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
Thank you, @jsg
The feedback here has been tough but also really helpful towards fixing problems and improving the concept. I've got about 30 items in the development tracker right now. Two weeks from now we should have most of those items implemented and that will really improve the whole concept of ServerVerify.
The big thing we are working on right now is Advanced Search, which I think will roll out in two days.
From there we are going to knock out some bugs and smaller features (ie, showing source for reviews, improving the public reporting tool, etc), plus adding or improving sorting/data surfacing stuff, and continue to prune the benchmarks, reviews, etc.
I think ServerVerify is a good idea in theory, but some of the execution needs to be cleaned up. I strongly dislike that LET reviews are being imported and assigned a star value as reviews without the original user's permission. I really don't think this was even necessary and the platform would be better off without it.
Yes, that seems to be the case. BUT: what exactly do comments like that achieve, other than venting emotions?
I get it, I'm not exactly happy myself, and yes, so far I tend to perceive it as a clusterfuck too. A probably well intended one but a clusterfuck nevertheless.
And to be perfectly honest, I'm not sure that @jbiloh's response (right after your post) indicates that his/their priorities fully match ours.
But be that as it may, jbiloh is jbiloh, you are you and I am me, and we are unlikely to change, and certainly not quickly. Also: repeatedly slapping, attacking or insulting someone with a view different from yours doesn't change their view or how they tick. If you want to change someone's view or priorities there is only and exactly one way (other than sheer brute force): you need to convince them, help them understand why your view is relevant, maybe even important for them.
So, what really did happen? jbiloh somehow came to the conclusion that a site like ServerVerify is a good idea, useful to many, and likely successful. That's his bloody right, just like yours or mine.
OK, the way he conceived/designed it as well the way he implemented it wasn't the best (not only IMO). And how (as well as when, as in "way too late, way too little communication with us") he introduced it wasn't exactly smart nor worthy a celebration.
But that just means that he made, granted grave IMO, mistakes. So what? Each and everyone of us has made mistakes as well. The interesting question however is whether, and if yes, how fast someone is willing and capable to learn from mistakes and to do better!
jbiloh obviously is willing and capable to learn from his mistakes and to do better. For example, he quite quickly got some important messages from us, adapted, and deleted thousands of scraped crappy records. Plus he does check new entries now.
That's what I meant. "He doesn't give a shit about us" has been proven wrong. "He doesn't care about criticism and suggestions" has been proven wrong. "all those data as well as the whole site/project is but a pile of worthless crap" has been proven kind of wrong. fact is He is listening to us, even to angry and basically insulting posts.
But yes, for a final verdict some patience is required, that's why I said "give him a chance!". I guess in a few weeks ServerVerify will be quite different and maybe even useful - but time is needed to implement what he learned by listening to us. After all, what are suggestions and criticism worth if he doesn't even get the time needed to implement it?
So, let's cool down and let the man and his team implement what he learned from our feedback!
Absolutely 100%. I still haven't had my questions answered and Jon has dodged them several times.
I'm still going to ask until I get a straight forward answer on the following:
Who asked?
Did you ask users if you could use their posts as reviews?
When you planned on sending a notification about the updates privacy policy?
When you will opt in and not opt out?
What does this do better vs VPSBenchmarks?
I am hoping more hosts speak up, even better if they start withdrawing. LET makes a lot of sales and traffic. If they don't want to answer the critical questions and criticism then why promote?
[Start Essay]
Yeah... sure no one has done that.
[Continued essay]
I think the individual should be mature to accept something is not right in the frist place. Then comes the part to learn and move on.
You are missing the point that AI was used to generate these crappy reviews in the name of anonymizing the shit.
[Continued essay]
There... this is better...
He is listening ignoring to us, even to angry and basically insulting posts.
Even if one doesnt agree to others viewpoint, and acknowledgement of why that is not important is needed. Straight out ignoring and responding selectively doesnt mean anyone is listening.
You can choose to give your final verdict, whatever that means. Its a free world...
Ah and yes, Give your last word as an authority. Go for it.
Some of you are being pretty ridiculous but I definitely appreciate the entertainment.
Not OK at all
"Dog barks, but the caravan moves on." -- saying in my country directly reflects what is going here.
Agreed 100 %, it’s very strange seeing ’emgh’ and scores I never left.
Crazy to think but it's also a saying in my country 😬
I think the site knows better how you would rate the provider.
If it's coloncrossing reseller - 5 stars, if not - 4.
The idea of serververify.com is good. I see a lot of potential in this - especially the benchmarks section. Current competitors seem to be:
I have to agree with others on the star rating auto generated from each profile review on LET. It's misleading and is like putting words into someone's mouth. Maybe a disclaimer that the star rating is AI generated would be good.
Looking forward to see what WNY IT team is cooking.😊 It will take time but is definitely going to be worth it.
