# Pitting Ed Zotti **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [May 14, 2005, 4:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-ed-zotti/303802 "2005-05-14T04:32:45Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Scarlett67](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/scarlett67/32/7387_2.png) [@Scarlett67](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Scarlett67)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 9:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-ed-zotti/303802/41 "2005-05-14T21:39:28Z")
> [@grienspace](#): > > Obviously you haven’t been paying attention. I had accepted **Ed’s** offer of March 25, **2004**. Please don’t get confused with his subsequent conditions that were applied in 2005. Yes, you did make that deadline, but the other part of the deal was to keep your charter membership current. You can’t let it expire and then expect to re-up later for the bargain price: > [@Ed Zotti](#): > > We said you get half off the regular subscription price **for as long as you keep your charter membership in force.** (bolding mine again) ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-ed-zotti/303802/42 "2005-05-14T21:41:11Z")
> [@Scarlett67](#): > > That’s not where you were late. From Ed’s “Super SDMB subscription special!” thread in ATMB, posted 3/31/2005: > > You’re telling us you paid on May 4. Ya snooze, ya lose. And if you submitted your payment to Paypal before 4/28/05 and it didn’t go through until May 4, your beef should be with PayPal, not **Ed**. > > By the way, I remembered ever since I paid last April that memberships would expire in April. So when April came around again, I double checked the date of the deadline and renewed before it passed. Plus there were all the stickies and discussion about who was renewing. Pretty hard to miss. Did you read the offer that **Ed** made to me? I accepted his offer in March 2004 on the basis that his word was good. I don’t give a flying fuck what he told you in April of the following year. I’m going on what he promised me when he solicited my $4.95 USD in 2004. ---
**Author:** ![Tabby\_Cat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Tabby\_Cat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tabby_Cat)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 9:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-ed-zotti/303802/43 "2005-05-14T21:41:31Z")
> [@Ed Zotti](#): > > How much? > > If you sign up before Wednesday, April 21, 2004, your first year’s subscription costs an unbelievably low US $4.95. What’s more, we promise that as long as you remain a subscriber, you’ll be able to renew annually for 50% of whatever the regular rate is at the time. If you don’t sign up till after April 21, you’ll have to pay the regular rate of US $14.95, just like the newbies. Underlining mine. From 26 Apr to whatever May, you were not a subscriber. Case closed. Not that they didn’t try to give you guys that forgot/didn’t get to renew on time a second chance, just send an email to **Tuba** (hardly consititutes begging here, and it was your OWN DAMN FAULT to begin with), but you insist on acting like a whiny brat. Yeah, I can admit that it probably would have been better if it were possible to make it a lifetime attachment to your user account. But for whatever reason, it wasn’t done this year. So what? You were already warned before hand, and there were multiple stickies, threads, emails telling you to re-sub. It only increases my opinion of you as a jackass. Yeah, I did a search for you. [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=4657204&postcount=1](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=4657204&postcount=1) ---
**Author:** ![Tabby\_Cat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Tabby\_Cat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tabby_Cat)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 9:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-ed-zotti/303802/44 "2005-05-14T21:43:36Z")
> [@grienspace](#): > > Did you read the offer that **Ed** made to me? I accepted his offer in March 2004 on the basis that his word was good. I don’t give a flying fuck what he told you in April of the following year. I’m going on what he promised me when he solicited my $4.95 USD in 2004. Well, read the end of your own quote. “FULL DETAILS AT:” where? I’m guessing that thread I just linked. BUSTED. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 9:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-ed-zotti/303802/45 "2005-05-14T21:53:58Z")
> [@Tabby\_Cat](#): > > Underlining mine. From 26 Apr to whatever May, you were not a subscriber. Case closed. Your quote is not dated. My quote of **Ed’s** is dated 2 days prior to my acceptance of his offer. That was March 25, 2004. jThat is what I agreed to. > [@](#): > > Not that they didn’t try to give you guys that forgot/didn’t get to renew on time a second chance, just send an email to **Tuba** (hardly consititutes begging here, and it was your OWN DAMN FAULT to begin with), but you insist on acting like a whiny brat. Renewal conditions were not a part of our contract. They were arbitrarily introduced a year after the contract went into effect by the other party. > [@](#): > > Yeah, I can admit that it probably would have been better if it were possible to make it a lifetime attachment to your user account. But for whatever reason, it wasn’t done this year. So what? You were already warned before hand, and there were multiple stickies, threads, emails telling you to re-sub. It only increases my opinion of you as a jackass. Perhaps you could tell me how many e-mails I have received regarding re subscription. Do you have some special access Jackass? ---
