how about we start a campaign to let VM know that we DONT LIKE SHAPING

[Bertie_MB]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

Just as a matter of interest Bertie - What would you anticipate that a member of CS might say if they were contacted / challenged by someone who believed, sincerely, and had evidentiary proof that they had been unfairly traffic managed?

Who knows? Yes I imagine you're right, they wouldn't do a lot about it. But again you're talking about individual cases, not a reason to stop shaping altogether.

The argument at the start of this thread was against shaping in terms of being able to download slower, not in terms of being shaped when you didn't deserve it. Of that 5% who get shaped (which according to you is wrong, and from what you've said should be a lower figure) I doubt there are many who get shaping when they haven't done anything wrong. Of those people who do get shaped I expect a high proportion is due to illegal content, and another fairly high proportion won't even notice when it happens - they'll just think their torrent speed is bad.

Let me know in 6 months if your campaign gets anywhere, but I suspect traffic shaping will still be with us. VM deal with lots of complaints about slow speeds, so the small number being incorrectly shaped won't really bother them at all...

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by dontpannic

Could it be that I and I'm sure quite a few people on this forum get 19/20mb speedtests all of the time? So before you start shouting around saying Virgin cannot support the service, look at the hard facts and evidence.

Look above. That was my 19th speedtest all previous were at the same speeds (some a bit higher). Does that EVIDENCE look like a company who cannot provide a 20mb connection?

I don't think so. I can quite clearly see 18.32Mbps there, and I quite regularly see download speeds of 2.23MB/s from various sites.

I don't know if that is evidence enough to you that Virgin CAN provide a 20Mb connection, but I suppose there's just no pleasing some people, is there?

You do understand the difference between "I and I'm sure quite a few people on this forum" and the entire customer base, don't you?

" Could it be that the 5% isn't actually 5% at all? Could it be that they've realized (shock horror) that they've committed to offering a service of twice the speed of the one they already can't deliver?"


That sounds about right to me.
Or maybe the 5% figure is the amount of customers allegedly abusing their " unlimited " broadband service in the context of its full customer base, taking into account customers not even taking broadband.

---------- Post added at 10:50 ---------- Previous post was at 10:47 ----------

Originally Posted by Bertie_MB

Who knows? Yes I imagine you're right, they wouldn't do a lot about it. But again you're talking about individual cases, not a reason to stop shaping altogether.

The argument at the start of this thread was against shaping in terms of being able to download slower, not in terms of being shaped when you didn't deserve it. Of that 5% who get shaped (which according to you is wrong, and from what you've said should be a lower figure) I doubt there are many who get shaping when they haven't done anything wrong. Of those people who do get shaped I expect a high proportion is due to illegal content, and another fairly high proportion won't even notice when it happens - they'll just think their torrent speed is bad.

Let me know in 6 months if your campaign gets anywhere, but I suspect traffic shaping will still be with us. VM deal with lots of complaints about slow speeds, so the small number being incorrectly shaped won't really bother them at all...

I think it will bother them when people who are thinking of taking broadband now think twice, is it too hard to get what you are paying for?
The british are known for their tight lipped ability and pay for a poor service.

[Bertie_MB]

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004

I think it will bother them when people who are thinking of taking broadband now think twice, is it too hard to get what you are paying for?

No it's not hard to get what you pay for. Traffic shaping is now public knowledge, so you know that you're paying for it. Hence you're getting what you paid for...

[jcuk]

out of 3.4 million broadband customers, only a few thousand come to these boards to complain about traffic shaping. their 5% sounds more accurate than it looks - saying that, i still personally disagree with traffic shaping, but if its helping another 3 million customers get a better service - then it shows vm look out for the majority of their customers.

there have been speed issues nationwide well before the 20megabit upgrade. yeah theyre trialling 50meg in kent, i know they arent serious about traffic shaping services like this perminantly, but afaik they are constantly doing quite major network upgrades. doesent happen overnight

just take a look at ADSL in peak hours. i live next door to a manager at bskyb, every day he gets escalations for the same thing at the same time. 'why is my broadband so slow','i play online games, why is my ping so high, im on 16meg but supposed to get about 8meg right?'

ive used my 20meg outside peak hours and during peak hours, rarely drops below 1900kb/sec d/l rate

your comments about richard branson, nations favourite, cant disagree. but at the end of the day he's a businessman, like the rest of us out to try and make some money, no?

