@VirMach Cancel the machine and close the account after issuing a work order?

sky_ooo

@VirMach
There was no violation,
I sent Ticket to change the IP, and paid $5, then my machine was deleted, my account was closed, and now I can’t log in
Ticket #645242

pullangcubo

Another one bites the dust.

This wouldn't be the last though.

Iroshan464

What's "work order"?
Google translate?

dahartigan

It is shameful to open the work order on BF vir chicks. Low knives and no wool for tickets. They will kill the chicken and return the ashes to you along with the bloodied wool.

dahartigan

@Iroshan464 said:
What's "work order"?
Google translate?

MJJ for tickets

sky_ooo

@Iroshan464 said:
What's "work order"?
Google translate?

Ticket

Andrews

@OP WARNING: SOCIAL CREDIT SCORE ZEROING IN PROGRESS...

20211114

In my opinion, this is not a violation, but an act of paying for value-added services

webminfo

There are many providers out there to choose from, eg: Racknerd

They will don't care about your thread here.

Xiaow

ticket

Iroshan464

So many friends coming to support the OP.

JabJab

@Xiaow said: ticket

chicken

AlwaysSkint

The End Is..

nutjob

This is such a sad story, I cried for an hour.

SpeedTest

@sky_ooo said:
@VirMach
There was no violation,
I sent Ticket to change the IP, and paid $5, then my machine was deleted, my account was closed, and now I can’t log in
Ticket #645242

You paid $5 for the new IP?

sky_ooo

@SpeedTest said:

@sky_ooo said:
@VirMach
There was no violation,
I sent Ticket to change the IP, and paid $5, then my machine was deleted, my account was closed, and now I can’t log in
Ticket #645242

You paid $5 for the new IP?

yes

dahartigan

@sky_ooo said:
@VirMach
There was no violation,
I sent Ticket to change the IP, and paid $5, then my machine was deleted, my account was closed, and now I can’t log in
Ticket #645242

Did you receive the chicken from @meilinhost ??

aRNoLD

@dahartigan said:

@Iroshan464 said:
What's "work order"?
Google translate?

MJJ for tickets

reverse it, and it's tickets for MJJ

codelock

Two account,
2 tickets
legendary 8.88 deal I am afraid @FAT32 needs a transcoding server to relax after all the work he did

VirMach

I remember these actions very clearly as I have to make sure we're absolutely making the right decision in these cases.

I'm not going to comment on every single thread that gets created, as I'm sure many more may come, but this one will be a good example that will represent why we're doing this and how we're doing it so I'll provide a lot of detail on this specific case here.

1. The account was already flagged for investigation and potential termination, before any communication from the customer.
2. We did not take action only because ticket was created, regardless of the ticket having been created, this would have been the end result. But that definitely expedited the process because the ticket was an indication that no important data was on the VM.
3. We only terminate services and close accounts if it is a serial abuser performing highly illegal activity and draining support time (to discourage them) or if we are certain there is no mistake & customer is not actively using the service to store their data (in this case, customer was attempting to re-install the OS.)
4. The person who originally created this account and likely sniped the deal has at least eight other accounts recently created/accessed in a similar fashion and confirmed beyond a reasonable doubt. Likely linked with many more, eight is just the immediate connections. Those will be handled soon as well, so probably don't buy from that guy.
5. The multiple accounts even involve the guy that ended up with the account, so this isn't really a case of someone unknowingly landing himself in this situation. He's clearly involved at a deeper level. I don't mind saying this because everything's already logged and we can still take further action and there's nothing he can do about it. Even some third potential person involved in the account also has multiple accounts (this one is based on IP address for one of the tickets, maybe that's why multiple tickets were created because they're uncoordinated.)
6. There are many suspicious activity/logs on the account, such as immediate password changes, email verification in a certain way, email changes and profile modifications, all logged. Once again, I can disclose this because we already have it all logged. I don't mind them putting forth a little bit more effort in concealing what they're doing in the future because at the current level, it's laughably bad.
7. The (original paying) customer was refunded fully for the initial order as well as the $5 paid for the IP change. We are not doing this for measly profits. We're doing what's fair. I haven't yet decided if we're going to start billing for our time though, depending on how deep and messy this gets. So far, it's relatively easy. They've made it easy for us by being sloppy, so no fee assessed before refund.