**Author:** ![Monstre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@Monstre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monstre)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 10:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-ed-zotti/303802/46 "2005-05-14T22:00:45Z")
> [@John Carter of Mars](#): > > That was my understanding from the get-go, but I’ll let the Offended Parties[sup]**TM[/sup]** or TPTB do the search. Or a **Monstre** with spare time… [Here was the original thread listing the original offer](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=269127). It was posted on 3/18/04. A couple of edits were made to the post, the last one on 4/21/04 (which was the addition of the big red sentence at the top, extending the offer date for an extra 5 days or so). Now, clearly the excerpt that **grienspace** lists here from the quoted e-mail doesn’t mention anything about how or when you must subscribe in future years, so from the wording in that e-mail alone, it would seem he has a point. However, his excerpt ends with: > [@](#): > > Full details are available at: **grienspace** – what was under this in the e-mail? Was it the thread I linked, or something else? I don’t recall ever getting such an e-mail (I found out about the offer on the boards, when a friend pointed me to the above thread) – so I don’t know what was in the e-mail. However, I would think that if an e-mail has a link promising “full details”, that it would be understood that the text of the e-mail doesn’t constitute the “full offer” and that one needs to read any attached link to get the “fine print”. From the above thread, there is the statement: > [@](#): > > What’s more, we promise that _as long as you remain a subscriber_, you’ll be able to renew annually for 50% of whatever the regular rate is at the time. So I guess it comes down to arguing the semantics of “as long as you remain a subscriber”. But this wasn’t a condition added after 4/26/04. This was posted on 3/18/04. (or at the very latest, 4/21/04, as that is the last edit date on that OP). ---
**Author:** ![ParentalAdvisory](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/53a042/32.png) [@ParentalAdvisory](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ParentalAdvisory)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 10:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-ed-zotti/303802/47 "2005-05-14T22:01:16Z")
> [@grienspace](#): > > Did you read the offer that **Ed** made to me? I accepted his offer in March 2004 on the basis that his word was good. I don’t give a flying fuck what he told you in April of the following year. I’m going on what he promised me when he solicited my $4.95 USD in 2004. Let’s use your “problem” as if it were a magazine subscription. In March of 2004, Maxim proposes the deal of a life time. $4.95 for a year of Maxim for newbies. Not bad, huh? So you buy it (And who wouldn’t?). This deal also stated that if you remained true to your subscription, that it would only cost $7.48 the next year (2005) if you paid the $7.48 by April 28, 2005, instead of the going rate of $14.95. The final issue for the year even told you that it was about to expire on the cover (hint hint: stickie!). But instead of renewing the subscription, you opt to wait until May 4, 2005 to pay. Now this is well over the deadline of the price break deal. Because you took this route, you now owe $14.95, if you wish to have Maxim send you magazines for another year. It’s that simple. You can’t expect Maxim to cut the price in half because you broke your promise and didn’t pay on time for the discounted price. ---
**Author:** ![Monstre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/e274bd/32.png) [@Monstre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Monstre)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-ed-zotti/303802/48 "2005-05-14T22:02:46Z")
ack! I found that thread and was typing up my post, and **Tabby\_Cat** beat me to posting the link. Ah, well… I just wanted to find it, anyways – as I had not remembered the exact wording on the offer, either. ---
**Author:** ![Excalibre](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/898d66/32.png) [@Excalibre](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Excalibre)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-ed-zotti/303802/49 "2005-05-14T22:03:20Z")
> [@grienspace](#): > > I’m not going to beg to restore my charter member status. It was never promised to me and the fact that members have to beg for it just galls me. Just do what you guys promised to do. “Beg”? So in other words: you didn’t read the stickies, you subscribed late, you’ve been offered an opportunity to have them fix your mistake, and you’re not talking it. Apparently you just like to whine. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 10:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-ed-zotti/303802/50 "2005-05-14T22:03:51Z")
> [@Tabby\_Cat](#): > > Well, read the end of your own quote. “FULL DETAILS AT:” where? I’m guessing that thread I just linked. > BUSTED. Ah, “As long as I remain a subscriber”. I see your point. However I must point out that the invitation to your cite was made to those who “haven’t stopped by the SDMB in a while”. I didn’t qualify. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 10:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-ed-zotti/303802/51 "2005-05-14T22:08:19Z")
