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
That was based on the top provider poll. Members voted on that and we wanted to try something new with the results.
We shouldn't need a rule for that. It's all common sense, and @Ishaq should have retracted himself when he decided to open a company; it's a pretty obvious conflict of interests. LET's owned by CC though, which itself is another conflict. We just have to live with it.
Then by all means, you have my vote of confidence in all the changes
apologies for the confusion .
I see no issue with that either - The title is deserved anyway if they won the poll or (by the olympia definition - 1st to 3rd, else entire) are in it, so it's just fair.
It's important to note that the leadership does not consist solely of service providers, but even of community members who have specifically spoken up against biases, people with great judgement that are respected community members. Look at Amitz and Raindog. I ask nothing of them but that they do what they think is right, at their convenience. I don't understand why that is easily overlooked or dismissed. To me, it's huge. They are incredible people and I want nothing more than to stand out of their way and let them do good here.
Why is that sad, exactly? Does it bother you for people to know that you have three accounts? If so, I would consider you to be someone interested in deceiving LET members, which is precisely why I started linking accounts: To make it hard for people to do that. Because they were doing it in droves. Of course, if they're not your accounts, we can talk about it. That's why I started noting "IP match" instead of "other account."
I never considered LET a fair place to begin with. This place reeks as much as WHT if not more. I don't think any other webhosting forum or community is really fair.
Besides, nothing is fair in life. Everyone want advantages and I can't blame them.
Admittedly though you've only been here since April, as far as I know. As a newcomer though, do you have any advice or suggestions on what I can do to increase fairness?
That's what corporations do.
No, that's what people do. Corporations are more straight and do it like me: spend money at their direct competition, promote their competition or invest (in whatever way) into companies moving away from them to provide an incentive for what you want. Bribing officials is illegal, bribing the owner/boss of a company is not a bribe but simply business (we just leave out the SEC rules here, not like anyone here is public traded, that would require in investors interest and some other rules).
If i offer the same price as CC somewhere or additional hardware/services to a provider for a few % of their company, them moving away and still make no loss or some profit on it (either on the server(s) or by the company, direct or calculated against interest collected) there is pure damage (as in customer loss and possible bad promo) for the target but no loss for anyone else.
Just not ordering is so 1999, nowadays you just need to extend your shit, the law is the limit and that goes very, very far before something is slander (especially in the US, and even more so if you manage to SOMEHOW bring anything religious in it, no one wants to touch that, even more so if you have money).
Even if it is true have the common sense to step away whilst this debate is going on instead of lurking and checking IP addresses. It just looks like a mod playing games even if it's not.
To be honest the team you have is great aside from Ishaq, he is like 'that' guy in the group that just does not fit in. Tries to tell a joke but nobody likes it then goes away to find out how to get back at you for not laughing.
Perception, that's mine, don't have any issues with him.
I was here for longer than that. I just tend to be a lurker. Registered an account only to troll around.
As long as it's run by humans, it can't really be fair. It is not helped by a human tendency to complain. But the impression LET has on surface is its blatant bias. WHT hides its bias well for newcomers for a while but that place is just as biased.
WHT and LET have their own flavors. Nothing to improve or change. Let it be.
Well if you think of any suggestions I do welcome them. You're right, bias cannot be removed. The idea that human nature can be removed from human actions would be a bit naive. Instead, my focus has always been to use human nature to achieve the results. For example, put people in leadership roles who have different biases to ensure a proper amount of internal conflict.
Finding the right people for the right position is probably the hardest thing in life.
Bias is generally created by conflicts of interest. If so, then perhaps those in charge (mods and such) should be those that have no conflict of interest, meaning anyone who is a part of a provier of any sort should be retained form taking a higher role. However, in doing so, you kind of remove merit of giving them such roles. Give or take so to speak. If one's gonna devote some of his time into policing this hellhole, he's gotta get something in return.
