Tuesday, December 18, 2007 |
Thank You, T-Mobile
I just received this email which does make me feel a lot better about the situation.Return-path: Envelope-to: @bibleboy.org Delivery-date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 13:47:57 -0500 Received: from mail by mojo.iad.bobkmertz.com with spam-scanned (Exim 4.54) id 1J4hTq-0004B0-70 for bob@bibleboy.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 13:47:57 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.7 (2006-10-05) on mojo.iad.bobkmertz.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.6 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=ham version=3.1.7 Received: from mail1.t-mobile.com ([206.29.162.141] helo=nxprdapirn01.t-mobile.com) by mojo.iad.bobkmertz.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.54) id 1J4hTp-0004Ax-PQ for @bibleboy.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 13:47:50 -0500 Received: from ([10.1.1.65]) by nxprdapirn01.t-mobile.com with ESMTP id 5502254.80783499; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 10:47:26 -0800 Received: from WAPRDVSEBE05.t-mobile.com ([10.1.1.130]) by waprdmsims01.t-mobile.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 18 Dec 2007 10:47:26 -0800 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Subject: RE: T-Mobile/Twitter contradiction Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 10:47:25 -0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <9E24A493-03F0-4117-9B99-950D8D6B4E0C@bibleboy.org> X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: T-Mobile/Twitter contradiction Thread-Index: AchBQkm4K5wJYqGPSsmBO+tvL5OnxQAY4C7A References: <9E24A493-03F0-4117-9B99-950D8D6B4E0C@bibleboy.org> From: "Media Relations" To: "Bob K Mertz" <@bibleboy.org> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Dec 2007 18:47:26.0413 (UTC) FILETIME=[6F15B7D0:01C841A6] Bob, Apologies for the confusion. The initial information provided was simply misinformed. The information provided by T-Mobile yesterday is correct - The Twiiter issue over this past weekend was due to technical service issues between Twitter and T-Mobile that have since been resolved.=20 Regards, T-Mobile USA, Inc. Public Relations ---- Update ---- I later received this email which definately was a lot warmer than what I had been receiving from the president's office. From: MediaRelations@T-Mobile.com Subject: RE: T-Mobile/Twitter contradiction Date: December 18, 2007 4:37:43 PM EST To: bob@bibleboy.org Thanks, Bob. We certainly aren't trying to hide anything - we absolutely value our customers and do our best to do right by them. As is today's tech age, the misinformation spread like wildfire which contributed to the widespread rumors. We took proactive measures to follow up on all customer inquiries and media inquiries to ensure our customers had the appropriate information. Appreciate your note and happy holidays. T-Mobile USA, Inc. Public Relations Labels: sms, tmo-vs-twit, tmobile, twitter (C)2003-2008, Bob K Mertz - Some Rights Reserved |
Can T-Mobile Apologize?
I received another email from T-Mobile. This time I'm not even entitled to have the name of the person it came from.Return-path: Envelope-to: @bibleboy.org Delivery-date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 09:08:00 -0500 Received: from mail by mojo.iad.bobkmertz.com with spam-scanned (Exim 4.54) id 1J4d6t-0000yv-D7 for bob@bibleboy.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 09:08:00 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.7 (2006-10-05) on mojo.iad.bobkmertz.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,HTML_30_40, HTML_MESSAGE,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY,URI_NOVOWEL autolearn=no version=3.1.7 Received: from mail2.t-mobile.com ([206.29.162.144] helo=nxprdapirn04.t-mobile.com) by mojo.iad.bobkmertz.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.54) id 1J4d6t-0000ys-06 for @bibleboy.org; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 09:07:51 -0500 Received: from ([10.1.1.27]) by nxprdapirn04.t-mobile.com with ESMTP id 5502115.66632999; Tue, 18 Dec 2007 06:07:41 -0800 Received: from NXPRDVSMBX02.t-mobile.com ([10.133.32.33]) by WAPRDMSIMS05.t-mobile.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Tue, 18 Dec 2007 06:07:41 -0800 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C8417F.5A8DDE22" Disposition-Notification-To: "Executive Response (ECR)" Subject: RE: ***Ban No. 498717587- Assigned to Marianne - Twitterr***Confirmation Request Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2007 06:07:40 -0800 Message-ID: In-Reply-To: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: ***Ban No. 498717587- Assigned to Marianne - Twitterr***Confirmation Request Thread-Index: AchA+8trGvRuXqhNShKzpk5KN0SungAg4McA References: From: "Executive Response (ECR)" To: "Bob K Mertz" <@bibleboy.org> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 18 Dec 2007 14:07:41.0530 (UTC) FILETIME=[5A83D3A0:01C8417F] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C8417F.5A8DDE22 