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.
ChicagoVPS - VPS unusable & unreliable, customer support even worse, but lost pp dispute - what now?
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
More related to the constant DDoS by some in the community, there is nothing anyone but those responsible can do about that.
And create a nanny state type of moderation that people continually say they do not want here.
There comes a point when some providers need to go, a good example of that is GVH, nuggets pushed too far again and again, it was long overdue and he had a good run here.
But what it comes down to really is that all these "bad providers" are actually popular ones in terms of sales, if people want to buy even based on what they can easily find out using a simple search then who are we to stop them?
The only reason they keep getting the airtime is because people keep buying.
Every negative thread about providers you see the same advice, don't prepay for long periods, do research in the future, look for reviews and so on. Yet people continue to take a chance!
Mun has been banned wrong today !
@mpkossen
Thanks for that short LEB/LET history
If I as a newb may ...
How about going another step in your "the community shall decide" policy (which I btw. consider good)? You could do that by formalizing it somewhat and putting it in (web) software.
From my experience (as a community admin) I know that it's always a problem that certain issues kind of free-float and more in the stomach (emotion) space rather than in the brain base.
So, how about offering some kind of "valuing" mechanism where people can hand out "marks"? If a certain negative threshold is reached, a sign goes off (maybe the nick in red or whatever); if yet another threshold is crossed, that Provider gets banned (either for a certain time or forever).
I think that the providers might actually like it themselves because the majority is is between medium and keeeewwl and they could use their LEB/LET "like" value as an insider quality mark. And finally, you, the admins, would have some tangible and (quite) objective basis.
re "Mun":
I agree that he went too far and too personal. But: His intention (from what I can see) was by no means evil. He was pissed but he was pissed for a good reason (CVPS).
I'm, frankly doubtful, whether banning him (for some time I understand) is adequate and constructive, in particular as, of course, it brings up questions like "OK, I see. screwing loads of customers and spamming them is OK for LET but having a - well justified, if badly targeted - tantrum gets you banned.
I don't think that's really your policy and, frankly, I don't think that's the smartest or most constructive thing to do.
P.S. I have said what I had to say/contribute to the case. I will NOT take part in any "bring Mun back!" campaigns.
For one because I do not in any way support escalating the situation any more. But also because, while I find mpkossens decision tough and actually somewhat overdrawn and quick, I also see that Mun hit hard and personal at mpkossen and mpkossen didn't ban Mun just in a bad mood or malevolently. Finally, I do not even know, or how long Mun is banned. If it's for 3 days, the pro-Mun engagement incl. potential "wars" arising from it will take way longer than the ban. Not knowing just isn't a good basis for starting trouble, sorry.
We've always had our quarterly polls as a good guideline for recommended hosts, but with them remaining mostly the same, they didn't suffice anymore. We're still going to do the polls but just two times a year and somewhat different. I'm still looking for another good community guideline for good hosts.
I'm sure you know, being a community administrator yourself, that it's not as simple as this. It's just one point of view out of many.
In this case, whatever @mpkossen does will be at his loss.
If he defends his action it will be for deaf ears as the other side of the "debate" never would change his opinion.
In this case a ban would probably make some people (like you) think that the ban is only a say to remove peoplewith different opinions and only members who think and acts as the admins please are welcome here.
It's a lose-lose situation actually.
This is something you need to speak to his mother about, not an Internet forum moderator.
This is a matter for the entity that governs spam policies in your country, not an Internet forum moderator.
What next, we should campaign our governments to shut down businesses with arbitrarily bad customer service?
Why not ban stupid consumers instead? That's the real problem.
I missed that post earlier, but if what W1V_Lee said is true, and they offered you to move to another node, I would accept the offer and hope it works out.
Also #FreeMun
Ill make a quick reply to the OP. The host server was never down, which was explained by myself in the ticket. I regret that you took that path you took, as I was more than willing to help you but you refused any help at all once I intervened.
Well this is an outright lie, I did apologize and explained how there was no outage that we saw on our end.
