Skip to main content

ICM and follow-up - Well, that was quick

Update (19th April 2013) - I'm still getting spam despite being assured that it will stop - read more.

Yesterday I posted about my experiences with ICM and an affiliated website,  In it I explained how I had repeatedly tried to unsubscribe from their email survey service to no effect, I also included the text of an email I'd written to Keith Bates, apparently the head of the 'Insight Division' of Creston, the overarching company that controls ICM, newvista Research and many others.

I waxed lyrical about how I didn't expect to receive any response to this email, but I was wrong.

Last night I received this response:

Dear Mr Zoltan,
I was very concerned to receive your email and immediately launched an investigation into your case. My team have been working on this matter for the past few hours and I am now in a position to respond to you
Firstly, let me apologize for the experience you have suffered. This is far below our usual standard. Secondly, I would like to reassure you that normally panellists cannot receive a survey until they have logged in, with login and password details being issued upon first registration. This evening we have double checked our procedures and are satisfied that all are operating properly.
Finally, I can confirm that you have been unsubscribed from our panel and that you will not hear from us again.
I am sorry that you have experienced a less than satisfactory level of service and hope that this will not affect your future participation in market research surveys.
Keith Bates

So it would appear that my ranting might just have achieved something for once.

It's just a shame that it took such drastic action to get the desired result!


Popular posts from this blog

Serializing to attributes in WCF with DataContractSerializer

It’s a common problem – you want to return an object from a WCF service as XML, but you either want, or need, to deliver some or all of the property values as XML Attributes instead of XML Elements; but you can’t because the DataContractSerializer doesn’t support attributes (you’re most likely to have seen this StackOverflow QA if you’ve done a web search).  Most likely you’ve then migrated all your WCF service code to using the XmlSerializer (with all the XmlElement/XmlAttribute/XmlType attributes et al) – and you’ve cursed loudly.Well, I’m here to rescue you, because it is possible – and the answer to the problem is actually inferred from the MSDN article entitled ‘Types supported by the Data Contract Serializer’.The example I’m going to give is purely for illustration purposes only.  I don’t have a lot of time, so work with me!Create a new Asp.Net WCF service application, you can use Cassini as your web server (probably easier – otherwise you might have to enable Asp.Net compatibil…

Asp.Net 2 and 4 default application pool generates CS0016 IIS7.5

Before I start – if you’ve found a bunch of other articles about this around the net, tried the fixes that are mentioned and still not getting any joy – then read on – you might find this solves your problem. Earlier today I discovered that when I run any ASP.Net 2 or 4 application through IIS7.5 using the default application pools (which use ApplicationPoolIdentity) on Windows 2008 R2 x64 I get an error message similar to this: Server Error in '/MvcApplication31' Application. Compilation ErrorDescription: An error occurred during the compilation of a resource required to service this request. Please review the following specific error details and modify your source code appropriately.
Compiler Error Message: CS0016: Could not write to output file 'c:\Windows\Microsoft.NET\Framework64\v4.0.30319\Temporary ASP.NET Files\mvcapplication31\222b4fe6\4e80a86\App_global.asax.clb4bsnc.dll' -- 'The directory name is invalid. '
Source Error:[No relevant source lines]

Adding ‘Deny’ functionality to AuthorizeAttribute in Asp.Net Web API

For the web service project I’m working on at the moment I need to be able to treat authorization differently based on the hostname of the URL that requests are made through.To state more clearly – these web services will have a ‘sandbox’ mode in addition to the real mode, and the mode a request will operate under is determined as part of the controller-selection phase early in the Web API request lifecycle.  So, say that my web services will be hosted on; the sandbox will simply be note – a discussion of how this is implemented is entirely outside the scope of this article; but I’ll just say that I’ve developed an in-house multi-tenancy layer for both MVC 4 and Web API that allows us to define ‘brands’ and, under those, you can then redefine content, controllers, and even the DI container that is used.These services are going to require caller-level authentication for most operations via SCRAM Authentication (RFC 5802), and as such m…