Sipgate Emergency Verification - LOL

Discussion in 'UK VOIP' started by Al Bowlly, Dec 13, 2009.

  1. Al Bowlly

    Al Bowlly Guest

    This really made me smile:

    Dear sipgate Customer,

    You have provided the following address for the activation
    of the emergency number service:

    noah Body
    nowhere
    London, SW1A 4AA

    Your SIP-ID: xxxxxxx

    The address has been successfully verified.
    The emergency number service is now activated.


    Best regards,

    the sipgate team

    --
    Midnight, the stars a n d you.........
    Al Bowlly, Dec 13, 2009
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. Al Bowlly

    Graham. Guest

    "Al Bowlly" <> wrote in message news:4b24ae6d$0$2491$...
    > This really made me smile:
    >
    > Dear sipgate Customer,
    >
    > You have provided the following address for the activation
    > of the emergency number service:
    >
    > noah Body
    > nowhere
    > London, SW1A 4AA
    >
    > Your SIP-ID: xxxxxxx
    >
    > The address has been successfully verified.
    > The emergency number service is now activated.


    Ok, noted, but I would suggest that it is up to us as users to behave a little
    more responsibly when dealing with this service.

    --
    Graham.

    %Profound_observation%
    Graham., Dec 13, 2009
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Al Bowlly

    Al Bowlly Guest

    On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 11:19:19 +0000, Graham. struck up his trombone and
    blew....

    > "Al Bowlly" <> wrote in message
    > news:4b24ae6d$0$2491$...
    >> This really made me smile:
    >>
    >> Dear sipgate Customer,
    >>
    >> You have provided the following address for the activation of the
    >> emergency number service:
    >>
    >> noah Body
    >> nowhere
    >> London, SW1A 4AA
    >>
    >> Your SIP-ID: xxxxxxx
    >>
    >> The address has been successfully verified. The emergency number
    >> service is now activated.

    >
    > Ok, noted, but I would suggest that it is up to us as users to behave a
    > little more responsibly when dealing with this service.


    Malarky to one side, the key is this; the details were claimed to be
    verified by sipgate. Clearly this is *not* true.



    --
    Midnight, the stars a n d you.........
    Al Bowlly, Dec 13, 2009
    #3
  4. Al Bowlly

    Graham. Guest

    "R. Mark Clayton" <> wrote in message news:...
    >
    > "Al Bowlly" <> wrote in message news:4b24ae6d$0$2491$...
    >> This really made me smile:
    >>
    >> Dear sipgate Customer,
    >>
    >> You have provided the following address for the activation
    >> of the emergency number service:
    >>
    >> noah Body
    >> nowhere
    >> London, SW1A 4AA

    >
    > you mean SW1A 1AA - now that would get you into trouble...


    SW1A 4WW ?

    --
    Graham.

    %Profound_observation%
    Graham., Dec 13, 2009
    #4
  5. Al Bowlly

    Adrian C Guest

    Graham. wrote:
    > "R. Mark Clayton" <> wrote in message news:...
    >
    >> you mean SW1A 1AA - now that would get you into trouble...

    >
    > SW1A 4WW ?
    >


    EC3N 4AB, I think :)

    --
    Adrian C
    Adrian C, Dec 13, 2009
    #5
  6. Al Bowlly

    Graham. Guest

    "Al Bowlly" <> wrote in message news:4b24d593$0$2488$...
    > On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 11:19:19 +0000, Graham. struck up his trombone and
    > blew....
    >
    >> "Al Bowlly" <> wrote in message
    >> news:4b24ae6d$0$2491$...
    >>> This really made me smile:
    >>>
    >>> Dear sipgate Customer,
    >>>
    >>> You have provided the following address for the activation of the
    >>> emergency number service:
    >>>
    >>> noah Body
    >>> nowhere
    >>> London, SW1A 4AA
    >>>
    >>> Your SIP-ID: xxxxxxx
    >>>
    >>> The address has been successfully verified. The emergency number
    >>> service is now activated.

    >>
    >> Ok, noted, but I would suggest that it is up to us as users to behave a
    >> little more responsibly when dealing with this service.

    >
    > Malarky to one side, the key is this; the details were claimed to be
    > verified by sipgate. Clearly this is *not* true.


    I fully appreciate the point you are making, what I am saying is I am
    not entirely surprised that they are not checking the accuracy of the personal
    details of citizens of a foreign country.
    VoIP emergency services is a can of worms as it is, without people
    registering false details, and I hope you have removed or corrected them.
    Sipgate also warn users not to "test" the service, my understanding is
    that it is acceptable to make a test call if you do it in a professional manor
    and not make a habit of it.

    --
    Graham.

    %Profound_observation%
    Graham., Dec 13, 2009
    #6
  7. Al Bowlly

    Al Bowlly Guest

    On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 13:48:46 +0000, Jono struck up his trombone and
    blew....

    > It happens that Al Bowlly formulated :
    >> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 11:19:19 +0000, Graham. struck up his trombone and
    >> blew....
    >>
    >>> "Al Bowlly" <> wrote in message
    >>> news:4b24ae6d$0$2491$...
    >>>> This really made me smile:
    >>>>
    >>>> Dear sipgate Customer,
    >>>>
    >>>> You have provided the following address for the activation of the
    >>>> emergency number service:
    >>>>
    >>>> noah Body
    >>>> nowhere
    >>>> London, SW1A 4AA
    >>>>
    >>>> Your SIP-ID: xxxxxxx
    >>>>
    >>>> The address has been successfully verified. The emergency number
    >>>> service is now activated.
    >>>
    >>> Ok, noted, but I would suggest that it is up to us as users to behave
    >>> a little more responsibly when dealing with this service.

