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:
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.
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
Well, read the end of your own quote. “FULL DETAILS AT:” where? I’m guessing that thread I just linked.
BUSTED.
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?
Or a Monstre with spare time…
Here was the original thread listing the original offer. 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:
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:
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).
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.
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.
“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.
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.
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.
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.
:rolleyes:
Okay, someone take over, I’m done. BS meter just imploded.
Have a nice day.
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.
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?”
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]
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.
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?
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.
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.
Really? We all get our own little rules now? Please.
You need to google “incorporation of contract terms by reference”. Just a hint. Yeah, that “FULL DETAILS AT:” makes a legal difference.
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.