🚀 go-pugleaf

In chi.internet J. Edgar Hoover <*/*f_b_i@rocketmail.com> wrote:
> Wrong!!!

> What you described might be MCSNet's current policy, but I never said my
> case happened recently. I was supporting the fact that MCSNet has a
> history of misleading customers and I was definetely one of them.

IMHO, it would be important that you stated a time frame.  You still
haven't done so.  How long ago was this - one two three or four years ago?
You stated it as if it were a CURRENT situation, misleading everyone.

> The main problem is that you assumed that this policy was in effect at the
> time I was a subscriber to their service. 
> It was not. 

My assumption was based on your posting - you gave no time frame and
posed the situation as if it were current, or at least recent.  That is
why I questioned the entire post as a phony: the facts did not match
the policy which has been distributed by a variety of media: UseNet
posts, MCSNet's policies on their web pages, advertisements in trade
magazines which explicitly state their policy and actually brag about
it.  Plus the fact that your email address could not be verified.

> I had many long arguments with MCSNet regarding their policy and the fact
> they purposely misled me. They were forced to refund my money due to their
> misleading policy. In fact, this might be why they changed their contract.

The fact that they refunded your money shows me that they resolved
the situation with you.  Indeed, it might be why they changed
their contract.  After the resolution, you continue to try to 
pose it as a problem.  You got your money, what more do you want?

> When I subscribed to MCSNet, I was required to send a xeroxed copy of my
> ID to them before they activated my service. I had to sign an affadavit
> and verify that I was over 21. Why do you suppose this was? Do they still
> require this? 

I can't remember the exact terms, but I think it does still include
a requirement of a parent if the subscriber is underage.  I think
this has more to do with the ability of a minor to enter into a 
contract than with content considerations.

> Not that it would have changed anything, but their web page was not
> available to me until after I signed on.

Many ISPs have trial accounts at no cost.  That you couldn't access
their web pages doesn't change anything.

> I asked the MCSNet representatives (I talked to more than one) if I had
> full access to binary areas and the USENET and they said yes. I asked this
> question several times, because I was aware of several ISPs limiting areas
> they didn't approve of (this is not limited to just the "porno" areas). 

The answer you receive will depend on how you pose the question.
Indeed, you did have full access to binary areas.  They just didn't carry
all of them and obviously did not carry those you wanted.  Did you
ask if they carry alt.binaries.pictures.erotica.female ?  Or 
alt.binaries.warez.ibm-pc?  Or any other specific group?  If not,
why not?

In fact, you stated this another way in your original message:
 >Next, I asked a simple straight forward question and MCS Net, and their
 >agents lied to me. I wanted to know if MCS Net censors the internet in any
 >way.

Technically speaking, no ISP can censor, because they are not 
government agencies.  Had you asked "Do you carry every conceivable
UseNet newsgroup?" you would have gotten the information you were
seeking.  The correct customer service answer would have been:
"No, we don't carry every one on our own server, but you are free
to access other news servers if you desire."

And, as a matter of fact, you were not prevented from accessing
anything you wanted from the Internet.

> I do not believe in censorship of any kind. I am an adult and I am fully
> capable of determining for myself what I want to see and read. I don't
> need Karl Denniger to do it for me and I certainly don't need his
> employees to lie to me and deny that this was their policy. 

You mean that every ISP must carry every newsgroup?  Why do you
make such a demand?  Can no ISP have a family focus?  Don't you
have the opportunity to choose an ISP based on their product mix?
And can't you augment any ISP's product mix by subscribing to other
news servers (Zippo and SuperZippo come to mind)?  Nothing prevented
you from getting the content you desired.

> I am glad to hear from you that MCSNet is now upfront about their
> censorship. Customers will approve or disaprove of Denniger's policy of
> censorship on their own, but at least he isn't lying to them anymore.

They have the responsibility to disclose to potential customers what
their policies are.  They are currently meeting that responsibility.

> You are quite right when you say,"If you don't like their policies, don't
> buy from them." When they stopped lying to me I demanded and recieved a
> refund and took my business elsewhere.

Again, problem resolved.  Not only did you have the right to go
to another provider, you had and have the right to start your own
ISP, configuring your news server any way you want.  You'll find
that some folks will be thrilled that you carry porno and warez, 
while others will be peeved.  Have fun!

> In the future, it would behoove you not to assume things.

It would behoove you to include all relevant information into a report.
"This happened to me three years ago" would have brought a perspective
to the report, which would have prompted me to merely reply that MCSNet
is more upfront now than then.  

We all must assume things. If we all waited for "the real truth" to
expose itself, the world would be at a standstill.  By posting the
original message, you made a statement.  I based my response on facts
known today: that MCSNet is quite upfront about their policies.
That you gave no indication of a time frame for your complaint (long
resolved) is a flaw of your message.  I'm sure you'll be clearer
about time frame in the future.

*
BTW, it is unnecessary for you to e-mail these posts to me.  Since you are
also sensitive to unwanted e-mail, you should understand that I did 
not ask for your copies of newsgroup postings and can easily find your
responses in the many groups you posted this.  I can think of no
reason that I would want to participate in a private discussion with
you, so please do not copy me.

Jude

-- 

        Jude Crouch (jcrouch@pobox.com) - Computing since 1967!
      Crouch Enterprises - Telecom, Internet & Unix Consulting
    Oak Park, IL  708-848-0145  URL: http://www.pobox.com/~jcrouch


> J. Edgar Hoover

> > 
> > Good try.  You get a zero.  First MCSNet actually ADVERTISES the fact
> > that they do not carry warez or porno groups.  This is no secret.
> > KD is proud of this fact and has no reason to hide it.  Matter of fact:
> > it's in the contract you sign to become a customer.  Fact: It's on
> > their web page available BEFORE you become a customer (MCSNet Account 
> > and Network Policies).  They are very upfront about this.
> > 
> > No one is forced to purchase their services from MCSNet.  If you
> > don't like their policies, don't buy from them.
> > 
> > Jude
> > 
> > --