I did however, put you in check, nicely, after you repeatedly started being vulgar to our support team and explained what the issues could have been but you were unwilling to try any suggestions:
Proof? Your support always says everything is fine, when it's clearly not (I've experienced it myself), and you have no credibility at all, so you need proof to make a statement like that.
If anything the above proves how Chris perceived (or chose to perceive) his customer.
And it proves that Chris doesn't care about privacy.
A tracert? Really? What should that show....?
?
If I may introduce another hint:
Chris, I feel, looks at it from a completely inverted perspective. In a sane world, it is not the customer who must prove that the product he payed for doesn't work properly.
It should be Chris to prove that the product he got payed for, actually did work and perform as specified.
@Cvps_chris Chris but then you told the op to open a paypal dispute if he wanted a refund. He was acting on your advice. This doesnt seem quite right to me as a provider speaking to the client unless we missed other ticket responses. Your response also seems a bit, whats the word, semi escalated as opposed to being agitated, not fully professional and or professional... very borderline would be the word I would use to describe it. In any event, you make a lot of money selling a product, it would have been a whole lot better to give him back his money and let him go his way. He would have probably not bothered to post a 'bad' review and reduced 'drama' for cvps.
As stated in the ticket, the product did work. From the looks of it, it looked like a misconfiguration on the clients end which we are not responsible for.
I have just written a ticket in which I clearly state that I can fly and that I'm the owner of new york city. Interested in some major buidings? I'll make you a good price
In other words: While e.g. logs under your control are still not 100% trustworthy, that would at least be one credible approach. "Look! I've written it in a ticket" is no proof whatsoever.
Here is where my thinking takes me, with several possible solutions:
Ask @CVPS_Chris politely for a good-faith refund. Ask Chris to set aside the facts (on either side) and provide a refund as a way for Chicago VPS to demonstrate that customer satisfaction is important. You have not had the VPS for long, after all. Chicago VPS demonstrates that they are willing to go the extra mile, and you walk away with some lessons learned, including the lesson that some people CAN step up and make good even when you think they won't.
Since you have not used most of the subscription, perhaps Chicago VPS will find it in their hearts to pro-rate some percentage (say a month or two, or maybe a percentage), and refund the rest? This is a way for you to offer some sacrifice for putting them through trouble, too. It helps cover their support costs. Neither side wins 100%, but it might be considered a fair and reasonable compromise. Both of you get to show that you are reasonable people.
Is there any kind of appeal process at PayPal? If so, can you argue that it should not matter whether the goods are digital or not if you did not receive what you paid for? Otherwise, merchants who sell digital goods need never deliver anything because they get to keep your money and win all appeals. How does PayPal distinguish between that and outright fraud? (I suspect that PayPal is trying to avoid the problem where customers get a digital good that cannot be refunded (a bitcoin, perhaps?) and then appeal because delivery is not provable. In your case, there is no way that Chicago VPS can argue that you used the full two year subscription that started two weeks ago.
Find satisfied Chicago VPS users on this forum, on WebHostingTalk, and elsewhere. There must be some. Ask them how they use their VPS and which node they are on. Ask Chicago VPS to move your VPS to a reliable node that other Chicago VPS customers can vouch to be reliable. Give it another try. Maybe this one will work out. At least you have shown that you are willing apply your own effort to get it to work out.
If all else fails and you are ready to abandon your subscription altogether, find a satisfied Chicago VPS customer and assign your remaining credit to them. This way, Chicago VPS doesn't get to walk away with your money free and clear. They must deliver the services that you bought, to someone who can use them. Hopefully you can find a worthy user in need.
I am* a satisfied cvps user o.O
I was too for a while. Then I started getting some nice packet loss and random VPS reboots. Then I realized I was paying $7 for 1GB of RAM monthly, and moved to a different host where I had much better specs (at that time at least.)
I pay 30/y for 2GB
I pay $8/yr for 2GB
This is unequivocal bullshit and defies reason. The system was down for -hours-, where even their console couldn't connect to the node. What configuration would cause that?
