 | | Re: Defining some written consequences for transgressions of T&C —James Brown
|
| | | (...) Yes, it's nice & clean. There's only thing I would recommend doing/adding: 1: stressing (somewhere) that these are 'typical' responses & general procedure, but that LUGNET reserves the right to bypass these guidelines in extreme cases. (If, (...) (24 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Defining some written consequences for transgressions of T&C —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | (...) Ahh. Yes. This is for the annoying kind of stuff and the illegal really bad stuff needs that reservation...thanks. (...) I meant for that to be covered under "requiring a response of acknowledgment of receipt." I guess if someone didn't (...) (24 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Defining some written consequences for transgressions of T&C —Eric Joslin
|
| | | | (...) I always found (when I did this for a living) that automatically suspending service for a non-response worked wonders. And that was for internet service in general. Waiting 24 hours for a response, then suspending service until a response came (...) (24 years ago, 5-Mar-01, to lugnet.admin.terms)
|
| | | | |