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable We have since verified that this was a rumor. Please see the second email that was sent to you yesterday. Thank you,=20 ________________________________ From: Bob K Mertz [mailto:@bibleboy.org]=20 Sent: Monday, December 17, 2007 3:26 PM To: Executive Response (ECR) Subject: Re: ***Ban No. 498717587- Assigned to Marianne - Twitterr***Confirmation Request Marianne,=20 Could you please explain to me why you previously emailed me that T-Mobile was blocking the Twitter service? The following email is signed with your very name. I can not understand this. To me this is an annoying example of a company that was once highly focused on their customers and good business practices losing touch with what matters. Minus the possibility that T-Mobile gave kick backs to many, including Twitter (which I highly doubt because Twitter has shown lots of responsibility and, therefore, have my trust), the "rumors" that T-Mobile was blocking Twitter were actually started inside of T-Mobile and were spread not only via Customer Service but also via the Office of the President. Up until now, everytime I contacted T-Mobile with an issue, they went out of their way to apologize for any inconveince that I at experienced. Now that we come to this issue of a huge failure of communication on T-Mobile's part that affected hundreds (maybe thousands) of customers and their response is to cleverly word emails to conceal the truth. While some emails infer that they made a mistake, they show absolutely no remorse for giving such blatantly incorrect information. The majority of T-Mobile's customers are not with T-Mobile because they have the best coverage but because they have the best customer service and could always trust what they were told by the company. Going forward I have to now question the reliability of the information that T-Mobile provides to me because if, in a matter as trival as this, you can't get their honest response and apology then when the matter becomes an issue much larger you certainly will not be able to rely on the answer they give you. Another huge issue in this is a display of capability. While this issue is not "Net Neutrality" per se, there was a blatant display of "we can keep you from doing what you want because it's our network" attitude which is, in fact, a violation of the spirit of neutrality. Coming from a company that has signed on with Google's Android to provide "Open Platforms", the attitude is very conflicting. While it may be true that T-Mobile did not filter SMS messages to Twitter, the executive office displayed their lack of concern of preserving customers' ability to access the information they want. I have personally loved T-Mobile up until now and I have stood up for them many times because I beleived in them as a company. I've requested information from T-Mobile multiple times to give them an opportunity to apologize because I want to continue to believe in the company but T-Mobile is unwilling to give me, or any other customer, that sense of security and that hurts. This is the type of attitude that I would expect from AT&T or Verizon but not the #4 carrier that is trying their best to gain their customers' support. I, for one, and very dissapointed in T-Mobile and, while this may not make me cancel my contract, it certainly will make me consider what I do when my contract is up. Labels: net neutrality, sms, tmo-vs-twit, tmobile, twitter (C)2003-2008, Bob K Mertz - Some Rights Reserved |
Monday, December 17, 2007 |
OMG, come on T-Mobile
Ok, so I wanted to turn this back into a personal blog but I just can not pass up posting this. I have received an email from the same persona at T-Mobile that told me Twitter was being blocked. In her email.... well, I'll just let you read:Return-path: Envelope-to: @bibleboy.org Delivery-date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 16:49:27 -0500 Received: from mail by mojo.iad.bobkmertz.com with spam-scanned (Exim 4.54) id 1J3IP9-00065R-1n for bob@bibleboy.org; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 16:49:27 -0500 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.7 (2006-10-05) on mojo.iad.bobkmertz.com X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,HTML_40_50, HTML_MESSAGE,UNPARSEABLE_RELAY autolearn=unavailable version=3.1.7 Received: from mail1.t-mobile.com ([206.29.162.142] helo=nxprdapirn02.t-mobile.com) by mojo.iad.bobkmertz.com with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.54) id 1J3IP8-00065O-PF for @bibleboy.org; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 16:49:11 -0500 Received: from ([10.1.1.66]) by nxprdapirn02.t-mobile.com with ESMTP id 5502347.80485432; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 13:49:07 -0800 Received: from NXPRDVSMBX02.t-mobile.com ([10.133.32.33]) by waprdmsims02.t-mobile.