Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!


PSA: Provider Tag Fee Implementation - Page 5
New on LowEndTalk? Please Register and read our Community Rules.

All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.

PSA: Provider Tag Fee Implementation

1235737

Comments

  • @yoursunny said: Requirement of this service is that your coupon code must include PUSHUPS and your website or WHMCS must contain a link to https://pushups.ndn.today somewhere.

    No IPv6 requirement?

    Thanked by 2Not_Oles Soulidk
  • yoursunnyyoursunny Member, IPv6 Advocate

    @stevewatson301 said:

    @yoursunny said: Requirement of this service is that your coupon code must include PUSHUPS and your website or WHMCS must contain a link to https://pushups.ndn.today somewhere.

    No IPv6 requirement?

    If your IPv6 isn't operational, my announcement would include the No IPv6 hall of shame.
    That would in turn enable every provider Host Rep in the list to post sales under that thread, leeching from your push-ups.

    Thanked by 2Not_Oles Soulidk
  • KermEdKermEd Member
    edited March 2022

    Now that I see him for who he is, I think I've actually figured it out.

    @jbiloh bought out LET, without knowing anything about how to run it, thinking we would honour him and be deeply grateful. He actually thought we would all rally and champion and build it for him because he now owns it.

    Fast forward, every time he tries to manipulate us in hidden and obvious ways, he hats called out and caught for it. That must be confusing as hell for him, as the average person on LET is unlikely to care about him let alone what he wants to do. The idea that an entire community is out of alignment with him would be an absolute nightmare for him. He would actively research methods to manipulate and categorize us. He doesn't really care what we think, and can't empathize. He would avoid answering honestly because the answers would terrify us.

    Also, on this note, strongly suggest @teamacc is now run by him. The exact same phrasing and wording, from someone who would normally have put the community first. It's a clear manipulation tactic there.

    Fast forward to today - rolled this out without discussion, with invoices due immediate, with reminders in 24hrs, demanding the community just try it out... Cutting discounts and specials plans to get money in ASAP. I think he over spent on his wedding triyng to impress people and is trying to manipulate us into fast cash. A narcissist wouldn't think about the user impact, they think if they hide the invoices from the public and give us a some frue frue vision lines we would fall into things.

    Every post he has ever made is to manipulate and earn money off us, and off hosts. It's why he edits our words, locks our threads, and promotes purple daddy who is paying him for ads and colocation while locking anti purpledaddy threads. He's sneaky enough I'd bet he even has some investment IN NerdRacks. In fact that was exactly the secret nature of how he created these fees and even his secret purchase of LEB/LET that only became disclosed when evidence leaked out. The real reason he unlocked @cociu was to ensure he has another host to invoice one day.

    It's all coming clear as day now.

  • henixhenix Member

    @KermEd said:
    ........
    It's all coming clear as day now.

    This sums up everything pretty well. GJ @jbiloh for killing let.
    On the other note what if the majority of providers move to other forums? The users will go where the deals at, so let will still die.

    Your get rich fast scheme failed and now people found out how cash hungry you truly are.

  • @KermEd said:
    Also, on this note, strongly suggest @teamacc is now run by him. The exact same phrasing and wording, from someone who would normally have put the community first. It's a clear manipulation tactic there.

    I don't see any new post from him since last year. Did I miss something?

  • Shit, I'm realizing that's why he shadow edits people's posts and threads. The importance of manipulation is more important than someones true opinion, because he can't stand that he can't control the community.

    When a thread he replies to stops being about him or what he can manipulate, he will shut it down. The only time he will reply to a thread is to attempt some method of manipulation.

    Huh. I think there is enough material here to write a thesis on the subject.

  • KermEdKermEd Member
    edited March 2022

    @kuroneko23 said:

    @KermEd said:
    Also, on this note, strongly suggest @teamacc is now run by him. The exact same phrasing and wording, from someone who would normally have put the community first. It's a clear manipulation tactic there.

    I don't see any new post from him since last year. Did I miss something?

    He magically posted a few pages back praising @jbiloh and almost saying what he said in here verbatim and that we should roll with someone suddenly implementing a 200/yr service fee.

    How many $5/yr servers some provider needs to sell to cover that fee is crazy, considering their profit is probably 0.25/user. So they need to sell what, 2,000 servers to pay for the privilege of posting an ad thread on LET?

    Had he picked a realistic number like $12/yr or a community friendly donator tag or something - it would make sense why an old admin would maybe support it...

    But why would an admin that has overseen a community of penny pinching for years on end suddenly join a thread to tell all the providers to just get onboard and try out a $200/yr arbitrary fee - it doesn't add up to me.

