Get Help

Warnings For Abusing The System.

Status: Implemented
by hamishlaw ‎10-11-2011 16:52

I suspect this or a variation of this idea has cropped up in the past but are giffgaff not missing a trick by not setting up an automated system for users when they have contravened one of the many T& C's for use before they are banned/their accounts are blocked. ?


This issue crops up on a regular basis with users either being penalised for excess data use, tethering, gaming the system, inappropriate behaviour on the forums, abuse of fellow giffgaffers, constantly posting duplicate threads without searching (last one was especially for myself) etc.


The point I struggle with is why is there not a more structured response to this issue whereby the culprits whether innocent or otherwise get a standard warning before being banned/blocked or yellow card then a red or even a three strike and you are out warning or something else other than a you have breached the T & C's cheerio ? Quite often when a user has fallen foul of the system it appears to be an innocent oversight, ignorance of the rules etc.


It just seems to me that as giffgaff markets itself largely on word of mouth recommendations and introductions it is not the optimum business approach to lose goodwill with some by adopting the current approach.


In case anyone thinks I am some wishy washy, sandal wearing,  animal loving liberal vegetarian you are wrong I just want to see the guilty punished not a lot of newbies who are feeling their way in the world of giffgaff.


Anyone want a hug ? Smiley Wink


The problem with a more transparent system could be that some people may take advantage of such an opportunity to 'test' giffgaff's ability to detect say tethering on a £10 goodybag. 


I am not saying that Giffgaff can't detect such things but some people may see it as an invitation to take liberties?


However, I agree with the general idea that new users who are genuinely making errors through ignorance should not be banned - maybe the way to achieve that is better communication on what is and is not acceptable?

What about when customers buy a goodybag with unlimited data ( everytime they buy a goodybag ) send them a text saying please read the T & C's to unlimited data as there are conditions of use in T & C's ( not to be used in ipads or dongles ECT. ) and if they go to the extreme of abusing the system then their services could be affected ( cancelled or even limited for a amount of time ) and for continued abuse ( 2 times or more after being warned by email and text message ) their services are terminated. vdubgttdi

Not sure how to post links but I'm sure I read in the T&Cs that abusers WOULD receive a warning.  Clearly, from reading posts on the boards this is NOT happening and indescriminate bans/barring is taking place.


No question at all about it, a warning e-mail/text containing a reminder of the 'rules' followed by ban/barring for future transgressions.

giffgaff; ergo sum bertiebat
giffgaff; ergo sum

I'm not sure that we get the full truth always from some of the posters who complain about being barred on the internet.  Apparently they should get a couple of email before the ban happens.  Some even probably think that they have been barred when their internet disappears when in fact it is another issue entirely. 


I think giffgaff need to come to this thread and specify what procedures are already in place as I suspect they are some existing rules that are already applied.


PS.  Yes a hug would be nice Smiley Happy


It must also be said that tho i agree with the sentiment of warnings etc, that ignorance is no excuse. Ignorance of the law doesn't stand up in a court whereas you should hope that any commercial companies Ts&Cs would do.

nobody should be signing up to something they don't understand then moaning about it after the fact.


EDIT big hugs to all (except the abusers)

(that sounds so wrong!!!)




the main problem giffgaff has is the stupid outdated lithium board they use.... its so limited in what they can do and acheieve its unbeleiveable that such a company would actually use something as stupid as the lithium system


An excellent idea, and well presented. It really puts customers off if they're new and suddenly banned without any idea of what's going on. It takes everyone time to adjust to something new, and as many modern day techie terms aren't known or understood by everyone (i.e. tethering, dongle etc) newbies can be caught out unawares unfairly.


The thing to remember is: Whether someone is breaching t&cs on purpose or by accident, if they post on here about it being unfair and/or unclear there is a problem with the system for addressing these things. If the system was as clear as it should be then we'd get very few if any complaints threads.


Since giffgaff are in an advantages position by having an insant communication service, i.e. the forums, they should be able to address these problems quickly and effectively.

former giff-staffer
Status changed to: Under Consideration
Hi guys, we are looking at the tethering warnings etc. at the moment and may make changes if appropriate. In regards to forum use, members are always PMd about their conduct and a suspension is always the last resort with this (e.g. when a large number of PMs does not influence a negative member to change) In terms of an automated system, we will have a look at the implications limitations of such a process if the level of content to be reviewed is large enough Smiley Happy

Tobias how sweet - many thanks for acknowledging the issue before it has even reached the 10 kudos mark. Who says giffgaff don't listen Smiley Happy


Now just mind and not bury it - I will be watching Smiley Wink


Thanks everyone for your support - have a hug from me Smiley Very Happy


@tobias_b:  good of you to respond and your comments make very interesting reading.  There have been a number of postings on the boards recently from members stating that they have simply been barred - now warning e-mail, nothing, just barred.


Your comments indicate that this is not/should not be happening.  Are we to take it then, that the posters in question are being a bit 'economical with the truth' - or have they just not read their e-mails (always a possibility, I suppose).