> [@grienspace](#): > > Your quote is not dated. My quote of **Ed’s** is dated 2 days prior to my acceptance of his offer. That was March 25, 2004. jThat is what I agreed to. > > Renewal conditions were not a part of our contract. They were arbitrarily introduced a year after the contract went into effect by the other party. > Perhaps you could tell me how many e-mails I have received regarding re subscription. Do you have some special access Jackass? Now it appears that it is you who are not paying attention. Perhaps this is congenital? If you click on \*\*Tabbycat’\*\*s link you will see that it is dated March 18 2004, a full week before you and Ed engaged in this contract. Oh, hell, I’ll do it for you. \*\* 03-18-2004, 01:26 PM #1 Ed Zotti Administrator Join Date: Feb 1999 Posts: 530 Location: The SDMB is switching to paid subscriptions * * * LAST MINUTE BULLETIN! Deadline for $4.95 charter rate subscription pushed back till Monday, April 26, 12 noon CDT!\*\* Later it says \*_If you sign up before Wednesday, April 21, 2004, your first year’s subscription costs an unbelievably low US $4.95. What’s more, we promise that as long as you \* remain a subscriber, you’ll be able to renew annually for 50% of whatever the regular rate is at the time. If you don’t sign up till after April 21, you’ll have to pay the regular rate of US $14.95, just like the newbies._ ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-ed-zotti/303802/52 "2005-05-14T22:11:04Z")
> [@ParentalAdvisory](#): > > Let’s use your “problem” as if it were a magazine subscription. In March of 2004, Maxim proposes the deal of a life time. $4.95 for a year of Maxim for newbies. Not bad, huh? So you buy it (And who wouldn’t?). This deal also stated that if you remained true to your subscription, that it would only cost $7.48 the next year (2005) if you paid the $7.48 by April 28, 2005, instead of the going rate of $14.95. Honest to God, the lack of reading comprension of some dopers is really frustrating. Your anology fails because there were no conditions attached to Ed’s offer to me \*\*prior \*\* to my acceptance. Nothing about if I remained true… at the time I accepted his offer. Any lawyers out there who would care to comment? Its not like I intend to sue or anything. ---
**Author:** ![Tabby\_Cat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Tabby\_Cat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tabby_Cat)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-ed-zotti/303802/53 "2005-05-14T22:11:10Z")
> [@grienspace](#): > > Ah, “As long as I remain a subscriber”. I see your point. However I must point out that the invitation to your cite was made to those who “haven’t stopped by the SDMB in a while”. I didn’t qualify. :rolleyes: Okay, someone take over, I’m done. BS meter just imploded. Have a nice day. ---
**Author:** ![Contrapuntal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/e274bd/32.png) [@Contrapuntal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Contrapuntal)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-ed-zotti/303802/54 "2005-05-14T22:13:58Z")
> [@grienspace](#): > > Honest to God, the lack of reading comprension of some dopers is really frustrating. Your anology fails because there were no conditions attached to Ed’s offer to me \*\*prior \*\* to my acceptance. Nothing about if I remained true… at the time I accepted his offer. > > Any lawyers out there who would care to comment? Its not like I intend to sue or anything. What the hell is your problem? Conditions stated 3.18.04. You accept 3.25.04. Try to get your head around this: 18 comes before 25. ---
**Author:** ![Rick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/9f8e36/32.png) [@Rick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rick)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 10:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-ed-zotti/303802/55 "2005-05-14T22:18:35Z")
> [@Turek](#): > > This reminds me of a “joke”: > > This lady’s car stops running, so she has it towed to the service center. The mechanic looks under the hood, does some stuff, and comes over to the lady. > > Mechanic: Your engine died because there was no oil in it. > Lady: Really? > M: Yes. Did your “Oil” light come on? > L: Yes, but I thought if it was really bad, it would blink or something. This thread reminds me of another. There is a flood. Fred a devout church goer does not evacuate his house saying that the lord will take care of him. As the flood waters rise he is forced to evacuate to the second floor of his house. A boat comes by and offers him a lift. “No thanks, the lord will take care of me” The flood waters rise even higher, and Fred is forced to climb on the roof. A second boat comes by and offers to save him. “No thanks, the lord will take care of me” The food rises even higher, and Fred is forced to climb onto the chimney. A helicopter flys by and drops a ladder. “climb aboard, it’s your last chance” No thanks, the lord will take care of me" As fate would have it, the waters continued to rise, and Fred was swept off the roof, and drowned. When he got to heaven, Fred meets the lord, and asks him "Lord why did you forsake me? The lord looked at Fred and said “I sent two boats and a helicopter, what did you expect me to do?” ---
