Howdy, Stranger!

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


Turns out we are throttling servers? Speeds are sooo low [Provider Rants]
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.

Turns out we are throttling servers? Speeds are sooo low [Provider Rants]

PulsedMediaPulsedMedia Member, Patron Provider
edited December 2023 in General

Dublin, IE 38.88 ms 0.0% 942.46 Mbps 940.50 Mbps Three Ireland - Dublin 
Helsinki, FI 1.07 ms 0.0% 940.61 Mbps 941.23 Mbps Elisa Oyj - Helsinki 
Minsk, BY 56.14 ms 0.0% 942.13 Mbps 888.89 Mbps A1 - Minsk
Paris, FR 42.56 ms 0.0% 949.64 Mbps 948.76 Mbps ORANGE - Paris 
Marseille, FR 45.83 ms 0.0% 941.38 Mbps 170.04 Mbps GSL Networks - Marseille
Madrid, ES 63.93 ms 0.0% 941.48 Mbps 936.08 Mbps Orange - Jazztel - Madrid 

This user bought a dedi like 18hrs ago, 5 or 6 tickets already, first one was asking for refund so he can swap a server to another (already delivered server so no refunds), OS reinstall request, couple tickets complaining speeds. Everyone of his tickets was replied in manner of few hours despite holidays.

Those are the results he himself posted, complaining we are throttling or server is broken because downstream speed was too low.

Avg UL Speed : 901.89 Mbps
Avg DL Speed : 257.85 Mbps

Yes, we control the testing servers, all of them globally, every piece of hardware on the route and are clearly just throttling.

His server costs under 20€ a month and comes with 1GigE Unmetered/Unlimited; MD Series: https://pulsedmedia.com/minidedi-dedicated-servers-finland.php

We clearly are scammers throttling his server, so this should be refunded!!!!

Went back to check his tickets, he already got a refund for "poor performance" of a seedbox 4 days ago. So this guy is probably a refund scammer or something else, network performance was no news to him. Same complaint, claiming speeds of 100-200mbps (without evidence).

grr nice way to spend Christmas day. Just needed to vent. Have a better Christmas day than i am having. To any wanna be providers; This is the crap you have to deal with, there are no holidays or free days; As the business owner shit rolls uphill so you have to handle yourself all holidays often. You take 10hrs to respond to a ticket during a holiday? You are a scammer and fraud, with no support what-so-ever.

Meanwhile someone's been complaining on our discord that we have no support what-so-ever because it took less than 10hrs to full resolution, not even from ticket open (according to him, probably took much less. People tend to round up 1hr to 1+day at worst). According to that same user response took 12-24hrs, while actual thing was resolved in less than 10hrs. Logical and makes sense certainly.

Meanwhile, even if you pay thousands or tens of thousands per month to LW/OVH, You are not even guaranteed to get response to a ticket within 2+ days, only during business hours and business days: https://www.ovhcloud.com/en/support-levels/plans/

Thanked by 2maverick the_doctor
Acceptable Speed For 1Gbps Unmetered Server?
  1. 100+Mbps168 votes
    1. 200+Mbps
        8.93%
    2. 400+Mbps
      11.90%
    3. 750+ Mbps
      37.50%
    4. NOTHING SHORT OF 1GBPS, 1000MBPS!
      22.02%
    5. 2000+ Mbps
        0.00%
    6. 10 000 Mbps OR YOU SCAM FRAUD!
        4.17%
    7. INFINITE DEDICATED FIBER LINK TO EVERY DEVICE ON INTERNET
      15.48%
«1

Comments

  • What's the destination he claims the ~250mbit/s to? What should be realistically possible when downloading lets say https://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test?

  • @PulsedMedia said: 18hrs ago, 5 or 6 tickets already

    image

    And I thought I was being annoying with 3 low priority tickets.