    Thanked by 2yoursunny bulbasaur
  • KermEdKermEd Member
    edited March 2022

    Also @jbiloh please no more personal messages to me. I think it's clear you make me a little uncomfortable and I don't want to engage in any conversations that aren't 100% transparent to people. But I appreciate why you would want me to not post.

    Anyway it wasn't my intention to create a revolt, and I only checked in to see if he's rescinded everything yet. He has not. So I shall fade back into the void and revisit my WHT threads :D

    Thanked by 1afn
  • bulbasaurbulbasaur Member
    edited March 2022

    @KermEd said: He magically posted a few pages back praising @jbiloh and almost saying what he said in here verbatim

    I guess you're referring to trewq and not teamacc, who stopped visiting after being ousted. (Or maybe jar, but that would be a weird plot twist and very unfunny, to say the least.)

    @KermEd said: every time he tries to manipulate us

    So here's what. The invoice that @stefeman posted shows that the invoice was generated by WNY IT Services Inc, the same company that operates Coloncrossing. Technically, Biloh was right that Coloncrossing wasn't operating LET (how could it, it's just a trademark), but fuck, that's a new low. (Though I also now see that it was discussed at length on OGF, so I'm not the first one to discover this.)

    Thanked by 3henix kkrajk adly
  • henixhenix Member

    @KermEd said:
    Also @jbiloh please no more personal messages to me. I think it's clear you make me a little uncomfortable and I don't want to engage in any conversations that aren't 100% transparent to people. But I appreciate why you would want me to not post.

    Anyway it wasn't my intention to create a revolt, and I only checked in to see if he's rescinded everything yet. He has not. So I shall fade back into the void and revisit my WHT threads :D

    We need the screenshots

  • DPDP Administrator, The Domain Guy

    @KermEd - What did I miss?

    If I captured your messages correctly, you’re saying that teamacc just appeared out of the blue, commented and left?

    And that comment was then deleted?

  • HBAndreiHBAndrei Member, Top Host, Host Rep

    How much to keep the 'Top Provider' tag for someone that never posts advertising threads? Asking for a friend...

    Cheers.

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran
    edited March 2022

    Since the concept of the "Provider Tag" fee was officially rolled out we have made two adjustments based on community and provider feedback:

    1. A reduction for existing providers on their initial fee of 20% from $100 per six months to $80 per six months
    2. Modifying the "Host Rep" permissions to include the ability to directly market their services in the unified "Mega Deals" threads we run for Black Friday, Cyber Monday, New Year's, etc.

    In addition to the above, and in acknowledgement that LowEndTalk has a very special appreciation for micro providers who are getting their start, what does the community think about the following modification below:

    Proposed Change: "Host Rep" tag holders will be eligible to directly market their services to LowEndTalk forum users in the REQUESTS (https://lowendtalk.com/categories/requests) category.

    By making this change Host Reps would have a clear opportunity to immediately, and organically, grow their business through the userbase of LowEndTalk and it provides a pathway to moving to provider tag status and thus being able to create individual offer threads.

    Thoughts?

  • henixhenix Member

    You can do whatever now, you can't be trusted anyway.

  • lentrolentro Member, Host Rep

    @jbiloh said: Modifying the "Host Rep" permissions to include the ability to directly market their services in the unified "Mega Deals" threads we run for Black Friday, Cyber Monday, New Year's, etc.

    In addition to the above

    Proposed Change: "Host Rep" tag holders will be eligible to directly market their services to LowEndTalk forum users in the REQUESTS (https://lowendtalk.com/categories/requests) category.

    This enables new hosts to market services before they can afford to pay $200/yr, so I'm for this. That being said, I'd encourage a lower price, more advertisements, or an infra provider to sponsor LET infrastructure as an alternative instead of charging providers. In any case though, a good move to the right direction in my eyes.

  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran

    @jbiloh said:
    Since the concept of the "Provider Tag" fee was officially rolled out we have made two adjustments based on community and provider feedback:

    1. A reduction for existing providers on their initial fee of 20% from $100 per six months to $80 per six months
    2. Modifying the "Host Rep" permissions to include the ability to directly market their services in the unified "Mega Deals" threads we run for Black Friday, Cyber Monday, New Year's, etc.

    In addition to the above, and in acknowledgement that LowEndTalk has a very special appreciation for micro providers who are getting their start, what does the community think about the following modification below:

    Proposed Change: "Host Rep" tag holders will be eligible to directly market their services to LowEndTalk forum users in the REQUESTS (https://lowendtalk.com/categories/requests) category.

    By making this change Host Reps would have a clear opportunity to immediately, and organically, grow their business through the userbase of LowEndTalk and it provides a pathway to moving to provider tag status and thus being able to create individual offer threads.

    Thoughts?

    I think if you're trying to win favor you'll find it's always around the next corner and you never really seem to get there.

