07-08-2006, 03:40 AM
|
|
|
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by thain
When no human being ever answers it's usually because some more senior human being in the company has screwed up. A mere router failure or other hardwarefault fault would get fixed in a few hours, and you'd get a chipper response telling you how effective their technical backup was. But after all this time and still no data.... somebody at Yahoo has reasons for not saying anything. Maybe the manager whose job it was to ensure that the backups worked? Maybe the bean counter who ran out of beans to pay the server farm which hosted your emails. Who knows?
Yahoo is free to users. As we don't pay them anything we have no rights where our data are concerned, so it's safer for Yahoo never to say anything in a situation like this because anything they DID say could get pounced on by a lawyer as an admission of liability.
The hard lesson is this:- always make backups on your own PC of any data you entrust to Yahoo. It's boring and time consuming and a nuisance, but I'm afraid the alternative may be an exciting problem you can do without.
|
While I'll understand what you're saying, that doesn't fully explain what's happening here. It's one thing to lose my current data, it's quite another to NEVER give me access to the account again!
Hell, I can live w/ data loss. I'm under no illusions when it comes to the distinct possibility that Yahoo or any other web-based email system could suffer data loss. But that's a risk I'm willing to take for the convenience of having them manage the data and having access from anywhere in the world.
Even if such data loss occurs, it's totally ridiculous to prevent all FURTHER access from now and forever! I've certainly been sent numerous emails since. And I have numerous accounts linked to that email address. For the sake of a single data loss event, Yahoo will now deny all future access to that email account?! That's rational behavior?
You may ultimately be proven right, but I find it hard to believe this would be Yahoo's reasoning. That's quite a draconian response to a rather straighforward problem. I also can't believe that their terms of service doesn't already provide them more than enough protection against liability for free services.
|