[Locky]

the only reason for shapeing is they can not be assed to upgrade the network to support 20 meg so they are even limiting the lower tiers in order to ge the 20 meg achieveing near maximum speed.

Originally Posted by Bertie_MB

No it's not hard to get what you pay for. Traffic shaping is now public knowledge, so you know that you're paying for it. Hence you're getting what you paid for...

Sorry Bertie, customers are not getting what they pay for.
They are paying for an " unlimited " service, " restriction " is another meaning of " limited ".
Simply because it is reported on here does not qualify it as public knowledge.
To satisfy that criteria I would need to receive a letter from vm explaining their reasons and offering me a get out free from penalty, even if I was within the first 12 months.
Some people are only too happy to hand over hard earned money for a crock of manure.

[dontpannic]

Originally Posted by Mr Angry

You do understand the difference between "I and I'm sure quite a few people on this forum" and the entire customer base, don't you?

Yes, I'm sorry I meant to add that. If Virgin were REALLY as bad as people seem to make out (sounds like the Daily Mail - OUTRAGE, SCANDAL), why do you think the monthly churn is just 1.6%, and that there are 4.3 MILLION customers for the broadband? If it was so bad don't you think the customer numbers would be declining??

Originally Posted by jcuk

out of 3.4 million broadband customers, only a few thousand come to these boards to complain about traffic shaping. their 5% sounds more accurate than it looks - saying that, i still personally disagree with traffic shaping, but if its helping another 3 million customers get a better service - then it shows vm look out for the majority of their customers.

there have been speed issues nationwide well before the 20megabit upgrade. yeah theyre trialling 50meg in kent, i know they arent serious about traffic shaping services like this perminantly, but afaik they are constantly doing quite major network upgrades. doesent happen overnight

just take a look at ADSL in peak hours. i live next door to a manager at bskyb, every day he gets escalations for the same thing at the same time. 'why is my broadband so slow','i play online games, why is my ping so high, im on 16meg but supposed to get about 8meg right?'

ive used my 20meg outside peak hours and during peak hours, rarely drops below 1900kb/sec d/l rate

your comments about richard branson, nations favourite, cant disagree. but at the end of the day he's a businessman, like the rest of us out to try and make some money, no?

So why dont vm cancel the contracts of the " 5% " instead of ripping off 95% ?
Surely once this was done it would send out the message loud enough?
Or maybe it could be that the reasoning used by vm is a red herring?

[Mr Angry]

Originally Posted by Bertie_MB

Who knows? Yes I imagine you're right, they wouldn't do a lot about it. But again you're talking about individual cases, not a reason to stop shaping altogether.

Lovely rationale there Bertie, the old "individual cases" trickspeak. Each individual case, when viewed collectively, constitutes a percentage of the overall customer base

Originally Posted by Bertie_MB

The argument at the start of this thread was against shaping in terms of being able to download slower, not in terms of being shaped when you didn't deserve it.

My earlier "Who polices the police"? comment reflects this.

Originally Posted by Bertie_MB

Of that 5% who get shaped (which according to you is wrong, and from what you've said should be a lower figure) I doubt there are many who get shaping when they haven't done anything wrong.

I didn't say it was "wrong" - I questioned the methodology of how it was arrived at. As for doubting that there are many who will be shaped who "haven't done anything wrong" I have offered individuals a means to ascertain if they have been unduly traffic managed. Why do you have a problem with customers exercising their right? Are you of the opinion that if someone is wrongly traffic managed (on a service tier that they pay for) that it is entirely acceptable for that to happen?

Originally Posted by Bertie_MB

Of those people who do get shaped I expect a high proportion is due to illegal content...

Since when have VM become the custodians of legal / illegal content? To put this in context (and entirely dispel any notion that there is some sort of "legal content" consideration playing any part in this decision) VM are using a "download up to 4000 music tracks in a day" pitch to sell this service. Who do you know that can afford to pay for that sort of legally downloaded content a day?