**Author:** ![Zoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/a4c791/32.png) [@Zoe](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoe)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 10:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-ed-zotti/303802/56 "2005-05-14T22:19:59Z")
> [@](#): > > **grienspace** : Perhaps you might advise me what the due date was? Information about individual membership expiration dates is found in our User CP’s. There is also a statement that membership privileges last for one year. Judging from your OP, I think yours actually lasted a little over 13 months. As quoted by **grienspace** : [quote] > [@](#): > > **LifeofWry** : Nine days to process an electronic transfer is SOMEBODY’S fault, but I don’t see how anyone could make a case that it’s grienspace’s. > [@](#): > > **grienspace** : I just reviewed my e-mail, and paypal just informed me that my echeck to the Chicago reader is now complete as of May 13. Never mind that they told me on May 04: > > > [@](#): > > > > This email confirms that you have paid Chicago Reader, Inc. ([subscriptions@straightdope.com](mailto:subscriptions@straightdope.com)) $14.95 USD using PayPal. I believe that it was TubaDiva in one of the subscription notices that mentioned that Paypal was taking a long time to actually process the transfer of funds. I had noticed this myself when I checked on by User CP and saw that my membership expiration date had not been changed. I double checked with Paypal and noticed that the transfer of funds had not been completed and I read some of the subscription threads to see if I could find out what the problem was. So **LifeonWry** was correct that the nine days to process the electronic transfer was not **grienspace** ’s fault. It was Paypal’s. It was not Paypal’s fault, however, that the membership had already expired on May 4. > [@](#): > > **grienspace** : I’m not going to beg to restore my charter member status. It was never promised to me and the fact that members have to beg for it just galls me. Just do what you guys promised to do. Certainly no one asked you to beg to restore your charter member status. **TubaDiva** acknowledged seeing your post and asked others with similar concerns to “please send me an email…” and **she** would plead your cases for you. I had also expected to be sent a notification that my subscription was about to expire, but the assumption was my fault. When I saw that there were threads/stickies about resubscribing, I thought I would be wise to investigate. Who else would they be talking to about resubscribing? ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 10:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-ed-zotti/303802/57 "2005-05-14T22:29:01Z")
> [@Contrapuntal](#): > > What the hell is your problem? Conditions stated 3.18.04. You accept 3.25.04. Try to get your head around this: > > 18 comes before 25. The e-mail directed to me personally supercedes any conditions that are made indirectly. Your interpretation is debatable. Hey, can’t you guys understand that I was sucker punched ? I don’t give a fuck whether it is the utility company telling me it is “their new policy” and I just have to live with it or **Ed** who most of you want to grant a great latitude in interpretation of his word to the detriment of his customers. I’m sick and tired of they way people acquiesce to the arbitrary demands of corporations. My understanding and contribution to my contract with the Chicago Reader on March 27 2004 is complete. Theirs is not. Period. ---
**Author:** ![ParentalAdvisory](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/53a042/32.png) [@ParentalAdvisory](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ParentalAdvisory)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 10:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-ed-zotti/303802/58 "2005-05-14T22:42:48Z")
> [@grienspace](#): > > HYour anology fails because there were no conditions… Okay… Fuck conditions, Fuck stickies, Fuck all that shit. You have a fucking User Control Panel that explicitely states a fucking expiration date. What does all that other shit matter? There was an expiration, you missed it, you pay the extra $7 to get reinstated. So suck it up, buttercup. For $14.95, you’re still getting a deal. That is still a fantastic price for this place. So um… lessons learned and all that. > [@](#): > > The e-mail directed to me personally supercedes any conditions that are made indirectly. Really? We all get our own little rules now? Please. ---
**Author:** ![Tabby\_Cat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/6a8cbe/32.png) [@Tabby\_Cat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tabby_Cat)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-ed-zotti/303802/59 "2005-05-14T22:46:40Z")
You need to google “incorporation of contract terms by reference”. Just a hint. Yeah, that “FULL DETAILS AT:” makes a legal difference. [http://library.findlaw.com/1998/Jan/1/128103.html](http://library.findlaw.com/1998/Jan/1/128103.html) ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [May 14, 2005, 11:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-ed-zotti/303802/60 "2005-05-14T23:00:51Z")
> [@Tabby\_Cat](#): > > You need to google “incorporation of contract terms by reference”. Just a hint. Yeah, that “FULL DETAILS AT:” makes a legal difference. > > [http://library.findlaw.com/1998/Jan/1/128103.html](http://library.findlaw.com/1998/Jan/1/128103.html) Uh, **Tabby** , you are replying to someone who spent six years working for a general contractor and whose primary duty was to study the contract supplied by the owner to gain the maximum advantage where dispute occurs. One concept has always stood out in my mind. It is incumbent upon the party who draws up the contract, (or who provides the offer) to communicate effectively the details of the conditions which apply prior to acceptance. I am extremely confident of my position. Once again , I welcome the input of a lawyer who is not invested in the emotion which seems to prevail around this issue. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-ed-zotti/303802.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/pitting-ed-zotti/303802.md?page=4)