After an arduous workout and continuing cable oujtage, I watched:
Nothing.
What did you watch?
What did you watch?
Ubiquitous <[email protected]> wrote:
After an arduous workout and continuing cable oujtage, I watched:
Nothing.
What did you watch?
Hey, thanks for asking!
The single greatest episode of Fantasy Island ever made with Maren Jensen
as Annette Funicello's super hot-to-trot ventriloquist's dummy come to life >who has sex with Annette's boyfriend, knowing that Annette can feel >everything that happens. I'm not entirely sure what Annette is complaining >about.
[email protected] wrote:
Ubiquitous <[email protected]> wrote:
After an arduous workout and continuing cable oujtage, I watched:
Nothing.
What did you watch?
Hey, thanks for asking!
The single greatest episode of Fantasy Island ever made with Maren Jensen
as Annette Funicello's super hot-to-trot ventriloquist's dummy come to life >> who has sex with Annette's boyfriend, knowing that Annette can feel
everything that happens. I'm not entirely sure what Annette is complaining >> about.
Hey, it's her fantasy, but I expect there was a twist, like her dummy doing anal sex or some extreme S&M sex.
Ubiquitous <[email protected]> wrote:
[email protected] wrote:
Ubiquitous <[email protected]> wrote:
After an arduous workout and continuing cable oujtage, I watched:
Nothing.
What did you watch?
Hey, thanks for asking!
The single greatest episode of Fantasy Island ever made with Maren Jensen >>> as Annette Funicello's super hot-to-trot ventriloquist's dummy come to
life who has sex with Annette's boyfriend, knowing that Annette can feel >>> everything that happens. I'm not entirely sure what Annette is
complaining about.
Hey, it's her fantasy, but I expect there was a twist, like her dummy
doing anal sex or some extreme S&M sex.
No, Annette was just jealous so they killed Maren Jensen and Annette went >back to her cheating boyfriend. There's just no way to make that sound like
a happy ending.
Ubiquitous wrote:
After an arduous workout and continuing cable oujtage, I watched:
Nothing.
The cable outage blows, but are you getting more accomplished at least?
Verily, in article <[email protected]>, did >[email protected] deliver unto us this message:
[email protected] wrote:
Ubiquitous wrote:
After an arduous workout and continuing cable oujtage, I watched:
Nothing.
The cable outage blows, but are you getting more accomplished at least?
One would think, but not withn intermittant Internet. Comcast is sending
someone over and charging me $100.
They shouldn't be charging you to fix service they're supposed to
provide. What's up with that?
Verily, in article <[email protected]>, did [email protected] deliver unto us this message:
[email protected] wrote:
Ubiquitous wrote:
After an arduous workout and continuing cable oujtage, I watched:
Nothing.
The cable outage blows, but are you getting more accomplished at least?
One would think, but not withn intermittant Internet. Comcast is sending
someone over and charging me $100.
They shouldn't be charging you to fix service they're supposed to
provide. What's up with that?
Verily, in article <[email protected]>, did [email protected] deliver unto us this message:
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 06:17:35 -0700, Melissa Hollingsworth
<[email protected]> wrote:
Verily, in article <[email protected]>, did
[email protected] deliver unto us this message:
[email protected] wrote:
Ubiquitous wrote:One would think, but not withn intermittant Internet. Comcast is sending >> >> someone over and charging me $100.
After an arduous workout and continuing cable oujtage, I watched:
Nothing.
The cable outage blows, but are you getting more accomplished at least? >> >>
They shouldn't be charging you to fix service they're supposed to
provide. What's up with that?
They always want to charge in case the problem isn't with their plant.
That said even if it is in their plant they will try to charge you
unless you fight back. Unless it is clearly a plant issue the CSRs
tend to assume the problem is with the user's equipment, hence the
charge.
That's terrible. Seems like every interaction these days has to be
approached as a potential fight.
