gpg: Signature made Tue Jun 19 19:38:11 2018 UTC
gpg: using DSA key 2099B64CBF15490B
gpg: Good signature from "Andy Smith <andy@strugglers.net>" [unknown]
gpg: aka "Andrew James Smith <andy@strugglers.net>" [unknown]
gpg: aka "Andy Smith (UKUUG) <andy.smith@ukuug.org>" [unknown]
gpg: aka "Andy Smith (BitFolk Ltd.) <andy@bitfolk.com>" [unknown]
gpg: aka "Andy Smith (Linux User Groups UK) <andy@lug.org.uk>" [unknown]
gpg: aka "Andy Smith (Cernio Technology Cooperative) <andy.smith@cernio.com>" [unknown]
Hi Ian,
Thanks for your input.
On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 07:50:37PM +0100, Ian wrote:
> I see this as ultimately a credit control question and, as such, up to
> you rather than anyone else.
You are correct, and that is the basis on which I want to make a
change, but I wanted to consult the customer base first to get a
better understanding of what people's views are.
It really is the case that I once did this many years ago and
received answers that were very much against any interference, but
at the time these were responses based on a very hypothetical
situation that perhaps people had a hard time applying to
themselves.
So, I want people to think about how they would like it handled if
it was their VPS doing for example 80Mbit/sec for 30 days resulting
in 40+TB of overage (£2,400+VAT) if they happened to not read (or
maybe not receive) any of the warning emails.
> But for new customers in particular, if they haven't asked, why should
> they expect to get it by default?
You are certainly not alone this time around in suggesting that the
credit facility should by default be zero unless a request is made
for more.
> If any customers are seen legally as consumers, then in your position
> I would take advice about the issues around extending them credit.
That is an interesting point that I hadn't considered!
Thanks,
Andy
--
https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting
