March 23, 2006
That's my poodle piddling on the comments.
He started at one of my posts at MVRWC, then followed me home, and then went to the wife's, and now he's here.
Remember though, he's just a poodle. Like all poodles, all he can do is yap. He has no bite.
He also follows commands like a good poodle. For example, he first dropped his poodle turds over 200 times at my blog. Then I pointed out to him that because every poodle turd was under a different IP address, he just raised my stats enough for me to jack up my BlogAd rates, which I did. My poodle turds have dropped significantly.
He also originally posted some poodle turds as "Fisting Fool." However, he changed it to "F1sting Fool" when I pointed out to him that the term "fisting" would draw tons of Google hits to my site, thereby allowing me to again raise my BlogAd rates.
Good poodle.
So, ignore the poodle piddling in the comments. He's mine, and he knows it.
And since there are 29 authors on this blog, it shouldn't be a problem cleaning up the poodle turds as soon as they appear. Sorry poodle.
Posted by: Vinnie at
08:22 PM
| Comments (9)
| Add Comment
Post contains 210 words, total size 1 kb.
September 12, 2005
But I'm not just an irate customer who had his pocket picked. I'm also a public policy researcher who would just love to find out how many people Classmates has nipped over the past three years, and since I now have a "free" membership, perhaps (as a commenter suggested) I' could put together a brief survey for people in the institutions where I went to school as a young turk. I know no one will pay me to do it, but it's a logical next step.
In the mean time if you or someone you know has had their account raided in this way you now know the policy prescription: One email followed by four irate responses gets a refund. Pass it on.
Posted by: Demosophist at
01:38 AM
| Comments (5)
| Add Comment
Post contains 230 words, total size 1 kb.
September 11, 2005
To get back to the fracas, if I understand Classmates correctly, they're now willing to refund half the money that they extracted from my account without permission. That's a little like offering to return half the toe they've just chopped off, but it's a step in the right direction. It's not a step that suggests they've quite grasped the concept of integrity yet; nor is it very competent from a business standpoint, but it does kind of shred their claim to having an unbreakable policy about refunds.
And there's something else of note. Either "Suzie" is in communication with someone who can make on-the-fly changes in policy (unlikely on a Saturday afternoon), or she's reading from a script that tells her, for instance: "After three irate email responses offer to cut the membership fee in half." But that's not important. What's important is what the exchange reveals about the company's ethical standards, which just aren't very high, and about its business savvy, which also isn't very high. At least, it's not high enough to cope with the very medium that gave them a market opportunity in the first place. more...
Posted by: Demosophist at
10:53 AM
| Comments (3)
| Add Comment
Post contains 1063 words, total size 7 kb.
September 10, 2005
So I'm giving them a little more "free" publicity, understanding fellow that I am.
Just in case it's not obvious, the implications of their claim that a "terms of service" contract--agreed to during the initial sign up of every client--covers any access to their customer's accounts that isn't vigorously and consistently resisted, basically amounts to a license to steal. Fundamentally what it means is that anyone who has ever signed up with this company had better have access to a good lawyer, or resign themselves to the possibility of having their pockets picked once a year, from now on... more...
Posted by: Demosophist at
11:52 AM
| Comments (10)
| Add Comment
Post contains 891 words, total size 6 kb.
September 09, 2005
Well, not quite. They have this automatic renewal option, but I set it to manual at the time. Apparently somewhere along the line my renewal switch was changed to "automatic" and even though I've assumed I was no longer a member they apparently managed to slip the fee past my radar for the second year. In fact, I didn't notice that they'd deducted a membership fee until a couple of days ago, when I was surprised to see the deduction of $39 for a third year listed on my bank account. I almost missed it this time too, had not my bank manager pointed it out to me. I'm starting to get pretty steamed. I'm having trouble paying for gas money as I work independent contracts to put food on the table, and these guys are stealthily ripping me off... more...
Posted by: Demosophist at
11:52 AM
| Comments (15)
| Add Comment
Post contains 979 words, total size 6 kb.
36 queries taking 0.0296 seconds, 211 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.