Openweb, why you do a client so?

Status
Not open for further replies.
aquadog said:
Yes this has everything to do with my original post and this solved the problem completely. You win again! Thanks for participating voted A+ will read again!
Click to expand...

Try replying to the post I replied to rather k,selectively making snark comments only to people who disagreed with some of your complaint does not make your complaint any more valid
 
PsyWulf said:
That specific problem was discussed earlier on these forums. Client paid. One cannot justify overuse because a service that isn't paid for didn't limit you as intended and you decided to be oblivious

Reactive plugging to prevent abusive people who would try to exploit a fault like this is why they can't accept responsiblity.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I'm a software developer. It's my job to make sure there aren't faults to be exploited in the first place. There shouldnt be 'reactive plugging' if the system was properly designed and tested. And yes, the systems I have worked on would cost my employers a lot of money if they were exploitable, so they are properly designed, reviewed and tested to ensure that it doesn't happen. Openweb and/or IS needs to adopt the same policy for its development to ensure that their customers don't find things to exploit, which in turns puts other innocent customes at a disadvantage when they have legitimate problems and aren't trying to exploit the system.

Would you use the same "reactive plugging" argument for a fault in a car's brake system? Only fix issues once they're causing enough of a problem to the consumers? Or would you expect the brakes to be designed and tested so that they don't have any issues in the first place? You demand a certain level of quailty for things that affect your life, why not demand the same levels of quality for things that affect your wallet, or for any transaction you enter into for that matter? It's because people are too lazy to raise a fuss, like the guy that said 'suck it up and switch isps' that we have a service industry that knows it can get away with being entirely incompetent, because nobody is willing to stand up and demand a decent level of service.


Whew my ISP isn't capping me and i'm at 3000gig on my 3gig account. I'm soooo innocent.

Calling it shady T&C makes me wonder how you'd feel at the receiving end of clients clamouring when they can't read a few numbers on a screen.
Click to expand...

Unless I'm mistaken, aquadog's control panel said he was capped. That would imply his account was used up. So he bought another account. Was it reasonable to expect him to check that his account was in fact a 7gb account instead of a 5gb account, when that's what he requested, and what he paid for?

On the flip side, why can't openweb's systems read a few numbers in a packet that explicitly say 'give me a 7gb account please', rather than giving him a 5gb account instead?

What do you do when you get quoted at a specific rate,3 days later the price is changed and you signed the dotted line with the new price and their "shady" T&C states quotes only valid for 2 days? OMG so unfair they shouldn't allow you to do this without triple-checking whether you read it?

You signed. You didn't read. Deal
Click to expand...

Yes, I would deal. Although in a real-world situation, if I accepted a quote a day after the quote expired, and the price had changed, then any normal business would contact me to say that my order cannot be placed because the quote is outdated, and send me a new quote. I've had a couple of experiences where I bought a product, or signed on to a contract, and shortly afterwards the same thing was either cheaper, or a better version was out for the same price. What do you think I did? I dealt.


I don't understand why you're going out of your way to defend openweb for having a buggy system. It's clear there's a problem with their system. The solution is not to say "don't blame them, they're just the reseller". The solution is to say "they should fix their system so that we don't have another 1000 posts complaining about their buggy system". Even if the problem is entirely on the IS side, and openweb's system is fine, they are still the reseller, and their customers are being affected, so they should be putting pressure on IS to fix the bugs on their side. No matter whose system has the bug, openweb is responsible for addressing it with aquadog, because aquadog is a customer of openweb, not IS.

If I have a query about my cellphone bill, I will go to Autopage, not directly to MTN, because it's Autopage that is reselling me the contract, and it is Autopage that I'm paying every month, so it is Autopage's job to provide support for my query, even if it's an issue on MTN's side.
 
PsyWulf said:
Try replying to the post I replied to rather k,selectively making snark comments only to people who disagreed with some of your complaint does not make your complaint any more valid
Click to expand...

You say this after you complete avoided my response?
 
beuges said:
Sorry, I'm a software developer. It's my job to make sure there aren't faults to be exploited in the first place. There shouldnt be 'reactive plugging' if the system was properly designed and tested. And yes, the systems I have worked on would cost my employers a lot of money if they were exploitable, so they are properly designed, reviewed and tested to ensure that it doesn't happen. Openweb and/or IS needs to adopt the same policy for its development to ensure that their customers don't find things to exploit, which in turns puts other innocent customes at a disadvantage when they have legitimate problems and aren't trying to exploit the system.
Click to expand...
Agree

Would you use the same "reactive plugging" argument for a fault in a car's brake system? Only fix issues once they're causing enough of a problem to the consumers? Or would you expect the brakes to be designed and tested so that they don't have any issues in the first place? You demand a certain level of quailty for things that affect your life, why not demand the same levels of quality for things that affect your wallet, or for any transaction you enter into for that matter? It's because people are too lazy to raise a fuss, like the guy that said 'suck it up and switch isps' that we have a service industry that knows it can get away with being entirely incompetent, because nobody is willing to stand up and demand a decent level of service.
Click to expand...
This is happening infact with suspension systems in Ridge Rovers or something as the latest case.