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 14 Dec 2007 13:49:07 -0800 X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5 Content-class: urn:content-classes:message MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C83E9B.272A7312" Disposition-Notification-To: "Executive Response (ECR)" Subject: T-Mobile and Twitter Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 13:49:07 -0800 Message-ID: X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: Thread-Topic: T-Mobile and Twitter Thread-Index: Acg+mybHtAT+bY+0SHGZezoY/aYtBQ== From: "Executive Response (ECR)" To: <@bibleboy.org> X-OriginalArrivalTime: 14 Dec 2007 21:49:07.0741 (UTC) FILETIME=[27215CD0:01C83E9B] This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C83E9B.272A7312 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Mr. Mertz: Twitter users are welcome to stay connected through T-Mobile service. Rumors that T-Mobile blocks the service are false. T-Mobile confirmed with Twitter that there was a technical issue between the two companies’ systems that temporarily prevented some customers from utilizing the service this past weekend. That issue has since been resolved and the companies are working to prevent such incidents from re-occurring. Should you have any further questions regarding this matter, please feel free to contact Customer Care at 800-937-8997. Thank you. Marianne Maestas, Executive Customer Relations Specialist, Office of the President, ! T! ! ! Mobile! stick together My God.... it was one thing to hear two different departments contradicting themselves but now THE SAME PERSON?. I really don't think I need to comment anymore Labels: duh, sms, tmo-vs-twit, tmobile, twitter (C)2003-2008, Bob K Mertz - Some Rights Reserved |
Final Thoughts on T-Mobile
With light of the posts that have been coming out today, I have to agree with most of them in the stressing that this is not a Net Neutrality issue. As a fellow blogger, I am asking that everyone take into consideration that this is my personal blog. Understand that I post things here for my friends to know whats up with me and this included the issues that I was having with T-Mobile. I did not post any of the initial posts with the intent that it would go as far as it has and, as such, I posted without serious investigation to the laws that govern SMS. I will admit that I incorrectly placed SMS into a "network" category rather than a "phone" category that it should have been in. While I agree that if T-Mobile was filtering Twitter SMS (which they were not) it would be in violation of the spirit of net neutrality, it is not an official or legal part of the debate. This entire situation has shown many good things and many bad things. One thing that is a concern of mine was that many blogs and news site posted links to my blog and ran with it without even contacting me to confirm any information. It's actually just fine that the blogs didn't do that but the news sites, well, it's a little more of a concern. In fact, in this situation I think it went completely in the opposite direction. Almost all of the personal blogs that reported what I had posted actually confirmed the issue themselves. Even over at the Buzz Out Loud forum there was confirmation from another reader that he had received the same message. The issue, going forward, is not about net neutrality but about customer service and executive offices quoting things that were blatantly incorrect. It is now a very well known fact that the issue between T-Mobile and Twitter were, in fact, of a technical nature but this does not relieve T-Mobile of responsibility of the press that they are receiving and, in my opinion, the longer they go without making a statement, the more bad press they deserve. The fact remains that I sent an email to the executive office expressing my concern that T-Mobile was filtering Twitter, which I was told by a CSR at T-Mobile. The response to that email in a very harsh tone and, as we know now, full of incorrect information. I reported what had happened to me and, as fellow bloggers, it is your responsibility to fact check and confirm whether this is true or false. There are numerous people that did just that and there were many people that didn't. Before I turn this personal blog back into just that, I want to give my final thoughts. First of all, mistakes are common in the blogosphere but facts are something that can be confirmed. The issue of filtering twitter may not be a part of net neutrality but the fact is the content of the email that I received. Secondly, it's be confirmed that the issue was of a technical nature and that has been resolved. The thing that has not been resolved is why T-Mobile responded in the way that they did. While I sit here asking bloggers to check their facts, I am reporting on a company that didn't do that and, for this reason, I feel that T-Mobile owes their customers an explanation of the situation. T-Mobile has always been an incredible company in my eyes. Their concern for customer service has always been one of the greatest assets to the company and, as AlternaGeek reported, an amazing company for embracing new technologies. They continue to be my favorite