    >>
    >> Malarky to one side, the key is this; the details were claimed to be
    >> verified by sipgate. Clearly this is *not* true.

    >
    > I think you're misunderstanding verification in this instance; it is you
    > who has verified that they are correct, not Sipgate.


    No. That is not correct. I was asked to *provide* the details, which I
    did. The process then notified me that the details would be verified and
    I would receive a response, which I did and have shared.

    I do hope they don't use the same system for checking employees in
    Schools in Germany. Mind you, I've never liked them since they killed me
    in the war.



    --
    Midnight, the stars a n d you.........
    Al Bowlly, Dec 13, 2009
    #7
  8. Al Bowlly

    Graham. Guest

    "Al Bowlly" <> wrote in message news:4b250d31$0$2483$...
    > On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 13:48:46 +0000, Jono struck up his trombone and
    > blew....
    >
    >> It happens that Al Bowlly formulated :
    >>> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 11:19:19 +0000, Graham. struck up his trombone and
    >>> blew....
    >>>
    >>>> "Al Bowlly" <> wrote in message
    >>>> news:4b24ae6d$0$2491$...
    >>>>> This really made me smile:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Dear sipgate Customer,
    >>>>>
    >>>>> You have provided the following address for the activation of the
    >>>>> emergency number service:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> noah Body
    >>>>> nowhere
    >>>>> London, SW1A 4AA
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Your SIP-ID: xxxxxxx
    >>>>>
    >>>>> The address has been successfully verified. The emergency number
    >>>>> service is now activated.
    >>>>
    >>>> Ok, noted, but I would suggest that it is up to us as users to behave
    >>>> a little more responsibly when dealing with this service.
    >>>
    >>> Malarky to one side, the key is this; the details were claimed to be
    >>> verified by sipgate. Clearly this is *not* true.

    >>
    >> I think you're misunderstanding verification in this instance; it is you
    >> who has verified that they are correct, not Sipgate.

    >
    > No. That is not correct. I was asked to *provide* the details, which I
    > did. The process then notified me that the details would be verified and
    > I would receive a response, which I did and have shared.


    Yes I know that's what they say, and in my case it was six and a half hours
    between the "emergency number activation in progress" message and
    the "successful" message, so if the gap between your messages is the same,
    it would tend to indicate an automated delay giving the illusion that
    a human is checking.

    --
    Graham.

    %Profound_observation%
    Graham., Dec 13, 2009
    #8
  9. Al Bowlly

    Al Bowlly Guest

    On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 16:37:42 +0000, Graham. struck up his trombone and
    blew....

    > "Al Bowlly" <> wrote in message
    > news:4b250d31$0$2483$...
    >> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 13:48:46 +0000, Jono struck up his trombone and
    >> blew....
    >>
    >>> It happens that Al Bowlly formulated :
    >>>> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 11:19:19 +0000, Graham. struck up his trombone
    >>>> and blew....
    >>>>
    >>>>> "Al Bowlly" <> wrote in message
    >>>>> news:4b24ae6d$0$2491$...
    >>>>>> This really made me smile:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Dear sipgate Customer,
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> You have provided the following address for the activation of the
    >>>>>> emergency number service:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> noah Body
    >>>>>> nowhere
    >>>>>> London, SW1A 4AA
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Your SIP-ID: xxxxxxx
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> The address has been successfully verified. The emergency number
    >>>>>> service is now activated.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Ok, noted, but I would suggest that it is up to us as users to
    >>>>> behave a little more responsibly when dealing with this service.
    >>>>
    >>>> Malarky to one side, the key is this; the details were claimed to be
    >>>> verified by sipgate. Clearly this is *not* true.
    >>>
    >>> I think you're misunderstanding verification in this instance; it is
    >>> you who has verified that they are correct, not Sipgate.

    >>
    >> No. That is not correct. I was asked to *provide* the details, which I
    >> did. The process then notified me that the details would be verified
    >> and I would receive a response, which I did and have shared.

    >
    > Yes I know that's what they say, and in my case it was six and a half
    > hours between the "emergency number activation in progress" message and
    > the "successful" message, so if the gap between your messages is the
    > same, it would tend to indicate an automated delay giving the illusion
    > that a human is checking.


    It was overnight in my case, but yes - clearly *nobody* looked at this at
    all. However, there is no benefit in them looking at this - it's just a
    'cost' to them, so fully understandable.

    It would not detract me from using their excellent service - I just found
    it amusing.



    --
    Midnight, the stars a n d you.........
    Al Bowlly, Dec 13, 2009
    #9
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. Kumar

    MCSD.NET verification

    Kumar, Nov 19, 2003, in forum: MCSD
    Replies:
    6
    Views:
    5,128
    Marc M
    Nov 21, 2003
  2. |{evin
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    535
    |{evin
    Jul 27, 2003
  3. Marko

    MCP Transcript Verification

    Marko, Jul 27, 2003, in forum: MCSE
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    534
    Marko
    Jul 27, 2003
  4. Stuart Millington

    Sipgate: dialing another sipgate number

    Stuart Millington, Jun 10, 2005, in forum: UK VOIP
    Replies:
    8
    Views:
    1,960
  5. Replies:
    19
    Views:
    1,258
    Graham.
    Dec 2, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page