Back in February, at the RISC OS Southwest Show, I purchased the new ARMX6 computer from R-Comp, which was seeing its official launch at the show. Once I got the machine home and set it up, my initial impression was basically “Wow!” – the speed improvement it shows over previous RISC OS computers is fantastic. Continue reading »
This morning, I booked some flights with Ryanair on behalf of my parents, who don’t feel confident enough with computers and the internet to do this sort of thing themselves.
This is something I’ve done many, many times for them (and I’ve occasionally booked flights for myself with Ryanair, as well) so I’ve been using their website for donkey’s years. I’ve seen it change from time to time, and I’ve often cursed at it (and the company themselves) for making it so damned annoying, insisting that I say at the booking stage that I don’t want to add this, that, or the other – then having to do so again when dealing with the online check-in, and so on. Continue reading »
This post is a follow up to the first, second and third rules of the Virgin Media forum moderators.
The title of this post are the words spoken to me today towards the end of a twenty three minute call I received from a chap called Pete, from Virgin Media‘s complaints department: You can blog about it all you like, we’ll allow you to do that.
The call was the result of a convergence of my complaints, sent in multiple directions, concerning the two main issues I’ve been having with the company recently: The first being the new P2P/NNTP traffic management policy (about which I have yet to post), which I believe is both unfair and unreasonable due to the way in which it has been implemented, and the second being the situation I’ve found myself in on their forums, being banned not once, not twice but three times.
The outcome of that call is that the complaints I’ve sent to the company via a number of channels have pretty much amounted to nothing.
This post follows up the first and second rules of the Virgin Media forum moderators, was updated on 1st May, 2011 and followed up in You can blog about it all you like – we’ll allow you to do that.
I questioned a moderator’s behaviour on the Virgin Media forum, and that thread got deleted. Amused, I wrote about it, and referred to it in my signature file on the forum. This wasn’t received very well: I was banned from the forum and presented with an unhelpful error message, referring as it did to something I couldn’t read as a banned user. I then bypassed that ban (simply by registering again) and deliberately brought the fact to the attention of the moderators by posting an ‘open letter’ to them on the forum. That message was deleted and I was banned again, as expected, and presented with a slightly longer error, clearly written by someone who was responding in a somewhat childish manner. Finally, after sending complaints off in a couple of directions, I bypassed the ban again, and sent a private message to the forum administrator regarding this, and copied it to the moderator I believed responsible.
This post follows up the first rule of the Virgin Media forum moderators, and is followed up in the third rule of the Virgin Media forum moderators and you can blog about it all you like – we’ll allow you to do that. It also received a minor update on 30th April 2011.
Last night, I was banned from the Virgin Media forums for doing exactly that. The history that led up to this can be found in the item I wrote on the 28th and updated late last night in direct response to the ban, so I won’t go over it here, except where I feel it necessary to provide context in this item. Instead, I’ll go straight to what happened next.
After updating the item (and linking back to it in the sig for my second account on the forum and posting an open message to the moderators), I turned in and gave the matter some thought as I drifted off in the direction of the land of nod. I decided that, perhaps, the update would be better placed as an item in its own right, in the end deciding that’s what I’d do this morning.
I’m not going to do that after all, though. Instead I’m going to talk about what I anticipated and mentioned in last night’s update – I’m going to discuss my second ban.
Updated 30th April 2011 and followed up in the second and third rules of the Virgin Media forum moderators…, and you can blog about it all you like – we’ll allow you to do that.
At this moment, I have an unfinished post regarding my ISP, Virgin Media, and a newly introduced traffic management policy – which only applies to upstream traffic for two protocols, NNTP (usenet, newsgroups) and P2P (peer to peer, file sharing). I’m holding back on finishing that off, for the moment, to give them time to answer some questions I’ve raised in public, on their forums – questions that, in truth, I don’t think are going to be answered.
There does seem to be a policy on the forums pertaining to their broadband and internet services whereby the forum team refrain from responding to a thread until several days after the last person has posted – the logic apparently being that other members of the community might provide an answer to anything raised, so the forum team only needs to bother if an issue is apparently unresolved. To some extent this makes sense but, to a disgruntled customer who is experiencing problems with some aspect of their service, it can be extremely frustrating, and the temptation must be there to follow-up a query, expressing annoyance that the issue isn’t being dealt with – which, unless the forum team take notice of what’s being posted, potentially delays their response.
I discovered today that I have an account with a company called Additions Direct and, although I don’t owe them any money, there is only £971 of the £1,000 credit limit available. This is because there is an unfulfilled order on the account – for an “X Factor Waistband Amplifier” which, at £25 (and looking like something utterly dreadful), is yet to be shipped – plus £3.95 delivery.
Except that I don’t have an account with them, having not used this company to purchase anything, and having not set up any such account.
Oh dear.
Some of my family and their friends are currently on holiday in Spain and their return flight is – or, rather, was – scheduled for tonight. That return flight is with Easyjet – they always fly with Easyjet because Easyjet flies to where they always go. It’s a no-brainer.
Obviously, though, there is a bit of a problem at the moment – the Eyjafjallajökull volcano in Iceland, which has been erupting, leading to an ash cloud which is disrupting flights. The flight my family and their friends were booked on, like many thousands of other flights, has been cancelled. And that’s fair enough – it’s far better to keep people grounded, albeit stranded overseas, than to take them up into the air when there is a risk that their aeroplane could be brought unceremoniously down.
However, being stranded overseas, they need to be accommodated until further notice, and that costs money, and not only that, at least one of the people in the group I’m talking about is self-employed, so he’s losing money while he’s stuck over there. (Again, quite probably like a great many people who are stranded overseas).
I wondered how long it would take – and the answer is one and a half to two months.
One and a half to two months, that is, before spammers found a new potential outlet for their rubbish: the comments section on this blog. (Not that there are very many people reading it!)
No spammer has actually tried using the comments to spread their garbage as yet, but today I received a user registration from a very spammy looking address.
Well, I have news for you Mr Potential-Spammer – any user’s first comment, and ALL comments including URLs have to be approved by me. Don’t bother.
I received the following invoice a few days ago from TeleBilling Ltd, showing a total amount payable of £39.50.
Scan of TeleBilling invoice
I didn’t recognise the name TeleBilling Ltd. I didn’t recognise the number supposedly called. I didn’t recognise the service that I was apparently being charged for. And I also didn’t recognise the number given as “my” telephone number: Continue reading »