day/30G a month - if you use more than that then you MUST keep you downloads to bare minimum effectively leaves you at just skeleton browsing, do more than that and you are going to get disconnected for remainder of the month.
as to openweb's service levels
-when i bought a openweb account i was called 7am on a saturday morning by a friendly oak from support extremely anxious and ready to get my account going, no not the setup mail or fax a personal call
-when my account went foobar, mr beep was in the adsl telkom line to get it sorted.
...
Last edited:
I never said OpenWeb was, on the whole, incompetent, just in this instance. I haven't changed my mind or choice of word.
I do think that making a bigger deal out of the topic, this one incident, is somewhat like making a mountain out of a molehill, so this is more of a reply to MrBEEP than anything else, not attacking you Mr.B, it's more of a debate I guess you could say (semantics maybe?).
Any company should have basically a checklist, shall I say, when releasing adverts. Eg; Name of service, Pros: what customers gain by this service, Cons: Price etc, and since requirements can increase the price dramatically, neglecting to state them is not a small mistake.
Surely there was more then one person who reviewed or had a hand in that advert before releasing it, which means a mistake was made at least once (every time it was read) by every person involved. Many people making the same mistake at least once each, is incompetent, even if it's just for that moment.
When I said incompetent I didn't mean "Lack of physical or intellectual ability" and that you should throw yourself infront of the next moving car you see lmao, I meant it as in "Not doing a good job" or "Not meeting requirements" (funny how the last definition mentions requirements).
Anyway, I've got nothing against you Mr.B, or OpenWeb, I had no intention of degrading you, infact I think you guys are probably one of the nicest ISPs around. But companies not listing the negatives (as in an advert) gets me going, I guess it's a pet peeve.
I think the bigger issue for OpenWeb regarding this isn't what happened, but why it happened and how to avoid it.
I appreciate the debate.
The 'advert' in question, is not an actual advert that we launched, but a link on our website.
Mr Otto had an issue with too little information describing OpenBrowse on our website, and went directly to the ASASA instead of mailing us, asking us to correct it.
As admitted in my previous post, I made a mistake, as the website is my sole responsibility. I do not waste money by hiring 17 people to do the job of 1 person. Clearly, it seems, due to our 'incompetence', I should hire more people to spell check, grammar check, and content check.
Naturally, this will come at a price, and at the end of the day, the consumer will pay.
I'd rather not. I will continue dealing with the website myself, and keep our prices as low as they currently are.
Browser, you have every right to feel the way you do, but calling me 'incompetent' for making a mistake is a peeve of mine. You certainly wouldn't enjoy being publically called 'incompetent' when you know you try more than your best. Why call other people that?
As far as i'm concerned this case is now closed. I do not feel an inifinite debate will lead to anything good.
Herewith a Dr Phil Summary:
1. OpenBrowse mistake corrected
2. Browser calls OpenWeb 'incompetent'.
3. OpenWeb replies.
4. Ownership of mistake taken by MrBEEP
5. ASASA ruled neither in favour nor against OpenWeb
6. Case Closed.
The 'advert' in question, is not an actual advert that we launched, but a link on our website.
Mr Otto had an issue with too little information describing OpenBrowse on our website, and went directly to the ASASA instead of mailing us, asking us to correct it.
As admitted in my previous post, I made a mistake, as the website is my sole responsibility. I do not waste money by hiring 17 people to do the job of 1 person. Clearly, it seems, due to our 'incompetence', I should hire more people to spell check, grammar check, and content check.
Naturally, this will come at a price, and at the end of the day, the consumer will pay.
I'd rather not. I will continue dealing with the website myself, and keep our prices as low as they currently are.
Browser, you have every right to feel the way you do, but calling me 'incompetent' for making a mistake is a peeve of mine. You certainly wouldn't enjoy being publically called 'incompetent' when you know you try more than your best. Why call other people that?
As far as i'm concerned this case is now closed. I do not feel an inifinite debate will lead to anything good.
Herewith a Dr Phil Summary:
1. OpenBrowse mistake corrected
2. Browser calls OpenWeb 'incompetent'.
3. OpenWeb replies.
4. Ownership of mistake taken by MrBEEP
5. ASASA ruled neither in favour nor against OpenWeb
6. Case Closed.
I never said OpenWeb was, on the whole, incompetent, just in this instance. I haven't changed my mind or choice of word.
I do think that making a bigger deal out of the topic, this one incident, is somewhat like making a mountain out of a molehill, so this is more of a reply to MrBEEP than anything else, not attacking you Mr.B, it's more of a debate I guess you could say (semantics maybe?).
Any company should have basically a checklist, shall I say, when releasing adverts. Eg; Name of service, Pros: what customers gain by this service, Cons: Price etc, and since requirements can increase the price dramatically, neglecting to state them is not a small mistake.
Surely there was more then one person who reviewed or had a hand in that advert before releasing it, which means a mistake was made at least once (every time it was read) by every person involved. Many people making the same mistake at least once each, is incompetent, even if it's just for that moment.
When I said incompetent I didn't mean "Lack of physical or intellectual ability" and that you should throw yourself infront of the next moving car you see lmao, I meant it as in "Not doing a good job" or "Not meeting requirements" (funny how the last definition mentions requirements).
Anyway, I've got nothing against you Mr.B, or OpenWeb, I had no intention of degrading you, infact I think you guys are probably one of the nicest ISPs around. But companies not listing the negatives (as in an advert) gets me going, I guess it's a pet peeve.
I think the bigger issue for OpenWeb regarding this isn't what happened, but why it happened and how to avoid it.
- Status