Verily, in article <[email protected]>, did >[email protected] deliver unto us this message:
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 06:17:35 -0700, Melissa Hollingsworth
<[email protected]> wrote:
Verily, in article <[email protected]>, did
[email protected] deliver unto us this message:
[email protected] wrote:
Ubiquitous wrote:One would think, but not withn intermittant Internet. Comcast is sending >> >> someone over and charging me $100.
After an arduous workout and continuing cable oujtage, I watched:
Nothing.
The cable outage blows, but are you getting more accomplished at least? >> >>
They shouldn't be charging you to fix service they're supposed to
provide. What's up with that?
They always want to charge in case the problem isn't with their plant.
That said even if it is in their plant they will try to charge you
unless you fight back. Unless it is clearly a plant issue the CSRs
tend to assume the problem is with the user's equipment, hence the
charge.
That's terrible. Seems like every interaction these days has to be
approached as a potential fight.
Melissa Hollingsworth <[email protected]> wrote:
Verily, in article <[email protected]>, did
[email protected] deliver unto us this message:
[email protected] wrote:
Ubiquitous wrote:One would think, but not withn intermittant Internet. Comcast is sending >>> someone over and charging me $100.
After an arduous workout and continuing cable oujtage, I watched:
Nothing.
The cable outage blows, but are you getting more accomplished at least? >>>
They shouldn't be charging you to fix service they're supposed to
provide. What's up with that?
Cox refuses to send somebody out without charging me $75 despite the fact >that I pay $10 a month to get free service calls.
Verily, in article <[email protected]>, did [email protected] deliver unto us this message:
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 06:17:35 -0700, Melissa Hollingsworth
<[email protected]> wrote:
Verily, in article <[email protected]>, did
[email protected] deliver unto us this message:
[email protected] wrote:
Ubiquitous wrote:One would think, but not withn intermittant Internet. Comcast is sending >>>> someone over and charging me $100.
After an arduous workout and continuing cable oujtage, I watched:
Nothing.
The cable outage blows, but are you getting more accomplished at least? >>>>
They shouldn't be charging you to fix service they're supposed to
provide. What's up with that?
They always want to charge in case the problem isn't with their plant.
That said even if it is in their plant they will try to charge you
unless you fight back. Unless it is clearly a plant issue the CSRs
tend to assume the problem is with the user's equipment, hence the
charge.
That's terrible. Seems like every interaction these days has to be
approached as a potential fight.
On 8/9/2025 8:09 AM, Melissa Hollingsworth wrote:
did [email protected] deliver unto us this message:
. . .
They always want to charge in case the problem isn't with their plant. >>>That said even if it is in their plant they will try to charge you
unless you fight back. Unless it is clearly a plant issue the CSRs
tend to assume the problem is with the user's equipment, hence the >>>charge.
That's terrible. Seems like every interaction these days has to be >>approached as a potential fight.
Welcome to unfettered capitalism.
Verily, in article <1077v6d$1dbll$[email protected]>, did [email protected] >deliver unto us this message:
Melissa Hollingsworth <[email protected]> wrote:
Verily, in article <[email protected]>, did
[email protected] deliver unto us this message:
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 06:17:35 -0700, Melissa Hollingsworth
<[email protected]> wrote:
Verily, in article <[email protected]>, did >> >> >[email protected] deliver unto us this message:
[email protected] wrote:
Ubiquitous wrote:
After an arduous workout and continuing cable oujtage, I watched: >> >> >> >>
Nothing.
The cable outage blows, but are you getting more accomplished at least?
One would think, but not withn intermittant Internet. Comcast is >sending
someone over and charging me $100.
They shouldn't be charging you to fix service they're supposed to
provide. What's up with that?
They always want to charge in case the problem isn't with their plant.
That said even if it is in their plant they will try to charge you
unless you fight back. Unless it is clearly a plant issue the CSRs
tend to assume the problem is with the user's equipment, hence the
charge.
