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.
BuyVM - Allegation of Trouble, Lies, Slabs, Hosts Servers in Basement
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Even if he did post the address, you're probably just going to say "Well, how do we know you didn't just pick some random office building in Batavia from Google maps and post their address?"
Since they're so familiar with Batavia and all, maybe they're planning to literally go to that address and knock on their door.
"Hi, you don't know us and we don't know you, but we'd just like to know if you hosted a bunch of servers in one of these office spaces for BuyVM a few years ago, and if you did, can you show us that room? We need to know the truth, you see. And by the way, is it in the basement?"
It won't happen because the company that owns this site has bad blood with BuyVM, so they're probably getting a kick out this slanderous thread as much as Fabozzi is.
Did BuyVM lie? I think Fran pretty much mentioned everything regarding slabbing in the past. While it may have been casually mentioned or worded in a way to make it not a big deal, the comments regarding their service indicate it's not impacted performance.
Did BuyVM cheat? Cheat with who? Against who? Did the OP and Francisco play Monoply together? How did they 'cheat'? Or did they 'cheat' because the one provider who keeps saying #winning is #losing?
Steal Solus? There doesn't seem to be any proof of that, just Fabozzi posting a seemingly old, outdated ticket he created with Solus. The fact he blocked the dates out and that he was requested not to share this leads me to believe the screenshot is old, else he'd not have blocked the dates out. Doesn't Phil from SolusVM have an account here? Someone tag him, I don't know his handle.
Slabs? Appears they did/do, and considering their service has been stable and solid, no one cares. If they slabbed to sell 300 VMs on an e3 w/ 32GB of RAM like Fabozzi did on a barebone server, then obviously we'd be pissed off as the performance would be horrid. No one is complaining about performance though.
Host servers in a basement? Didn't Francisco say he MOVED the 'basement'/office servers to their new location? So it'd be -hosted-, not hosts.
I don't think BuyVM is perfect, no company is. I've got VPSes with many providers here and on vpsBoard, and I can say that they're one of the best I've had experience with, top 3 for sure. Francisco is a nice guy, I've reluctantly pinged him in the past to ask a question about something and he was always kind to take a moment to help or point me in the right direction. Regardless of the stuff Fabozzi thinks he has on them they continually outrank him in the top provider polls, and this seems to be more provider jealousy because CVPS is operating a cookie-cutter budget host who's biggest competitor is itself.
Fabozzi pretending that he honors the truth is hilarious considering his past and the peers he surrounds himself with. I'd not give him an address of anything, considering his intentions are clearly malicious. (Then again, I gave him my home address in the past upon request for a subpoena that I never got)
But as I said up top, this thread won't be sunk, locked or edited to remove the slander because CC doesn't like BuyVM so Jon and Fabozzi are probably laughing at all of this.
I've always wondered, why is that? Just because Jon and Chris are buddys and Chris is tired of #loosing against BuyVM or is there more to that story?
BuyVM had a semi-public removal of servers from CC when they dumped them. Then supposedly gained a lot of sales from people who wanted BuyVM on the east-coast but didn't want to purchase one with them in Buffalo with CC.
And CC blames BuyVM for that SJ Colocrossing rack photo that they think they got someone to take it, or something.
And of course because Fran and Aldy have participated in threads that slap them around when they fucked up in the past and haven't been shy to express their opinions, either.
Fixed.
I would not talk about biased admins if I were you. I still have a warning in your forum for something which never happened, just because you didnt like (or another admin didnt like) what was written in my signature even if it was public stuff nobody contested.
Thing appear to change, though, props for that, and also, people here seem to be learning how PR works in the LE world. It is good your board is there, it is good this one is here, now there is a balance. Yet, don't claim someone else is biased, because you are too. We live in a biased world, tough luck, only freedom of speech will get out the truth. Convenient and unconvenient truth alike. Isnt freedom great ?
You and I went over this already.
You got a warning/infraction and Martin was mean to you. I saw the report, and then check in on you and you're throwing a hissy fit all over the forum and editing all of your old posts and going directly against his request which you say was unfair and not right. I gave you an infraction simply for immediately going against his original request. You got a temporary 5 day slap on the wrist by having the ability to edit your posts and have a signature removed. which was quite reasonable considering your response to him. Then, you, myself and Martin had a long dialogue that spanned several pages via a private message and on Friday, 5 days later, your restriction was lifted. You were able to post the entire time during your restriction, and did, and once more became a nuisance, even though you were aware that your restriction would be lifted soon, by manually adding a signature to your posts. As per your thread about Fran/Aldy you stated several times you 'expected to be banned' and were believed to be trying to get a rise out of us even after discussions with you, and were treated as such.
You claim bias, but I let your Fran/Aldy thread go on for 18 pages although no useful information had come out of since page 3 or 4 I even agreed with you that what Fran said to you in private was a sort of snide thing to say. When no clear resolution was in sight and after warning in advanced that the thread would be closed soon, I suggested you settle it in private. Which you did for one of the two, I believe. The thread is still public, is not 'hidden' in a forum that only members can see and that Google can not and it nothing you said was edited, I didn't "sink it" like some forums would against brands they may have bias towards... How did I express bias? Just because I locked a semi-incoherent never ending thread? There are threads about many brands that get locked over there when we feel it's time to do so. I think we use pretty decent judgement in that.