On an even more unsavoury note a recent report noted an 80% increase in illegal child porn sites - what are VM doing about that? Are they banning access to them or are they simply going to traffic manage their customers who view them? If VM were to be seen to be playing an honest part in trying to circumvent the distribution of illegal content then perhaps these measures would appear less unpalatable, indeed praiseworthy, for most paying customers but the fact is they're not.

Any assertion by them that offering their customer base an apparant ability to download a certain amount of illegal / questionable material, purportedly twice as fast as the current maximum, is hardly in keeping with trying to stay within the confines of the law or encouraging your customer base to do so. Lets not fool ourselves here.

Originally Posted by Bertie_MB

..and another fairly high proportion won't even notice when it happens - they'll just think their torrent speed is bad.

As I mentioned earlier - all quite rather convenient don't you think.

Originally Posted by Bertie_MB

Let me know in 6 months if your campaign gets anywhere, but I suspect traffic shaping will still be with us.

Nice attempt at a sleight, but it's not my campaign.

Originally Posted by Mertie_MB

VM deal with lots of complaints about slow speeds, so the small number being incorrectly shaped won't really bother them at all...

Quite. And it's about time people stood up to them and asked quite simply why, If they cannot effectively handle the demand for existing tiers, are they introducing services which place further excessive demands on their infrastructure?

Originally Posted by dontpannic

Yes, I'm sorry I meant to add that. If Virgin were REALLY as bad as people seem to make out (sounds like the Daily Mail - OUTRAGE, SCANDAL), why do you think the monthly churn is just 1.6%, and that there are 4.3 MILLION customers for the broadband? If it was so bad don't you think the customer numbers would be declining??

Good reasoning apart from the absence of the figures for customers who were offered a retention package.
So factor in the retention figure and there is a different way of looking at things.

[dontpannic]

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004

Sorry Bertie, customers are not getting what they pay for.
They are paying for an " unlimited " service, " restriction " is another meaning of " limited ".
Simply because it is reported on here does not qualify it as public knowledge.
To satisfy that criteria I would need to receive a letter from vm explaining their reasons and offering me a get out free from penalty, even if I was within the first 12 months.
Some people are only too happy to hand over hard earned money for a crock of manure.

NO. It is unlimited. You aren't being STOPPED from downloading. there is no "CAP" it is a speed limit in effect. You don't complain that you've bought a car that can do 80mph but can only use it to do 20mph during Rush Hour do you??? You accept it and move on. This is what I don't understand about Virgin Medias "OUTRAGEOUS!"* broadband service.

*I don't actually think Virgin Media's Broadband is outrageous. I'm just hinting at the fact that people are overreacting big stylee.

[Bertie_MB]

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004

Simply because it is reported on here does not qualify it as public knowledge.

http://allyours.virginmedia.com/html...t/traffic.html

If people don't research a product before purchasing it then tough. You could say the same about any uncapped broadband service since they all have a fair usage policy in the small print.

arcamalpha2004 very specifically said "people who are thinking of taking broadband". The key words being "thinking of" meaning those who don't have it yet. So my post was completely accurate as I wasn't referring to those who already have VM broadband.

Originally Posted by dontpannic

You don't complain that you've bought a car that can do 80mph but can only use it to do 20mph during Rush Hour do you???

Lol, I like that example a lot!

[dontpannic]

Originally Posted by arcamalpha2004

Good reasoning apart from the absence of the figures for customers who were offered a retention package.
So factor in the retention figure and there is a different way of looking at things.

But that wouldn't equal 4 million people! Virgin Media are STILL voted best consumer ISP so they must be doing something right (everything IMO)

Originally Posted by dontpannic

NO. It is unlimited. You aren't being STOPPED from downloading. there is no "CAP" it is a speed limit in effect. You don't complain that you've bought a car that can do 80mph but can only use it to do 20mph during Rush Hour do you??? You accept it and move on. This is what I don't understand about Virgin Medias "OUTRAGEOUS!"* broadband service.

*I don't actually think Virgin Media's Broadband is outrageous. I'm just hinting at the fact that people are overreacting big stylee.

No over reaction at all, vm are advertising an unlimited service, that should be delivered in the full context of the word " unlimited "
If vm believe that 5% of customers are " abusing the unlimited service " deal with it in the correct manner, do not penalise the other 95 %