That's terrible. Seems like every interaction these days has to be
approached as a potential fight.
Have you met cable?
I haven't had cable TV in years. I rely on streaming.
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 09:06:24 -0700, anim8rfsk <[email protected]>
wrote:
Melissa Hollingsworth <[email protected]> wrote:
Verily, in article <[email protected]>, did
[email protected] deliver unto us this message:
[email protected] wrote:
Ubiquitous wrote:One would think, but not withn intermittant Internet. Comcast is sending >>>> someone over and charging me $100.
After an arduous workout and continuing cable oujtage, I watched:
Nothing.
The cable outage blows, but are you getting more accomplished at least? >>>>
They shouldn't be charging you to fix service they're supposed to
provide. What's up with that?
Cox refuses to send somebody out without charging me $75 despite the fact
that I pay $10 a month to get free service calls.
That's the craziest thing I've heard. I mean, yes it is free money for
the company but then you have to wonder just what are you paying that
$10 for and why do you keep paying it?
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 11:43:06 -0700, anim8rfsk <[email protected]>
wrote:
shawn <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 09:06:24 -0700, anim8rfsk <[email protected]>
wrote:
Melissa Hollingsworth <[email protected]> wrote:
Verily, in article <[email protected]>, did >>>>> [email protected] deliver unto us this message:
[email protected] wrote:
Ubiquitous wrote:One would think, but not withn intermittant Internet. Comcast is sending >>>>>> someone over and charging me $100.
After an arduous workout and continuing cable oujtage, I watched: >>>>>>>>
Nothing.
The cable outage blows, but are you getting more accomplished at least? >>>>>>
They shouldn't be charging you to fix service they're supposed to
provide. What's up with that?
Cox refuses to send somebody out without charging me $75 despite the fact >>>> that I pay $10 a month to get free service calls.
That's the craziest thing I've heard. I mean, yes it is free money for
the company but then you have to wonder just what are you paying that
$10 for and why do you keep paying it?
Because they won’t let you cancel it
There is nothing you shouldn't be able to cancel if it is an extra
service.
shawn <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 09:06:24 -0700, anim8rfsk <[email protected]>
wrote:
Melissa Hollingsworth <[email protected]> wrote:
Verily, in article <[email protected]>, did >>>> [email protected] deliver unto us this message:
[email protected] wrote:
Ubiquitous wrote:One would think, but not withn intermittant Internet. Comcast is sending >>>>> someone over and charging me $100.
After an arduous workout and continuing cable oujtage, I watched: >>>>>>>
Nothing.
The cable outage blows, but are you getting more accomplished at least? >>>>>
They shouldn't be charging you to fix service they're supposed to
provide. What's up with that?
Cox refuses to send somebody out without charging me $75 despite the fact >>> that I pay $10 a month to get free service calls.
That's the craziest thing I've heard. I mean, yes it is free money for
the company but then you have to wonder just what are you paying that
$10 for and why do you keep paying it?
Because they won’t let you cancel it
did [email protected] deliver unto us this message:
Melissa Hollingsworth <[email protected]> wrote:
[email protected] deliver unto us this message:
Have you met cable?
I haven't had cable TV in years. I rely on streaming.
How do you receive internet?
I have cable Internet, but nothing has gone wrong with it in yonks. I
guess we have good providers in the Pacific Northwest.
Melissa Hollingsworth <[email protected]> wrote:
did [email protected] deliver unto us this message:
Melissa Hollingsworth <[email protected]> wrote:
[email protected] deliver unto us this message:
Have you met cable?
I haven't had cable TV in years. I rely on streaming.
How do you receive internet?
I have cable Internet, but nothing has gone wrong with it in yonks. I
guess we have good providers in the Pacific Northwest.
No cable subscriber has ever had a good experience dealing with the call center.
Dimensional Traveler <[email protected]> wrote:
On 8/9/2025 8:09 AM, Melissa Hollingsworth wrote:
did [email protected] deliver unto us this message:
. . .