  • PulsedMediaPulsedMedia Member, Patron Provider

    @totally_not_banned said:
    What's the destination he claims the ~250mbit/s to? What should be realistically possible when downloading lets say https://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test?

    It was that network speed test thing, there was a lot. I picked a few targets, those were the averages of all of them.

    Since they are public test servers AND over the internet, the speeds can be whatever to any single place, they could be congested, their transit could be congested, there could be maintenance on the route etc etc.

    Btw, your test file link is broken :)

  • @PulsedMedia said:

    @totally_not_banned said:
    What's the destination he claims the ~250mbit/s to? What should be realistically possible when downloading lets say https://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test?

    It was that network speed test thing, there was a lot. I picked a few targets, those were the averages of all of them.

    Since they are public test servers AND over the internet, the speeds can be whatever to any single place, they could be congested, their transit could be congested, there could be maintenance on the route etc etc.

    Btw, your test file link is broken :)

    Oops, sorry. I always forget that it's actually HTTP. A rare occurance in 2023. It's really: http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test

  • PulsedMediaPulsedMedia Member, Patron Provider

    @sillycat said:

    @PulsedMedia said: 18hrs ago, 5 or 6 tickets already

    image

    And I thought I was being annoying with 3 low priority tickets.

    Re-checked, 3 individual new tickets, but re-complaints over the same thing multiple times.

    Latest is something along the lines he has tried to work with us, and that we are essentially fraudsters not providing him 1Gbps to any target over the internet.

    Thanked by 1sillycat
  • PulsedMediaPulsedMedia Member, Patron Provider

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @PulsedMedia said:

    @totally_not_banned said:
    What's the destination he claims the ~250mbit/s to? What should be realistically possible when downloading lets say https://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test?

    It was that network speed test thing, there was a lot. I picked a few targets, those were the averages of all of them.

    Since they are public test servers AND over the internet, the speeds can be whatever to any single place, they could be congested, their transit could be congested, there could be maintenance on the route etc etc.

    Btw, your test file link is broken :)

    Oops, sorry. I always forget that it's actually HTTP. A rare occurance in 2023. It's really: http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test

    nope still broken :)

  • edited December 2023

    @PulsedMedia said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @PulsedMedia said:

    @totally_not_banned said:
    What's the destination he claims the ~250mbit/s to? What should be realistically possible when downloading lets say https://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test?

    It was that network speed test thing, there was a lot. I picked a few targets, those were the averages of all of them.

    Since they are public test servers AND over the internet, the speeds can be whatever to any single place, they could be congested, their transit could be congested, there could be maintenance on the route etc etc.

    Btw, your test file link is broken :)

    Oops, sorry. I always forget that it's actually HTTP. A rare occurance in 2023. It's really: http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test

    nope still broken :)

    Strange, works for me? I can click it and it loads. What's happening on your side?

  • PulsedMediaPulsedMedia Member, Patron Provider
    edited December 2023

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @PulsedMedia said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @PulsedMedia said:

    @totally_not_banned said:
    What's the destination he claims the ~250mbit/s to? What should be realistically possible when downloading lets say https://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test?

    It was that network speed test thing, there was a lot. I picked a few targets, those were the averages of all of them.

    Since they are public test servers AND over the internet, the speeds can be whatever to any single place, they could be congested, their transit could be congested, there could be maintenance on the route etc etc.

    Btw, your test file link is broken :)

    Oops, sorry. I always forget that it's actually HTTP. A rare occurance in 2023. It's really: http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test

    nope still broken :)

    Strange, works for me? I can click it and it loads. What's happening on your side?

    straight from a inventory MD node:

    root@le1mp3-1-10:~# wget -O /tmp/cachefly http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test
    --2023-12-25 13:19:04--  http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test
    Resolving cachefly.cachefly.net (cachefly.cachefly.net)... 205.234.175.175
    Connecting to cachefly.cachefly.net (cachefly.cachefly.net)|205.234.175.175|:80... connected.
    HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
    Length: unspecified [text/html]
    Saving to: '/tmp/cachefly'
    