mobile carrier. Some might say that can't be true because of the things I posted but the fact is the opposite is true. I want T-Mobile to address this issue because I don't want them to fall into the same category as the larger mobile providers that don't care about their customers. I believe that if a company is truly concerned about their customers they will investigate the things their own employees relayed and they will offer an explanation to their customers. If they stay silent then, to me, it would appear they really don't care what their customers think. Just remember that if someone is wrong about one thing it does not mean they are automatically wrong about everything and this also means that if a company makes a mistake it doesnt make them the worst company in the world. Happy Twittering! :) This will be the last post that I make to my blog related to this issue unless I would hear additional communication from T-Mobile. Everyone is still more than welcome to contact me at tmo-vs-twit@blog.bibleboy.org or to leave comments on this blog. I am a personal blogger and it's been a fun few days but I need to go back to my roots which are real life and not the New York Times Labels: blogosphere, net neutrality, sms, tmo-vs-twit, tmobile, twitter (C)2003-2008, Bob K Mertz - Some Rights Reserved |
A blogger attacks the blogosphere?
This really isn't totally related to the T-Mobile/Twitter issues but it appeared on the Twitter Blog related to my post(s) about T-Mobile. This really isn't an attack at anyone specifically but I'm just curious what people think about the situation and how people feel the Blogosphere works. There certainly is always the possibility of a blogger knowing what they are talking about and not knowing what they are talking about but, in my opinion, the blogosphere is the collective group of bloggers that back up and confirm each other. If every story on the internet right now about T-Mobile/Twitter was just a 100% copy of my blog, then this would be a completely different story. What happened is I seemingly posted to my blog first and people refered to it as the first story but numerous posts about this situation were related to people receiving the same email I received or, at the very least, the same response from customer service. There was even a post of someone claiming that a T-Mobile rep actually google'd my site and gave that email as their official response. Some confirmations occured on the Buzz Out Loud Forums while a good central point of confirmation after confirmation occured over at Satisfaction where Biz Stone himself said T-Mobile was blocking Twitter.What does everyone think? I'm really curious to hear what the overall thoughts of this entire incident is. Please leave your comments below or email me at tmo-vs-twit@blog.bibleboy.org Labels: blogosphere, net neutrality, sms, tmo-vs-twit, tmobile, twitter (C)2003-2008, Bob K Mertz - Some Rights Reserved |
Sunday, December 16, 2007 |
T-Mobile and Twitter - Not quite there, but trying
Its been a long 48 hours or so and it looks like we are on our way to a resolution but we're not there yet.For the past 30-45 mins, I have been having issues with not only sending tweets but with receiving them as well. It appears that I'm not the only one that is still having issues. I think that there is enough information coming from Twitter's official channels to not worry about policy at T-Mobile for blocking Twitter but there definately are still some kinks that are being worked out. It also appears that I am not alone in thinking that T-Mobile needs to make a statement regarding the events of the last few days. If there was policy made to block Twitter and then it was retracted, they need to own up to it and if there wasn't then they need to answer for their executive offices telling many subscribers incorrect information (this is quite different than a CSR giving false information). In either case, they really need to explain why people in the executive offices were responding to customer in very harsh emails and almost in a threatening nature. If you havent read the response I received from T-Mobile, please click the tmo-vs-twit tag below and find that email. In any case, it is really awesome to see people pull together and stand up for something that is right and I am honored to have been able to bring this information to you and be part of this community. No matter what part T-Mobile was wrong in, it is important that consumers stop rolling over and playing dead... when that happens, we'll start gaining ground in technology advancements. Again, you are welcome to contact me at tmo-vs-twit@blog.bibleboy.org with any information that you have or anything that you would like to share. Please also feel free to follow me on Twitter. For now, I'm going to watch the ice fall around me and pray I dont lose power :) Labels: net neutrality, sms, tmo-vs-twit, tmobile, twitter (C)2003-2008, Bob K Mertz - Some Rights Reserved |
Saturday, December 15, 2007 |
T-Mobile and Twitter, Friends Again?