It's no secret that I host with them, but simply finding them suitable for what I needed in a host doesn't make me biased. I can still be fair, and I think I was. You had some valid concerns about how things went down with your 5-day restriction and we addressed it and I understand your view of it all. I even updated the rules to make them clearer to understand and added the request to respect the decisions of moderators and admins. We deal with a lot of BS sometimes and there can't be a written rule already created for every possible potential future mishap...
Now I get the feeling that we go back to the cold war era.
Tear down Korea into south and east, snatch Vietnam into two parts (the gooks and the goods), break apart Yugoslavia into three parts.
"If you are not our friend then you are our enemy" ... Meh...
That is not how it happened and I still have the warning for a non-issue. The only issue with my signature was that you dint like it (you, as in the people running the board). It is particularly troubling since you protested against similar issues here so you would have been expected to think otherwise, yet you apply the same measures whenever you do not approve some stuff (which was not even controversial, I was only citing something nobody denied they said and added even your own conclusion).
You cannot claim bias when you do the same thing, that was my point.
We ended our relationship with them, not the other way around.
I believe they had made it known that they were not interested in renewing their contract publicly, before you terminated it (the contract). In fact I think you did them a favor as they were prepared to finish it as it was written despite not wanting to. So unsure if that was a good intentioned move on your part, or if you thought it'd punish them. Hard to tell.
You cannot claim bias when you do the same thing, that was my point.
I'll look at the warning, they were supposed to expire after 5 days. Either way, it's moot because you have full access just like everyone else does.
You already know I didn't give you the original warning, Martin did. I only stepped in and gave you a punishment because you immediately threw a hissy fit after his contact with you, instead of contacting me or attempting to resolve it in any sort of civilized manner.
I forget what you signature said and don't care to spend the time to look it up, other than you were linking to your locked thread and stating something about Fran. His original contact was due to it being 5 lines, not 4, and added the sentiment of some other members in that it was 'crap', IE how you were behaving.
Comparing your 5 day slap on the wrist compared to what I received here is something you were attempting to create a situation for. As I said, you were trying to get a rise out of us in the thread directly, and afterwards attempted to try to get a rise out of us by creating scenerios where you would force action to be taken to fit whatever point you were trying to make. I knew this, and responded as such. If you honestly think that I was unfair to you, and that I had no right to restrict your account slightly (Just so everyone knows, he wasn't banned, and still had access to post) on a privately owned site, then you're crazy.
I got a "two week ban" that lasted months over a signature violation here. You got a 5 day slap on the wrist for the original infraction from Martin (which may or may not been appropriate as we discussed), my infraction for your immediate and childish response to his contact with you. I should have given you the boot after you went, and for another time went against both of our requests even though you knew your restriction was soon to be over, but that is what you wanted... you wanted us to get riled up and take action so you can be self-satisfied in your own mind in that what you said would happen, and continued to provoke and poke until it happened... happened.
I can decide if it's sad or grimly hilarious the mods haven't locked/closed this yet.
Further evidence that LET is more about CC marketing than community discussions. You can bet that if this thread based ChicagoVPS or CC or HVH, it'd be set to sink in a heartbeat.
@Spirit what happened to you?
@jcaleb can you do the right thing here?
Nothing much. I don't know what exactly to do with community double standards so I let it go. Just as I do in numerous ChicagoVPS or CC threads I see on the top of the frontpage all the time. That's all.
@Spirit, it seems this thread is dead anyways, most of the content is just a repeated question that won't be answered as of this time. With that in mind can we have this thread closed, please
?
Mun
Honestly this seems like a dispute between CVPS/ColoCrossing and BuyVM that just needs to be settled privately. No sense in wasting more time here. I am sure if a client has a concern with anything in this thread they have done the right thing and opened a ticket with the provider in question. As we have closed threads in the past because of personal disputes. I feel this one fits in line with something that needs to be addressed in a PM.
mun, I'm still waiting for your answers to my questions!
Oh wait, I never asked any. OK never mind
Nob. Just saying
No, we need more drama and popcorn.
How about we just close or sink on sight any potential drama thread? Oh wait, we can't because "OMG CC/CVPS/HVH/GVH GOT CLOSED/SUNK/DELETED!!1"
Meh ...
I still vote for closing this one (and any similar thread in the future)
How about you guys who want this to be closed stop bumping it?
Agreed.
edit: aww shit..
Is this the thread where someone asked about the guy who was going to shut down his business but is still selling 3 year hosting plans? if so, would be interested to hear an answer for that
You really should not worry about that. As soon as Chris Fabozzi starts his "Datacenter Empire" (Pinky & Brain Style), ColoCrossing will find another sock puppet to carry on with ChicagoVPS. Chris is not half as important as he would love to seem.
@raindog308 this thread will lose interest over time
But the stabbing will continue
Lying or not, if you provide me service as promised, then I'm happy.