Con.
Posted 12/06/2012 - 13:26
Link
That's a link to the form Barrie. We understand the process.
What I'm saying is that if you have an example of this process being faulty, then bring it to the attention of JPS so they can attend to it.
If that doesn't work or proves unsatisfactory then that is the time to complain about it.
At the moment just effectively saying "we don't trust you" is not a great way to deal with anybody. I doubt that many of us would respond well to that at work.
What I'm saying is that if you have an example of this process being faulty, then bring it to the attention of JPS so they can attend to it.
If that doesn't work or proves unsatisfactory then that is the time to complain about it.
At the moment just effectively saying "we don't trust you" is not a great way to deal with anybody. I doubt that many of us would respond well to that at work.
Best regards, John
Posted 12/06/2012 - 14:09
Link
At work I found when it came down to it, it was what was written in the contract, not trust that held sway.
Barrie - Too Old To Die Young
https://pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/barrieforbes
https://www.flickr.com/photos/189482630@N03/
https://pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/barrieforbes
https://www.flickr.com/photos/189482630@N03/
Posted 12/06/2012 - 15:22
Link
So I wonder what Bob, the_archaeologist, has to say about all this?
It's very odd that he was able to start this thread on 10/6/2012, when his last login was made on 9th April 2012.
If he really stayed logged in for two months prior to making the post, I wonder why he has nothing more to say ?
It's very odd that he was able to start this thread on 10/6/2012, when his last login was made on 9th April 2012.
If he really stayed logged in for two months prior to making the post, I wonder why he has nothing more to say ?
Peter E Smith - flickr Photostream
Posted 12/06/2012 - 15:36
Link
Interesting point Peter.
The thread seems to have gone way off his original complaint, but I was hoping he would come back with more to say. Could his account have been hacked somehow?
The thread seems to have gone way off his original complaint, but I was hoping he would come back with more to say. Could his account have been hacked somehow?
Posted 12/06/2012 - 15:42
Link
Gwyn wrote:
Interesting point Peter.
The thread seems to have gone way off his original complaint, but I was hoping he would come back with more to say. Could his account have been hacked somehow?
I wouldn't go by that date. Yours currently shows as last login 11th June 2012 - 20:52.Interesting point Peter.
The thread seems to have gone way off his original complaint, but I was hoping he would come back with more to say. Could his account have been hacked somehow?
I think it's the last time you were authenticated and the server sent you a cookie.
Talking of which, where is the cookie warning on this site (as is legally required)?
Posted 12/06/2012 - 16:23
Link
As for that, where is it on the vast majority of sites. I clear out a dozen even when I've only used this site (Some of which are flagged as malicious [possibly/probably erroneously] by my AV software
Bernard
Bernard
Posted 12/06/2012 - 17:16
Link
Quote:
Talking of which, where is the cookie warning on this site (as is legally required)?
You'll find it under Terms of Use>Privacy
Talking of which, where is the cookie warning on this site (as is legally required)?
Best regards, John
Posted 12/06/2012 - 17:22
Link
Actually that doesn't cover it. It's meant to be upfront and obvious. But hardly anyone has done it!
Not having a go John as I know it's not down to you.
Not having a go John as I know it's not down to you.
Posted 12/06/2012 - 17:25
Link
I didn't think you were having a go, but I was curious so I went looking for the information. If it's relevant, the law doesn't apply to cookies used for technical reasons only.
Even moving from page to page requires cookies, unless we want to log on again for every page.
Even moving from page to page requires cookies, unless we want to log on again for every page.
Best regards, John
Posted 12/06/2012 - 17:27
Link
I've only visited two sites which had the cookie notice up front and obvious. For one if you refused cookies it wouldn't let you any further, which surely can't be the point of the law.
Maybe because you are a member you accept cookies from PU automatically? Though when I check the site without logging in I don't get the message either, even after clearing out cookies, which I do regularly anyway.
Maybe because you are a member you accept cookies from PU automatically? Though when I check the site without logging in I don't get the message either, even after clearing out cookies, which I do regularly anyway.
Posted 09/03/2013 - 13:36
Link
greynolds999 wrote:
Just to clarify (and it might be the reason you are annoyed) this site has nothing to do with Pentax UK.
It is an entirely independent site and is not funded or affiliated with Pentax in any way.
In that case statement retracted and apologies to all concerned.
Just to clarify (and it might be the reason you are annoyed) this site has nothing to do with Pentax UK.
It is an entirely independent site and is not funded or affiliated with Pentax in any way.
Posted 09/03/2013 - 17:35
Link
What is there to apologise for? I can see your point - I see an article and think 'Ooh that might look interesting' and find as soon as I've clicked the link it's available only to PU subscribers...
Would be better to have a members area that's invisible to non-subscribers and a banner that says - if you pay for membership these are the benefits you can get.
Would be better to have a members area that's invisible to non-subscribers and a banner that says - if you pay for membership these are the benefits you can get.
AKA Welshwizard/PWynneJ
Assorted Pentax/Nikon/Mamiya stuff
Assorted Pentax/Nikon/Mamiya stuff
Add Comment
To leave a comment - Log in to Pentax User or create a new account.
6913 posts
17 years
Co. Durham UK
https://pentaxphotogallery.com/artists/barrieforbes
https://www.flickr.com/photos/189482630@N03/