I explained the offer very well before it went live. I understand not everyone gets to see my messages, but the plan did have "beta" in the name for this particular one so some problems should be expected to the point where a vague reinstallation issue ticket isn't created, with a second ticket for an IP change and third ticket requesting IP change in such a short time in a frantic attempt to try to fix a problem that wasn't there (the web VNC was just broken.) We did say we would at our discretion refund these particular plans anyway, on top of the original disclaimer that we can cancel packages if we chose we cannot render them. Obviously, there is a potential for us abusing this but refrain from using that clause as much as possible to the point where these and other "multiple account" cases are the only ones where we enforce that policy. And these particular cases, once again, do go much further than that. It involves others not being able to get these deals fairly because a few people decided to play dirty and we won't stand for that.

Finally, we are redistributing these as best as possible to those who are at the very least not botting/sniping the offer and respecting our terms of service on the most basic level by not creating multiple accounts to circumvent our systems. That should be enough to prove that we're not just doing this to refund/cancel "good" deals (why would we even post these in the first place if we wanted to refund them by default?) That seems to be the go-to attack by these people to rile people up.

AICDOWS

@VirMach said: I remember these actions very clearly as I have to make sure we're absolutely making the right decision in these cases.

I'm not going to comment on every single thread that gets created, as I'm sure many more may come, but this one will be a good example that will represent why we're doing this and how we're doing it so I'll provide a lot of detail on this specific case here.

The account was already flagged for investigation and potential termination, before any communication from the customer.

We did not take action only because ticket was created, regardless of the ticket having been created, this would have been the end result. But that definitely expedited the process because the ticket was an indication that no important data was on the VM.
We only terminate services and close accounts if it is a serial abuser performing highly illegal activity and draining support time (to discourage them) or if we are certain there is no mistake & customer is not actively using the service to store their data (in this case, customer was attempting to re-install the OS.)
The person who originally created this account and likely sniped the deal has at least eight other accounts recently created/accessed in a similar fashion and confirmed beyond a reasonable doubt. Likely linked with many more, eight is just the immediate connections. Those will be handled soon as well, so probably don't buy from that guy.
The multiple accounts even involve the guy that ended up with the account, so this isn't really a case of someone unknowingly landing himself in this situation. He's clearly involved at a deeper level. I don't mind saying this because everything's already logged and we can still take further action and there's nothing he can do about it. Even some third potential person involved in the account also has multiple accounts (this one is based on IP address for one of the tickets, maybe that's why multiple tickets were created because they're uncoordinated.)
There are many suspicious activity/logs on the account, such as immediate password changes, email verification in a certain way, email changes and profile modifications, all logged. Once again, I can disclose this because we already have it all logged. I don't mind them putting forth a little bit more effort in concealing what they're doing in the future because at the current level, it's laughably bad.
The (original paying) customer was refunded fully for the initial order as well as the $5 paid for the IP change. We are not doing this for measly profits. We're doing what's fair. I haven't yet decided if we're going to start billing for our time though, depending on how deep and messy this gets. So far, it's relatively easy. They've made it easy for us by being sloppy, so no fee assessed before refund.
I explained the offer very well before it went live. I understand not everyone gets to see my messages, but the plan did have "beta" in the name for this particular one so some problems should be expected to the point where a vague reinstallation issue ticket isn't created, with a second ticket for an IP change and third ticket requesting IP change in such a short time in a frantic attempt to try to fix a problem that wasn't there (the web VNC was just broken.) We did say we would at our discretion refund these particular plans anyway, on top of the original disclaimer that we can cancel packages if we chose we cannot render them. Obviously, there is a potential for us abusing this but refrain from using that clause as much as possible to the point where these and other "multiple account" cases are the only ones where we enforce that policy. And these particular cases, once again, do go much further than that. It involves others not being able to get these deals fairly because a few people decided to play dirty and we won't stand for that.

