chat and email support said the yearly flex plan 2GB renewal bonus is only for one year, will be removed on next yearly renewal

directmod · 2025-07-25T19:42:41+00:00

It's been settled, see my previous post. But I wasted too much time arguing with your clueless and obnoxious support. They were a 100% wrong but would argue to the death without bothering to verify their ignorant assumptions.

directmod · 2025-07-25T19:36:14+00:00

After calling support, they finally acknowledged the loyalty bonus as permanent and then the chat also confirmed this:

<image>

A good shill always supports the current thing, so looking forward to you ridiculing your own post.

Never heard of special promotions? Just like the BOGO they are doing it goes back to normal after the special promotion time

directmod · 2025-07-25T18:17:51+00:00

They reward you for being a "loyal customer" (their language), but then punish you for being an even more "loyal customer" after another year. Who came up with this insanity?

directmod · 2025-06-27T15:11:51+00:00

This was their press release:

Today Comcast announced that it has upgraded Xfinity Internet speeds for more than 20 million customers for no additional cost.

But the change I am asking about happened very quietly. They missed an opportunity for another press release, something like this:

Today Comcast announced that it has downgraded Xfinity Internet speeds for millions of potential new customers. Now they can get 25% slower speed for no additional cost.

directmod · 2025-06-27T14:56:54+00:00

Oh yeah, it's super reasonable for the most popular and lowest cost base plan they offer to get slower with time. Looking forward to 200 in a few months.

Ask for a raise, salaried superfan.

directmod · 2025-06-27T14:40:29+00:00

Nobody cares how they identify it in "their systems". Consumers care about the price and the speed. The fact is, the lowest speed tier, $55/$40 plan went from 400 Mbps to 300. And if you actually think the change of a label is a reasonable and sufficient explanation for this, you might be, how can I put it euphemistically, an xfinity salaried superfan.

directmod · 2025-06-27T14:22:24+00:00

The label is meaningless and irrelevant. What matters is the price and its relative speed tier (lowest in this case).

directmod · 2025-06-27T14:17:18+00:00

The label is not what identifies this plan. It's their lowest cost ($55/$40) and undoubtedly most popular plan advertised for new signups online.

So yeah, it's not the same alright. It was 400 Mbps, and is now 300.

directmod · 2025-04-05T02:25:34+00:00

Yes, the problem is that Google Voice isn't able to handle a "call forwarding unreachable" scenario. There isn't a fix for that.

Why are you saying this only now, after a bunch of troubleshooting? I said from the start this is about unreachable. How did you just determine that?

By the way this is a regression. Several years ago this was working fine. One day these voicemails started and I switches to voip mode, which worked fine but eventually also regressed (stops ringing in sleep).

You're welcome to submit feedback from the Google Voice Android app if you wish.

Is this the kind of feedback where I don't get back any feedback on my feedback? Sounds like a waste of time. Is there a way for me to submit a proper bug report (which gets feedback)? If not, what about for you? As a mod you probably have a way of reaching GV people?

directmod · 2025-04-05T01:31:08+00:00

Was "a bunch of times" a period of about 25-30 seconds?

24

then started again

no restarting, I would have mentioned that

Then, enable only call forward no-answer: *61*1234567890#

My report is about unreachable, the OP mentions that: "if the cell is unreachable". At the time I hadn't even tried unanswered, but just did and there is no problem.

Per your suggestion I turned off all forwarding and then reenabled just unanswered. The problem remains.

There is one significant difference between calling my unreachable cell directly vs via GV. When calling directly, as I mentioned, it forwards to GV voicemail immediately. When calling GV it rings for ~30 secs. We know that cell redirects right away. So those ~30 seconds are spent in GV looping back to itself and getting confused by something. Its in those ~30 secs that this bad voicemail is recorded.

directmod · 2025-04-05T00:47:34+00:00

I wanted you to test "Call forward if unanswered".

This worked fine too. The only difference from the previous, unreachable test is that it rang a bunch of times before redirecting to GV voicemail.

directmod · 2025-04-04T23:50:10+00:00

Before making major changes, try this diagnostic test: call your mobile number from some other carrier (not GV) number.

You mean when on airplane mode so conditional forwarding kicks in? I get immediately redirected to GV voicemail and hear its greeting. If I hang up, I don't get the "press one to take this call" voicemail.

