Guest and Member subscriptions being discontinued

[janusz]

Originally Posted by adrian44

the TOS had that line about their right to terminate the service any time for any reason or for no reason..

This, in itself, is another argument for avoiding FM.
Compare this "we can kick you out if/when we like it" approach with e.g:

Runbox Solutions may terminate the Agreement with 30 days prior notice. Upon such termination, you may be entitled to a refund corresponding to the then-remaining period of the Term. Whether you are entitled to a refund or not will be stated in the termination notice.

Runbox Solutions may terminate the Agreement without prior notice if you breach the provisions of this Agreement. You shall not be entitled to claim any refund or compensation if Runbox Solutions terminates the Agreement as a result of your breach of the terms of the Agreement.

(my emphasis)

[Bamb0]

Originally Posted by FredOnline

This is so out of line.

I am truly disappointed in the attitudes of some here on the forum.

Im sorry Fred... I am upset about other things also and this just adds to it.........

I dont mean to sound bad or anything.......

[adrian44]

Originally Posted by janusz

This, in itself, is another argument for avoiding FM.
Compare this "we can kick you out if/when we like it" approach with e.g: (my emphasis)

No comparison indeed. I was with Runbox for years and they were absolutely fantastic be it the email service or customer care.

[walpurg]

I think some of the self-appointed FM spokespeople here still fail to recognize that the people who complain about losing a lifetime address aren't really complaining about that part of it. I'm sure virtually everyone here has considered the possibility of FM going out of business, getting acquired (which indeed happened) and completely restructured (which fortunately didn't), the world ending, and other scenarios resulting in them losing their long-time address. But not everyone has been prepared for the company simply going back on their word.

When I joined FM over 10 years ago, I signed up for a yearly subscription - Enhanced at first, Full after it became obvious a few years later that I didn't actually use any Enhanced-level features. The reason I didn't take a Member level account was because I thought the specs were too low - had they been enough for me, I very likely would have taken advantage of the offer even though I could have paid more. If it's being offered, and it fits my needs, why not take it? Because someone else is paying more to have more? Is anyone here seriously reasoning this way?

The suggestion that if people took advantage of a nice offer, it somehow means they're cheapskates and freeloaders is incredibly disingenuous. More so when coupled with a bunch of preaching about what a great company FM is. Yes, indeed, all these people thought it was a great company too, it gave them an excellent deal and good service over the years. It's exactly because it's supposed to be a great company that people don't understand this sudden breach. It has not been explained from a technical standpoint, the business value is far from obvious, there has been no hint of any "act of God" that would necessitate tightening the belt. In the context, I think it's perfectly normal for people to feel disoriented and upset. I know it never occurred to me that the level that was advertised as "lifetime" would be done away with just to "simplify internal infrastructure", and I sure wouldn't be happy about it if it affected me directly. if anyone seriously wants to call this a standard business practice, I sure hope they also warn anyone dealing with them that their handshake really isn't.

Re: Bron's participation. I love this guy, for me he's someone who has probably done more than any other FM staffer over the last few years to instill confidence in FM - because it absolutely builds confidence in the company when you can see that these people know their stuff and aren't afraid to talk even about their mistakes and what they've learned from those. This, however, is a discussion forum, so if someone like Bron posts about these changes here (as opposed to the FM blog or some other platform controlled by them), there's certainly an expectation that there will be some follow-up discussion. I know I have personally expressed interest in the technical side of why this needs to happen, and I know I'm not the only one who'd like to hear about this. The reason why I've been sarcastic about the "simplify internal infrastructure" line is precisely beause there has been no technical explanation backing this up (board member speculation doesn't count). At this point, Bron keeping silent isn't helping FM, because it leaves the impression that there actually is no competent technical reason behind all this. In which case, while saying that Bron personally "doesn't give a crap" is almost certainly misdirected, such words are ready to spill out because this attitude is being felt from the company, and unfortunately he happens to be the "face" of this news here.