Unless I'm mistaken, aquadog's control panel said he was capped. That would imply his account was used up. So he bought another account. Was it reasonable to expect him to check that his account was in fact a 7gb account instead of a 5gb account, when that's what he requested, and what he paid for?
Click to expand...
Sorry if the Number wasn't right above the status i'd actually agree.

Yes, I would deal. Although in a real-world situation, if I accepted a quote a day after the quote expired, and the price had changed, then any normal business would contact me to say that my order cannot be placed because the quote is outdated, and send me a new quote. I've had a couple of experiences where I bought a product, or signed on to a contract, and shortly afterwards the same thing was either cheaper, or a better version was out for the same price. What do you think I did? I dealt.
Click to expand...
My statement mentioned new quote was given and signed without the client checking it. Not their job to make sure it was read over and over and over ;)


Anyways not defending Openweb per se,just against somebody wanting to be refunded for user error due to an assumption



My final note. Yes you are owed that 2gig back. If you didn't use the 3gig afterwards yes that should be creditable. Seeing as you didn't confirm or deny using it I can't say :)

Good luck dude
 
beuges said:
I don't understand why you're going out of your way to defend openweb for having a buggy system. It's clear there's a problem with their system. The solution is not to say "don't blame them, they're just the reseller". The solution is to say "they should fix their system so that we don't have another 1000 posts complaining about their buggy system". Even if the problem is entirely on the IS side, and openweb's system is fine, they are still the reseller, and their customers are being affected, so they should be putting pressure on IS to fix the bugs on their side. No matter whose system has the bug, openweb is responsible for addressing it with aquadog, because aquadog is a customer of openweb, not IS.

If I have a query about my cellphone bill, I will go to Autopage, not directly to MTN, because it's Autopage that is reselling me the contract, and it is Autopage that I'm paying every month, so it is Autopage's job to provide support for my query, even if it's an issue on MTN's side.
Click to expand...

tad bit off topic but it comes in to should openweb have supported me in this instead of going "go ask the router manufacturer, we support software side only (windows setup)":

my recent experience lies with setting up a pptp not with windows but with my router, on the page of opeweb its says that you need a pptp router if you want multiple pc's using their vpn product and so now i wanted to setup the router so that it will work as a pptp instead of having it pppoe with the local only account and using windows's vpn software.

was i excepting to much from mrBeep to support me in telling how todo the router setup or should he have at least a page on how do to pptp setup instead of just pushing me off towards the manufacturers ? as to his response no sorry only windows setup support are given.... :(

i still don't know how to get the damned router working as pptp to use a product sold by them, so i am trying now experts exchange since i couldn't get correct way of doing it off google.

i did get the feeling of; we sell, we make money, least effort, KthnxBai...
 
Last edited:
Hi Friends

Indeed this is one of the longest threads I have been monitoring regarding OpenWeb in quite some time.

We admitted that there was a problem, and fixed it. The user was given his full bandwidth compliment. I also apologised as it was an error that we corrected.

Clearly this thread would've been avoided if we provided the user with a refund on the 3GB's he chose to purchase. We sell our bandwidth as a non-refundable entity.

However, as this was a mistake on our systems part, we will be providing the user in question with a free 3GB account. Could the person whom started the thread kindly PM me with your Name and Surname, Physical Address and Telephone number. I will then forward you a free 3GB account.

I apologise for the inconvenience. The fault has now been resolved.

Kind regards
MrBEEP

P.S This was quite an interesting read.....
 
as to post 66
see thread, which mrBeep has formally responded to.

moved out for sake of separation.
 
Last edited:
MrBEEP said:
Hi Necuno

I responded to your thread directly.

Kind Regards
MrBEEP
Click to expand...

thanks, but i was just pointing out its in another thread.

*posts amended in related threads*
 
Last edited:
MrBEEP said:
Hi Friends

Indeed this is one of the longest threads I have been monitoring regarding OpenWeb in quite some time.

We admitted that there was a problem, and fixed it. The user was given his full bandwidth compliment. I also apologised as it was an error that we corrected.

Clearly this thread would've been avoided if we provided the user with a refund on the 3GB's he chose to purchase. We sell our bandwidth as a non-refundable entity.

However, as this was a mistake on our systems part, we will be providing the user in question with a free 3GB account. Could the person whom started the thread kindly PM me with your Name and Surname, Physical Address and Telephone number. I will then forward you a free 3GB account.

I apologise for the inconvenience. The fault has now been resolved.

Kind regards
MrBEEP

P.S This was quite an interesting read.....
Click to expand...

MrBEEP...
What I think upsets me is the fact that if the user in question had not started this thread, you would have never given him any form of subsidation what-so-ever. Why does a user need to go to these lenghs in order to "resolve" a query?
 
