[...]
touches like this could eventually win the customer back.
Guaranteeing that whatever problem(s) drove the customer away will not happen again may win the customer back, but sprinkling a little sugar over those problems will not.
Anyone with any sense of fair play would also say that since there was a lag time before the address could be used that anything new that comes into the address should be bounced to the new address, with a message back to the sender that a new address is being used.
And how, exactly, would something like this be accomplished?
1) Email addresses are, for all intents and purposes, anonymous. You don't know who "owns" a particular address. 2) The "I've moved!" bounce would require that your former provider use their resources to support this service, essentially forwarding part of their business to a competitor. Can you think of anyone willing to spend thier money to do that?
What? You don't like to know what your credit card balance is? Do you really just blindly use your credit card(s)?
I would think that most people, when reviewing their credit card statement would be looking for things they know should be on there, and things that shouldn't be on there...
Or have our attention spans dwindled down so far that we can't remember the services we signed up for?
...she continued to use the service without paying, regardless of the fact she was never actually billed.
That's something I like to call "willful ignorance". She knew she was obligated to pay for the service she signed up for, and continued to use, yet she remained silent when she realized (and for that long, she had to have realized) that something wasn't right.
Yeah, the ISP goofed, but she lacked the moral responsibility to resolve the issue before it became an issue.
In short, she tried to capitalize on the ISP's mistake by continuing to use the service without speaking up, and when she finally got called on it, she sued.
This borders on fraud, in my opinion.
The part where the ISP kept the account locked, but still existant, even after she cancelled it... well, that was just plain bad practice on their part.
If a company billed for a service that they may or may not provide, I'd certainly think twice about giving them my business...
Company: We've got this great service, but understand that we're not obligated to provide it to you, regardless of the reasons, even if you are a paying customer. Me: Umm... next?
But, by the same token, if no one is buying cds anymore, what impetous is there for your favourite band to bother making one?
Ohh, I don't know... Maybe the fact that people actually like their music, and that the artists themselves enjoy the music they create?
The fact that our society is so money-driven leads people to make monetary gain their primary goal. Sure, I like making money, too, but if I also really liked what I did, I would be perfectly happy if the money I made was enough to get by on. Anything more than that would certainly be welcome, but I wouldn't fight to keep it.
Yeah, yeah, I know... I'm being just a wee bit too idealistic, and probably a bit hypocritical, but hey... when in Rome..
I have a Hotmail account that I registered with the intent of using for personal emails (it was my first and last name, big mistake), but I started receiving spam without even using the account. Ever.
I would get anywhere from 25-35 unsolicited emails a day to this account... Then it filled up, around the 17th of this month. After I cleared everything out, I noticed that I was only receiving 3-8 spams a day.
I still haven't used the account, but I log in twice a day just so I can keep a manual record of the "spam bombardment", which I realize is nothing compared to most of you out there.;)
I'm not even sure what you're shouting about. Of course people won't play a game they don't like. Who are you talking to?
I think it's safe to assume that Lieberman and Gore don't play GTA because they don't like, so you can't be talking to them. I don't play games I don't like, so I know you're not talking to me.
So, what was your point again?
People like Lieberman are taking shots at videogames, thinking they they're the root of the problem. They think that, like a weed, if they get rid of the roots, the problem goes away.
Fortunately (for us) this weed keeps coming back, because we have some amazingly inept and ignorant gardeners.
I'm not too familiar with how far the DMCA extends, but does anyone think it might be possible to argue that forged headers are a conscious effort to circumvent anti-spam software?
I mean, there's a lot of material that enters my inbox that would be inappropriate for young children.
Also, there's the possiblity that the excessive amounts of spam could clog your account, preventing important emails from getting through. Similar to DoS attack?
These might be tenuous arguments, but there's gotta be a way to make the legislators realize... anything...
It's a voluntary exchange of work (shareholders have to work for the money to purchase shares), so the shareholders end up with the copyrighted material and the employees end up with their paychecks.
And so on, and so on... Until this backtracking connects to so many people that the final work might as well be publicly owned.
My point being, this kid worked for friggen STAR WARS. If he really was such a goober on this stuff.. of COURSE he brought some stuff home.. Hell.. some or all of it could have even been legimitate.
