Death to the CEOs and lawyers
I really hope that the Roku employees who started this BS has their brakes taken away by their car manufacturer and they do a Paul Walker
I understand your feeling, but that's a bit extreme response.
I so love your comment. I would've done the same thing (I do this w/my cell ph all the time)
The **bleep** greedy monsters have gotten control of simething that should be enjoyable and free of a bunch of stinking legal hoopla! ALL tv viewing has become SO assanine just to watch a stinking TV for entertainment which for some of us is the only form of entertainment because we're poor, strapped for money. Then you have to have 50 million emails, usernames, passwords (🤯🤯🤯) that I'm surprised we can even turn our tvs on 🤣. I now keep a notebook w/all of the info bc otherwise I'll go more insane than I already am .... lololol
-After My Own Heart
Love it .... 🤣🤣🤣
I'm STILL trying to get a STRAIGHT FORWARD answer from VERIFY (I think it's a generated robot answering) bc it's not answering what I asked of it!!!
My Ques: is my $25 ROKU device for streaming on a basic TV, no fancy junk going to be disabled BEFORE I'm asked to OPT-IN (that's ONLY choice ROKU TV OWNERS are being given)??? This is still a FREE country isn't it? Greedy monsters who are able to control people's CHOICES should be destroyed (that's a JOKE)--the small print always gets us espec when they add all the legal mumbo jumbo that would take 2days to read &/or understand & that's why WE ... The People ... agree! We JUST want to watch our dang TV!
They’re still taking payments though! I canceled my subscription!
So glad hear that someone knows how to make them address the madness of blocking services while still taking payments.
I received this email from Roku. My answer is below it.
|
.
@o2night wrote:
Why is it so hard for people to get the point of this? The arbitration update wasn't the problem. It was BRICKING people's tvs to FORCE it.
Since my post started the conversation, I'll take at least some of the blame for presuming the main problem was obvious, with the secondary problem of identifying the changes in the Dispute Resolution Terms (not the existence of arbitration terms), and tertiary problem being the punitive opt-out process which provides no sensible way to return devices to a functional state.
To be fair to the folks for whom this was the first time they discovered the arbitration terms and who, by virtue of not being familiar with the applicability of such terms and how disputes are handled in practice in their jurisdiction, were unpleasantly surprised, their expression of this has a place in this discussion - even if it distracts from the focus on the more important and urgent problem.