Finally, we are redistributing these as best as possible to those who are at the very least not botting/sniping the offer and respecting our terms of service on the most basic level by not creating multiple accounts to circumvent our systems. That should be enough to prove that we're not just doing this to refund/cancel "good" deals (why would we even post these in the first place if we wanted to refund them by default?) That seems to be the go-to attack by these people to rile people up.

Excuse me, does it mean that as long as there are multiple accounts, they will be banned?

sky_ooo

@VirMach said:
I remember these actions very clearly as I have to make sure we're absolutely making the right decision in these cases.

I'm not going to comment on every single thread that gets created, as I'm sure many more may come, but this one will be a good example that will represent why we're doing this and how we're doing it so I'll provide a lot of detail on this specific case here.

1. The account was already flagged for investigation and potential termination, before any communication from the customer.
2. We did not take action only because ticket was created, regardless of the ticket having been created, this would have been the end result. But that definitely expedited the process because the ticket was an indication that no important data was on the VM.
3. We only terminate services and close accounts if it is a serial abuser performing highly illegal activity and draining support time (to discourage them) or if we are certain there is no mistake & customer is not actively using the service to store their data (in this case, customer was attempting to re-install the OS.)
4. The person who originally created this account and likely sniped the deal has at least eight other accounts recently created/accessed in a similar fashion and confirmed beyond a reasonable doubt. Likely linked with many more, eight is just the immediate connections. Those will be handled soon as well, so probably don't buy from that guy.
5. The multiple accounts even involve the guy that ended up with the account, so this isn't really a case of someone unknowingly landing himself in this situation. He's clearly involved at a deeper level. I don't mind saying this because everything's already logged and we can still take further action and there's nothing he can do about it. Even some third potential person involved in the account also has multiple accounts (this one is based on IP address for one of the tickets, maybe that's why multiple tickets were created because they're uncoordinated.)
6. There are many suspicious activity/logs on the account, such as immediate password changes, email verification in a certain way, email changes and profile modifications, all logged. Once again, I can disclose this because we already have it all logged. I don't mind them putting forth a little bit more effort in concealing what they're doing in the future because at the current level, it's laughably bad.
7. The (original paying) customer was refunded fully for the initial order as well as the $5 paid for the IP change. We are not doing this for measly profits. We're doing what's fair. I haven't yet decided if we're going to start billing for our time though, depending on how deep and messy this gets. So far, it's relatively easy. They've made it easy for us by being sloppy, so no fee assessed before refund.

I explained the offer very well before it went live. I understand not everyone gets to see my messages, but the plan did have "beta" in the name for this particular one so some problems should be expected to the point where a vague reinstallation issue ticket isn't created, with a second ticket for an IP change and third ticket requesting IP change in such a short time in a frantic attempt to try to fix a problem that wasn't there (the web VNC was just broken.) We did say we would at our discretion refund these particular plans anyway, on top of the original disclaimer that we can cancel packages if we chose we cannot render them. Obviously, there is a potential for us abusing this but refrain from using that clause as much as possible to the point where these and other "multiple account" cases are the only ones where we enforce that policy. And these particular cases, once again, do go much further than that. It involves others not being able to get these deals fairly because a few people decided to play dirty and we won't stand for that.

Finally, we are redistributing these as best as possible to those who are at the very least not botting/sniping the offer and respecting our terms of service on the most basic level by not creating multiple accounts to circumvent our systems. That should be enough to prove that we're not just doing this to refund/cancel "good" deals (why would we even post these in the first place if we wanted to refund them by default?) That seems to be the go-to attack by these people to rile people up.

First of all, my English is not very good, I use Google Translate to convert
I respect you
I abide by your charging standard, I paid
However, it is really unreasonable to close my account and cancel the machine
I really like the 8.88 machine, optimizing the IP is a long-term use requirement

h2o

@VirMach said:
I remember these actions very clearly as I have to make sure we're absolutely making the right decision in these cases.