Apparently you missed the part where he was arrested.
Slashdot Mirror
Dominos, man... Dominos...
Side note: I propose that, from this point forward, members of boy bands be referred to as "Jim Something".
Lemme guess... You've got karma to burn, right?
"[...] It's slander when it's spoken. In print, it's libel."
Hmm... only about 456,250 more days to go. I better start buying up all the Kool-Aid I can find.
The older IE and Netscape browsers supported the tag, and they were eventually removed. Presumably because it's no longer a standard.
Ohh, the irony...
I still love Mozilla, though.
Take a good long look at the subject of the post you replied to...
Where did that come from?
Wait, lemme guess... your DM killed your 73rd level Elf last night.
Yeah, but yelling always gets people's attention...
1) Email addresses are, for all intents and purposes, anonymous. You don't know who "owns" a particular address.
2) The "I've moved!" bounce would require that your former provider use their resources to support this service, essentially forwarding part of their business to a competitor. Can you think of anyone willing to spend thier money to do that?
I'd like to know where you pulled that out of. On second thought, maybe not.
What? You don't like to know what your credit card balance is? Do you really just blindly use your credit card(s)?
I would think that most people, when reviewing their credit card statement would be looking for things they know should be on there, and things that shouldn't be on there...
Or have our attention spans dwindled down so far that we can't remember the services we signed up for?
...she continued to use the service without paying, regardless of the fact she was never actually billed.
That's something I like to call "willful ignorance". She knew she was obligated to pay for the service she signed up for, and continued to use, yet she remained silent when she realized (and for that long, she had to have realized) that something wasn't right.
Yeah, the ISP goofed, but she lacked the moral responsibility to resolve the issue before it became an issue.
In short, she tried to capitalize on the ISP's mistake by continuing to use the service without speaking up, and when she finally got called on it, she sued.
This borders on fraud, in my opinion.
The part where the ISP kept the account locked, but still existant, even after she cancelled it... well, that was just plain bad practice on their part.
If a company billed for a service that they may or may not provide, I'd certainly think twice about giving them my business...
Company: We've got this great service, but understand that we're not obligated to provide it to you, regardless of the reasons, even if you are a paying customer.
Me: Umm... next?
The fact that our society is so money-driven leads people to make monetary gain their primary goal. Sure, I like making money, too, but if I also really liked what I did, I would be perfectly happy if the money I made was enough to get by on. Anything more than that would certainly be welcome, but I wouldn't fight to keep it.
Yeah, yeah, I know... I'm being just a wee bit too idealistic, and probably a bit hypocritical, but hey... when in Rome..
I have a Hotmail account that I registered with the intent of using for personal emails (it was my first and last name, big mistake), but I started receiving spam without even using the account. Ever.
;)
I would get anywhere from 25-35 unsolicited emails a day to this account... Then it filled up, around the 17th of this month. After I cleared everything out, I noticed that I was only receiving 3-8 spams a day.
I still haven't used the account, but I log in twice a day just so I can keep a manual record of the "spam bombardment", which I realize is nothing compared to most of you out there.
I don't think that the anchor saying he liked GTA3 was the point Daleks was trying to make.
I'm not even sure what you're shouting about. Of course people won't play a game they don't like. Who are you talking to?
I think it's safe to assume that Lieberman and Gore don't play GTA because they don't like, so you can't be talking to them. I don't play games I don't like, so I know you're not talking to me.
So, what was your point again?
People like Lieberman are taking shots at videogames, thinking they they're the root of the problem. They think that, like a weed, if they get rid of the roots, the problem goes away.
Fortunately (for us) this weed keeps coming back, because we have some amazingly inept and ignorant gardeners.
...maybe? Somehow?
I'm not too familiar with how far the DMCA extends, but does anyone think it might be possible to argue that forged headers are a conscious effort to circumvent anti-spam software?
I mean, there's a lot of material that enters my inbox that would be inappropriate for young children.
Also, there's the possiblity that the excessive amounts of spam could clog your account, preventing important emails from getting through. Similar to DoS attack?
These might be tenuous arguments, but there's gotta be a way to make the legislators realize... anything...
Must've been "Bring Your Bong To Work" day...
...what you did to ants with a magnifying glass?