As you demonstrate venting emotions indeed seems to be the main motivation for quite a few posts here.
I didn't say that. But if I wanted you to think again and significantly change your approach (and to throw away lots of work and also do more work) would I be more successful if I attacked and insulted you -or- would I be more successful if I criticized your work constructively and provided reasons for what I suggest?
Sounds good - but actually is short-sighted IMO. Reason: what is right and what is wrong? As I don't have a reason to assume that @jbiloh is stupid, but there is plenty reason to assume that his perspective is quite different from ours, he does have reasons to assume that he is right and we as well do have reasons to assume that we are right and he is wrong.
So, what needs to be accepted is that what he did and how he did it is not what we like.
As for actual mistakes (independent of perspective) the main one I see is that he used AI. But (a) that's a forgivable mistake (there are many, many who use AI ... and get slop), and (b) he did recognize and accept that that was a mistake and he did "clean up" and even drastically so as I already pointed out.
.
Sorry but that's just an accusation - and one that is provably false.
Besides: Did you put work, time, and money into this project? NO you didn't, So what's your position to demand anything? You are but a consumer of what he is trying to build! And so am I largely.
But while you demand based on vague assumptions and as if you were a paying customer, what I say to jbiloh is based on a realistic self-perception ("I'm merely one among thousands who might profit from his work") and accordingly I'm not demanding but rather suggesting and constructively.
Of bloody course you had to vent your emotions (dislike and perception of "jsg is not going with the herd") into an ad hominem.
@default
[self-censored]
If you're going to use an individual's review then don't add to it.
If you want to insert your own info (stars) don't use the individual's review.
It's either an actual review or not, come on.
True. When one uses content from another source, they should not alter that source, and should put reference towards the source in notes (such as links in foot notes, final notes, parentheses, and so on).
One can comment on the content of someone else (similar to how we use the "quote" feature here in LET), and can even rate it with stars (like we use "thanks" feature in LET), but one must preserve the quote as it is, while separating editor's view within a distinct section using either different paragraphs (as an answer or interpretation of editor), or use editor notes in parenthesis, to make it clear that it is their own view (not of the quoted author).
The idea behind ServerVerify was to pull all of the information the LowEndBox and LowEndTalk platform has from its almost 20 years of history, and present it in an easy to understand UI that quickly surfaces data that helps inform buyers on their hosting purchases.
Other websites are either just review sites, or have some sort of benchmark feature, but are confusing to use and hard to navigate. ServerVerify is meant to make it easy for the general consumer to use plus provide enough data where it is interesting to the tech savvy as well.
We are still working to hit the right combination of all those things plus improving the existing feature set and adding new features.
I know some folks here have been very critical of the concept, and that is OK. I accept and welcome all feedback, negative, positive and neutral. We are using all of the feedback and other suggestions to improve the platform for the benefit of all. It is not perfect today, we don't think it is perfect today, but we are absolutely dedicated towards improving it.
So far, since first showcasing the platform privately to our providers a month ago we've adopted over 20 features suggested by our providers and users (plus a lot more bug fixes). So we are listening and improving things. We need another 3-4 weeks in my estimation to roll out a number of new key features plus continue to clean and prune the data (benchmark assignments, omitting the remaining low quality reviews, and assigning more LowEndTalk reviews to providers -- all of which is now being done manually to ensure accuracy).
Some new key features we will have implemented over the next few week days and weeks:
Meanwhile we are still collecting feedback and suggestions. Most of what people are sharing is ending up in our Trello development tracker and is getting implemented. I feel really optimistic about how quickly we are implementing user feedback.
By the time end of year arrives I am confident that ServerVerify will represent a true value to consumers and SMB looking to purchase cloud/vps/dedicated servers and that the data the platform will surface will be a genuine aid to buyers.
Sounds good but 20 years feels impractical 😅 since many of them would have got acquired/deadpooled. Also outdated reviews due to old hardware. Past 4-5 years could be a good idea.
Yeah I agree. Right now we are focusing on 2020 to present.
Ffs, just re-create serverbear. That’s it
What the fuck is that. I don't remember having voting somewhere.
What the fuck is this guy doing? This is disgusting
I would say that the website's graphics cause the CPU to work a lot unnecessarily.
We are working to optimize that now.
The system reads your review, doesn't change it, and assigns a star rating based on the contents of the text. If its wrong please report and we will correct it.
Now that we're embracing AI, can this thread be unsunk: https://lowendtalk.com/discussion/192140/humans-only-please/ ?
LowEndTalk is a discussion forum between people, not machines and people.
If there are users who are using machines to script replies in a bot like nature please let us know.
I just thought maybe your stance on AI had somehow changed.
LowEndTalk is a forum of people talking to people, my friend. No change there.