They always want to charge in case the problem isn't with their plant. >>>> That said even if it is in their plant they will try to charge you
unless you fight back. Unless it is clearly a plant issue the CSRs
tend to assume the problem is with the user's equipment, hence the
charge.
That's terrible. Seems like every interaction these days has to be
approached as a potential fight.
Welcome to unfettered capitalism.
D.T., you throw terms like capitalist and capitalism around like
epithets, which is no different than the term liberal being treated like
a label of contempt that must be disrespected.
Capitalism is an economic system in which the means of production are privately owned. It is a neutral term. That's all it means.
Of course it's fettered. People are free to contract and enter into
business transactions having reasonable expectations of both parties performing the contract. If one party fails to perform, that's a breech
of contract and is enforceable in court or arbitration.
On 8/9/2025 11:31 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
Dimensional Traveler <[email protected]> wrote:
On 8/9/2025 8:09 AM, Melissa Hollingsworth wrote:
did [email protected] deliver unto us this message:
. . .
They always want to charge in case the problem isn't with their plant. >>>>>That said even if it is in their plant they will try to charge you >>>>>unless you fight back. Unless it is clearly a plant issue the CSRs >>>>>tend to assume the problem is with the user's equipment, hence the >>>>>charge.
That's terrible. Seems like every interaction these days has to be >>>>approached as a potential fight.
Welcome to unfettered capitalism.
D.T., you throw terms like capitalist and capitalism around like
epithets, which is no different than the term liberal being treated like
a label of contempt that must be disrespected.
Capitalism is an economic system in which the means of production are >>privately owned. It is a neutral term. That's all it means.
Of course it's fettered. People are free to contract and enter into >>business transactions having reasonable expectations of both parties >>performing the contract. If one party fails to perform, that's a breech
of contract and is enforceable in court or arbitration.
Except in the US it is becoming less and less enforceable because the
laws to enforce it are being stripped away.
shawn <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 11:43:06 -0700, anim8rfsk <[email protected]>
wrote:
shawn <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 09:06:24 -0700, anim8rfsk <[email protected]>
wrote:
Melissa Hollingsworth <[email protected]> wrote:
Verily, in article <[email protected]>, did >>>>>> [email protected] deliver unto us this message:
[email protected] wrote:
Ubiquitous wrote:
After an arduous workout and continuing cable oujtage, I watched: >>>>>>>>>
Nothing.
The cable outage blows, but are you getting more accomplished at least?
One would think, but not withn intermittant Internet. Comcast is sending
someone over and charging me $100.
They shouldn't be charging you to fix service they're supposed to
provide. What's up with that?
Cox refuses to send somebody out without charging me $75 despite the fact >>>>> that I pay $10 a month to get free service calls.
That's the craziest thing I've heard. I mean, yes it is free money for >>>> the company but then you have to wonder just what are you paying that
$10 for and why do you keep paying it?
Because they won’t let you cancel it
There is nothing you shouldn't be able to cancel if it is an extra
service.
Have you met cable?
An oldie but a goodie and always deserves a repost:
The First Honest Cable Company
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ilMx7k7mso&pp=ygUUaG9uZXN0IGNhYmxlIGNvbXBhbnk%3D
They also did one for net neutrality:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JucFpDhuF98&pp=ygUUaG9uZXN0IGNhYmxlIGNvbXBhbnk%3D
SOUTH PARK did a good bit on the local cable company, too
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbHqUNl8YFk&pp=ygUUaG9uZXN0IGNhYmxlIGNvbXBhbnk%3D
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 18:52:50 -0000 (UTC), "Adam H. Kerman"
<[email protected]> wrote:
shawn <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 11:43:06 -0700, anim8rfsk <[email protected]>
wrote:
shawn <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 09:06:24 -0700, anim8rfsk <[email protected]>
wrote:
Melissa Hollingsworth <[email protected]> wrote:
Verily, in article <[email protected]>, did >>>>>>> [email protected] deliver unto us this message:
[email protected] wrote:
Ubiquitous wrote:
After an arduous workout and continuing cable oujtage, I watched: >>>>>>>>>>
Nothing.