Aye.

dahartigan

Lol now this is flooding out the scalpers

NoComment

@sky_ooo said:
First of all, my English is not very good, I use Google Translate to convert
I respect you
I abide by your charging standard, I paid
However, it is really unreasonable to close my account and cancel the machine
I really like the 8.88 machine, optimizing the IP is a long-term use requirement

Your machine got cancelled because you bought it from a scalper.
If you did not buy it, your machine got cancelled because you had multiple accounts.
You did not get cancelled because you made a work order.

Translate this.

cybertech

@sky_ooo said:

@VirMach said:
I remember these actions very clearly as I have to make sure we're absolutely making the right decision in these cases.

I'm not going to comment on every single thread that gets created, as I'm sure many more may come, but this one will be a good example that will represent why we're doing this and how we're doing it so I'll provide a lot of detail on this specific case here.

1. The account was already flagged for investigation and potential termination, before any communication from the customer.
2. We did not take action only because ticket was created, regardless of the ticket having been created, this would have been the end result. But that definitely expedited the process because the ticket was an indication that no important data was on the VM.
3. We only terminate services and close accounts if it is a serial abuser performing highly illegal activity and draining support time (to discourage them) or if we are certain there is no mistake & customer is not actively using the service to store their data (in this case, customer was attempting to re-install the OS.)
4. The person who originally created this account and likely sniped the deal has at least eight other accounts recently created/accessed in a similar fashion and confirmed beyond a reasonable doubt. Likely linked with many more, eight is just the immediate connections. Those will be handled soon as well, so probably don't buy from that guy.
5. The multiple accounts even involve the guy that ended up with the account, so this isn't really a case of someone unknowingly landing himself in this situation. He's clearly involved at a deeper level. I don't mind saying this because everything's already logged and we can still take further action and there's nothing he can do about it. Even some third potential person involved in the account also has multiple accounts (this one is based on IP address for one of the tickets, maybe that's why multiple tickets were created because they're uncoordinated.)
6. There are many suspicious activity/logs on the account, such as immediate password changes, email verification in a certain way, email changes and profile modifications, all logged. Once again, I can disclose this because we already have it all logged. I don't mind them putting forth a little bit more effort in concealing what they're doing in the future because at the current level, it's laughably bad.
7. The (original paying) customer was refunded fully for the initial order as well as the $5 paid for the IP change. We are not doing this for measly profits. We're doing what's fair. I haven't yet decided if we're going to start billing for our time though, depending on how deep and messy this gets. So far, it's relatively easy. They've made it easy for us by being sloppy, so no fee assessed before refund.

I explained the offer very well before it went live. I understand not everyone gets to see my messages, but the plan did have "beta" in the name for this particular one so some problems should be expected to the point where a vague reinstallation issue ticket isn't created, with a second ticket for an IP change and third ticket requesting IP change in such a short time in a frantic attempt to try to fix a problem that wasn't there (the web VNC was just broken.) We did say we would at our discretion refund these particular plans anyway, on top of the original disclaimer that we can cancel packages if we chose we cannot render them. Obviously, there is a potential for us abusing this but refrain from using that clause as much as possible to the point where these and other "multiple account" cases are the only ones where we enforce that policy. And these particular cases, once again, do go much further than that. It involves others not being able to get these deals fairly because a few people decided to play dirty and we won't stand for that.

Finally, we are redistributing these as best as possible to those who are at the very least not botting/sniping the offer and respecting our terms of service on the most basic level by not creating multiple accounts to circumvent our systems. That should be enough to prove that we're not just doing this to refund/cancel "good" deals (why would we even post these in the first place if we wanted to refund them by default?) That seems to be the go-to attack by these people to rile people up.

First of all, my English is not very good, I use Google Translate to convert
I respect you
I abide by your charging standard, I paid
However, it is really unreasonable to close my account and cancel the machine
I really like the 8.88 machine, optimizing the IP is a long-term use requirement

do u know what? the new owner who got ur machine really likes it too.

