🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <5jmh50$m1d$1@Jupiter.Mcs.Net>, karl@MCS.COM (Karl Denninger) wrote:

>In article <01bc504d$b1048aa0$aa1762ce@pcpalpl.www.thrunet.net>,
>John Kemper <pcpal@thrunet.net> wrote:
>>A warning to all looking to get setup with an internet service provider.
>>
>>A company called MCS Net in the Chicago area is one definate Rip-OFF. 
>>I recently signed up with them and they stuck it to me. In requesting
>>service from this company I specifically asked if they supported Dynamic
>>Bandwith Allocation, one of the protocols supported by my Ascend Pipeline
>>75. We even went so far as to explain this protocol to the tech person who
>>contacted us back. We were assured that they would support this. So after
>>chargin me for a hookup and finally having a chance to try it we discovered
>>that they could not support this. After going around in circles with the
>>owner of the company they refused to refund my setup fee of $50. This was
>>clearly one big Rip-Off. The owner swears that none of his people would
>>have told us their service would support DBA but the truth is they did.
>>Knowing this and determining form his tone when I spoke to him and the fact
>>that he was ready to deny me my refund as soon as he called I can only
>>sermise that they do this often. He even went so far as to say that they
>>are well aware my device is not fully supported by their equipment leads me
>>to believe that they have do this to other people as well. He even stated
>>that they have long been aware of the problem. Seeing how I requested to be
>>connected for a trial to see if it worked and further assured that it would
>>but they could not set me up a temporary account to try. So I trusted them
>>but when the time came to give it a try DBA didn't work. The owner in the
>>end told me I should have requested a trial account and when I stated I did
>>he they said I should have asked for some sort of supervisor. I even tried
>>that and was denied. He was again aware of this because it took a whole day
>>of cursing people out just to talk to him. I reccomend that if you are
>>looking for service in the Chicago area you don't try MCS.
>
>This set of statements is completely false and has no bearing on reality.

It's your word against his karl and your record appears to be very suspicious.
Perhaps you need a reminder of the problems other people have had with you.

>Mr. Kemper was told that if the statement he *claims* was made is in fact
>true he will receive a full refund.

Your too greedy to just say sorry it didn't work and give him a refund.

>I also offered him several workarounds
>for the problem, including a way to utilize the network within the "A band"
>to avoid excessive time charges (allowing him to leave the connection
>up on 2B channels at all times), all of which he refused to work through
>with our technical department.

All that at quite a hassle for him, why should he go keep going round &
round & round.

>The P75, along with a number of other ASCEND products, uses PROPRIETARY
>protocols to determine if a second channel should be brought up when receive
>data is being sent.  This is completely unnecessary and is a rather 
>transparent attempt to tie service providers to ASCEND hardware on 
>the central site.  It is one of the reasons we do not stock or sell 
>ASCEND ISDN hardware; other equipment does not have this requirement.

Then you should have been up front to him about your not wanting to work
with Ascend equipment.  If you have a mad on against Ascend in addition to
USR its a problem for you and your company but it should not be a problem
for a potential customer.

>We removed all ASCEND hardware from our central site over two months ago.
>Our technicians are very aware of the issues surrounding this change;

Then he should have not been sold an account if your that mad about Ascend.

<mcs ad deleted>

>The proper "long term" fix is for ASCEND to start doing things right.  But
>there are short-term fixes to alleviate the cost of leaving a 2B call nailed
>up, and they were offered.

How about you try "to start doing things right" regarding potential customers.
That would be a refreshing change.

>Again, Mr. Kemper was offered several other options, all of which he
>refused to cooperate in persuing.

Of course your type of "cooperation" had nothing to do with his postition.

>Nonetheless, I stated that at the
>conclusion of our investigation into what he was *actually* told that if 
>he was due a refund of the setup fee (even though he signed a contract 
>which stated that the setup fee is non-refundable in all circumstances) 
>we would process that refund.

Your so-called "investigation" reminds me of the Spanish Inquisition.

>Mr. Kemper obviously feels he has no obligation to wait for the resolution 
>of that investigation, but rather he prefers to come here and post false
>statements and abuse people.

Prove what he said was false beyond your rants.

>Mr. Kemper obviously feels he has the right to "curse people out" from his
>above statements as well.

Of course you don't ever do anything like that.   Pot... Kettle... Black

>I was out of the office at a trade show setup today, and in fact made
>several calls to attempt to reach him which were unsuccessful due to his
>telephone being busy.  Mr. Kemper never left a single voicemail during
>the time that he was "unable to reach me".

Did you try something called "Email"

>Perhaps people who deal with "PC Pal" should choose another business to work
>with if Mr. Kemper feels he has the right to abuse people in general both
>verbally and in a manner such as this.

Oh please karl... tell us another one...  your past statements tend to show you.

>Even though Mr. Kemper has taken to posting this kind of blatent lie, and
>has blemished his reputation for being truthful with me in this fashion,

You haven't proved a single thing on your behalf.

>leading me to believe he is not being truthful about the matter at hand,

It sure got you to respond with your so-called "investigation" without proof.

>we STILL will refund his money if we discover that he was in fact being 
>truthful about what he was told by our technical department.

Refunding his money would be the Ethical and the right thing to do and end it.
Everyone is waiting for you to do the right thing.

>This is my first and last response to Mr. Kemper's untruths, but I will
>repost it if necessary as a response.

Okay, we'll remember you said that this is your "first and last response" here.

You still haven't proved anything he said is untrue. It's just your word
against his.

>Karl Denninger (karl@MCS.Net) <blatant ad in violation of chi.* charter
deleted>



Mike

michael1@anetx-chi.com



     ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
    "don't imagine that you can defend a spineless little runt like
      karl in a public forum and not get slammed for it."
              Anthony Adams response to wix, 4/17/97