Change to AUP - Section (d)

Open discussion regarding technological or telecommunication issues
Tazz
Posts: 177
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 11:05 pm
Location: Launceston

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by Tazz » Mon Nov 16, 2009 1:06 pm

I simply wish to know where I stand.
Please bring back the 60gig limit...

cdonges
Posts: 44
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2008 9:18 am
Location: Toowoomba, Australia

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by cdonges » Mon Nov 16, 2009 1:07 pm

Col wrote:I'm sorry, but by removing the 60GB hard limit and making it uncharged, how did you expect that to be perceived? Almost everyone would take it as being unlimited. I agree that massive downloaders should be kicked, but I just hope the limit is reasonable.
I agree they can kick whoever they want, but if they want to be fair they should advise in advance what the rules for being kicked are and they should be rules that can be followed.

photonbuddy
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 11:53 am
Location: Newcastle

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by photonbuddy » Mon Nov 16, 2009 1:07 pm

If we perceive that our whole basis for being in business is being threatened by a tiny percentage of users we aren't going to meekly allow that to happen we are going to eliminate the problem.
I don't think anyone would argue this point, although I am sure most would like to know the figures for these tiny percentage of people.

I think this whole topic has been caused by the wording of the changes to the policy. It really needs to be clarified with some hard figures to help potential abusers monitor their usage.

Peleus
Posts: 31
Joined: Sat Nov 08, 2008 5:45 pm
Location: Wollongong

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by Peleus » Mon Nov 16, 2009 1:12 pm

ForumAdmin wrote: If any user thinks that being given 12 hours a day where the internet service isn't charged for (in terms of downloads) is somehow a disadvantage then...there are lot of ISPs to choose from. I think we may have run out of our 'use by date' for being an ISP who caters to very high down loaders who, without wishing to sound offensive, are almost certainly not using our services for legal purposes and therefore are an 'exposure' that needs to be dealt with in the not so distant future. I could easily be wrong in that thinking but then I have a responsibility not to knowingly endanger the company's future.
If this is the case, and you wish to prevent users downloading excessive amounts of data, why not simply leave the plans how they were? Why not simply have that 60gb offpeak quota, which will charge a steep ($3/gb after) penalty on those users you feel are using an unfair amount of bandwidth? This way as you say - everyone has access to this offpeak data usage through the use of generous limits. Those who typically use "lower" amounts of data usage do have access to download that "free" bandwidth in the early hours of the morning, and those who are "heavy" users have access to a large amount, however have a clear restriction on what is acceptable, and what isn't.

The only thing which "unmetered" seems to provide is the exact same freedom for those "lower" usage people, and a constant worry for the heavier down loaders who used to use their 60gb a month, but now have to log onto Exetel's website every day to check if they are going to be kicked off Exetels service for streaming some more video that morning.

Orkon
Posts: 81
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2007 12:38 pm
Location: Sydney, Australia

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by Orkon » Mon Nov 16, 2009 1:12 pm

ForumAdmin wrote:
If any user thinks that being given 12 hours a day where the internet service isn't charged for (in terms of downloads) is somehow a disadvantage then...there are lot of ISPs to choose from. I think we may have run out of our 'use by date' for being an ISP who caters to very high down loaders who, without wishing to sound offensive, are almost certainly not using our services for legal purposes and therefore are an 'exposure' that needs to be dealt with in the not so distant future. I could easily be wrong in that thinking but then I have a responsibility not to knowingly endanger the company's future.

Perhaps Exetel's future is with the type of customer that will appreciate that they get the lowest possible internet costs that allows legal use of our services to be maintained at a known fixed price provided that they learn to use a download scheduler and ensure their children do the same.

I don't know enough about 'legal' downloads to determine whether they could be greater than 60 gb a month or any other figure for any single service but I guess we'll find out over time.

In the mean time 'uncharged' doesn't mean 'unlimited' because if it did we would have used the word "unlimited" and not "uncharged" - by all means check a dictionary together with Fowler's, the OE or the Cambridge Modern English Usage and if I'm wrong in that belief please point out a more accurate description.

As Exetel's ONLY reason for being in business is to provide the lowest possible cost ADSL service (in this case) then we will continue to look for ways of doing that better each month we are in business.

As usual, we welcome any suggestion that assists us to do that.
Im not suggesting that the off peak be uncharged - far from it. As this thread has expressed (and this one http://forum.exetel.com.au/viewtopic.php?f=288&t=34307) the general sentiment is that of wanting to go back to their previous hard cap of 60GB - not about abusing the service.

Members are seeking clarification to the AUP change because in real terms a service that cost $45 for a 12GB/60GB last month could now be changed to $45 service for 12GB/3GB (which is at its extreme but within the bounds of the AUP). While we have a choice to change plans/ISPs, some people (like me) came to Exetel because they offered a competitive service. I can't get ADSL2 (RIM) and Exetel provide in my view the best adsl 1 plans prior to November 1. So changing plans isn't viable because there are non that offer a fixed quota in the off peak (and thats what I would be happy with and have been happy with for the last 2 years).

Scott

ryanb
Posts: 60
Joined: Thu Apr 23, 2009 8:49 am
Location: Sydney

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by ryanb » Mon Nov 16, 2009 1:13 pm

ForumAdmin wrote:So a soft limit has to be adhered to and if such limits mean that any user is unhappy with Exetel then......choice of plan or, if you're really unhappy, choice of ISP is available to you.
Are you planning to have some lenience for the first month? I have already downloaded quite a bit and Exetel have only just now updated this policy half way through the month. So really, I have had 2 weeks of thinking offpeak downloads were uncharged/unmetered and now with policy implementation, the damage may already be done (already downloaded too much).
Peleus wrote:The only thing which "unmetered" seems to provide is the exact same freedom for those "lower" usage people, and a constant worry for the heavier down loaders who used to use their 60gb a month, but now have to log onto Exetel's website every day to check if they are going to be kicked off Exetels service for streaming some more video that morning.
That's the thing. There may be some Exetel users who have adhered to a limit with them for years (as they want to be good users) but now they have no idea what is appropriate and may be getting kicked because they are a good user, but were unsure what amount was appropriate.
Last edited by ryanb on Mon Nov 16, 2009 1:19 pm, edited 2 times in total.
.

alinos
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 3:28 am
Location: vic

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by alinos » Mon Nov 16, 2009 1:16 pm

also add to legal download methods
Direct2Drive
Impulse
Netflix
DLC for games PC,Console

id be happy if the plans returned to what they were i can deal with pre defined limits having a moving magic number
just like budgeting your pay

as i said for earlier till i recover my steam directory i will be using a large amount of DL after that it should quiet back down

raedphiz
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 1:11 pm
Location: melbourne

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by raedphiz » Mon Nov 16, 2009 1:19 pm

To give us a guide as to what the "quota" will be for this month could the averages for October please be posted.

Col
Posts: 213
Joined: Fri Mar 14, 2008 7:55 pm
Location: NSW

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by Col » Mon Nov 16, 2009 1:22 pm

I would be happy with a move back to a hard limit too. A soft limit in the fine print isn't really above board in my opinion.

Ravenous
Posts: 325
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2008 4:44 pm
Location: Brisbane, Qld

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by Ravenous » Mon Nov 16, 2009 1:24 pm

Three times the average is generous. The figure will be skewed upwards (at first), as i suspect the heavy downloaders use significantly more than the common person. If I had to make the decision, I would have chosen three times the median or X percentile of highest download usage.

I expect the average to start HIGH at first, then decline sharply soon thereafter (as unfair users move on) , then gradually settle before organically growing over time.

If a sharp decline was to happen then expect a wail of complaints from the whiners. HEED MY WARNING

P.S. I vote NO to re-establishment of a hard limit on off-peak downloads.

Tazz
Posts: 177
Joined: Mon Sep 17, 2007 11:05 pm
Location: Launceston

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by Tazz » Mon Nov 16, 2009 1:32 pm

alinos wrote:also add to legal download methods
Direct2Drive
Impulse
Netflix
DLC for games PC,Console

id be happy if the plans returned to what they were i can deal with pre defined limits having a moving magic number
just like budgeting your pay

as i said for earlier till i recover my steam directory i will be using a large amount of DL after that it should quiet back down
Plus Foxtel, you can download programs you missed etc, that could add up to quite a bit per month
Bigpond Movies where you can download movies to watch.
the list gets longer by the month as TV networks also add downloading shows to their websites.

Please bring back the 60gig limit

tropt

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by tropt » Mon Nov 16, 2009 1:35 pm

As Exetel's ONLY reason for being in business is to provide the lowest possible cost ADSL service (in this case) then we will continue to look for ways of doing that better each month we are in business.
I would sincerely hope, that your only reason for being in business is to make money. That being said, it's rather difficult to make money if you upset your customers with policy changes that make little sense to anyone but the people within your company.

The first i heard of this change, was the 'Modification Of Acceptable Use Policy' email i received today. That doesn't provide me with much of an opportunity to remain a happy customer, especially considering i signed up for one set of rules... which have now been changed 'in my best interest'.

In our house, all my family uses the internet connection we have with Exetel. Some to download movies, some play online games, some are studying and watch online training videos on a daily basis. We can work with a static hard limit. It's easy to manage and everyone in our house gets a percentage of the quota as their own.

What you're proposing is madness. How can we accurately plan our internet usage that depends on a 'constantly changing average monthly user download limit'?

alinos
Posts: 24
Joined: Sat Oct 31, 2009 3:28 am
Location: vic

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by alinos » Mon Nov 16, 2009 1:42 pm

a further point is that if anyone here downloaded Modern warfare 2 off steam it was between 11-12GB which is almost a quarter of the old off peak which depending on the average could disable any further downloads without being banned

~vjay~
Posts: 46
Joined: Fri Oct 12, 2007 7:40 pm
Location: Victoria

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by ~vjay~ » Mon Nov 16, 2009 1:43 pm

Somewhere someone quoted that the averase user DL was @5gb. So you mean to tell me that in actuality, instead of expanding on a great service and passing on the benefits to the customers you intend to cut my offpeak to 25% of what I'd paid for?

Exetel makes the plans. The customer pay for those plans with the understanding of what their entitled to. I'm really fascinated to see how this all is going to turn out.

Whoever makes up all these rules as we're going along must have lost a lot of friends playing games as a kid.

MiserD
Posts: 2
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 1:07 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by MiserD » Mon Nov 16, 2009 1:49 pm

To the forumadmin... It seems as if you are taking what is said personally... and as an active part of your company, why shouldn't you? I don't think anyone is meaning this to be a personal attack on you, but you are the 'face' of a customer service point. Removing yourself from the business... think of it like electricity... Say Ergon says' anyone using 3 times the average household will have their power turned off', and you had been working late and you have 2 fridges and 2 freezers and an electirc hotwater system, etc, you are left with the question "what is the average household use?" you would be very upset that they are possibly going to turn your power off, when in actual fact, you maybe under the average. This isn't the arrangement you signed up for with Ergon and that is how people who have joined Exetel feel about the rewording of the AUP.

You are probably seeing a lot of the bigger users in the forums complaining as they have probably pushed the boundaries of what was thought a reasonable change, but the company did put them onto these new plans without sending a request of confirmation and the terms were obviously not clear as you wouldn't have had to change the AUP if they were. It is ok to admit making a mistake with the structure of these new plans that everyone has been put on, however own up to it, clear up the issues that people have raised repeatedly with you, the big 2 is the lack of consent to be changed to such plans with out notice and a finite boundary on what is AUP in an 'uncharged' plan.

It sounds like your business plan was to attract more customers... which it did! Well done... you have them on a minimum contract of 6 months and if they break those contracts you get more money out of them... but think of the badwill this venture has cost Exetel? Not only with current clients, but the bad press you are going to/ are getting around this issue, will be seen by even more potential clients and that will be bye bye money for you. I think the easiest solution for Exetel is to go back to Octobers structure, and learn from November. Cause this is the best practice for Exetel and for the customer and allows you to properly budget bandwidth as well as the customer.

Locked