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran

    @jar said: I think if you're trying to win favor you'll find it's always around the next corner and you never really seem to get there.

    Definitely some wisdom there.

    Just trying to acknowledge the smallest providers among our community and how we can foster them and their growth.

    Thanked by 2jar HostMayo
  • dustincdustinc Member, Patron Provider, Top Host

    @jbiloh said:
    Since the concept of the "Provider Tag" fee was officially rolled out we have made two adjustments based on community and provider feedback:

    1. A reduction for existing providers on their initial fee of 20% from $100 per six months to $80 per six months
    2. Modifying the "Host Rep" permissions to include the ability to directly market their services in the unified "Mega Deals" threads we run for Black Friday, Cyber Monday, New Year's, etc.

    In addition to the above, and in acknowledgement that LowEndTalk has a very special appreciation for micro providers who are getting their start, what does the community think about the following modification below:

    Proposed Change: "Host Rep" tag holders will be eligible to directly market their services to LowEndTalk forum users in the REQUESTS (https://lowendtalk.com/categories/requests) category.

    By making this change Host Reps would have a clear opportunity to immediately, and organically, grow their business through the userbase of LowEndTalk and it provides a pathway to moving to provider tag status and thus being able to create individual offer threads.

    Thoughts?

    Great idea -- more flexibility for the providers who are unwilling to pay for advertisements. This provides balance for those who remain active within the community to learn, and perhaps catch an opportunity while they're at it along with the many other benefits in engaging with existing clients.

  • KermEdKermEd Member
    edited March 2022

    @stevewatson301 said:

    @KermEd said: He magically posted a few pages back praising @jbiloh and almost saying what he said in here verbatim

    I guess you're referring to trewq and not teamacc, who stopped visiting after being ousted. (Or maybe jar, but that would be a weird plot twist and very unfunny, to say the least.)

    Sorry yes, :D. Jar imho works for a large provider that's constantly making changes that negatively impacts end users, such as expiring their credits as they try and stay open for business from overgrowth. Nice guy, but his job (in a way) is dependant on people accepting poorly communicated pricing changes. I know why he picks the stance he does... and definitely appreciate he has his opinion. But it does go against all change management best practices (no surprises).

    I think you are right on the user ID, I tagged the wrong one :D

    @henix said:

    We need the screenshots

    It's polite... But planned and uninteresting.

    People like him do that to either pacify you, change their power structure by being one-on-one, block your time so you aren't contributing to the public conversation, use one on ones against you, or just to further manipulate the conversation and/or generate receipts for somewhere like LET.

    There is no practical reason for him to send someone like me a DM. My opinions were already stated at the onset.

    @DP said:
    @KermEd - What did I miss?

    If I captured your messages correctly, you’re saying that teamacc just appeared out of the blue, commented and left?

    And that comment was then deleted?

    I mixed up the names :D. The comment wasn't deleted but looked almost copy pasted from what @jbiloh was posting and doesn't make sense to me in the context of why they supported his statements.

    @jbiloh said:
    Since the concept of the "Provider Tag" fee was officially rolled out we have made two adjustments based on community and provider feedback:

    1. A reduction for existing providers on their initial fee of 20% from $100 per six months to $80 per six months
    2. Modifying the "Host Rep" permissions to include the ability to directly market their services in the unified "Mega Deals" threads we run for Black Friday, Cyber Monday, New Year's, etc.

    I think, you still think 20% off an invented fee matters. And you still think this is a negotiation.

    I'm not interested (nor able to trust) a word or idea out of you. The only way to make me happy is to roll back everything 100%. And we discuss the future of LET only after all this damage is reversed. You have no room to negotiate anything with me anymore, I can't speak for others.

    Thanked by 2bulbasaur iKeyZ
  • ErisaErisa Member

    @jbiloh said: Proposed Change: "Host Rep" tag holders will be eligible to directly market their services to LowEndTalk forum users in the REQUESTS (https://lowendtalk.com/categories/requests) category.

    In my personal opinion, allowing this is the only way that the provider fee has a chance of succeeding.

    Requests threads are commonplace and IMO an important part of the community, providers reading them and offering custom deals as a result is an important part of that.

    Losing this dynamic would be horrible, especially if other users were allowed to recommend a provider for a request but the provider wasn't able to mention themselves. It would be very odd.

    The SEO and prominance on the main page is the main advantage one may gain from the proposed way the Provider tag would work under this new system, since it is essentially just advertising. While I still don't completely agree with the proposed system, allowing participation in request threads without payment does lessen the blow to the community.

  • KermEdKermEd Member
    edited March 2022

    @dustinc said:
    Great idea -- more flexibility for the providers who are unwilling to pay for advertisements. This provides balance for those who remain active within the community to learn, and perhaps catch an opportunity while they're at it along with the many other benefits in engaging with existing clients.

    Your special treatment (that you pretend to be oblivious to) is a large part of the reason people are fighting against @jbiloh. If you want this to work out in your favour, the best idea is probably for you to stay quiet. #justsaying

    Thanked by 3henix BlaZe afn
  • jarjar Patron Provider, Top Host, Veteran
    edited March 2022

    @KermEd said:

    @stevewatson301 said:

    @KermEd said: He magically posted a few pages back praising @jbiloh and almost saying what he said in here verbatim

    I guess you're referring to trewq and not teamacc, who stopped visiting after being ousted. (Or maybe jar, but that would be a weird plot twist and very unfunny, to say the least.)

    Sorry yes, :D. Jar imho works for a large provider that's constantly making changes that negatively impacts end users, such as expiring their credits as they try and stay open for business from overgrowth. Nice guy, but his job (in a way) is dependant on people accepting poorly communicated pricing changes. I know why he picks the stance he does... But it does go against all change management best practices (no surprises).

    I only work for MXroute 💜

    DO ran me off.

  • jbilohjbiloh Administrator, Veteran

    @Erisa said: In my personal opinion, allowing this is the only way that the provider fee has a chance of succeeding.

    Requests threads are commonplace and IMO an important part of the community, providers reading them and offering custom deals as a result is an important part of that.

    Losing this dynamic would be horrible, especially if other users were allowed to recommend a provider for a request but the provider wasn't able to mention themselves. It would be very odd.

    The SEO and prominance on the main page is the main advantage one may gain from the proposed way the Provider tag would work under this new system, since it is essentially just advertising. While I still don't completely agree with the proposed system, allowing participation in request threads without payment does lessen the blow to the community.

    Thanks for sharing your opinion. Looking forward to hearing some other opinions on my proposed tweak regarding Host Reps.

    Thanked by 1Erisa
  • DPDP Administrator, The Domain Guy

    Here’s my clear take on this.

    Put this on hold, discuss, come to an agreement with the majority, and then execute.

    Thanked by 2nobizzle kkrajk
  • @jar said:

    I only work for MXroute 💜

    DO ran me off.

    Well, then pardon my french, fuck DO :D. You there as about the only saving grace for me.

    What I was trying to say (and not saying well) is that I also appreciate you are an individual with different experiences and a different opinion. But I don't think your account is spoofed by @jbiloh

    Thanked by 1jar
  • Honestly, $16/mth is almost nothing. WHMCS alone costs more than that. There's billing software costs, virtualization software costs, hardware costs etc. It might hurt the margins of smaller providers, but most providers on LET rarely post offer threads anyway.

    A simple solution would be to compile offers by host reps in megathreads. It would also encourage people to come check out LET once in a while. There's at least 3 megathreads every year (usually more), and I am quite sure most providers make less than 3 threads a year. The only shortcoming to this is that it would require admin time to compile offers into a single thread. Maybe this can be circumvented by making a thread where all users can read, but only host reps can post offers. It would be messy, but it's better than nothing.

  • NekkiNekki Veteran

    What’s this? Unexpectedly juicy drama on a Saturday evening. Bully I say, Bully!

  • ChefJoeChefJoe Member
    edited March 2022

    What about the monthly payment option others suggested (maybe heavily discounted for new providers)? Say $10 for a month of full marketing permissions but limited to providers in their first 4 years since tag approval? (for all I know, maybe $10/mo translating to 3 offer posts is still a bit high for providers starting out)

  • yoursunnyyoursunny Member, IPv6 Advocate

    @Nekki said:
    What’s this? Unexpectedly juicy drama on a Saturday evening. Bully I say, Bully!

    Well, you have the opportunity to earn $500.
    https://lowendtalk.com/discussion/comment/3389892/#Comment_3389892

  • @NoComment said:
    Honestly, $16/mth is almost nothing.

    First it isn't $16/month - that's marketing speak. It's $100/6 months just to be given the right to post a thread on a public forum.

    Second, if it was almost nothing, no one would be complaining and (more importantly) he wouldn't need to collect it.

    It would appear from this thread it matters to some - it doesn't matter how big or small or how they run their business, if it matters to the smallest of hosts it absolutely has no space being part of LET.

    How some asshole can charge hosts $200/year for thread posts, while demanding they sell their services at no more than $10/year, is a fucking embarassing business strategy to begin with. Blindly invoicing them for it, sending overdue notices, and apologizing with a discount code - I'm not sure it can even be taken seriously.

    At this point the goal of @jbiloh profiting off everyone else's posts and businesses doesn't even matter. The dumb rollout is reason enough to just cancel this bad idea immediately and start community driven discussions a week or two from now when the topics cooled down. And when there aren't looming overdue invoices over all the hosts heads.

Sign In or Register to comment.