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 lies about ugvps ownership
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
How exactly? Because Chris provided paypal to get the debt paid off? Non-sense. If that was the only way to get owed money back, everyone would have done this.
I disagree.
Just because your customer falls behind and you establish a payment plan doesn't mean either party should be disallowed at leb.
That's assuming that is what the case is. A lie is a lie, just like the SolveDDoS and multiple ServerMania brands are a lie. The community shouldn't permit lies and falsities to abound simply due to who is participating in it.
It's a pretty simple integrity-check for the community and those in charge, really. Should the community be accepting to blatant lies and misleading cover-ups? What makes it okay for Chris to do it, but not others? Where is the line drawn at?
According to LETs rules the case is clear. @mpkossen has to Ban CVPS if he wants to keep a bit of integrity.
I notice you use the word 'If' but then ask for absolute enforcement right now. As if LET admin needs to jump when the internet says 'jump'.
As it stands, Biloh et al knows Chris and to some extent Tom. Are they biased, sure. Everyone naturally gives the benefit of doubt to people they know. They have a better line of communication with the parties involved. Then on the other hand, we have an internet mob that's clamouring for blood.
I value reading LET and value most of your opinions, so from the bottom of my heart - this hysteria is getting out of hand. If at the end of the day, if the most vocal of the community wants to gang together and ostracize providers they personally don't like at the flimsiest bit of evidence, then this site has become an inbred piece of shit. The very accusation a lot of you have been making (except at the other side) from day one.
You're the first 'victim' of this new community. You simply lacked the face-to-face network with the powers that be and have been left dangling to appease the mob.
I personally think that was a bad call and sets a bad precedence.
@OkieDoke the abuse email for that IP is [email protected].
http://whois.arin.net/rest/poc/QCQ-ARIN.html
Am i the only one who foresaw that this thread was going to be like it is atm? (i.e WINNING!)
This thread really made me feel that it is time to move to the board that shouldn't be named.
@Zen
I'm sorry Zen. I've stepped out of line
Burn CVPS! BAAAAAA! BAAAAAA!
#WINNING
@tchen I think perhaps I do not get my underlying point over well, and perhaps you put it better, I am not saying they should jump because I say so or because anyone says so, I am just saying that the same rules should apply to all.
"if" was a bad way to start it, more evidence has been posted here than about server mania etc so its only fair that the same thing happens to CVPS/UGVPS i.e. all offer posts are removed and they are not allowed to post more.
That is my opinion and of course if Jon does not want to do that because of some loyalty to a friend that he does not have to other people that have been punished then fine he can do that it is his show after all, obviously any last drop of integrity is gone at that point but no doubt he knows that.
I doubt he cares about that. Notice him side step every approach I have made to him, by PM also, he's probably going to write something up for @mpkossen to send me. Here boy.
I just think we should be more civil about it, frankly being personally insulting to people is not going to get anyone anywhere.
Should be simple: Rules are broken, here is proof, please take action.
Armchair lawyers and name calling is likely to just get peoples backs up and the net result is a thread gets buried rather than a logical argument taking place.
Let's not forget it wasn't just her name that was used; the guy impersonated her for weeks if not months on IRC. There is no good explanation for why he was going around semi-flirting with other providers using his wife's name.
Or giving out personal ID like he did to me..
Why didn't she flirted with me
Wait, what's this?
Right. This whole situation is scum-tastic and unjustifiable.
Sorry if I jumped the gun on that one Anthony. I'm probably a bit edgy because I don't want to see LET devolve into something ugly. By all means, keep digging, investingating, etc.
Just moving it along, I tried looking up the paypal account and found it isn't verified
https://www.paypal.com/verified/[email protected]
Which begs the question then... how is this good evidence when I can sign up as anyone here and get to that same point (aside from kickstarting Paypal's fraud team)?
It takes 3-5 business days to change a name on a paypal business account and he was "looking" for Thomas on a day when the account was in his name, and supposedly barely had time to pull out his laptop, according to Chris himself on this very forum. You do the math. Let's not explain this away, it is what it is. He's not your responsibility to clean up for.
https://www.paypal.com/verified/[email protected]
It's likely they swapped the info already.
Tagging @jarland in case he took a screenie of it during the background check.
You can literally always question every thing, at some point you just have to realize you can't please everyone. If you're not going to believe that this happened, better to just let it go IMO. I'm sure I have whatever you're asking for but you can always find another question to ask. At work though, on break.
Really? Gosh that is indicative of someone with real personal issues. The whole thing is like out of a movie. Never ever did I see myself being a front row witness to marriage drama like this.
Oh the things you see...
Leb and let are a community but we all must be careful to avoid a mob justice mentality. If a provider is to be penalized for something so personal like this, and then making a bad judgment call by not changing the name of the acting individual once his marriage was over (and he was no longer employed at netsol) then the rules need to be very carefully constructed.
I am one hundred percent certain that crystal was involved and complicit in this. Her angle as the feel bad for me routine, and then trying to extort money for the domain is a bad act. Folks are glossing over that because they'd rather unreasonably attack cvps.
Has a provider ever received a temporary or permanent ban from leb for having a personal drama like this? From what I understand service has continued without interruption the whole time right?
PS: remember mixed up in all of this is Toms ability to make an income and therefore indirectly this impacts crystal and the children. That's why rushing to judgment and such needs to be avoided.
Yes
I have nothing personally against Chris but he does bring these drama episodes upon himself and his brand. I wouldn't agree that it's unreasonable CVPS to be thrown in the thick of this one.
Really? Chris has a personal conversation with crystal via text and phone (which she later posts publicly) and the fact that it clearly corroborates his story is overlooked because folks would rather attack Chris above all else.
Who and what for? Was service impacted for customers?
Ill PM you the name as they are in good standing now and I dont want to be that dude
You'll note I didn't say anything against Chris in this matter, just that it's not unreasonable, after all the other drama his brand has engendered, for CVPS to be involved here.