The cable outage blows, but are you getting more accomplished at least?
One would think, but not withn intermittant Internet. Comcast is >sending
someone over and charging me $100.
They shouldn't be charging you to fix service they're supposed to >>>>>>> provide. What's up with that?
Cox refuses to send somebody out without charging me $75 despite the fact
that I pay $10 a month to get free service calls.
That's the craziest thing I've heard. I mean, yes it is free money for >>>>> the company but then you have to wonder just what are you paying that >>>>> $10 for and why do you keep paying it?
Because they won’t let you cancel it
There is nothing you shouldn't be able to cancel if it is an extra >>>service.
Have you met cable?
Oh I understand. I'm just saying how it SHOULD work. Seems like you
might be able to talk to your local public utility commission.
BTR1701 <[email protected]> wrote:
An oldie but a goodie and always deserves a repost:
The First Honest Cable Company
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0ilMx7k7mso&pp=ygUUaG9uZXN0IGNhYmxlIGNvbXBhbnk%3D
They also did one for net neutrality:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JucFpDhuF98&pp=ygUUaG9uZXN0IGNhYmxlIGNvbXBhbnk%3D
"We want more money."
SOUTH PARK did a good bit on the local cable company, too
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vbHqUNl8YFk&pp=ygUUaG9uZXN0IGNhYmxlIGNvbXBhbnk%3D
These are wonderful.
Dimensional Traveler <[email protected]> wrote:
On 8/9/2025 11:31 AM, Adam H. Kerman wrote:
Dimensional Traveler <[email protected]> wrote:
On 8/9/2025 8:09 AM, Melissa Hollingsworth wrote:
did [email protected] deliver unto us this message:
. . .
They always want to charge in case the problem isn't with their plant. >>>>>> That said even if it is in their plant they will try to charge you >>>>>> unless you fight back. Unless it is clearly a plant issue the CSRs >>>>>> tend to assume the problem is with the user's equipment, hence the >>>>>> charge.
That's terrible. Seems like every interaction these days has to be
approached as a potential fight.
Welcome to unfettered capitalism.
D.T., you throw terms like capitalist and capitalism around like
epithets, which is no different than the term liberal being treated like >>> a label of contempt that must be disrespected.
Capitalism is an economic system in which the means of production are
privately owned. It is a neutral term. That's all it means.
Of course it's fettered. People are free to contract and enter into
business transactions having reasonable expectations of both parties
performing the contract. If one party fails to perform, that's a breech
of contract and is enforceable in court or arbitration.
Except in the US it is becoming less and less enforceable because the
laws to enforce it are being stripped away.
It turns out, with arbitration, you can choose your own and don't have
to go with the company's.
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 11:43:06 -0700, anim8rfsk <[email protected]>
wrote:
shawn <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 09:06:24 -0700, anim8rfsk <[email protected]>
wrote:
Melissa Hollingsworth <[email protected]> wrote:
Verily, in article <[email protected]>, did >>>>> [email protected] deliver unto us this message:
[email protected] wrote:
Ubiquitous wrote:One would think, but not withn intermittant Internet. Comcast is sending >>>>>> someone over and charging me $100.
After an arduous workout and continuing cable oujtage, I watched: >>>>>>>>
Nothing.
The cable outage blows, but are you getting more accomplished at least? >>>>>>
They shouldn't be charging you to fix service they're supposed to
provide. What's up with that?
Cox refuses to send somebody out without charging me $75 despite the fact >>>> that I pay $10 a month to get free service calls.
That's the craziest thing I've heard. I mean, yes it is free money for
the company but then you have to wonder just what are you paying that
$10 for and why do you keep paying it?
Because they won’t let you cancel it
There is nothing you shouldn't be able to cancel if it is an extra
service.
shawn <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 11:43:06 -0700, anim8rfsk <[email protected]>
wrote:
shawn <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 09:06:24 -0700, anim8rfsk <[email protected]>
wrote:
Melissa Hollingsworth <[email protected]> wrote:
Verily, in article <[email protected]>, did >>>>>> [email protected] deliver unto us this message:
[email protected] wrote:
Ubiquitous wrote:
After an arduous workout and continuing cable oujtage, I watched: >>>>>>>>>
Nothing.
The cable outage blows, but are you getting more accomplished at least?
One would think, but not withn intermittant Internet. Comcast is sending
someone over and charging me $100.
They shouldn't be charging you to fix service they're supposed to
provide. What's up with that?
Cox refuses to send somebody out without charging me $75 despite the fact >>>>> that I pay $10 a month to get free service calls.
That's the craziest thing I've heard. I mean, yes it is free money for >>>> the company but then you have to wonder just what are you paying that
$10 for and why do you keep paying it?
Because they won’t let you cancel it
There is nothing you shouldn't be able to cancel if it is an extra
service.
You can’t do it online anymore. You have to talk to a real person. The real >person simply says no you can’t cancel it. You can’t cancel part of a >service. You can’t move your service down to a lower level. Where do you go >from there?
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 23:53:56 -0700, anim8rfsk <[email protected]>
wrote:
shawn <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 11:43:06 -0700, anim8rfsk <[email protected]>
wrote:
shawn <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 09:06:24 -0700, anim8rfsk <[email protected]>
wrote:
Melissa Hollingsworth <[email protected]> wrote:
Verily, in article <[email protected]>, did >>>>>>> [email protected] deliver unto us this message:
[email protected] wrote:
Ubiquitous wrote:
After an arduous workout and continuing cable oujtage, I watched: >>>>>>>>>>
Nothing.
The cable outage blows, but are you getting more accomplished at least?
One would think, but not withn intermittant Internet. Comcast is sending
someone over and charging me $100.
They shouldn't be charging you to fix service they're supposed to >>>>>>> provide. What's up with that?
Cox refuses to send somebody out without charging me $75 despite the fact
that I pay $10 a month to get free service calls.
That's the craziest thing I've heard. I mean, yes it is free money for >>>>> the company but then you have to wonder just what are you paying that >>>>> $10 for and why do you keep paying it?
Because they won’t let you cancel it
There is nothing you shouldn't be able to cancel if it is an extra
service.
You can’t do it online anymore. You have to talk to a real person. The real
person simply says no you can’t cancel it. You can’t cancel part of a
service. You can’t move your service down to a lower level. Where do you go
from there?
You cancel the service and start over from there.
shawn <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 11:43:06 -0700, anim8rfsk <[email protected]>
wrote:
shawn <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 09:06:24 -0700, anim8rfsk <[email protected]>
wrote:
Melissa Hollingsworth <[email protected]> wrote:
Verily, in article <[email protected]>, did >>>>>> [email protected] deliver unto us this message:
[email protected] wrote:
Ubiquitous wrote:
After an arduous workout and continuing cable oujtage, I watched: >>>>>>>>>
Nothing.
The cable outage blows, but are you getting more accomplished at least?
One would think, but not withn intermittant Internet. Comcast is sending
someone over and charging me $100.
They shouldn't be charging you to fix service they're supposed to
provide. What's up with that?
Cox refuses to send somebody out without charging me $75 despite the fact >>>>> that I pay $10 a month to get free service calls.
That's the craziest thing I've heard. I mean, yes it is free money for >>>> the company but then you have to wonder just what are you paying that
$10 for and why do you keep paying it?
Because they won’t let you cancel it
There is nothing you shouldn't be able to cancel if it is an extra
service.
