🚀 go-pugleaf

jerrywl@hotnospammail.com wrote...
:
:boursy@earthlink.net (John Bunyan) wrote:
:
::Honey <honey@texas.not> wrote...
:::
:::There once was a crooked i.s.p.
:::who cheated their customers with glee.
:::But when found out, 
:::how loud they did shout
:::that it was all in their a.u.p.
:::
::  Yes--they are amazing--long history
::of false advertising and attempts to 
::silence any who critisize them.  
:
:I agree Steve. Using common adjectives to describe an 
:account and then defining those adjectives differently 
:than common usage in a separate document is certainly 
:less than forthright 

  I've heard Texas.Net is coming out with its own
version of a dictionary just in case they have to 
explain the matter in court.


:as is using 50 MB of web storage as an advertising draw 
:and then limiting the bandwidth to transfer the data 
:from that space to 250 MB/month (expressed as 2 Gb/month).
:
:If I had business dealings with Nooorick, I'd drop him 
:like a hot potato for taking the "buyer beware" position 
:in support of TN. 

  TN being of course Texas.Net.  Are they behind all of
your posts to austin.internet getting cancelled?  Victums
of Texas Nets rather strange advertising and redefinition
of the English language should notify the Texas Attorney
Generals office--a crook is a crook is a crook.

:Both TN and Noooorick remind me of (unscrupulous) used car 
:salesmen. Of course everyone expects used car salesmen to 
:try to screw them 

  Yes--but it wasn't until consumers starting screaming about
the fraud that various states passed laws protecting consumers
from these theives--same process is necessary in Texas with
some of it's ISPs.

:but I'd guess that most people expect ISPs to operate at a 
:higher moral level.

  Why?  Many ISPs that I've seen for some odd reason seem
to thing they are somehow immune from common and accepted
business practices such as truth in advertising, respect
for the customer, etc.  

  What gets me most about many of these crooks is they'll 
advertise a deal in the paper, a subscriber forms a contract 
with them based on that, and then the crooked ISP changes 
the fine print in the TOS (which no intelligent consumer is 
going to bother with anyway--they're completley irrelevant 
to the advertised contact one entered in to) about such 
things as changing unlimited to mean quite limited, etc.  

   Fortuantly the FTC just sued one online service about just 
that and they are required to notify all customers directly 
via email or snail mail everytime they wish to change the 
terms of the contract to see if the consumer wishes to enter
in to a new one.  Consumers should always keep the original ad
they answered which was the basis for their contract--ignore
and TOS nonsense you hear after the contract is entered--it's
quite irrelevant.  

                        Steve
                        news.admin.censorship

:
::  Couldn't help but notice in 
::austin.internet attempts to get you
::censored by contacting your service
::provider--now she was a real net.scum.
::Watch them jump and dance as they'll 
::alternately tell you your irrelevant,
::killfiled, etc. while at the same time
::they'll try to get your plug pulled.
::These types have no integrity and your
::comments on Texas.Net quite clever
::and on-target.
::
:
:-- 
:jw
: