Change to AUP - Section (d)

Open discussion regarding technological or telecommunication issues
Locked
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 3:43 pm

Gidget wrote:Why is there such emotion being expressed, with the use of expressions like "booted"? Moving to another ISP is an option, but surely you might consider changing to a more appropriate plan (commensurate with your usage) with Exetel first?
There is no plan with a higher usage than the one I am on.

ForumAdmin
Exetel Staff
Posts: 3663
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2004 2:31 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by ForumAdmin » Mon Nov 16, 2009 3:59 pm

Tazz wrote:
ForumAdmin wrote:
raedphiz wrote:To give us a guide as to what the "quota" will be for this month could the averages for October please be posted.
26.5 gb
Is this the average use per user for the month?
or
the average use per user for the month in the offpeak period only?
off peak only .

rseydler
Posts: 129
Joined: Mon Mar 02, 2009 12:45 pm
Location: Brisbane

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by rseydler » Mon Nov 16, 2009 4:02 pm

Gidget wrote:
rseydler wrote:Can I change back to my old plan please? This whole 3x thing is making me nervous. I'd rather pay excess fees if I need to download large work stuff than get booted.

Ron
I'm not singling you out, but your post is typical of many on this thread ...

The email that Exetel sent out (see first post on the thread) said, inter alia,
d) For all plans that have an 'uncharged' off peak period Exetel will deem any individual customer who downloads more than three times the average of all other customers on these types of plans in any period as 'unfair users' and will ask such customers to move to another Exetel plan or to move to another provider.
(bold added by me).

Why is there such emotion being expressed, with the use of expressions like "booted"? Moving to another ISP is an option, but surely you might consider changing to a more appropriate plan (commensurate with your usage) with Exetel first?

Gidget
Because at Extel you pay for your peak usage (as has been expressed many many times, by many many people) and I have no need for any more peak than I already have. So I pay more to get back to a 60GB plan so I can feel safe using up to 60GB a month.
This has just made my day.

Ron

ForumAdmin
Exetel Staff
Posts: 3663
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2004 2:31 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by ForumAdmin » Mon Nov 16, 2009 4:03 pm

MiserD wrote:1) Glad you don't take anything said on this forum personally!

2) Maybe from your idea of what the changes to Exetel's AUP half way through the billing cycle... but this is how CUSTOMERS are seeing this.

3) You have missed the point... you have upset all but a tiny miniority of CUSTOMERS with these changes as you have not provided (until hours after the fact) of WHAT the (previous months)AVERAGE actually was, and you have NOT clarified SATISFACTORILY how you are going to address the issue for those that STUPIDLY understood 'unmetred' to mean WITHOUT RESTRICTION. You say you will ask them to leave and find another ISP, so we as customers can refuse to leave? Does that mean every month heavy users can just say 'no, not going anywhere'? Or do you need to clear up the wording in that too... cause you can ask someone to leave, they can say no, you have the right to refuse service... so does that mean you are going to refuse service to everyone who have gone over the estimated limit this month? which in effect is the same as saying you are going to cut off their internet service. Your definitions are too vague, which is why you have angry customers right now and the timing of the redifinition as to when it takes effect, which is too late for some to actually do anything about.

New point...Maybe before you put changes like this into place, you sample your client base, to cover any issues you do not see from a company perspective? Cause if you had asked around, the fundamental questions would have been asked and solution worked into the new AUP instead of the perverbial hitting the fan.
Perhaps you're right.

Then again, perhaps you aren't.

Either way it isn't your problem - it's Exetel's shareholders.

stainsby
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 11:47 pm
Location: Bunya, Brisbane, QLD
Contact:

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by stainsby » Mon Nov 16, 2009 4:07 pm

Forum Admin: "It would be very foolish to operate any mission critical service on a residential plan."

I know, but I didn't say anything about the (hypothetical) backups being mission critical - maybe they are a redundant copy. It's my choice to make in any case [actually for a robust backup system like backuppc might be OK for residental services .. maybe a topic for another thread some time.] Anyway, I maintain that there are lots of legit ways to use up tons of bandwidth. I know Exetel is looking for the right formula to protect users and themselves - as the person that writes TOSs for our own client, I don't envy them in this task. I just don't think the 3 x average guideline is a goer.

Exetel also need to be careful what they say publicly w.r.t. bandwidth usage and illegality, and that's afact (sorry, couldn't help that).

vk3xem
Posts: 910
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2008 6:45 pm
Location: HEALESVILLE
Contact:

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by vk3xem » Mon Nov 16, 2009 4:08 pm

I am personally not affected by this latest change, but as Forum Admin has said the average off peak usage is 26.5G so three times that is 79.5G. That equates to a gain of up to 19.5G per month for the leeches at no extra charge and before they come to the attention for leeching.

The advantage of this new policy is that it will cater for emerging use of streaming video, like ABC's iView. As users start to make use of such data intensive services the average will actually start to increase, so I can only see this flexibility to be a positive for all users.

Stop complaining, it is a net gain for all users!!!
The views I present are that of my own and NOT of any organisation I may belong to.

73 de Simon, VK3XEM

stainsby
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 11:47 pm
Location: Bunya, Brisbane, QLD
Contact:

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by stainsby » Mon Nov 16, 2009 4:12 pm

"26.5G so three times that is 79.5G"

Yes, but this is not a fixed quantity. Why not jut make the limit 80GB and update it to some new value each quarter? It would lend a bit of certainly.

ForumAdmin
Exetel Staff
Posts: 3663
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2004 2:31 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by ForumAdmin » Mon Nov 16, 2009 4:19 pm

stainsby wrote:Forum Admin: "It would be very foolish to operate any mission critical service on a residential plan."

I know, but I didn't say anything about the (hypothetical) backups being mission critical - maybe they are a redundant copy. It's my choice to make in any case [actually for a robust backup system like backuppc might be OK for residental services .. maybe a topic for another thread some time.] Anyway, I maintain that there are lots of legit ways to use up tons of bandwidth. I know Exetel is looking for the right formula to protect users and themselves - as the person that writes TOSs for our own client, I don't envy them in this task. I just don't think the 3 x average guideline is a goer.

Exetel also need to be careful what they say publicly w.r.t. bandwidth usage and illegality, and that's afact (sorry, couldn't help that).
Personally I don't care what anyone downloads (except when someone in an unpressed badly fitting blue uniform turns up to the office with the appropriate paperwork).

I do care about giving value for money and I do care about not wasting money.

That means any number of things including restricting the ability of users to download more than the provisioned band width can handle.

So, perhaps it means that Exetel is no longer the correct ISP for some 1% of users who obtain some value from massive downloads - that may well be the case as things change continuously over time. But, at the end of the day, it is less than 1% of Exetel users who download more than 50 gb in the off peak period and even those users are now being given an 'extra' 15 gb or so AT NO ADDITIONAL CHARGE - so....who knows what will happen other than whatever it is all Exetel users will be better off by more efficient and productive use of the 'spare' bandwidth.

ForumAdmin
Exetel Staff
Posts: 3663
Joined: Sun Jan 04, 2004 2:31 pm
Location: Sydney

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by ForumAdmin » Mon Nov 16, 2009 4:21 pm

stainsby wrote:"26.5G so three times that is 79.5G"

Yes, but this is not a fixed quantity. Why not jut make the limit 80GB and update it to some new value each quarter? It would lend a bit of certainly.
Because it would completely destroy the point of constantly modifying it to ensure the available bandwidth doesn't get saturated.

clownbow
Posts: 1
Joined: Mon Nov 16, 2009 3:58 pm
Location: australia - earth

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by clownbow » Mon Nov 16, 2009 4:21 pm

vk3xem wrote:the average off peak usage is 26.5G so three times that is 79.5G.

The advantage of this new policy is that it will cater for emerging use of streaming video, like ABC's iView. As users start to make use of such data intensive services the average will actually start to increase, so I can only see this flexibility to be a positive for all users.

Stop complaining, it is a net gain for all users!!!
I plan on using it for streaming and Foxtel legal downloads. 80GB off peak should be plenty but I don't know yet how big the foxtel tv files are yet. Still waiting for the foxtel rep to arrive to install my service. My not charged plan starts on 1st of December.

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 4:22 pm

ForumAdmin wrote:...even those users are now being given an 'extra' 15 gb or so AT NO ADDITIONAL CHARGE.
Only as long as the average of all users who have unmetered off peak reaches 25GB ((60GB + 15GB) / 3 = 25GB.

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 4:25 pm

With respect I think there is a massive thing that Exetel may be currently underestimating the importance of to their customers. I'm sure they have their philosophies and things such as Price, Service and Value are on the list. What I don't think they realize (or at least so it seems) is how much their customers value certanty. You can see for yourself, people who actually may be gaining ~30% in quota (79.5gb vs 60gb) are asking to be put back on plan's with less, purely so they can be sure with what they have. The thing that I don't think anyone wants is the massive pain of having to continously check every day what the average downloads were for last night, check to see how you compare, and plan what we can do that night to keep under some threshold which will get us disconnected.

Please - put some firm hard limits in place - make them assigned based off usage statistics of the previous months quota to enable you to use all your bandwidth - but give us a number at the start of the month. That way we can all plan and revolve our usage around that set figure rather than what is going to occur. Give us certainty of what we can and can't do.

stainsby
Posts: 7
Joined: Mon Oct 06, 2008 11:47 pm
Location: Bunya, Brisbane, QLD
Contact:

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by stainsby » Mon Nov 16, 2009 4:40 pm

ForumAdmin wrote:
stainsby wrote:"26.5G so three times that is 79.5G"

Yes, but this is not a fixed quantity. Why not jut make the limit 80GB and update it to some new value each quarter? It would lend a bit of certainly.
Because it would completely destroy the point of constantly modifying it to ensure the available bandwidth doesn't get saturated.
I really can't see how that is going to work if the average rises for some reason (e.g. new popular video app). Maybe the heat is affecting my brain (it is like 30C in here).

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 4:50 pm

I can see copyright infringement ruining it for legit uses between June and August because US tv shows take a break, which would mean the average would reduce leaving people who need to download some big things legally can't (or am I giving P2P too much credit?). Add to that by then you will have scared away or kicked many large downloaders who would have helped increase the average. It will be interesting to see how the average evolves over time.

vk3xem
Posts: 910
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2008 6:45 pm
Location: HEALESVILLE
Contact:

Re: Change to AUP - Section (d)

Post by vk3xem » Mon Nov 16, 2009 5:04 pm

Col wrote:I can see copyright infringement ruining it for legit uses between June and August because US tv shows take a break, which would mean the average would reduce leaving people who need to download some big things legally can't (or am I giving P2P too much credit?).
Yes, I think you are.
Col wrote: to that by then you will have scared away or kicked many large downloaders who would have helped increase the average.


Large down loaders are NOT the average, so as Forum Admin suggested if 1% get booted it isn't going to affect the average by much.
Col wrote: will be interesting to see how the average evolves over time.
I would expect the average to slowly increase at a manageable level as services like ABC's iView become more popular. A fixed quota sounds good, but this new average policy is looking further to the future.

In the time I have been with Exetel (over 18 months now) I have never seen them try to rip off customers, they have always been progressive with their ideas and have always quickly dealt with issues that have arisen. This new change is obviously a bonus to many customers, at this time a soft limit of 79.5G for off-peak usage is very generous.
The views I present are that of my own and NOT of any organisation I may belong to.

73 de Simon, VK3XEM

Locked