    /tmp/cachefly                                                  [ <=>                                                                                                                                     ]       7  --.-KB/s    in 0s      
    
    2023-12-25 13:19:04 (387 KB/s) - '/tmp/cachefly' saved [7]
    
    root@le1mp3-1-10:~# cat /tmp/cachefly 
    100mb
    root@le1mp3-1-10:~#
    
  • edited December 2023

    @PulsedMedia said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @PulsedMedia said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @PulsedMedia said:

    @totally_not_banned said:
    What's the destination he claims the ~250mbit/s to? What should be realistically possible when downloading lets say https://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test?

    It was that network speed test thing, there was a lot. I picked a few targets, those were the averages of all of them.

    Since they are public test servers AND over the internet, the speeds can be whatever to any single place, they could be congested, their transit could be congested, there could be maintenance on the route etc etc.

    Btw, your test file link is broken :)

    Oops, sorry. I always forget that it's actually HTTP. A rare occurance in 2023. It's really: http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test

    nope still broken :)

    Strange, works for me? I can click it and it loads. What's happening on your side?

    straight from a inventory MD node:

    root@le1mp3-1-10:~# wget -O /tmp/cachefly http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test
    --2023-12-25 13:19:04--  http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test
    Resolving cachefly.cachefly.net (cachefly.cachefly.net)... 205.234.175.175
    Connecting to cachefly.cachefly.net (cachefly.cachefly.net)|205.234.175.175|:80... connected.
    HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
    Length: unspecified [text/html]
    Saving to: '/tmp/cachefly'
    
    /tmp/cachefly                                                  [ <=>                                                                                                                                     ]       7  --.-KB/s    in 0s      
    
    2023-12-25 13:19:04 (387 KB/s) - '/tmp/cachefly' saved [7]
    
    root@le1mp3-1-10:~# cat /tmp/cachefly 
    100mb
    root@le1mp3-1-10:~#
    

    Lol, seems the b.... not-so-friendly-people block wget... I've never noticed since i always use curl but i just tried it and there it is: 7 measly bytes.

    curl -o /dev/null http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test should work though.

    If one should trust people that block wget and forget about curl is another question though ;)

  • No problems hitting max speeds on my dedi. People are dumb.

    Thanked by 1PulsedMedia
  • PulsedMediaPulsedMedia Member, Patron Provider

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @PulsedMedia said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @PulsedMedia said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @PulsedMedia said:

    @totally_not_banned said:
    What's the destination he claims the ~250mbit/s to? What should be realistically possible when downloading lets say https://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test?

    It was that network speed test thing, there was a lot. I picked a few targets, those were the averages of all of them.

    Since they are public test servers AND over the internet, the speeds can be whatever to any single place, they could be congested, their transit could be congested, there could be maintenance on the route etc etc.

    Btw, your test file link is broken :)

    Oops, sorry. I always forget that it's actually HTTP. A rare occurance in 2023. It's really: http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test

    nope still broken :)

    Strange, works for me? I can click it and it loads. What's happening on your side?

    straight from a inventory MD node:

    root@le1mp3-1-10:~# wget -O /tmp/cachefly http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test
    --2023-12-25 13:19:04--  http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test
    Resolving cachefly.cachefly.net (cachefly.cachefly.net)... 205.234.175.175
    Connecting to cachefly.cachefly.net (cachefly.cachefly.net)|205.234.175.175|:80... connected.
    HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
    Length: unspecified [text/html]
    Saving to: '/tmp/cachefly'
    
    /tmp/cachefly                                                  [ <=>                                                                                                                                     ]       7  --.-KB/s    in 0s      
    
    2023-12-25 13:19:04 (387 KB/s) - '/tmp/cachefly' saved [7]
    
    root@le1mp3-1-10:~# cat /tmp/cachefly 
    100mb
    root@le1mp3-1-10:~#
    

    Lol, seems the b.... not-so-friendly-people block wget... I've never noticed since i always use curl but i just tried it and there it is: 7 measly bytes.

    curl -o /dev/null http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test should work though.

