Exposed black heart mycustomhosting

SkylarkHosting

@MCHPhil said:

@SkylarkHosting said:
Multiple active accounts. Definitely a violation of TOS. Why did you open multiple accounts in first place?

Why reply to a banned user?

Ah! missed that.. didn't see his avatar / profile. My bad.

randvegeta

@angstrom said:
@MCHPhil: If I switch to public defender mode, I might point out that -- unless I've missed it -- I don't see an explicit prohibition against multiple accounts in either your AUP ( http://mycustomhosting.net/aup.php ) or your TOS ( http://mycustomhosting.net/tos.php ).

I think the main issue is the op wanted a refund when he was not entitled to one.

MCHPhil

@angstrom said:
@MCHPhil: If I switch to public defender mode, I might point out that -- unless I've missed it -- I don't see an explicit prohibition against multiple accounts in either your AUP ( http://mycustomhosting.net/aup.php ) or your TOS ( http://mycustomhosting.net/tos.php ).

I think you might need to read all the thread again. This was never an issue of it being against my TOS/AUP by having multiple accounts.

#11. We offer a 7 day 100% satisfaction guarantee on our Web Hosting and VPS plans. If you are not satisfied with your purchase please let us know for a refund! (Minus time used) We offer no refunds on domain name purchase with few exceptions. If you are an exception we have already contacted you to proceed with a refund. We will not refund if you are terminated due to violations of our AUP or TOS. Refund policy ONLY applies to first order placed. Not all orders. Refunds are processed in 3 - 5 business days. If you do not receive it within 5 business days, please ticket so it may be investigated.

I've bolded the important bit.

angstrom

@randvegeta said:

@angstrom said:
@MCHPhil: If I switch to public defender mode, I might point out that -- unless I've missed it -- I don't see an explicit prohibition against multiple accounts in either your AUP ( http://mycustomhosting.net/aup.php ) or your TOS ( http://mycustomhosting.net/tos.php ).

I think the main issue is the op wanted a refund when he was not entitled to one.

That was one issue. But the OP was also raked across the coals for having more than one account.

MCHPhil

@angstrom said:

@randvegeta said:

@angstrom said:
@MCHPhil: If I switch to public defender mode, I might point out that -- unless I've missed it -- I don't see an explicit prohibition against multiple accounts in either your AUP ( http://mycustomhosting.net/aup.php ) or your TOS ( http://mycustomhosting.net/tos.php ).

I think the main issue is the op wanted a refund when he was not entitled to one.

That was one issue. But the OP was also raked across the coals for having more than one account.

The reason he was raked over the coals for having multiple accounts is because he was trying to cheat my TOS/AUP.

Oh and for deceiving the forum here, that probably didn't help his situation.

angstrom

@MCHPhil said: The reason he was raked over the coals for having multiple accounts is because he was trying to cheat my TOS/AUP.

[Still in public defender mode] Okay, so if you allow an individual to have multiple accounts, the refund policy does not apply to each account that the individual has but rather to the whole set of accounts that the individual has. In other words, what counts is the first order of the first account opened by the individual, and not to the first order of any subsequent account opened, even though the individual is otherwise free to open multiple accounts.

WSS

dicks

MCHPhil

@angstrom said:

@MCHPhil said: The reason he was raked over the coals for having multiple accounts is because he was trying to cheat my TOS/AUP.

[Still in public defender mode] Okay, so if you allow an individual to have multiple accounts, the refund policy does not apply to each account that the individual has but rather to the whole set of accounts that the individual has. In other words, what counts is the first order of the first account opened by the individual, and not to the first order of any subsequent account opened, even though the individual is otherwise free to open multiple accounts.

Probably a good thing I don't use the word "account" in TOS#11.

Edit: TOS#10 -> TOS#11.

angstrom

@MCHPhil said:

@angstrom said:

@MCHPhil said: The reason he was raked over the coals for having multiple accounts is because he was trying to cheat my TOS/AUP.

[Still in public defender mode] Okay, so if you allow an individual to have multiple accounts, the refund policy does not apply to each account that the individual has but rather to the whole set of accounts that the individual has. In other words, what counts is the first order of the first account opened by the individual, and not to the first order of any subsequent account opened, even though the individual is otherwise free to open multiple accounts.

Probably a good thing I don't use the word "account" in TOS#10.

Do you mean:

"10. We reserve the right to terminate any account without warning or notice if any of the TOS or AUP restrictions are violated and we reserve the right to examine the contents of any account at any time."