You can’t do it online anymore. You have to talk to a real person. The real person simply says no you can’t cancel it. You can’t cancel part of a service. You can’t move your service down to a lower level. Where do you go from there?
shawn <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 23:53:56 -0700, anim8rfsk <[email protected]>
wrote:
shawn <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 11:43:06 -0700, anim8rfsk <[email protected]>
wrote:
shawn <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 09:06:24 -0700, anim8rfsk <[email protected]>
wrote:
Melissa Hollingsworth <[email protected]> wrote:
Verily, in article <[email protected]>, did
[email protected] deliver unto us this message:
[email protected] wrote:
Ubiquitous wrote:
After an arduous workout and continuing cable oujtage, I watched: >>>>>>>>>>>
Nothing.
The cable outage blows, but are you getting more accomplished at least?
One would think, but not withn intermittant Internet. Comcast is sending
someone over and charging me $100.
They shouldn't be charging you to fix service they're supposed to >>>>>>>> provide. What's up with that?
Cox refuses to send somebody out without charging me $75 despite the fact
that I pay $10 a month to get free service calls.
That's the craziest thing I've heard. I mean, yes it is free money for >>>>>> the company but then you have to wonder just what are you paying that >>>>>> $10 for and why do you keep paying it?
Because they won’t let you cancel it
There is nothing you shouldn't be able to cancel if it is an extra
service.
You can’t do it online anymore. You have to talk to a real person. The real
person simply says no you can’t cancel it. You can’t cancel part of a >>> service. You can’t move your service down to a lower level. Where do you go
from there?
You cancel the service and start over from there.
Exactly what I’m doing as soon as I’ve cleaned off the DVR completely.
Unless they offer me like literally thousands of dollars which they owe me >for years of compromised service.
. . .
Don't blame you at all. The one good thing about Comcast when I had
them was that at the end of each term of service I could call them up, >connect to the right people whose name I can't think of right now
(retention)
and tell them I wanted to know what deals they could offer
me to keep my business. They always gave me whatever the going deal
was for new customers which was a good deal over the normal cost, but
at the cost of needing to sign up for another year or two of service.
No arguments, no need to spend hours negotiating. Did it a few times
with no issues.
Comcast may not be perfect but they know how much more it costs them
to get a new customer over keeping an existing customer.
On 8/9/2025 11:53 PM, anim8rfsk wrote:
shawn <[email protected]> wrote:Do they consider "no service" (as in cancelled entirely) a "lower level"
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 11:43:06 -0700, anim8rfsk <[email protected]>
wrote:
shawn <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sat, 9 Aug 2025 09:06:24 -0700, anim8rfsk <[email protected]>
wrote:
Melissa Hollingsworth <[email protected]> wrote:
Verily, in article <[email protected]>, did >>>>>>> [email protected] deliver unto us this message:
[email protected] wrote:
Ubiquitous wrote:
After an arduous workout and continuing cable oujtage, I watched: >>>>>>>>>>
Nothing.
The cable outage blows, but are you getting more accomplished at least?
One would think, but not withn intermittant Internet. Comcast is sending
someone over and charging me $100.
They shouldn't be charging you to fix service they're supposed to >>>>>>> provide. What's up with that?
Cox refuses to send somebody out without charging me $75 despite the fact
that I pay $10 a month to get free service calls.
That's the craziest thing I've heard. I mean, yes it is free money for >>>>> the company but then you have to wonder just what are you paying that >>>>> $10 for and why do you keep paying it?
Because they won’t let you cancel it
There is nothing you shouldn't be able to cancel if it is an extra
service.
You can’t do it online anymore. You have to talk to a real person. The real
person simply says no you can’t cancel it. You can’t cancel part of a
service. You can’t move your service down to a lower level. Where do you go
from there?
that you can't downgrade to?
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 715 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 15:09:27 |
| Calls: | 12,102 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 15,004 |
| Messages: | 6,518,041 |