But then really, if anyone wants to pick a fight, they can. I do feel MrGeneral has a point although I feel he is overreacting. But the fact that someone on a higher positio on LET is hooked up in this affair is the mark of "blatant bias".
Whether that's true or not, for visitors, I don't think it matters.
IMHO, if you want to do it right, you should start from the very beginning, and this wasn't a good beginning IMHO. Simple as that.
Hi Tony,
That is not the issue.
The issue, in my point of view, is that the companies interviewed should have been in the Market for a while. This is a new company we're talking about, that coincidently belongs to an Administrator here. We all know it's an advantage.
Your perception is that he doesn't fit in the group. So how can you stand back and say you don't have issues with him? Stop making it personal. Completely irrelevant comment.
It started with everyone saying @Ishaq should not be removed. Now you've clearly all changed your minds.
I agree with you, 100%.
You are the salt of LET.
Fair enough, and understood, Tim.
We've had our fights, but I am not blaming you here, at all, jarland. I want you to know that.
You were not part of this decision I think.
And the company is 2 months old. 2 damn months. We got companies here that have been advertising for years and trying to survive in the LET market. Those yes, would deserve to be interviewed in first place.
Conflict of interest, for sure. Trying to burst sales for a 2 month company.
I do not have anything against the parties envolved. It's just that this very first interview, didn't occur as I expected to. Not at all.
Agreed.
But when I point that out, I get attacked by a lot of his friends.
Just like a gang :P
Reminds me I should create a gang-meme :P
LET/LEB isn't like WHT, at all.
We got freedom of speech here and mods/admins won't ban you for a simple opinion/disagreement.
Here's my thread to prove that. Although, I'm a pretty old member. I've had my fights with the admins/mods yet, but that's why I like LET, we can share our opinions.
I want to make a drama joke here but there are so many possibilities that I've crashed.
If there was a goth or metal cover of "We Are Family" I would post it here.
Indeed, he does not fit within the more consistent personalities in the admin/moderator group. How does that infer I personally have issues with him?
I get you want to defend him but don't try to turn my comments around and use them for your own means, I will rip you a new asshole faster than you can spin up that next VPS.
Talking about the way he tells jokes is quite clearly a personality clash - and nothing to do with his abilities as a moderator/admin.
Perhaps you should have come up with some better examples to support the claim he does not fit in with the group.
And don't make childish threats. You'll end up with egg on your face.
To be clear, I am absolutely thrilled that @Ishaq agreed to help here. He has been such an incredible help to me. He is a truly nice guy with a great head on his shoulders. We disagree often enough that it generates quality output, and that is important. He is not a "yes man" and he is a hard worker. That, I think, made him a great choice to help run the community.
I am very grateful for his hard work and time spent giving back to this community.
Slightly off topic but I was under the impression the admins/mods here were being paid by the owners here for their contribution/time (including write up to offer posts) so is there any reason said admins are asking for "donations" to contribute to their "time" for offer submissions.
Now this makes sense if they were not being paid already for doing exactly this. Now if did we make a donation I would be just slightly cheesed off said funds may have gone to start up host fund in direct competition.
I'd be also very interested to know how many hosts made such "donations" and were posted pretty fast vs others not "donating" and not having their offers made public on LEB.
No-one is being paid, no-one has since @mpkossen.
This new offer to pay writers is just that, new. It has been previously explained that I accept no payment from the owners and neither did Ishaq (not sure if that may change for him). I have no interest in being paid for my involvement.
OK well that shows you are incapable of either reading, understanding or both.
Anyway, he is big enough to reply if his feelings have been hurt, I don't need to discuss it with his lap dog.
It either shows that you're very unclear at voicing your points, or you think a sense of humour is a requirement to be a sufficient moderator around here.
He isn't going to reply, for good reasons, so I guess this is done.
I knew that, bye then pet.
I'm not posting on his behalf. I just think your comment was totally unreasonable and off-topic.
Later, hater.