Metronet applies restrictions to Usenet

Just received;

Dear Sir/Madam

Further to our email of the 26th January 2004 we have been monitoring
Usenet usage over the past 7 days and unfortunately no change has
resulted in Usenet patterns by a small band of customers. We are
therefore outlining here the formal changes we will now be applying.

The changes announced here also reflect the individual emails we have
received and also the very in-depth discussion that has recently taken
place on Adslguide.org.uk.

Most customers are of the opinion that they would be happy for us to
remove Usenet access altogether, provide access to text only Usenet,
or make it an extra chargeable service and these are options we have
considered.

However we are equally aware that Usenet is a very useful tool and
therefore any such action would impact on customers who do not have
excessive usage and could be deemed unfair on the majority.

Therefore as a fairer course of action we have decided to simply
reduce the number of concurrent connections to 2 per IP and reduce the
speed of access to binaries to 128Kbps. These changes will take place
over the next 24hrs.

This does not prevent anyone from subscribing to a Usenet service
independently and these changes only apply to the service we provide
via Supernews - which we are providing as an added value service with
no subscription charge levied on customers for such access.

NB: These restrictions ONLY apply to the Usenet news service and NOT
to your ADSL or web access, email or other Internet applications you
may be using and if you are not currently accessing Usenet or have no
use for it then you are NOT affected.

However, in case you want to access Usenet news groups details can be
found here: http://support.metronet.co.uk/techsumm.xhtml1

Thank you.

Regards

ADSL Services Team
MetroNet

Jim wrote:

> Just received;
>
> Dear Sir/Madam
>
> Further to our email of the 26th January 2004 we have been monitoring
> Usenet usage over the past 7 days and unfortunately no change has
> resulted in Usenet patterns by a small band of customers. We are
> therefore outlining here the formal changes we will now be applying.

What they are trying to say is that they can't
afford a T1 line and you the customer
had better fuck off so that we to whom you shall payeth
money shalleth fucketh off to our bank laughing all the way.

You people have to wake up to this kind of broadband con.
A large part of it is down to upstream carrier (i.e. just
that one fucking company that begins with B) that
been dragging its heels ready to be broken up.

There is no shortage of bandwidth. 95% of the fibers are unlit.
Its all astro turfers pretending there is some sort
of bandwidth shortage while in far east everybody
gets to play with 100Mbit broadband now.

7 wrote:

> There is no shortage of bandwidth. 95% of the fibers are unlit.
> Its all astro turfers pretending there is some sort
> of bandwidth shortage while in far east everybody
> gets to play with 100Mbit broadband now.
>

That 100Mbit is usually shared between all those in a
building/street/part-of-street though.

--

Brian Morrison

please observe reply-to address

On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 17:56:59 +0000, Brian Morrison wrote:

> 7 wrote:
>
>> There is no shortage of bandwidth. 95% of the fibers are unlit. Its all
>> astro turfers pretending there is some sort of bandwidth shortage while
>> in far east everybody gets to play with 100Mbit broadband now.
>>
>>
> That 100Mbit is usually shared between all those in a
> building/street/part-of-street though.

Don't worry, 7 seems to have an obtuse opinion on everything under the sun.

Dave

--
For what we are about to balls up may common sense prevent us doing it
again
in the future!!

Dave Stanton wrote:

> On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 17:56:59 +0000, Brian Morrison wrote:
>
>> 7 wrote:
>>
>>> There is no shortage of bandwidth. 95% of the fibers are unlit. Its all
>>> astro turfers pretending there is some sort of bandwidth shortage while
>>> in far east everybody gets to play with 100Mbit broadband now.
>>>
>>>
>> That 100Mbit is usually shared between all those in a
>> building/street/part-of-street though.
>
> Don't worry, 7 seems to have an obtuse opinion on everything under the
> sun.
>
> Dave

Take that check!
Don't worry astro turds for BT$ have to earn money somehow.

On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 18:25:42 +0000, Dave Stanton <(E-Mail Removed)>
wrote:

>On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 17:56:59 +0000, Brian Morrison wrote:
>
>> 7 wrote:
>>
>>> There is no shortage of bandwidth. 95% of the fibers are unlit. Its all
>>> astro turfers pretending there is some sort of bandwidth shortage while
>>> in far east everybody gets to play with 100Mbit broadband now.
>>>
>>>
>> That 100Mbit is usually shared between all those in a
>> building/street/part-of-street though.
>
>Don't worry, 7 seems to have an obtuse opinion on everything under the sun.

And he's quite out of touch with reality. My ADSL line here in Manila
is 384k. I don't know anyone who has higher than 512k.

Chris

Dave Stanton wrote:

> On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 17:56:59 +0000, Brian Morrison wrote:
>
>> 7 wrote:
>>
>>> There is no shortage of bandwidth. 95% of the fibers are unlit. Its all
>>> astro turfers pretending there is some sort of bandwidth shortage while
>>> in far east everybody gets to play with 100Mbit broadband now.
>>>
>>>
>> That 100Mbit is usually shared between all those in a
>> building/street/part-of-street though.
>
> Don't worry, 7 seems to have an obtuse opinion on everything under the
> sun.
>
> Dave

Oh really 'Dave' - why don't you call yourself a nym shifting
astro turfing turd.

Chris Blunt wrote:

> On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 18:25:42 +0000, Dave Stanton <(E-Mail Removed)>
> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 17:56:59 +0000, Brian Morrison wrote:
>>
>>> 7 wrote:
>>>
>>>> There is no shortage of bandwidth. 95% of the fibers are unlit. Its all
>>>> astro turfers pretending there is some sort of bandwidth shortage while
>>>> in far east everybody gets to play with 100Mbit broadband now.
>>>>
>>>>
>>> That 100Mbit is usually shared between all those in a
>>> building/street/part-of-street though.
>>
>>Don't worry, 7 seems to have an obtuse opinion on everything under the
>>sun.
>
> And he's quite out of touch with reality. My ADSL line here in Manila
> is 384k. I don't know anyone who has higher than 512k.
>
> Chris

Really 'Chris' - is that what they sock puppets of nym shifting
astro turds these days?

On Fri, 04 Feb 2005 19:09:02 GMT, 7
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>Chris Blunt wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 18:25:42 +0000, Dave Stanton <(E-Mail Removed)>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 03 Feb 2005 17:56:59 +0000, Brian Morrison wrote:
>>>
>>>> 7 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> There is no shortage of bandwidth. 95% of the fibers are unlit. Its all
>>>>> astro turfers pretending there is some sort of bandwidth shortage while
>>>>> in far east everybody gets to play with 100Mbit broadband now.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> That 100Mbit is usually shared between all those in a
>>>> building/street/part-of-street though.
>>>
>>>Don't worry, 7 seems to have an obtuse opinion on everything under the
>>>sun.
>>
>> And he's quite out of touch with reality. My ADSL line here in Manila
>> is 384k. I don't know anyone who has higher than 512k.
>>
>> Chris
>
>Really 'Chris' - is that what they sock puppets of nym shifting
>astro turds these days?

I'm afraid I don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about.

> I'm afraid I don't have the slightest idea what you're talking about.

See what I mean Chris

Dave

--
For what we are about to balls up may common sense prevent us doing it
again
in the future!!