Network management Toolkit

Story: Irate Bulldog user settles court case

• 
• 

It is a great pity that Mr Oppenheim decided to accept a cash settlement rather than his originally stated aim to obtain full disclosure of the facts behind last year's service failures.

It is my own experience that some ISPs are far too secretive about the services that they do and do not provide.

Some months ago I left my cable telephone and broadband supplier and went back to BT after a long and protracted dispute. The problem was that some emails sent to me were consistently failing to reach my account. It took considerable effort on my part to finally get to the reason: The ISP was using a third-party blacklist to block email from certain domains. The intention is to reduce spam, but it inevitably blocks some legitimate email too, since frequently spammers and legitimate users share the same domian.

ISPs should be obliged to make full disclosure of policies such as this, so that potential customers can make an informed decision over whether the ISPs service levels will be appropriate for their needs - before signing up.

Obviously it is up to the customer to decide whether, for instance, failing to receive some legitimate email in exchange for a reduction in spam is a satisfactory situation or not.

At present, these ISPs seem to prefer the mushroom school of customer service. Keep them in the dark and drop **** on them.

• 
• 

• 
• 
• 

Full Talkback thread