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.
All new Registrations are manually reviewed and approved, so a short delay after registration may occur before your account becomes active.
Comments
And what the fuck does all this have to do with me? < you lovely roses >
MOD EDIT: warning sent.
Just spreading the love, probably.
``> @shovenose said:
You're being provider abused another provider which isn't a good thing. Change your attitude!
Ah, I was just talking about with GVH when he set up a script to re-download speedtest files, and then filled up a 250GB VPS and shut it down. that guy has no life.
The defense rests.
On the 8th day God created Michael, and everyone was pissed.
That's in the bible. Don't argue.
I would not argue with the bible @jarland, you know that. Besides I rarely visit the fiction section nowadays.
Oh you
I also had to admit I had the belief it was you. I'm sorry
I'm clearly wrong now however.
We too also have problems with shady VPN businesses that don't take responsibility for their clients.
I don't know who the VPN provider is... but I would guess those who do charge backs are in a very small minority.
@serverian has released the perfect amount of information, the fact is MOST people reading this thread are unable to ascertain who in particular it is. This much should be obvious by the number of companies clammering to state that is not them.
Fraudulent chargebacks are a big issue, if this thread has served as a wake up call to the company involved then it is a win for everyone.
As others have said, a bit disingenuous to claim this as it's obvious that he went out of his way to dramatically plant a list of identitarian markers within a very specific context, transforming the former client into a target.
With that in mind, if you're the raging identitarian cultural informant type but have been experiencing 'ethical' qualms in this thread, why not just add a clause to your Privacy Policy (you can even call it 'the Golden Rule') wherein you claim the right to out anyone who does a chargeback and be done with it?
edit:
I'm not trying to shame @serverian here as it seems he knows better. I think he probably acted hastily and in anger, then realized his mistake.
I don't Think it would be such a bad thing to have something in your privacy policy that if you carry out a charge back without first contacting the provider to discuss the reasons then you will be named publicly. However if a host was to take that route I don't think they should do it here or on any other site, it should be on a page within their own site, the one which relates to the charge back so that there is opportunity to remove it or have it removed unlike on here in a post.
It's a fine line of course and open to abuse. But it could reduce charge backs. If however you are like me and actually do read the terms and snapshot to Google Drive in case they later change without notification then I would be put off seeing that clause.
Not because I charge back, it would just make me uneasy that the clause is there as it appears somewhat threatening even to the innocent.
It's really stupid how they blame us for terminating their service for clearly violating the ToS and AUP. I just have a list of few ips / emails I've been keeping track who does what with our service.
Back in the day, at least around here, if you wrote a bad check at a small store, they might tape it up somewhere next to the register for their reference and for public shaming. Worst I ever heard it called was libel, which it wasn't since it was purely fact that the check was rejected.
Because we already had over 50 comments in this one. It felt like a waste to pass by on that.
But I agree, a new discussion would have been the best option.
I don't think that is what providers want; it's more about the fact that they cannot do much about complaining customers while the other way around a consumer can make as much noise as humanly possible (we've seen some nice examples of that).
Well, apparently you are one of those consumers that was called out by a provider, making you a nice example. And what @W1V_Lee said.
Did I get this right that a member from LET signed up with @serverian and abused the service. Even a DMCA was sent. Said member got kicked out and then initiated a chargeback?
And this member is also a provider?
He didn't even get kicked out I believe. His IP was null-routed because of a DDoS.
Other than that: yes.
That provider should use hos own service to do whatever he did then.
Is charge back really a big issue like some claims here? Is it mostly just asians and eastern europeans (scammers)?
Heh. Sorry bout that.
Now, since EarthVPN said that its not them, so that leaves the two out. @serverian, just wondering, is this provider an active or semi active member(at least lurks daily)? As it can get pretty scary as any of us could have just subscribed a plan with him/her or he/she promoting a plan to us via pm without knowing this fact.
Why is everyone trying to guess who that is? You are completely missing the point of this discussion ....
Yes it is since there is a chargeback fee. Sorry, but I'm missing the point about asians and eastern europeans, are you saying they're all scammers and no one should provide the service for them so that would solve the problem?
I guess I'm lucky, only had one dispute/chargeback and that was by an american.
The company should be the bigger person. Privacy is getting very critical these days.
Customers are people. People are assholes sometimes. No matter if they're affiliated with LET/LEB. A Company is an entity that should watch their brand carefully. Big or small. Doesn't matter. The part about VPNs should not have been mentioned imo. At that point it went from anonymous to almost-anonymous. Which is not the privacy I expect from a company.