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
Acctually ur a lier,I checked the whole post and followed nodeseek the truth is-
The provider has clearly stated that leaking the IP address will result in account deletion. However, you claimed that there is no such rule, which proves that you are lying.
At the same time, I have checked other users’ speed test results, and they were able to reach 1G/s. Your own screenshot also proves that 1G/s is achievable.
Since the bandwidth is shared, it requires competition among users, and it is impossible to maintain full speed at all times.
Ur spreading false information and making things up is unacceptable. This community does not welcome such behavior.
'nuff said.
It's telling that the entire response to criticism is in a combative tone while completely skipping the actual criticism (that a bad review would factor into a termination decision at all). This is LET. People are going to point out a business' bad practice.
Review bans -- If it were only for abusive language in support tickets, I don't think anyone would blame you @jar. The problem is when a review factors in, even a little bit. Having that be even a partial justification is a problem because it signals to others that your customers can't speak freely about their opinions of your service without risking a ban. That casts doubt on whether your product is good, or people are just afraid to say it is bad. That is why providers do not do review bans.
Retaliatory reviews -- You don't have to be silent, you can certainly defend yourself! But the venue for that is in the vendor response section. It is NOT in retaliatory reviews for businesses you're not a customer of. That's not what Trustpilot is. It's literally in the website title: "Experience the power of customer reviews" In the transaction, you are not a customer, you are a vendor. Unless you bought hypnotherapy from that lady (and all the other customers you left retaliatory reviews of), you shouldn't have left a review of her.
Privacy violations -- Generally for financial transactions (of less than $10k), you can anonymize the customer data and keep the country + amount and satisfy concerns of both parties. Beyond that, there are legal mechanisms that can be used to force this if someone is determined enough. (I don't expect you to believe me as a random internet commenter, but ask your legal counsel and they will tell you why US companies comply with interstate & international privacy regulations. If the big companies thought they could get out of it, they would.) Anti-privacy, especially from an e-mail host, also just seems a really weird battle to fight.
Speaking constructively, these are issues that are concerning to people and you should try to work on.
I didn't even notice he'd been leaving retaliatory reviews. That's just scummy.
From one of his retaliatory reviews where he's... reviewing a customer:
While this deploy is running... perhaps I was unclear to the both of you. If you disagree with my terminating a user for writing a bad review after I put up with him endlessly and unjustifiably berating me in support tickets:
I am genuinely disregarding your opinion and choosing to electively inform you of that. I am not going to be your drama tonight. The circle jerk is going to have an empty chair, sorry.
I'm sorry, but calling legitimate criticism of bad business practices a "circle jerk" shows an inability to accept criticism.
Factoring in the number of stars someone gives you in any way to your termination decisions is problematic, period.
Huh? the local port is
143.14.106.109(AS216211) not154.31.113.6(AS906)https://apps.db.ripe.net/db-web-ui/lookup?source=ripe&key=143.14.104.0 - 143.14.107.255&type=inetnum
https://search.arin.net/rdap/?query=154.31.113.6
Note:
I did triple-check just to confirm that my eyes doesn't deceive me.
Well, he didn't admit to what you selectively quoted. He actually said:
It sounds like the customer should have been terminated even before the review but @jar was giving him the benefit of the doubt, and the review just made him realise what he should have already done. Of course, terminating him before the review would have still produced a negative review outcome, so there's not really any difference.
And to be honest, if a customer is so upset with your service that they give a terrible review, why wouldn't you make it right to them by ending the relationship and giving them a refund. Surely that's the best outcome for both sides.
Because a contract cannot be unilaterally changed by one side. Just look at the recent DediRock drama.
Now, offering a refund would be fine.
If the customer was acting so badly that they should be terminated, then it should be done whether they give a 1 star review or a 5 star review. Anything else is retaliation (and "it's not JUST retaliation" doesn't make it any better).
And again, the other part of what I wrote:
Yes, the review itself shouldn't be a reason to terminate, but if a customer has already caused problems, maybe violated ToS, whatever, but given him more than enough reason to be canceled already, then whether the review was the extra tipping point or not is irrelevant - neither side was happy.
If the customer was so desperate to keep the service and not have a refund, they shouldn't be giving it a 1-star review. If they actually valued the service so much that they wanted to keep it, it was clearly better than a 1-star service.
Was a refund involved, though? A shitty service is better than no service if refunds are off the table.
Dinos Against Scammers is monitoring this situation
😳😏
Terminating a user mid-contract for being rude in tickets = perfectly fine
Terminating a user mid-contract for leaving a bad review = not ok
Leaving retaliatory Trustpilot reviews when you're not a customer = not ok
That's what the response feature is for. Leaving retaliatory reviews for a business that you're not a customer of could be considered malicious misuse of Trustpilot.
Imagine you bought something from Ebay. You were unhappy with the seller/item and returned it. The Ebay seller then tracks down your business and leaves a negative review on your Trustpilot page saying you're an idiot and don't understand how to use the item. Do you think that'd be acceptable behavior?
But terminating someone isn't changing the contract, in many cases it follows the contract.
As for MXroute, their policy literally says that they have the right to terminate anyone, anytime, for any reason, just like basically any and all businesses out there. So if MXroute decides to terminate someone they are not changing the contract, they are following it to the letter.
Also, most policies and terms actually include a paragraph that allows them to be updated at any time so yes, a contract can be, and often is, changed unilaterally. Google 'unilateral variation clause' for more information.
I checked 154.31.113.6 only based on the iperf3 speed test. Not the other
Indeed. And that is why people are calling him out on bad business practices, not on fraud. It may be legal for one to factor in a person's bad review to terminate their service, but it's certainly not professional.
Anyhow, my response was to what ralf said, which is a somewhat different situation involving refunds:
If you're so unhappy as to go through the effort of leaving a bad public review, why'd you want to remain with the provider? Not to mention, at the end of the day, many businesses on LET are small (not that it is a required factor) - why shouldn't they also exercise their right to choose who they deal with?
Because it was a service paid for. Now, if it was only a $7/year service, I could see it being worth just calling it a loss.
While it may be legal, retaliatory reviews and bans for giving bad reviews is highly taboo here (and in general).
It feels like there's more uproar about this than the hundreds of scams that were facilitated on and allegedly by this forum over the years. Although, based on your join date, unless you're a prior lurker you may be blissfully unaware. Anyway..
I've lurked for several years here as well as on OGF when it started up.
If you think two pages of criticism is a real uproar, you must have missed out on some real multi-hundred page gems.
Two pages is nothing, but I guess that's my point. It feels like we sort of wooshed over all the really bad stuff that happened years back, but I also did drop off the face of the earth LET for 3 years
Oh for sure, but there's no reason for us to bring up bigger drama just to pad this mini-drama. After all, CharityHost's shenanigans neither lessens nor worsens others' bad behavior.
A lot has happened in the last 3 years, btw!
Lack of sleep.. don't even know what thread I'm in.
Anyway, time for bed
https://t.me/acckChat/644428