[BritTim]

Originally Posted by walpurg

Re: Bron's participation. I love this guy, for me he's someone who has probably done more than any other FM staffer over the last few years to instill confidence in FM - because it absolutely builds confidence in the company when you can see that these people know their stuff and aren't afraid to talk even about their mistakes and what they've learned from those. This, however, is a discussion forum, so if someone like Bron posts about these changes here (as opposed to the FM blog or some other platform controlled by them), there's certainly an expectation that there will be some follow-up discussion. I know I have personally expressed interest in the technical side of why this needs to happen, and I know I'm not the only one who'd like to hear about this. The reason why I've been sarcastic about the "simplify internal infrastructure" line is precisely beause there has been no technical explanation backing this up (board member speculation doesn't count). At this point, Bron keeping silent isn't helping FM, because it leaves the impression that there actually is no competent technical reason behind all this. In which case, while saying that Bron personally "doesn't give a crap" is almost certainly misdirected, such words are ready to spill out because this attitude is being felt from the company, and unfortunately he happens to be the "face" of this news here.

I agree with the essence of your complete post, with one slight difference. Lat's say Bron is unhappy with the decision FastMail made, but wants to mitigate the damage both to the company, and to the impacted users. He decides to inform us of the company's decision with the official justification,, and remains willing to assist in any way he personally can. It would be quite unreasonable, I think, to expect him to defend the company's decision, beyond informing us of the official reasons, if he does not agree with it, but he certainly would be out of line(as a FastMail employee) telling this board that he thought the decision was wrong. I think that scenario is plausible, but we cannot be sure.

[samhu]

Originally Posted by BritTim

It would be quite unreasonable, I think, to expect him to defend the company's decision.

To me the more perplexing thing is why you seem to have taken up the role of being Fastmail's spokesperson?

[BritTim]

Originally Posted by samhu

To me the more perplexing thing is why you seem to have taken up the role of being Fastmail's spokesperson?

You are correct, I think, that I have posted more than I should on this thread. I will keep my thoughts to myself from now on. (I have never considered myself as supporting FastMail on this.)

[walpurg]

Originally Posted by BritTim

I agree with the essence of your complete post, with one slight difference. Lat's say Bron is unhappy with the decision FastMail made, but wants to mitigate the damage both to the company, and to the impacted users. He decides to inform us of the company's decision with the official justification,, and remains willing to assist in any way he personally can. It would be quite unreasonable, I think, to expect him to defend the company's decision, beyond informing us of the official reasons, if he does not agree with it, but he certainly would be out of line(as a FastMail employee) telling this board that he thought the decision was wrong. I think that scenario is plausible, but we cannot be sure.

I see your point, but unfortunately if a company staffer posts news about the company's decision at a forum, the decision claims to have a technical justification, and the staffer has a long history of explaining technical details above all else, obviously people will expect him to do what he always does and explain it. Not necessarily defend, but definitely explain. If he's actually on a secret ninja mission to blow the whistle, then I hope he can understand that people can't read his mind and be prepared to catch some flak without taking it personally. I personally don't hold his lack of participation against him personally, I was simply trying to outline how people can interpret the situation.

[TenFour]

I was a FM user back in the day, before I had a Gmail account, and everything worked nicely for me. However, I would never expect any generic email address from any provider to truly be a "lifetime" address, no matter what the advertising copy or TOS said. If you want a real lifetime address purchase a domain and use that, with whatever email service provider is still in business. Companies come and go all the time, and a very likely scenario is a company could just fold up shop overnight leaving you with no address and no way to even contact the company. Probably the safest long-term generic addresses are with Outlook.com and Gmail, as I don't see either of them folding overnight. Almost any company below that size might disappear quite quickly. Witness what has happened to Yahoo.

[jhollington]

Originally Posted by TenFour

Probably the safest long-term generic addresses are with Outlook.com and Gmail, as I don't see either of them folding overnight. Almost any company below that size might disappear quite quickly. Witness what has happened to Yahoo.

Leaving aside the iCloud Mail service itself, which is fairly limited, Apple is also likely pretty stable along the same lines in terms of addresses. While they've moved from mac.com to me.com to iCloud.com over the years, that only affects new signups —*all of the legacy addresses remain supported if you originally had one. Basically kind of like what Microsoft has done with its transition from Hotmail to Outlook.com.