    If one just trust people that block wget and forget about curl is another question though ;)

    That's just silly of them i think.
    Probably people are infinite looping wget then and they just blocked wget. Kinda defeats the purpose tho.

    I know some people like to loop wget just because they can or "they paid for the BW" on unmetered servers, we had one reseller like that a decade ago.

  • PulsedMediaPulsedMedia Member, Patron Provider

    @bgerard said:
    No problems hitting max speeds on my dedi. People are dumb.

    No, but can you get 1Gbps from a Dialup in namibia or kenya? Obviously we are scammers and fraud if you cannot download at full 1Gbps from a dialup in rural town Namibia! ;)

  • HostSlickHostSlick Member, Patron Provider
    edited December 2023

    Where is the customer from?
    Just wondering

    I see such nonsense Here mainly from MJJ only.

    Thanked by 1sillycat
  • edited December 2023

    @PulsedMedia said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @PulsedMedia said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @PulsedMedia said:

    @totally_not_banned said:

    @PulsedMedia said:

    @totally_not_banned said:
    What's the destination he claims the ~250mbit/s to? What should be realistically possible when downloading lets say https://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test?

    It was that network speed test thing, there was a lot. I picked a few targets, those were the averages of all of them.

    Since they are public test servers AND over the internet, the speeds can be whatever to any single place, they could be congested, their transit could be congested, there could be maintenance on the route etc etc.

    Btw, your test file link is broken :)

    Oops, sorry. I always forget that it's actually HTTP. A rare occurance in 2023. It's really: http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test

    nope still broken :)

    Strange, works for me? I can click it and it loads. What's happening on your side?

    straight from a inventory MD node:

    root@le1mp3-1-10:~# wget -O /tmp/cachefly http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test
    --2023-12-25 13:19:04--  http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test
    Resolving cachefly.cachefly.net (cachefly.cachefly.net)... 205.234.175.175
    Connecting to cachefly.cachefly.net (cachefly.cachefly.net)|205.234.175.175|:80... connected.
    HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK
    Length: unspecified [text/html]
    Saving to: '/tmp/cachefly'
    
    /tmp/cachefly                                                  [ <=>                                                                                                                                     ]       7  --.-KB/s    in 0s      
    
    2023-12-25 13:19:04 (387 KB/s) - '/tmp/cachefly' saved [7]
    
    root@le1mp3-1-10:~# cat /tmp/cachefly 
    100mb
    root@le1mp3-1-10:~#
    

    Lol, seems the b.... not-so-friendly-people block wget... I've never noticed since i always use curl but i just tried it and there it is: 7 measly bytes.

    curl -o /dev/null http://cachefly.cachefly.net/100mb.test should work though.

    If one just trust people that block wget and forget about curl is another question though ;)

    That's just silly of them i think.
    Probably people are infinite looping wget then and they just blocked wget. Kinda defeats the purpose tho.

    I know some people like to loop wget just because they can or "they paid for the BW" on unmetered servers, we had one reseller like that a decade ago.

    Likely. I don't want to know how many silly scripts have this URL hardcoded as it's been around for so long. So long i don't even remember when or where i got it. Must have been 10-15 years ago (sadly they never added a 1GB version). Time cache-flies, lol :D

  • 0 fcks given.

  • PulsedMediaPulsedMedia Member, Patron Provider

    @HostSlick said:
    Where is the customer from?
    Just wondering

    I see such nonsense Here mainly from MJJ only.

    You knew it right, Indian.

    Thanked by 1sillycat
  • I demand 10Gbit/s to my home connection in rural India where I have a dialup!

