Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Keyser
Yes I have noticed this, and so it appears that ntl themselves are not following their own guidelines.
I think that if ntl were to set sensible limits, such as 100GB download a month, then there would many less problems. At the moment we have 1GB/day for 3 or more days in a 14 day period. How stupid does that sound? If they are going to have such a limit then they should define it in a clear way. i.e. 30GB/month.
IMHO, the problem is that ntl are not following their own guidelines, and are only sending letters to massive abusers of the service. They then report this on these forums, and everyone else starts worrying about going over 1GB/day for 3 or more days in a 14 day period, when this isn't what ntl are enforcing.
The first step to sort this ridiculous situation out would be to clearly define acceptable use at a reasonable level (imho different on each service level). Then they could enforce this and it would be clear what the limit was.
Only a stupid compnay would enforce a different limit than that in their guidelines, because surely they must realise that publicising a 1GB/day for 3 or more days in a 14 day period limit is only annoying their customers, not discouraging them from using, e.g. up to 100GB.
Madness.
|
I think that we have to look at the reason why NTL sought fit to introduce a cap, that being to avoid service being affected by users who were taking more than their fair share of the bandwidth available. Not every user who exceeds the guidelines set out in the AUP is affecting the service of others so why go after them?
The problem with having a "per month" limit on downloads such as the 100Gb that you suggest is sensible is that this 100Gb could be taken at any time during the month and could seriously affect other users dependant on the time that it was taken. Some users who are not using anything like 100Gb a month may increase their usage to make sure that they are getting the full 100Gb that they are "paying for".