Even if, it has nothing to do with the contract. And if they do this they have to take care to fulfill their contract.
Just comes down to how sneaky Geoff is.
it would have been well OUT of the 90 day period (more like 240 or so)
Oh this matters immensely in contracts
The reason I was banned was NOT listed as any violation on their guidelines until AFTER I was banned 
I literally had to ask why I was banned since I had no idea what rule I had violated
That’s not what I asked.
“Includes a single license for Desktop, Web, Mobile and Raspberry Pi, plus additional benefits.” is what the sales page says. As those additional benefits aren’t stipulated on that page or the follow up confirmation email and no contract of sale is included with the purchase that outlines how access is provided and for how long then you’d be hard pressed to argue that you didn’t have access to the beta (what it was called at the time of your sale) for at least some of the duration of your licence. While the site said you had beta access, it doesn’t say for how long or which beta etc. Again, reasonable person.
That’s not what I asked.
Did they tell you why in the end?
No refund was sought as it wasn’t MY personal purchase but clients
I informed them - but do not believe they asked for a refund
They have since stopped renewing their pro+ license(s)
The product comparison item in the middle of the buy page states what is / isn’t included with each license type.
Beta access IS one of the specific item referred with NO qualifications, caveats etc.
And, as has been pointed out more than once to them & in this thread, there IS a way they can permit a “suspended” person to access all those benefits and NOT post. SILENCE is exactly that option in discourse. One they HAVE been made aware of and flatly refused to take advantage of.
I was given a warning that an additional violation of the guidelines could result in my suspension. The reason I was ultimately suspended was NOT listed as rule/guideline when I was ultimately suspended. Its why I asked as it was a surprise.
There was no negative post in their forum.
They never did quote a specific post etc no
It was a vague “negative influence in the community”
Not specific posts
Not specific violations of guidelines on their forums
I have to admit that I dont understand your defence of Xojo
So the person who had the contract, your client, still had access to the pre-release?
If there was only one beta that year, would a reasonable person expect there to always be a beta available. Same goes for access, if you get access to the beta through the forum and you can be banned from the forum while still having a licence, would a reasonable person believe they could still get on the forum to download their beta? As a reasonable person, I’d say no but others might disagree.
And there in lies the issue, if its not stipulated, then it falls to reasonable person.
Just looking back on wayback to a few months before you were finally banned, there’s plenty in there about not being negative including no-content replies, being civil, and improving the discussion in some way.
From memory you posted a fair amount of things against these few things alone and I vaguely remember one liner “no-content” digs but my memory isn’t that accurate any more so that might have been just before another of your warning/timeouts and not before the ban.
So all that being said, you being banned “literally out of the blue” as you say doesn’t really sit well with me as even I can recall you having multiple chances and warnings and you yourself say that you had one final warning even after all that. Any reasonable person hearing you say “out of the blue” that would assume that you were just minding your own business and boom, banned, which as it turns out wasn’t the case, yet you keep saying it.
I’m not defending them, I’m just a reasonable person having a discussion about how I interpret the actions of xojo, their customers and employees/contractors of their customers.
From my perspective you were given numerous warnings and timeouts about your behaviour yet you still believe that you were hard done by even though, as has only just become apparent, you weren’t a customer at the time who lost access to anything?
I have to admit that I dont understand your position.
as you are not a lawyer I was giving this entire stuff to a lawyer for checking the law situation. It is part of the contract. There is no way around. Even if you want and try to provide Xojo as doing right: they are not. As we are asking one of the bigger Lawfirms in Dallas I believe they know about the laws more then us here. Except you are a lawyer.
Cool, should be interesting, I’ll await the update, any timescales on that?
So you are protecting Xojo and you are doing a good Job as a Judge here. Sorry but sometimes I am asking my self how I got banned. I lost so much money that you could run the company a long time with it and the answer where: no, use Web 2.0. So, in your being a justice Xojo is always right. You are not reflecting that Xojo was doing something wrong and that they clearly not spending support. Mr. Geoff Perlman for Example said that there will be Support for Web 1.0 when and if there are Showstoppers. There are and I was writing him personally about it. Guess what. No Support Nothing.
As a user I have the right to get a Software which is able to fulfill the functional and technical stuffs they tell in the advertisements. So, sorry, that was and is not the case.
Following to the Customer rights a feature that is coming soon you have the right that it comes at least within a year. ANDROID is still not there.
So, I am sorry. You protect Xojo, speak about laws in USA, speak about the correct behavior. But are you a Lawyer that you know that better than a Bar member in Dallas/Texas?? Is it so that you judged that the access to the Beta isn’t part of the contract?
I am really sorry but slowly that makes me angry.
Did I said I will do a lawsuit about? No. You implement things which I was never writing and what I was never implementing. I was asking a lawyer about the situation. As I am not interested in Xojo : NADA, NULL, NOTHING, NEVER AGAIN : I will not spend time and money for it. I was asking while you tell us here how it works. Not how it is,
What situation? Losing prerelease access, being banned or moving away from xojo?
Until a decision is made in court, its all opinion, even if its from all large law firm in based on whatever you have or haven’t told them about things.
Access to Xojo pre-releases is included with the Xojo Pro license. It is stipulated. Literally. Explicitly. In multiple places. And not once with the stated condition of it being exclusively accessible via the Xojo Forums.
Here is another source:
https://blog.xojo.com/2021/10/04/all-you-need-is-xojo-pro/
What I can’t figure out is why you seem to care so much about this particular topic?
1 Like
As I’ve mentioned already, just because it says it on the comparison chart or that post, it doesn’t mean that there aren’t any additional requirements for access.
That post was made after this info was added to the forum guidelines.
No. It is in your thinking. For me it is not opinion. I MOVED away from Xojo with rewriting the anyhow not really reliable Xojo Web App in Java with Vaadin Framework. So that is not an opinion. Xojo Web 1 and Web 2 are not made for big projects with many users.
What you tried is turning around what I said. That is something what I believe is showing how you act. So: Welcome to my Ban list.
Uhhh ok, difficult response so ban. Thanks for letting me know 
1 Like
Julian is just a troll. Just ignore him…
Ignoring him and that’s it. Don’t want to mess around with him. I really don’t need that. For what?
Says the guy who has no interest in xojo yet still makes threads and screenshots about it…
They can delete posts, its in black and white in the rules you agree to when posting on their forum, yet you still harp on about it and I’m the troll… internet gold.
2 Likes
Pretty funny. I’m not using Xojo due to all the bugs. Mhahahahahaha. If Geoff did his job, I’d still be using Xojo.
And those guidelines were altered AFTER some people bought which means those new conditions were not / are not part of the original contract
If a person renewed they would be
The company cant retroactively change the contract
You’ll find you’re not BANNED (not in Xojo terms)
Probably he added you to his personal ignore list
Vastly different
says the guy who seems bent on picking a fight for no other reason than to pick a fight ?