    Thanked by 1PulsedMedia
  • PulsedMediaPulsedMedia Member, Patron Provider

    KNEW IT!

    PP Dispute was filed!

    lol, fscking MJJs

    Thanked by 2sillycat Patriarch
  • Second most entitled people group after americans. From personal experience, at least.

    Thanked by 1op23
  • HostEONSHostEONS Member, Patron Provider

    this is a common problem with Low End Customers

    Just a couple of days ago a LET user, and not a new user, and he is from EU

    The user ordered Ryzen based VPS, but with just 1 G Memory I think at a very discounted price, but then later he realised that 1G is no enough for his MariaDB or some DB, so he sent me and email that it's his fault that he did not chose the right specs etc... and all the crap, and clearly said there is no problem with the performance of the VPS but he did not choose the right specs

    But later it was all settled for a month

    Then after a month or two he woke up again and started ranting in one of my sales thread that the performance is not good enough compared to his other VPS provider, so I just made sure the node was not overloaded etc....

    I responded him on LET, then he wanted an upgrade, so I told him he needed to submit a support ticket to get the upgrade as it is required for purpose of records, I just cannot create a invoice in a user account on the basis of a comment in forum

    Then he updated that same ticket and first thing he said was "this is the reason I don't like to deal with Indians" and all other crap, though he himself is of Indian origin but living in EU

    I ignored it and still replied

    Then he started saying that I should just whois his domain (the domain used in his email) it's like 20+ years old, so he is not a newbie and tried to bully, but still I ignored and let it go

    Then he replied again in forum, so even I replied and did clarified that you have a VPS with lower specs or something similar (sorry my memory is foggy, to give exact details) but it was something that was clarify that it's not a fault at hosteons, it was client's fault or client needs more resources for his applications.

    then he starts bullying, "my young friend, you need to learn how to run a hosting business" he would refer to Dustinc and Crunchbits in ticket, and say see how they sell 1,40,000 VPS in a single post, and yeah he wanted me to give him a FREE UPGRADE, I clearly denied, atleast I would never entertain a BULLY ....

    Though that moron does not know that he is not dealing with some young kid here, I'm into hosting business since 2003 and into IT industry probably since 1995 or so

    But all I finally did was just said, backup your data and I'll refund you, I just refunded and GOT rid of him.

    It's best to refund and get RID of such morons, as they are like energy VAMPIRES, they suck out all the positivity in you and ultimately we providers who are genuinely trying to give quality service and make a living suffer and feel toxic, some of these morons think just by paying a couple of $$ they own us, we just need to understand it's not worth the hastle to deal with them, it's best to REFUND and get rid of them .

  • PulsedMediaPulsedMedia Member, Patron Provider

    @HostEONS dang, those people create more work than 1000 other customers.

    This is very prevalent with seedboxes especially, everyone gets the smallest cheapest possible, and a significant fraction of the users expect they get a dedicated server for the price. Seedboxes consume orders of magnitude more resources than regular VPS, even from low usage people. Leave 1 public torrent on rTorrent? That could take the entire 10Gbps link by itself without resource caps.

    Now, the storage box -> Because it's based on same software, a lot of people seem to buy it and try to use it as a seedbox. Then these proceed to complain why doesn't his 5€ a month RAID0 lowest cost storage box allow him to transcode and stream, use it as regular seedbox etc. We just provide terrible service for not getting top of the line seedbox performance for storage box price? Yeap that's what it has to be!

    This is why we axxed most of the low cost stuff, person who pays 5€ a month is exponentially more likely to complain he doesn't get infinite performance, than a person paying 15€ a month.

    Seedboxes consume so much more resources in all regards they will never be cheaper to produce than a regular VPS -- Yet, that's exactly what certain people expect. The lower the cost of the service, the more they expect out of it.

    I see this time and time again, every provider with the best possible pricing tends to have seemingly abysmal reputation, and those who charge more but provide technically worse service tends to have stellar reputation. So price is inversely proportional to your reputation, and price is sometimes also inversely proportional to the technical quality of the service.

