The Worthington Post

Life. Liberty. Happiness.

Comments

  1. Although technically not required in memo form, it might have been nice had Mr. Eldridge at least written: “Yours truly.”

    Reply

  2. This is great. Honestly, I should write more letters to customer service. Or at least blog them the letters like this, since I have no idea if my letter will ever make it to anyone who can influence change.

    Reply

    • Thanks for the props, and for stopping by! I’ll certainly be tweeting this letter for the next few days, and sending it via snail mail as well. Effecting change would be GREAT, but I really wrote this to blow off steam. 🙂

      Reply

  4. I love this. I really enjoying sending letters to companies who have transgressed in some way. My favourite is still my insurance company who informed me that as there were no witnesses to the woman who cut me up on a roundabout, causing us to collide, they would have to accept her version and make me pay for the damages. I did enjoy pointing out that not only did her version of events place us on a different roundabout to the actual location, in order to cause the damage she alleged, I would have had to drive straight over the centre of the roundabout taking careful aim at the front of her car, which would have likely been noticed in rush hour.
    I didn’t have to pay!

    Reply

  5. I was holding back tears because of how hard I was laughing. Your response was excellent! I unfortunately have a difficult time controlling my anger and I would’ve never been able to reply in manner such as you did. It was awesome!

    Reply

  6. Just sent (7/8/13) to Scientific American:

    Just as I was about to compose my own reply to your magazine, I discovered someone at WAPO had already done the job for me: http://worthingtonpost.wordpress.com/2013/01/07/suspension-notice/

    Obviously, I should add a couple of personal details to flesh out the blog post linked to above.

    1) I NEVER sign up knowingly for any service, publication, product, etc., with ‘automatic renewal.” I don’t consider it a convenience, regardless of the rhetoric, but an attempt to hook me into something in advance that I may very well not want. The notion that I need the Big Brother approach is demeaning: if I want to renew a magazine, I will do so. If I don’t, it’s a safe bet that the decision was a conscious choice, not an oversight.

    2) When I originally signed up to get print copies of SA, I THOUGHT I was getting access to on-line only articles. There was something I saw reference to (too long ago to recall now) I really wanted to read, likely about mathematics. Imagine my disappointment when I found I was getting hard copies of your magazine, which frankly I didn’t want that badly, but not the very thing I DID want, and that to get that access would cost additional fees. On my view, I’d been misled and, likely, ripped off.

    3) By a fortunate coincidence, the credit card I used to subscribe to SA had to be cancelled and replaced, not once, but twice, in the interim. So, surprise! You couldn’t charge me for a renewal to which I never agreed. Sorry for you, but not my fault, folks.

    4) I don’t want to renew. It was evident when you got nothing from me. So take your threats of collection and put them where my access to that article I wanted to read went.

    Thanks,

    Michael Paul Goldenberg

    Reply

    • Oh, it makes me so very happy you were able to use my retort to save you some effort! And, #4 made me laugh out loud.

      Also, as much as I wish I had the readership of WAPO, I must note that I am not esteemed and revered Washington Post Newspaper, but the lowly and minimally admired Worthington Post Blog. 🙂

      Let me know if they respond to you. They didn’t to me. Shocked, I tell you.

      Reply

Trackbacks

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Archives