Mutter Bundle #42: To Love is To Serve
12 Oct 2026 18:42
My two pence, sixpence even, on the eternally debated fair use policies of “Unlimited” data plans, from the giffgaff community.
Some offerings (hello, Revolut Mobile!) advertise their plan as “Unlimited” while having a 150GB fair use policy. So, potentially, a customer comparing two “Unlimited” plans to make a choice could, without realising it (sure, sure, should've read the small print), effectively be comparing a 150GB plan against a 650GB plan.
I just can’t comprehend why some folks are defending such practices.
Ok, it’s written in the small print. Ok, Ofcom allows it. Ok, most people don’t need heaps of data. Still, a so-called “Unlimited” plan with an xyzGB fair use limit isn’t an Unlimited plan, just as a 500GB plan with a fair use limit below 500GB wouldn’t be a 500GB plan.
https://community.giffgaff.com/d/34638641-dont-call-it-unlimited-if-it-isnt/27
With all-you-can-eat buffets, there are usually other constraints that aren’t directly about the amount of food, such as a time limit on how long you can stay in the restaurant, a ban on taking “leftovers” with you, or drinks not being included, etc. Yes, these all indirectly affect how much food the average person could consume, but they don’t put any direct restriction on it.
Terms or no Terms, an all-you-can-eat buffet is unlikely to say “All you can eat, but no more than 5 spring rolls, 1 soup, and 3 pork ribs”, which, by analogy with “Unlimited” data offerings, is essentially what networks are saying with their fair use policies.
If networks’ fair use policies placed other kinds of limits instead, for example, “limited to 1 device” or “tethering allowed up to a max of 100GB”, that, imo, would be different and understandable.
https://community.giffgaff.com/d/34638641-dont-call-it-unlimited-if-it-isnt/28
People would still complain, true that. But the argument isn’t about keeping 100% of people happy 100% of the time. It’s about fair advertising.
If a network advertises Unlimited Data but there’s no realistic scenario where a customer can use it without worrying about a cap on GB, then the "unlimited" claim isn’t honest, because the word "unlimited" isn’t true in any meaningful sense.
But if a user genuinely doesn’t have to think about how much data they use, and is only restricted from "going mad with it" by other conditions (tethering allowance, limit on connected devices, etc.), then the advertising is fair. People can complain all they like, but the headline promise holds up, as you can use the service without having to watch a meter.
https://community.giffgaff.com/d/34638641-dont-call-it-unlimited-if-it-isnt/35
I’m risking pitchforks and torches, but I always thought the concept of Always On was the most honest way to advertise what was essentially unlimited data with restrictions for heavy users. If I remember correctly, though, on top of those restrictions giffgaff still had some sort of policy about Always On, which could more or less be interpreted as “we'll switch off your Always On plan if we consider you to be overusing it, but we won’t tell you what overusing actually means”. But that’s another story.
Back to the Always On concept itself. This is more or less exactly how some networks in other countries go about it. They advertise their plan as Unlimited, but with only xyzGB at full speed, or only xyzGB with access to 5G. Those are still constraints, but, imo, they’re not the same as simply hitting a xyzGB fair use barrier.
https://community.giffgaff.com/d/34638641-dont-call-it-unlimited-if-it-isnt/38
I agree that there’s little point spitting feathers about companies enforcing T&Cs we’ve signed up to. But there’s nothing wrong or unreasonable with calling out companies that advertise 150GB (example: Revolut) or 650GB (example: giffgaff) plans as "Unlimited". Discussions like this can also help users realise that most networks aren’t offering truly unlimited data, regardless of whether they say they do. That understanding leads to better choices. For example, a user who realises that the £14.99 "Unlimited" Revolut Mobile plan is in fact a 150GB plan might go for TalkMobile’s £11.95 180GB plan instead, getting more domestic allowance for less on the same Vodafone network.
Another hypothetical (and yes, rather niche) example. Say, someone live streams on TikTok from their phone all day. Network A plan isn’t fully unlimited, but it includes genuinely uncapped use of certain social media apps, TikTok among them. That could be a much better and cheaper option for the user than Network B 650GB plan advertised as "Unlimited". However, without digging into the small print, a user might just pick the so called "Unlimited" plan anyway, simply because it seems to cover everything and offers perceived peace of mind.
https://community.giffgaff.com/d/34638641-dont-call-it-unlimited-if-it-isnt/42
13 Oct 2026 08:39
Tallinn, Estonia.
14 Oct 2026 11:07
To love is to serve. Say what you want, argue all you like, but to love is to serve, and that is that.
Go on then, have a go, catch me out, why wouldn’t you. Ask me: “And are you yourself ready to serve another person selflessly, always, for as long as you breathe, never once expecting anything in return? Are you ready to martyr yourself quietly on the altar of someone else’s happiness, without hoping it would be repaid? Have you ever done so?”
Fair question. And here’s your fair answer. No, I am not ready, and no, I have not.
This, however, changes nothing about the fact that to love is to serve. Yes, we’re all just human beings, flesh and blood, not saints. Imperfect creatures unable to radiate that perfect, undiluted, ask-for-nothing, no-strings love. Fine. But we can still aim at it, hold it as a horizon, a fixed point we walk towards even knowing we will never fully arrive. We can take the first step towards it, sincerely, showing we mean to serve, hoping the person we love will meet us there.
That step, that first step, I have taken. I hope that answers the question in full.
And if both, instead of testing each other’s willingness to serve, simply begin serving in return, perhaps that is enough for love? Imperfect, ordinary, earthbound, yet still strong and beautiful love. Eh?
Picture it like this. Picture the blanket. One cover, two people under it, and each would probably prefer to have it entirely to themselves, and there’s nothing shameful in that, it’s simply how we’re built. And you can, wanting the whole blanket for yourself, reach a compromise, and each ends up covered by half. Or you can want to give your loved one the whole blanket, and if they want the same for you in return, you’ll both end up covered just the same, each by your own half. Same end result, different road. And that road is what matters. One road is to limit your own wants, whilst still putting them first. The other is to put your partner’s needs first, and limit what your partner has to sacrifice without putting them through some sort of a daft, sly test of “well well, let’s see how long you’ll last giving me the whole blanket.”
To love is to serve.
14 Oct 2026 15:46
Poznan, Poland.