?

Edit: Just saw your edit.

MCHPhil

@angstrom said:

@MCHPhil said:

@angstrom said:

@MCHPhil said: The reason he was raked over the coals for having multiple accounts is because he was trying to cheat my TOS/AUP.

[Still in public defender mode] Okay, so if you allow an individual to have multiple accounts, the refund policy does not apply to each account that the individual has but rather to the whole set of accounts that the individual has. In other words, what counts is the first order of the first account opened by the individual, and not to the first order of any subsequent account opened, even though the individual is otherwise free to open multiple accounts.

Probably a good thing I don't use the word "account" in TOS#10.

Do you mean:

"10. We reserve the right to terminate any account without warning or notice if any of the TOS or AUP restrictions are violated and we reserve the right to examine the contents of any account at any time."

?

Please see edit. Meant the TOS article we are discussing. It mentions nothing about accounts. Again the bold point I made a few replies back is the end all. I specifically do not mention accounts for this reason. It's laid out simply as "Refund policy ONLY applies to first order placed. Not all orders."

angstrom

@MCHPhil said: Please see edit. Meant the TOS article we are discussing. It mentions nothing about accounts. Again the bold point I made a few replies back is the end all. I specifically do not mention accounts for this reason. It's laid out simply as "Refund policy ONLY applies to first order placed. Not all orders."

Okay, fair enough. The defendant is guilty as charged. Thanks for your cooperation. :-)

(I'm a little surprised that you're fine with an individual's having multiple accounts, but okay.)

MCHPhil

There are many legit reasons to have multiple accounts. Like someone stated (maybe even yourself), what if I represent an small MSP. I'd likely have my accounts setup in a way that each was specific to 1 account. So I'd personally make use of the business identifier when signing up with a provider and also utilize a company email. I might not be able to reply via it, but that's not usually an issue. I'd also likely use the business address, but that would also depend on the arrangement I have with my client.

Just one example I can expand on. Lots of others though. Own multiple business. Again make sense.

Personal accounts, not likely.

Edit: Remember I'm an american business... I don't know what a pseudo name is. As a person / individual you have 1 legal name.

angstrom

@MCHPhil said: There are many legit reasons to have multiple accounts. Like someone stated (maybe even yourself), what if I represent an small MSP. I'd likely have my accounts setup in a way that each was specific to 1 account. So I'd personally make use of the business identifier when signing up with a provider and also utilize a company email. I might not be able to reply via it, but that's not usually an issue. I'd also likely use the business address, but that would also depend on the arrangement I have with my client.

Just one example I can expand on. Lots of others though. Own multiple business. Again make sense.

In a business context, yes, of course, that makes sense.

MCHPhil said: Personal accounts, not likely.

The possibility of this (that you allow multiple personal accounts) is what surprised me.

MCHPhil

angstrom said: The possibility of this (that you allow multiple personal accounts) is what surprised me.

I'm sorry if I have given anyone that impression but I do not. If you are caught there are repercussions. Those are up to the client. We can either combine them under your legal entity. I'll require verification of that information, to the best of my ability. Or I can close all accounts under TOS#7 followed by TOS#10.

angstrom

@MCHPhil said:

angstrom said: The possibility of this (that you allow multiple personal accounts) is what surprised me.

I'm sorry if I have given anyone that impression but I do not. If you are caught there are repercussions. Those are up to the client. We can either combine them under your legal entity. I'll require verification of that information, to the best of my ability. Or I can close all accounts under TOS#7 followed by TOS#10.

This hasn't been the easiest discussion, but I think that I see now: although your TOS doesn't explicitly disallow a private person from having multiple accounts (as a private person), there will nevertheless be a problem if a private person tries to open multiple accounts, because a private person has only one legal name, and it is that one legal name that the private person will have to give when opening each account, and multiple accounts associated with the same legal name aren't permitted. (Something like this, right?)

My sense is that it would be more effective (because more explicit, especially for an international audience) to add a clause to your TOS like:

Clients may not open multiple personal accounts under any circumstance.

(Cited from https://buyvm.net/terms-of-service/ )

MCHPhil

Thank you! Added.

deank

Loved the stupid drama. This is what LET is all about.

angstrom

@deank said:
Loved the stupid drama. This is what LET is all about.

If you think that this was stupid drama, then you really haven't experienced stupid drama on LET.

I beg to differ about this having been "stupid drama".