Update 07:41pm EST: I can confirm that I can now send some SMS messages to Twitter. Whether political or technical, the issue is going in the right direction. I still really am hoping for a statement from T-Mobile regarding what happened and, if the issue wasn't political, why the president's office was indicating (in harsh emails) that it was blocking Twitter.Update: AlternaGeek reports "All is Well" Update 12/17/07 08:15am EST: It certainly seems that everything is now ok. With Monday morning arriving there are no more (visible) complaints of anyone still having issues. It will be interesting to see how T-Mobile handles the PR nightmare they created for themselves. Here a few links of sites reporting the incident after resolution: WAP Review Mashable Well folks, it looks like Twitter and T-Mobile may be friends again. A statement from a Twitter rep indicates the issue is technical and not political. Personally, I am not sure that I totally believe that this was never a political issue. While I understand that it's a common occurence for CSRs to give incorrect information to customers, this is of a different magnitude. Many people have e-mails from T-Mobile's President's office that not only state they are intentionally blocking Twitter but followed up with threats of the $200 early termination fee. These emails are on top of many people who were specifically told this by numerous different T-Mobile CSRs. The important thing that matters is that the situation be rectified but the issue that will still remain is why T-Mobile responded in the ways that they did to their customers. It has a funny taste in my mouth -- the taste that someone felt the pressure and reversed a previous decission but didn't want to admit that they made a mistake. The problem isn't solved at this time so it does remain to be seen but solved or not, T-Mobile certainly needs to send an apology to their customers for the ill-worded E-Mails that were sent out from the president's office. Labels: sms, tmo-vs-twit, tmobile, twitter (C)2003-2008, Bob K Mertz - Some Rights Reserved |
Friday, December 14, 2007 | |
T-Mobile vs. Twitter (Links and ongoing updates) 12/15@2038
Last Update: 12/15/07 @ 8:38PM EasternBiz Stone has now officially announced that T-Mobile has shut Twitter off for good. First, the important information. We need everyone to contact T-Mobile and explain to them the negative impact they have made in these last few days. Their customer service number is 800-937-8997 and you can email the President's office at rdotson@t-mobile.com. It is very important that we voice our opinion in this matter.
Please let me know if you have any other links or any additional information and I will be happy to update this information. For a complete list of my posts related to this issue, please go to http://blog.bibleboy.org/labels/tmo-vs-twit.html. You can email me at tmo-vs-twit@blog.bibleboy.org Hope to see you on Twitter from T-Mobile sometime soon! :) Labels: net neutrality, sms, tmo-vs-twit, tmobile, twitter (C)2003-2008, Bob K Mertz - Some Rights Reserved | |
Response From T-Mobile
Update: To follow all of my posts related to the T-Mobile/Twitter issues, please click here.From: ExecutiveResponse@T-Mobile.com Subject: T-Mobile and Twitter Date: December 14, 2007 4:49:07 PM EST To: -----@bibleboy.org Return-Path: Envelope-To: -----@bibleboy.org Delivery-Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2007 16:49:27 -0500 Received: from mail by * with spam-scanned (Exim 4.54) id 1J3IP9-00065R-1n for -----@bibleboy.org; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 16:49:27 -0500 Received: from mail1.t-mobile.com ([206.29.162.142] helo=nxprdapirn02.t-mobile.com) by * with esmtps (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.54) id 1J3IP8-00065O-PF for bob@bibleboy.org; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 16:49:11 -0500 Received: from ([10.1.1.66]) by nxprdapirn02.t-mobile.com with ESMTP id 5502347.80485432; Fri, 14 Dec 2007 13:49:07 -0800 Received: from NXPRDVSMBX02.t-mobile.com ([10.133.32.33]) by waprdmsims02.t-mobile.