Hi Murmaid

As seen in this thread, the opinions are split 50 / 50. The user to chose to purchase the extra bandwidth. We did not tell the user to do this.

We fixed the problem the same day we were alerted of it.

An apology was sent to the user once the account was fixed, the same day. It was the users choice to purchase the extra bandwidth.

Yes, there was a problem, and it was on our side, but because the problem was swiftly resolved, the user did not need to purchase extra bandwidth.

Hopefully such a situation would not need to come up again, as the problem was now fixed.

Kind Regards
MrBEEP

Murmaider said:
MrBEEP...
What I think upsets me is the fact that if the user in question had not started this thread, you would have never given him any form of subsidation what-so-ever. Why does a user need to go to these lenghs in order to "resolve" a query?
Click to expand...
 
MrBEEP said:
Hi Murmaid

As seen in this thread, the opinions are split 50 / 50. The user to chose to purchase the extra bandwidth. We did not tell the user to do this.

We fixed the problem the same day we were alerted of it.

An apology was sent to the user once the account was fixed, the same day. It was the users choice to purchase the extra bandwidth.

Yes, there was a problem, and it was on our side, but because the problem was swiftly resolved, the user did not need to purchase extra bandwidth.

Hopefully such a situation would not need to come up again, as the problem was now fixed.

Kind Regards
MrBEEP
Click to expand...

MrBEEP, with all due respect, I have been priviledged to view all the corrispondance between yourself and the user in question. You are merely putting up PR smoke and mirrors and altering the sequence of events to appear in your favour.

You make out as though the user chose to purchase the bandwidth knowing that he was capped at 5GB. This is indeed not the case. The bandwidth was purchased with the user under the impression that he had been capped at 7GB.

We both also know that the user DID NOT purchase the bandwidth after you resolved the issue, the bandwidth was purchased before you were even notified about the issue.

The fact still remains that if Openweb had upgraded the account accordingly this entire issue wouldn't have existed.
AND
The fact still remains that if the user had not started this thread, you would not have subsidised him in anyway.
 
All in the aim of trying to make a customer happy after he clicked a button to buy more cap willingly.

Murmaider you are incorrigible
 
Murmaider said:
MrBEEP, with all due respect, I have been priviledged to view all the corrispondance between yourself and the user in question. You are merely putting up PR smoke and mirrors and altering the sequence of events to appear in your favour.

You make out as though the user chose to purchase the bandwidth knowing that he was capped at 5GB. This is indeed not the case. The bandwidth was purchased with the user under the impression that he had been capped at 7GB.

We both also know that the user DID NOT purchase the bandwidth after you resolved the issue, the bandwidth was purchased before you were even notified about the issue.

The fact still remains that if Openweb had upgraded the account accordingly this entire issue wouldn't have existed.
AND
The fact still remains that if the user had not started this thread, you would not have subsidised him in anyway.
Click to expand...

What exactly are you asking for here? The CEO of the company has formally apologised, corrected the problem, endeavored to hunt down the reason why it occurred in the first place AND the queried customer has been offered a free bandwidth package. I'm not sure what else can possibly be done?
 
aquadog said:
There. Fixed that for you bud.
Click to expand...

All in the aim of trying to make a customer happy after he clicked a button to buy more cap based on wrong information when he couldn't read clearly written numbers.

Thanks i've fixed it myself
 
Last edited:
PsyWulf said:
All in the aim of trying to make a customer happy after he clicked a button to buy more cap based on wrong information when he couldn't read clearly written numbers.

Thanks i've fixed it myself
Click to expand...

We've been over this plenty of times, so I'm not sure exaclty what the issue is with your eyes or what, but when I saw that it said I was capped, I took it for what it was. Now please, stop posting in this thread. You are exhausting and not furthering your argument by repeating the same things over and over again.

The stats page said I was capped and that's that.
 
aquadog said:
We've been over this plenty of times, so I'm not sure exaclty what the issue is with your eyes or what, but when I saw that it said I was capped, I took it for what it was. Now please, stop posting in this thread. You are exhausting and not furthering your argument by repeating the same things over and over again.

The stats page said I was capped and that's that.
Click to expand...


Oh yes the number right above it is impossible to read. My apologies. I'll go cry in the corner at being bested by single lines QQ
Try answering actual questions and NOT repeating the same lame argument and I wouldn't have to repost the reason you are in the wrong kk
 
Equinox said:
What exactly are you asking for here? The CEO of the company has formally apologised, corrected the problem, endeavored to hunt down the reason why it occurred in the first place AND the queried customer has been offered a free bandwidth package. I'm not sure what else can possibly be done?
Click to expand...

I'm sorry, I've read over my post a number of times and I don't seem to see any question marks, could you possibly point them out to me?

Anyhow... from my perspective, my post was in fact a statement and not a question. I apologise profusely if my statement drew you to any conclusion that I was in fact asking a question.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X