Well, it is a MontyP quote.. and basically there are a group of people and the spokesperson says "We are all individuals" and one chap shouts out "I'm not!" proving that he is infact an individual.
I happen to think it is quite funny.
------------------------------------------------ "We are all individuals" "I'm not!"
So pipex offer you an unlimited service, so what are you complaining about? the fact Plusnet don't, is this suppose to change the fact?
And its Plusnet < one word not plus.net
Your living in a dream world Firth.
I think you mean You're.
------------------------------------------------ "We are all individuals" "I'm not!"
No, I'm outraged because an ISP has broken the ASA's charter by making misleading claims in advertising. I had already told you this and I'm somewhat surprised that you appear to be unable to read the reply that I gave. The reply which you did in fact quote in your post.
It's still "you're" BTW. I'm not charging you for these lessons, because I see care in the community as so essential.
Kind of a bad thing for someone who purports to be an IT Manager.
------------------------------------------------ "We are all individuals" "I'm not!"
My first ever Blocked senders list, ohh its all quiet in here now.
That is obviously untrue.
Of course they woudl that would be the service that Plusnet woudl have contracted to supply.
Why? The aim is to set the limit such that it can be supplied, not to set a limit that cannot be supplied.
And that is what they are not getting. They are getting a service which is subject to a limit but that limit is not set out clearly and is at present set as whatever Plusnet think it should be.
No it's about take and don't give. Plusnet take the subscription fees and don't give the service they advertised. They also want to be free to degrade the service whenever they choose without the inconvenience of being tied to a contractual obligation.
Jeesus on a bike, is there somewhere people like you go for a lobotomy as a passing out ceremony from school?
Your stupid posts at this point.
Should there be a "d" in there somewhere?
Plusnet DID offer an unlimited service - which they are now reneging on.
BTW, it is "it's" not "its". As you can clearly see "it's" is a contraction of it and is.
------------------------------------------------ "We are all individuals" "I'm not!"
Apparently they started enforcing it this year. Next year they are rolling out 3 new services upto 3mb but all will have hard monthly limits.
That's "you're", your welcome.
Yes, I suppose I am. I'm living in this world where people who make mistakes are man enough to apologise for their mistakes, not tiny dickless fuckwads who compound one set of lies with another. I rather thought that you might have more about you but I can see that was dream rather than reality.
Even better the entire crowd responds as one "Yes, we are all individuals" before the lone voice cries out "I'm not."
It's very appropriate because it shows the bizarre belief systems of the sheeple like Ron. He's an individual because he believes whatever line he is fed.
Well actually it's reasonable to use either form. Except that plusnet refer to themselves as PlusNet, not Plusnet. However plus.net is the domain that is synonymous with PlusNet and it's unambiguous. Given yoru weak command of your native language, I'd suggest that step out of the greenhouse and put the basket of rocks to one side.
Ah, another apt MP quote...
"Are there any women here"
------------------------------------------------ "We are all individuals" "I'm not!"
As with many other terms, "IT Manager" has become debased. They used to be halfway decent chaps, not overly bright but often competent and usually fairly well schooled. Yes their only role was as a figurehead and to give someone to sign the sick notes, expenses forms and timesheets but they had their purpose.
Today it's given out as a sort of gold star badge to clueless school leavers who sharpen pencils and make tea, badly. Everyone laughs at them behind their back, because they are David Brent with less of a clue.
The BOFH is still in charge.
If you were such an IT whizz you'd be using a proper newsreader with a kill file. A self-styled IT Manager using Outlook Express is most amusing, like someone claiming to be a carpenter trying to cut 2x4 with a penknife.
... and often earning twice what the manager does ;)
------------------------------------------------ "We are all individuals" "I'm not!"
And the rest. I had to get an IT manager to approve my invoice once, it was interesting watching his knuckles go white as he read the form, and the paper was quite creased in places.
The story is pretty much the same with cable but it is worth realising how the infrastructure works.
A metaphor would be using the road network. You start up a "Road services company" and build a dual carriageway from the M25 out to New Town. Now you go out and find customers, who are installed in small residential roads connected to main roads and eventually to your dual carriageway.
These customers now pay you £30 a month to make use of the road network you built for them, and you repay the loans you took out to fund the building of these roads. All is well to begin with, the customers have been told they can use the roads whenever they like and they find themselves very happy with the situation. The roads are fast and mostly empty, etc.
New Town gradually grows larger, as customers are tempted to sign up to New Town and use the well made and properly maintained dual carriageway to get out onto the M25 and commute to the rest of the world. The existing customers are happy, so new customers come along, all with their £30 a month rental invitations clasped firmly in their paws.
By and large, though, the town grows that little bit too big. People start to be aware that there is a problem, the dual carriageway keeps getting clogged up by traffic and there are queues to get on in the morning, queues at the roadworks, queues to get onto the M25.
Something must be done.
The choices are simple:
1) Build a motorway instead, funded by all those extra £30 a month rentals that are now coming in. 2) Start a campaign against the heaviest users, branding them "road abusers" and repositioning them in the backwater streets so they are caught up in their own traffic jam and leaving the dual carriageway free for the sunday drivers and the ones that pop to the shops on pension day. In this way, the people who are no longer able to get to work have to move to Ready Town where they have a couple of motorways, and you can pack still more people who don't really use the road system much into New Town, while leaving the dual carriageway as it is.This particular situation sounds more like mis-selling than trying to make excessive profits. The metaphor would be charging only £20 a month on the strength that you want to enlarge the town quickly with the full knowledge that you will be punishing the users who actually need the roads so as to end up with more users than your road network can handle, were it not for the fact that they won't be allowed to use it much, i.e. sundays and shopping is ok, but commuting to work will be branded "abuse" and you'll charge them a road toll as well as the £30 rental for the road, so that they go elsewhere.
Adapting the metaphor to Cable companies, well I don't think there are very many cable companies any more so choice is definitely limited, however, the cable company has a rather more massive road network that is mostly filled with Sky TV vans and various other TV channel content in vans being delivered to all and sundry, so variations in end user traffic patterns don't tend to matter very much as the capacity of the network is several times as large as a dedicated user road would be.
As a result, Cable companies tend only to get upset if you are sustaining a significant bandwidth usage and although I'm sure it happens, I don't know anyone who's fallen foul of the NTL one, for instance. They certainly don't care if you commute, nor if you come home for lunch every day and go out to the theatre each evening, as in the metaphor where this would be several times your monthly allowance of "unlimited" road use.
BT are in a similar position, as far as I can see, but I don't use them so can't comment on what the service is like, only what their position ought to be. One obvious difference is businesses will use BT for data communications but they won't have any use for cable TV, hence there's no point in supplying spare bandwidth along with the TV services, a model which works well in a residential context.
Plus.net is the website address, its not the company name which is registered at companies house as plusnet, also they do not mention plus.net anywhere on the website.
Soon you will get bored of your anal spelling suggestions its it's who cares its Usenet, my spelling is correct apart from the odd apostrophes here and there, and I'm not going to correct it just to satisfy you.
If you don't understand my typing then don't reply its quite simple.
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.