Re: NO multiple logins !! Livingston won't listen (fwd)

Robert Forsman (thoth@cis.ufl.edu)
Wed, 26 Jun 1996 12:40:42 EDT

jeffm@iglou.com (Jeff Mcadams) ,in message <m0uYYKh-000sDYC@iglou.com>, wrote:

> Thus spake MegaZone
> >So billl them for sharing. Case closed.
>
> Point 1) Many ISP's have policies in place already and changing
> acceptable use and billing policies almost *never* makes customers happy
> and usually pisses many off. This is not something that we like to do.
> In this case, we aren't having a major problem with this, but the
> administrative solutions to this sometimes are not nearly as workable as
> you engineer people seem to think. It would take some *major* hacking
> to our billing system to bill people for duplicate logins, and we'd much
> rather just prevent them in the first place (like I said, its not a
> major problem for us...right now).

Translation: we'd rather you do the programming

:)

I think I'll go with the billing option.

> you seen all the advertisements for $19.95 (or less) flat rate? If we
> sell a flat rate account at $19.95 (as most other ISP's are doing these
> days) and then start billing for a duplicate login, users are going to
> cry foul and split for another provider, cause if you do that, then its
> really not flat rate, now is it?

Hmm, interesting problem. I think you believe the following:

* If customers get "login refused" when they log in multiple times they will
not switch ISPs.

* If customers get billed for multiple logins, they will switch ISPs.

I'm not sure that's the case, but then, i'm not one of the customers.