And Chris has inadvertently proven my point.
He actually has no clue or record that the servers were down. What does he use to check the status of the servers? A Christmas Tree? Even in his broad accusation that it was a misconfiguration on my part, he provides nothing concrete. At best it's fleeting conjecture. The reason the support staff didn't respond to a single request for an explanation is because they truly had nothing to give me.
Wait for part two, where evidence of some massive misconfiguration gets magically found.
I can accept a reduced level of service. I was not a stranger to ChicagoVPS' reputation. However, what I received was not a reduced level of service - it was completely unusable. The server was down for hours, at least three times over two days. But more importantly, the staff at Chicago VPS showed neither diligence nor urgency in trying to resolve, identify and remedy the situation.
Imagine your dog being the only line of support between you and your server. Whenever you asked it a question, he just barked nonsense back at you. That was effectively ChicagoVPS' support.
As I've said time and time again, I would have gladly moved to another node if they had indicated to me there was an issue with the current node, or had any explanation other than, "your server is up."
What gets me is this...his staff distinctly said, over and over again, "it's a minor network outage"...yet Chris here says there was no outage...which means, giving Chris the benefit of the doubt, the expected level of support, and the culture behind it, is so poor, that they consistently just say that there's a network outage because that is the norm. They don't even bother checking into it. They just reflexively claim it's a network outage.
Chicago VPS is a caricature of a bad hosting company. Something you'd see out of a Dilbert cartoon.
Even if you give Chicago VPS all the benefits of the doubt, it took me canceling my service and getting to the CEO of the company before I got offered any kind of support...and the extent of that support was a promised tracert.
Let's cut the bull. What's far more likely is you're slamming servers packed in like hens in a PETA video, and your staff has one directive, and one directive only - to stave off the spread of salmonella. Other than that, it's a Mad Max world. Server up - server down - who knows...whichever way the digital winds blow.
I did ask for a refund. Many times. It was refused.
I'd love to donate the remainder of my subscription to the use of this community if someone can think of a way. It's a 5gb server, prepaid for two years. Up, down - who the hell knows, but at least you'll get Chris' trademark tracert.
In all seriousness, if there's a way this community can use the server, it's yours.
Oh, come on, please. The OP posted the ticket in the first place (and seems to have left out the part where Chris came in), so don't play the privacy card just because it suits you now.
There's seriously no winning with some people and it's really, really disappointing. (shakes head)
Let's host LET on it.
@mpkossen I'm starting to think that there's no good coming out of this thread. Might I suggest that you close it?
And if he does that he'll be accused of protecting Chris and CVPS.
It's No-Win situation, @Nekki. Whether or not the thread is closed, Maarten will be accused of all kinds of things. It happened before and he handled it just fine, no?
Having moderated and administered large forums before, I know you can't please everyone because it's simply impossible.
That being said, I have to reiterate that there's no good coming out of this thread, and it is of no benefit to the LET Community.
The bottom line is: OP made a decision to purchase services from CVPS which did not live up to his expectations and he believes that Chris and his staff did not handle the situation appropriately. On the other hand, Chris believes that he did. This will go on and on indefinitely. Needless to mention that there are many other threads on LET that cover similar topics.
This is why I'm suggesting that we close the thread and move on.
offtopic: it's threads like these that make me miss LEA, it's obvious that CC and some hosts here are in a conflict of interest.
ontopic: instead of arguing Chris should give the money back to the guy except for the period he used the server (if he's not using the service you can't ask a person to still pay, and that will win in any court in the USA or the EU, unfortunately the amount is too small to take legal action)
I'm going to have to disagree with you. CC holding ownership of LEB and LET does not mean that every large CC Customer is given immunity or special treatment. CVPS is one of CC's largest customers, and so was another provider here which owner was banned by @mpkossen as he previously stated.
Every aspect of this topic has been discussed several times already. This thread contributes nothing to the community but inviting more unnecessary drama.
Just m 2¢