That said, I really do sympathize with those folks who would likely not have been thinking this way back in 2002.

[Gsptlsnz]

Originally Posted by jhollington

Leaving aside the iCloud Mail service itself, which is fairly limited, Apple is also likely pretty stable along the same lines in terms of addresses. While they've moved from mac.com to me.com to iCloud.com over the years, that only affects new signups —*all of the legacy addresses remain supported if you originally had one.

Just make sure you don't store any nude selfies!

[Gankaku]

I haven't been around for awhile. I was a little surprised when I saw this post. I used to have a "lifetime account", as a matter of fact I bought one for my daughter too. She stopped using hers when she grew up and got a college account, then a gmail account. I stopped using mine when I didn't login for ages and it was closed. I have an Enhanced Fastmail account that I use for most of my mail, and didn't need that one anyway but wasn't really happy when it got closed for me not being able to login to it. After all, I did pay for it!

But time goes on. To the people who want to ask for their money back on what was supposedly a lifetime account, I think that's okay. For the people who get irate and want to bring class action lawsuits? How about ...not. Why do people want to sue over everything...it's perturbing.

Fastmail has come a long way from the beginning. I'm glad Rob and his company are running it again and it's kind of like all of our email company again. There are changes, have been changes and will be more changes. It's a company that's been gearing itself up over the years. It IS a paid service, like it or not. If you don't want the security and features of this service, you can certainly choose to use other free providers.

Perhaps Fastmail can offer those users, either their money back or $15 off their first and second years of paid accounts. I would like that!

[Terry]

It is so nice to see some of the old mods back....

[n5bb]

Originally Posted by Gankaku

...But time goes on. To the people who want to ask for their money back on what was supposedly a lifetime account, I think that's okay. ...

Fastmail staff has already said they would do this. I don't remember anyone posting that they had taken them up on the offer.

Originally Posted by Gankaku

...For the people who get irate and want to bring class action lawsuits? How about ...not. Why do people want to sue over everything...it's perturbing.

I agree. Everyone who obtained a Guest or Member account had to agree to the terms and conditions under which the account was offered.

Originally Posted by Gankaku

...Perhaps Fastmail can offer those users, either their money back or $15 off their first and second years of paid accounts. I would like that!

Fastmail has offered to refund the original payment. Both Member and Guest accounts get a 50% discount on any current plan until July 31, 2017. And Members get an additional $15 discount. So Fastmail is giving those account holders an amazing gift if they purchase an upgrade.

Your suggestion ($30 discount for two years) is much less generous than what Fastmail is offering to all Member accounts:

• A Basic 2-year subscription price is normally $55, so your suggested discount would result in a $25 cost for two years.
• Members are offered a special 50% + $15 discount on a Basic account. This will result in a cost of $12.50 for two years, ending at the end of July, 2019.
• All Members can get a free Basic account for one year, ending at the end of July, 2018.
• So although Member accounts will be closed in July, if they upgrade to a Basic account at zero cost they will have free email until July 31, 2018.
• The Basic account, which is available for zero cost for over a year to Members, is a huge improvement over the Member features:
  • Email storage: 125X better (Basic 2 GB compared to Member 16 MB)
  • File storage: 1000X better (Basic 1 GB compared to Member 1 MB)
  • Aliases: 600X better (Basic 600, Member 1)
  • Calendar: Provided in Basic, not available in Member.
• So every Member who doesn't want to pay Fastmail one penny more should immediately upgrade their account to Basic and get the far better features for over one more year. They can then close the account if they wish.

Bill

[samhu]

All's well for "one-time fee" Members according to n5bb if:

1) They don't mind losing an email address that they thought was "for life" (of FastMail).
2) They accept that it's OK for a company to not stand behind its part of a deal.
3) They don't mind being made to switch to an ongoing subscription fee model for an upgrade they don't want or need.

Additionally, if Members subscribe to the "more you pay, the more you save" ethos, not only should they not complain, they should be eternally grateful to FastMail for its kind generosity.