Rogers他们就是垄断加拿大手机市场

woi666

美国电信商准备进入加拿大了，Roger等三大电信居然号召民众抵制。


真不要脸，看一报道，加拿大网费全球最贵前10名，还不让人竞争

http://www.snowmaple.ca/article-1363-1.html


你家网络用的是Rogers吗，知道吗，马上又要涨价了

克 飞

我们家用Rogers，经常暗涨几块钱。。。连续多个月，非要打电话去才能回来。。。所以他们的收费系统有问题，每月他们自动地给你额外加钱。。。一个大公司怎么能用这样的方法来挣钱呢？我真的很不耻这种行为哎，我们都有合同的。。。这种事情发生在中国，早就给闹成什么样。。。在加拿大难道法律允许？

我爱北京天安门

我用了fido, 后来才知道,原来和rogers是一伙的，是骗子加强盗。开始我还去争，后来精疲力尽，只盼着合同结束。加拿大法律就是为这些公司利益而定的。

加拿大法律多如牛毛，自相矛盾。最后还是有国会的好恶来决定如何执行，而国会是由游说团（lobby）操纵的。

不同的公司甚至可以利用法律，各取所需。如这篇星报上的文章：

Toronto tenants complain of “double standard” over cameras
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2013/08/11/toronto_tenants_complain_of_double_standard_over_cameras.html

Tenants of a Toronto Community Housing building are crying “double standard” after learning another public housing complex has hallway security cameras — something they have spent years begging for.

In June, 200 tenants of 220 Oak St., in the Regent Park area, submitted a petition to the TCHC asking for CCTV (closed-circuit television) cameras to be installed on every floor after several murders occurred in the highrise. But Lisa Joan Overholt, the agency’s senior director of community safety, rejected the request, claiming such cameras would “violate certain aspects of privacy legislation” and be a costly investment that “would set a precedent across all communities.”

Oak St. residents now argue the precedent has already been set. They’re demanding answers as to how 291 George St., near Dundas St. E. and Jarvis St., is allowed to have cameras on every floor despite the TCHC’s privacy laws.

“I’m totally dumbfounded and shocked,” said Miguel Avila-Velarde, the Oak St. tenant representative who started the petition. “I’m also offended. It appears they have two sets of policies depending on the building.”

Overholt was not available for comment. TCHC spokeswoman Sara Goldvine said 291 George’s cameras “are in public areas” and therefore “do not violate the CCTV policy,” which states the agency “will not place CCTV cameras anywhere that tenants, employees and the public should reasonably expect privacy,” including “directly in front of a tenant’s door.”

While a Star reporter observed cameras placed directly in front of apartment doors at 291 George, Goldvine said, “I have no reason to believe those cameras violate that policy because of the way they’re angled and so on.”

When asked why 220 Oak could not have similarly angled cameras installed in their hallways too, she replied: “They are very different buildings in terms of the resident profile, the security concerns and physical (structure).”

Councillor Pam McConnell, who originally brought 220 Oak’s petition to city council, argued the cameras wouldn’t violate tenants’ privacy because “hallways are public spaces, like streets.”

“There’s no reason these tenants shouldn’t have the same security as other buildings,” she said. “There’s no cost too costly in terms of peoples’ safety.”

Residents of 291 George said their cameras were installed five years ago after tenants requested funding for them from the TCHC.

。。。

dalu2020

rogers 太黑。

竹本小川

Rogers 非常黑

- 此帖来自无忧论坛手机版