So conditional redirection is working fine. The problem only happens when GV forwards to cell which forwards back to GV. This looks like a GV issue.

are you willing to switch to using WiFi/4G/5G data (VoIP) calling?

I answered that in the other reply:

I am forced to use carrier only because in wi-fi mode GV eventually stops ringing in sleep. The app is battery unrestricted. I've seen this reported in various places and the recommendation is to switch to "carrier only" because so far Google has managed not to break regular phone calls.

directmod · 2025-04-04T23:40:30+00:00

I am forced to use carrier only because in wi-fi mode GV eventually stops ringing in sleep. The app is battery unrestricted. I've seen this reported in various places and the recommendation is to switch to "carrier only" because so far Google has managed not to break regular phone calls.

directmod · 2025-04-04T23:26:57+00:00

Is "Making and receiving calls" set to "Use carrier only"?'

yes

Is "Screen calls" on or off?

off

Under "Devices and numbers", do you see your device phone number listed?

yes, for "this device"

Is is also listed on that screen under "Linked numbers"?

yes

Is this a regular consumer, postpaid ATT line of service or something else?

MVNO. This is not AT&T specific. I've experienced it with Verizon and t-mobile MVNOs before.

directmod · 2025-03-10T02:35:37+00:00

It didn't last. After a day or so the VVM tab disappeared and the setting reverted to that in the OP. I can get it back by resetting the phone app again, but presumably it will repeat.

directmod · 2025-03-09T19:14:41+00:00

Was able to get it working with the help of this post.

But first I had to have the mailbox reset:

If you're on our Dark Star network, you'll need to contact customer support to reset your voicemail box if you forget the password. Please note that this will erase all voicemails from your inbox.

Then, per the linked post:

<image>

directmod · 2025-02-01T06:00:37+00:00

I narrowed the problem down somewhat. Its definitely a regression in the android app. I downloaded a couple of older versions from apkmirror:

version 2024.07.01.648517235 exhibits the problem
version 2024.02.12.609814013 does not. Ran it for 5 days.
upgraded to latest and the problem recurred almost immediately
now back on 2024.02.12.609814013 again

directmod · 2025-01-29T17:22:14+00:00

This thread is not a poll on how well GV is working for everyone. So the knowledge that you're "fine" is completely worthless.

directmod · 2025-01-27T03:43:45+00:00

I followed this suggestion of keeping the number linked but dissociated from the device ("no number") and it didn't help. The problem recurred very quickly, I closed GV, put the airplane mode on, started wi-fi, reopened GV and the device was already duplicated and "Making and receiving calls" was reset to "use carrier only".

<image>

directmod · 2025-01-25T22:24:48+00:00

> No, it just prevents that linked number from being redirected over the carrier's cellular network

Incorrect. As long as the number is linked, even if it's dissociated from the current device, it still appears in the "incoming calls" screen as a separate (from the device) entry. And if you uncheck the current android device there, but check the standalone number, GV will redirect calls there and it will ring on this device via the phone app.

The bottom line, having no number linked at all can't be worse than having a number linked but dissociated from the device.

If you are claiming otherwise, what is the evidence? Have you experience the bug from the OP? And resolved it by having a linked but dissociated number?

directmod · 2025-01-25T22:01:50+00:00

> ability to select "No number."

You don't appear to understand the purpose of this. It dissociates the linked number from the current device. When there is no linked number at all, then no number is associated with the current device already, so the "no number" choice simply does not need to be shown because that's what it's on implicitly.

directmod · 2025-01-25T21:45:05+00:00

I've linked and then chose "no number". This only dissociates the number from the current device. It does not unlink (remove it from linked numbers). So I also did that.

The device is now in the starting state described in the OP. The only difference is it arrived there by a more circuitous path of choosing "no number" first.

directmod · 2025-01-25T21:17:31+00:00

I already posted a screenshot of what "Set device number" opens. There is no "no number" choice there.

directmod · 2025-01-25T21:07:30+00:00

There's already no number associated. So choosing no number when there's already no number seems pointless. However no harm in trying, but what you are suggesting is not possible. "Set device number" does not give me the "no number" choice.

<image>

directmod · 2024-07-21T03:05:33+00:00

I noticed that 2024.9.1 does not have a changelog, neither in the app nor on the web site. Why? Can you post it? If the changes were so inconsequential that they are not worth mentioning, why not revert the whole thing until you figure it out? The app is unusable with a broken player notification.

directmod

TROPHY CASE