September 9, 2005
Letter to AOL via thread concerning
AOL's article asking for the resume of FEMA's director.
Why was AOL asking on its subscriber's home
page to see the resume of FEMA's director? Wasn't it a List Director
at AOL who stole and then sold millions of AOL member names to his
buddy last year, a SPAMMER?
What did his resume look like? And who was
fired at AOL for hiring him, not digging deeper into his resume?
Then there are the resumes of the politically-correct
editors at AOL, who are publishing articles like the one above on
AOL's homepage, not to mention those silly polls they create that
seem to direct you to only those results AOL wants to see. Why must
we pay over $20 a month as AOL promotes a political agenda on our
dime, the technology hijacking e-mail addresses so people can't
change ISPs?
And then what about the resume of AOL's CEO,
Jonathan Miller? Under his leadership, AOL allowed extensive promotion
on its ISP of loony conferences last week by rich-boy Robert Kennedy,
Jr. and again on the member's dime. This is not to mention the bucks
that AOL raked in from Kennedy's organization for AOL's producing
the content to its 13-million members. . . Kennedy an acid-left
activist who reminds one of the story of Chicken Little.
Unlike many of us, Kennedy has been able
to eat from a silver spoon all his life via the profits of the sins
of his grandfather, who wasn't exactly a member of the friends of
the earth. Doesn't AOL have something better to do than support
Kennedy, Jr., as he runs around screaming the sky is falling, instead
understanding this tiny blue marble is a changing and evolving environment
unlike a protected movie set in Hollywood?
In fact, let's take AOL's asking for resumes
one step further.
I think it would benefit all members if AOL
would post the resumes (or at least e-mail addresses) of those who
are responsible for publishing its content to the Web. Then if any
paying member sees an in-your-face agenda brewing, they could contact
the author with a complaint.
It's amazing to me that AOL can complain
about Katrina victims not being able to get a hold of FEMA, while
on the other hand AOL makes it virtually impossible for a member
to contact AOL itself to simply discuss content. . . not to mention
not being able to contact a service desk that is located in the
United States for those of us who live here.
Here is how one call worked for me last week,
our living in North Carolina. The conversation by AOL's rep went
something like this, the person very polite:
1. "Hello, you have reached
AOL's Help Desk. How can I help you with your AOL problem?"
2. "To answer your question,
I am not in India. I am in Argentina."
3. "Oh, I'm sorry,
I cannot help you with your question. You have reached a help
desk. You can write to AOL [using
snail-mail] at its headquarters
in Dulles, Virginia, with your concern if you're not happy with
the excellent service you are receiving from AOL."
4. "Thank you for
calling AOL. You will soon be receiving an e-mail customer satisfaction
survey, [not like the snail-mail we have to use to communicate
with them], asking how helpful I was in answering your question."
5. "Thank you for calling
AOL."
Forgetaboutit!
Finally, I couldn't copy my writings from
AOL's posting screen, do a spell check in my sophisticated word
processor's software, and then paste it back into the screen? No
exactly the kind of technical advancement one expects from a paid
provider, eh?