A technical experiment

[#1]

I changed the e-mail address associated to my Plusnet account.

I tried logging on using the e-mail address.

I got this.

The e-mail address is (apparently) linked to more than one account.

Clicking on 'request usernames' (plural) brings up an 'e-mail me' link. Which may not work, given the stored e-mail address of 'null@null.null'.

(Sanity checks on domain names may be a requirement when people change their details?)

Obviously this can be construed as non-positive comment. But it is technically correct.

[#2]

Were you able to put the email address back to something sensible ?

or did entering your 'username' lock you out because the associated email address is associated with more than one account ?

It seems unlikely that  null@null.null  would be linked to ANY account let alone more than one !

.

[#3]

@outcast As 'null@null.null' is clearly NOT an email address, I am a little confused by the response -I would have expected something more along the lines 'we can't find this address, please try again'.

[#4]

As 'null@null.null' is clearly NOT an email address

Why ? its got something prior to an '@' , its got at least one '.' in the domain name. The only possible reason for NOT being an email address is that 'null' is probably not a valid TLD.

If the only checking is syntax, then it will pass!.

[#5]

Fair enough, @MisterW , but where would that 'address' route from/to?

I don't want to get into a long discussion on this flight of fancy from our resident 'expert in all things', but it appears someone is trying to be too clever, and failing  - IMO.

[#6]

@jab1 Sorry if I wasnt clear, to you and I its clearly not a valid email address and it wont route anywhere. However, to a computer system just checking syntax, it could well appear to be valid!

[#7]

Totally get that, @MisterW . I was just a little surprised at the 'Plusnet' response in the original post. 😀

[#8]

It'll probably be a dev who created a test account that used null email address to avoid real emails being sent..

[#9]

"Were you able to put the email address back to something sensible ?

or did entering your 'username' lock you out because the associated email address is associated with more than one account ?"

I took the "you'll need your username or e-mail address to log on" as a statement of fact (i.e. either one is acceptible with no dependency between the two). The account was/is still accessible via the username for the account. And the e-mail address associated with that account is now reverted to something more 'sane'.

I wasn't brave enough to try using the (invalid) e-mail address as a method of authentication for the account.

[#10]

I don't presume to be what you state. I know little about copper lines (ADSL/VDSL, etc.) and the oddities that appear on them.. I think you trump me on that