    Such an irony. Higher Price = Better Rep, Worse Service. Lower Price = Worse Rep, Better Service. -- doesn't always happen, but sometimes it does, sometimes cheap is just cheap. But sometimes, in order for a company to provide those prices they have to goto extraordinary lengths in technical competency in order to make that happen.

    Thanked by 1HostEONS
  • HostEONSHostEONS Member, Patron Provider

    @PulsedMedia said:
    @HostEONS dang, those people create more work than 1000 other customers.

    Yes it's best to loose some customers rather then loosing a lot more Good ones.

    This is very prevalent with seedboxes especially, everyone gets the smallest cheapest possible, and a significant fraction of the users expect they get a dedicated server for the price. Seedboxes consume orders of magnitude more resources than regular VPS, even from low usage people. Leave 1 public torrent on rTorrent? That could take the entire 10Gbps link by itself without resource caps.

    Yes very true, I'm not into seed boxes, but this happened with me in past even with VPS when I used to offer unmetered VPS, even though I had FUP, they still expect to use full 1G 24x7

    Now, the storage box -> Because it's based on same software, a lot of people seem to buy it and try to use it as a seedbox. Then these proceed to complain why doesn't his 5€ a month RAID0 lowest cost storage box allow him to transcode and stream, use it as regular seedbox etc. We just provide terrible service for not getting top of the line seedbox performance for storage box price? Yeap that's what it has to be!

    This kind of issue happens with almost all hosting services, I remember almost 20 yrs ago when I was providing Unix shell account for IRC, they would expect to run unlimited process on a shell but when our monitoring script kills their bouncers they shall bitch about it, some even tried to use it for proxy, even though it's against TOS.

    Even right with VPS it's clearly mentioned commercial VPN are not allowed on our network, they would still order it and when account terminated, they start posting negative reviews

    This is why we axxed most of the low cost stuff, person who pays 5€ a month is exponentially more likely to complain he doesn't get infinite performance, than a person paying 15€ a month.

    True and a good step.

    Seedboxes consume so much more resources in all regards they will never be cheaper to produce than a regular VPS -- Yet, that's exactly what certain people expect. The lower the cost of the service, the more they expect out of it.

    Again very true

    I see this time and time again, every provider with the best possible pricing tends to have seemingly abysmal reputation, and those who charge more but provide technically worse service tends to have stellar reputation. So price is inversely proportional to your reputation, and price is sometimes also inversely proportional to the technical quality of the service.

    It's probably quantity vs quality

    Such an irony. Higher Price = Better Rep, Worse Service. Lower Price = Worse Rep, Better Service. -- doesn't always happen, but sometimes it does, sometimes cheap is just cheap. But sometimes, in order for a company to provide those prices they have to goto extraordinary lengths in technical competency in order to make that happen.

  • Maybe we need a forum category where providers can post customer reviews

    Thanked by 2BasToTheMax emgh
  • The seed box business also attracts a lot of tech illiterate customers, as a result they are used to and expect the support speed of multi-billion dollar companies and have unrealistic performance expectations (they don't understand shared ports or networking)

  • HostEONSHostEONS Member, Patron Provider

    @Moopah said:
    Maybe we need a forum category where providers can post customer reviews

    Haha ... I'm sure most providers wants it, but none will actually post details as it's bad for business + Privacy issues ....

  • @HostEONS said:

    @Moopah said:
    Maybe we need a forum category where providers can post customer reviews

    Haha ... I'm sure most providers wants it, but none will actually post details as it's bad for business + Privacy issues ....

    Privacy? I keep my shades open all the time, no matter what! I'm Dick Daily, and I aint ashamed of some tiny shenanigan's. Unless you got somethin rude to say.

