On 7 Dec 2005 at 7:15, Owain Sutton wrote:

> David W. Fenton wrote:
> > On 6 Dec 2005 at 23:36, Owain Sutton wrote:
> > 
> >>David W. Fenton wrote:
> >>
> >>>On 6 Dec 2005 at 17:28, Owain Sutton wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>David W. Fenton wrote;
> >>>>
> >>>>>(can't imagine why the Royal Mail
> >>>>>requires it -- makes no sense at all).
> >>>>
> >>>>Because you only get so many free searches each day - there's a
> >>>>subscription service which allows unlimited searches.
> >>>
> >>>Is the Royal Mail not a government service? That is, shouldn't it
> >>>be free?
> >>
> >>It's not a 'government service', but a public limited company whose
> >>majority owner is the British Government.
> > 
> > It's called the "Royal Mail" and it's not considered a government
> > service?
> 
> Should I ask the RAC for a refund on my car insurance?

Well, looking up a postal code benefits the Royal Mail, so it ought 
to be free. It is free, up to a point, but there is an unnecessary 
registration required, ostensibly so that they can charge for 
extended services.

There is nothing wrong with public institutions charging for extended 
services.

> >>And in any case, there's plenty of "government services", from
> >>passports to self-service photocopies in libraries, that aren't
> >>free.
> > 
> > 
> > My point is not actually about having to pay. It's reasonable that
> > for a certain volume of requests you'd be required to pay beyond
> > that point. 
> > 
> > However, many free resources limit the number of times you can use
> > them in a day, and they don't require a logon. All they do is count
> > the number of requests from a particular IP address. I can tick off
> > a half dozen such sites. You can certainly pay for unlimited
> > service.
> > 
> > But I see no reason why you should have to set up an account and
> > logon to look up one single postal code. That is completely
> > senseless, and is completely orthogonal to the question of whether
> > one should or should not pay for volume services.
> 
> OK, in that case, the answer to your question is "because it's not a
> very well-designed website".

I strongly doubt that the policy of requiring a logon was put in 
place by the designer of the website. It's quite clearly a management 
directive, one that is ridiculous, and makes it less likely that 
people will avail themselves of the free service it provides.

And I can't help but read into the logon requirement the idea that 
this is precisely what they intended.

-- 
David W. Fenton                        http://www.bway.net/~dfenton
David Fenton Associates                http://www.bway.net/~dfassoc

_______________________________________________
Finale mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.shsu.edu/mailman/listinfo/finale

Reply via email to