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.1830); Fri, 14 Dec 2007 13:49:07 -0800 Dear Mr. Mertz: My name is Marianne Maestas and I am with the Executive Customer Relations department of T-Mobile. I am contacting you on behalf of Mr. Robert Dotson in regards to the email that you sent him yesterday evening. In your email, you express concerns, as you are not able to use your service for Twitter. As you have been advised, Twitter is not an authorized third-party service provider, and therefore you are not able to utilize service from this provide any longer. You indicate your feeling that this is a violation of the Net Neutrality. T-Mobile would like to bring to your attention that the Terms and Conditions of service, to which you agreed at activation, indicate "... some Services are not available on third-party networks or while roaming. We may impose credit, usage, or other limits to Service, cancel or suspend Service, or block certain types of calls, messages, or sessions (such as international, 900, or 976 calls) at our discretion." Therefore, T-Mobile is not in violation of any agreement by not providing service to Twitter. T-Mobile regrets any inconvenience, however please note that if you remain under contract and choose to cancel service, you will be responsible for the $200 early termination fee that would be assessed to the account at cancellation. Should you have any further questions, please feel free to contact Customer Care at 800-937-8997. Thank you, Marianne Maestas, Executive Customer Relations Specialist, Office of the President, Labels: net neutrality, tmo-vs-twit, tmobile, twitter (C)2003-2008, Bob K Mertz - Some Rights Reserved |
Thursday, December 13, 2007 | ||
T-Mobile violates Net Neutrality? (Blocks Twitter)
Update: Apparently the email address for the customer service executive is rdotson@t-mobile.com and not rbotson like I first posted.Update 12/14 @ 3:34pm: Twitter has confirmed that there is an issue on the satisfaction page (link below) but they don't indicate what the problem is. No one that I have been in contact with has heard anything from T-Mobile other than what we were told by customer service (that they are blocking twitter and/or they don't support short code) Update 12/14 @ 4:58pm: I have received this response from T-Mobile. Very Upsetting Update: To follow all of my posts related to the T-Mobile/Twitter issues, please click here For the last few days I have been unable to send SMS messages to the Twitter service from my T-Mobile cell phone. This evening I decided that enough was enough and I called T-Mobile. I spoke with 3 different reps and would not let up until I got an answer for why this was no longer working. Finally I spoke with someone in Customer Relations and she felt strongly enough about this that she got a tech on the phone. After waiting for the tech to research the issue they came back with a response (and the rep I was spoeaking with was as outraged as I was). Their official response was that T-Mobile does not support third party messaging services and the reason why I am all of a sudden unable to send messages to the Twitter service is because their system "caught up to the bug." I specifically asked if this meant I should expect to never be able to send to Twitter again and the answer was yes. I explained to the rep about Net Neutrality and, to be honest, she had been outraged from the start. She completely agreed with me that this was an example of T-Mobile picking and choosing who you can and can't use with your T-Mobile SMS. I also explained that I paid for unlimited SMS messaging and not selective unlimited SMS messaging. She, again, agreed. The rep and I collectively agreed that this matter needed to be heard and she opened a "Voice Forum" request with the ID of 0623630. For reference to the people reading this, the rep that I talked to had the ID of 3828493. One thing that I do want to request is that if anyone calls in to speak with someone or emails customer service, please do not speak negatively towards the rep that I spoke with. She was extremely helpful and very instrumental in getting the ball rolling. Also, if you want somewhere to send an email, please use rdotson@t-mobile.com. It would be really great if we get a lot of people to write in or call in and explain the issues with their decission and how we object to any move that a company makes towards chosing what we can and can't do with a service we pay for. Hope to see you on Twitter from T-Mobile soon! :) Labels: net neutrality, sms, t-mobile, tmo-vs-twit, twitter (C)2003-2008, Bob K Mertz - Some Rights Reserved |
(C)2008, Bob K Mertz - Some Rights Reserved
BibleBoy's Blog by Bob K Mertz is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-Share Alike 3.0 United States License.