  • HostEONSHostEONS Member, Patron Provider

    @CheepCluck said:

    @HostEONS said:

    @Moopah said:
    Maybe we need a forum category where providers can post customer reviews

    Haha ... I'm sure most providers wants it, but none will actually post details as it's bad for business + Privacy issues ....

    Privacy? I keep my shades open all the time, no matter what! I'm Dick Daily, and I aint ashamed of some tiny shenanigan's. Unless you got somethin rude to say.

    Yeah just like providers don't want clients who keep bitching in public for every little thing, same way even client won't prefer to take service with a provider who would publicly review them or shame them .... hence it's not something that a provider would do, unless some major abuse or crime is involved, though if a client posts a bad review then provider is forced to post details but client still need to make sure that they don't post anything sensitive

    It's not really a good idea I think ...

  • @HostEONS said:

    @CheepCluck said:

    @HostEONS said:

    @Moopah said:
    Maybe we need a forum category where providers can post customer reviews

    Haha ... I'm sure most providers wants it, but none will actually post details as it's bad for business + Privacy issues ....

    Privacy? I keep my shades open all the time, no matter what! I'm Dick Daily, and I aint ashamed of some tiny shenanigan's. Unless you got somethin rude to say.

    Yeah just like providers don't want clients who keep bitching in public for every little thing, same way even client won't prefer to take service with a provider who would publicly review them or shame them .... hence it's not something that a provider would do, unless some major abuse or crime is involved, though if a client posts a bad review then provider is forced to post details but client still need to make sure that they don't post anything sensitive

    It's not really a good idea I think ...

    But we want to see funny customer tickets

  • PulsedMediaPulsedMedia Member, Patron Provider

    @Moopah said:
    The seed box business also attracts a lot of tech illiterate customers, as a result they are used to and expect the support speed of multi-billion dollar companies and have unrealistic performance expectations (they don't understand shared ports or networking)

    I wish! I wish they were used to and expect support speed & quality of multi-billion dollar company.
    That would mean we wouldn't need to provide any support at all, such savings! ^_^

    @CheepCluck said:

    @HostEONS said:

    @Moopah said:
    Maybe we need a forum category where providers can post customer reviews

    Haha ... I'm sure most providers wants it, but none will actually post details as it's bad for business + Privacy issues ....

    Privacy? I keep my shades open all the time, no matter what! I'm Dick Daily, and I aint ashamed of some tiny shenanigan's. Unless you got somethin rude to say.

    Oh, No little itty bitty weenie jokes at all? Just a lil' bit even? ;D

    @HostEONS said:

    @Moopah said:
    Maybe we need a forum category where providers can post customer reviews

    Haha ... I'm sure most providers wants it, but none will actually post details as it's bad for business + Privacy issues ....

    Privacy is of uttermost importance. We've been seen to uphold the privacy of even the most annoying publicly ranting customers.
    In this age; No one seems to care about privacy until lack of privacy hurts themselves.

    Privacy goes hand in hand with freedom of speech.

    Thanked by 2HostEONS CheepCluck
  • HostEONSHostEONS Member, Patron Provider

    @Moopah said:

    @HostEONS said:

    @CheepCluck said:

    @HostEONS said:

    @Moopah said:
    Maybe we need a forum category where providers can post customer reviews

    Haha ... I'm sure most providers wants it, but none will actually post details as it's bad for business + Privacy issues ....

    Privacy? I keep my shades open all the time, no matter what! I'm Dick Daily, and I aint ashamed of some tiny shenanigan's. Unless you got somethin rude to say.

    Yeah just like providers don't want clients who keep bitching in public for every little thing, same way even client won't prefer to take service with a provider who would publicly review them or shame them .... hence it's not something that a provider would do, unless some major abuse or crime is involved, though if a client posts a bad review then provider is forced to post details but client still need to make sure that they don't post anything sensitive

    It's not really a good idea I think ...

    But we want to see funny customer tickets

Sign In or Register to comment.