Nekki

I am very much enjoying this turn of events. I may purchase an idler from @VirMach to compensate them for the entertainment.

uzerhode

it seems the problem is from "multiple new accounts with snipping bots", then resell with the account.

多账户脚本抢鸡,我终于明白为什么我总是两手空空.

Saahib

What about sending "Warning" or "Notice" to customer before closing account ?

chocolateshirt

@sky_ooo said:

@VirMach said:
I remember these actions very clearly as I have to make sure we're absolutely making the right decision in these cases.

I'm not going to comment on every single thread that gets created, as I'm sure many more may come, but this one will be a good example that will represent why we're doing this and how we're doing it so I'll provide a lot of detail on this specific case here.

1. The account was already flagged for investigation and potential termination, before any communication from the customer.
2. We did not take action only because ticket was created, regardless of the ticket having been created, this would have been the end result. But that definitely expedited the process because the ticket was an indication that no important data was on the VM.
3. We only terminate services and close accounts if it is a serial abuser performing highly illegal activity and draining support time (to discourage them) or if we are certain there is no mistake & customer is not actively using the service to store their data (in this case, customer was attempting to re-install the OS.)
4. The person who originally created this account and likely sniped the deal has at least eight other accounts recently created/accessed in a similar fashion and confirmed beyond a reasonable doubt. Likely linked with many more, eight is just the immediate connections. Those will be handled soon as well, so probably don't buy from that guy.
5. The multiple accounts even involve the guy that ended up with the account, so this isn't really a case of someone unknowingly landing himself in this situation. He's clearly involved at a deeper level. I don't mind saying this because everything's already logged and we can still take further action and there's nothing he can do about it. Even some third potential person involved in the account also has multiple accounts (this one is based on IP address for one of the tickets, maybe that's why multiple tickets were created because they're uncoordinated.)
6. There are many suspicious activity/logs on the account, such as immediate password changes, email verification in a certain way, email changes and profile modifications, all logged. Once again, I can disclose this because we already have it all logged. I don't mind them putting forth a little bit more effort in concealing what they're doing in the future because at the current level, it's laughably bad.
7. The (original paying) customer was refunded fully for the initial order as well as the $5 paid for the IP change. We are not doing this for measly profits. We're doing what's fair. I haven't yet decided if we're going to start billing for our time though, depending on how deep and messy this gets. So far, it's relatively easy. They've made it easy for us by being sloppy, so no fee assessed before refund.

I explained the offer very well before it went live. I understand not everyone gets to see my messages, but the plan did have "beta" in the name for this particular one so some problems should be expected to the point where a vague reinstallation issue ticket isn't created, with a second ticket for an IP change and third ticket requesting IP change in such a short time in a frantic attempt to try to fix a problem that wasn't there (the web VNC was just broken.) We did say we would at our discretion refund these particular plans anyway, on top of the original disclaimer that we can cancel packages if we chose we cannot render them. Obviously, there is a potential for us abusing this but refrain from using that clause as much as possible to the point where these and other "multiple account" cases are the only ones where we enforce that policy. And these particular cases, once again, do go much further than that. It involves others not being able to get these deals fairly because a few people decided to play dirty and we won't stand for that.

Finally, we are redistributing these as best as possible to those who are at the very least not botting/sniping the offer and respecting our terms of service on the most basic level by not creating multiple accounts to circumvent our systems. That should be enough to prove that we're not just doing this to refund/cancel "good" deals (why would we even post these in the first place if we wanted to refund them by default?) That seems to be the go-to attack by these people to rile people up.

First of all, my English is not very good, I use Google Translate to convert
I respect you
I abide by your charging standard, I paid
However, it is really unreasonable to close my account and cancel the machine
I really like the 8.88 machine, optimizing the IP is a long-term use requirement

You already got refund. Case closed.

Nekki

@Saahib said:
What about sending "Warning" or "Notice" to customer before closing account ?

Chat shit get banged.