# BuyVM Legal Defense Fund? LOL



## raindog308

This is so lame and desperate...ChicagoVPS is begging Solus to sue BuyVM over Stallion.


----------



## danni

As Im not a client of BuyVM, care to share specificly?


----------



## Aldryic C'boas

I can't imagine why he would censor the dates... it's almost like he drug up a very old conversation from before we proved to SolusLabs that the code was our own (and they publicly confirmed), and is just acting like a child trying to stir the pot <_<

EDIT:  Oh, he also tried to claim that we were behind his multiple compromises.  Never had any proof of that nonsense, either.


----------



## Mun

Well I am going to sue you for having your DC in a basement in a non-existent city in New York. MY DATA DIDN"T EVEN EXIST Q_Q.


----------



## peterw

Your imaginary vps in your imaginary DC are very stable and fast, for imaginary vps.


----------



## drmike

Ahh, you know I checked out early yesterday after pulling a 48 hour straight work marathon then a 24+ into yesterday.... Sleep needed 

@raindog308 why do you have these screenshots and where did they come from (i.e. were they posted elsewhere)?

Again, popcorn in hand, I am not jumping in this mess, BUT, I'll bet you $1,000 that Solus won't do a damn thing / can't / whatever.  Would be a shame if something I had 'leaked' and it's not an exploit.


----------



## Damian

Isn't this the ticket string that was posted in like mid-2012 when BuyVM made the move away from Solus?


----------



## Aldryic C'boas

drmike said:


> @raindog308 why do you have these screenshots and where did they come from (i.e. were they posted elsewhere)?


Yeah, they were part of a clusterfuck thread over on LET.  Just look for BuyVM in the title - the OP's name should tell you most of what you need to know about the thread 



Damian said:


> Isn't this the ticket string that was posted in like mid-2012 when BuyVM made the move away from Solus?


It was either then, or when Chris was trying to blame us for his Solus being compromised multiple times.  There's been so much drama from that front I honestly don't recall.


----------



## Damian

http://lowendtalk.com/discussion/1460/whats-with-the-real-reasoning-behind-the-conflict-between-buyvm-and-solusvm-recently/p1 is the thread I was thinking of.


----------



## DomainBop

> BuyVM Legal Defense Fund? LOL



Shouldn't ChicagoVPS be in that title too since the statute of limitations isn't up for customers and others to nail their asses to a wall in court over their database breaches.



> (i.e. were they posted elsewhere)?



Screenshots were posted in the "BuyVM are career criminals and smell bad too" thread on LET that Chris and Kevdam from ChicagoVPS, Andrew from 123Systems, Maarten Kossen from Procurios, and ajizzle/Alex Vial from ColoCrossing spent the night participating in.


----------



## BrianHarrison

The whole discussion over there is borderline ridiculous. It is highly unprofessional for ChicagoVPS to take to a public forum like that to besmirch another provider. They come off looking like petulant children. The recurring examples of schadenfreude on hosting forums -- especially between providers -- should stop.


----------



## jarland

I'm worried about this hurting buyvm like I'm worried about getting brute forced on 22.


----------



## maounique

It will not stop, this is the market, the wild-wild west of hosting. Literally cut-throat competition.

What is most funny, is that the market (which was always a niche in the first place) is incapable to support even those with a big share, at least not so much as if they were doing something else, less effort, more gain.

NOTE: My feud with Aldryic and Francisco WAS personal and started before I was working for Prometeus, it was never Prometeus vs BuyVM, even if some people tried to make it that way and is also in the past. I think all attacks from both camps should cease, people here leave CC alone, people there leave BuyVM alone. We found out interesting facts with these things, but in the long run, nobody cares,including most of their customers. All the bashing against me calling me racist, even muslim gipsy had 0 effect on cancellations, at least I dont recall seeing any that says it was because of my opinions.


----------



## drmike

The whole LET thread now is a CC-associates orgy.   The CC crew can't stop climbing over one another in their debauchery.

I could get slappy and give them something to do...  But I am a tad busy 

Problem with the thread and timing is that whole circus is reactionary to the CC/HVH throw down and a way to bury that and other constant CC-related threads that stayed on top of vpsB + LET for past week or two.

The BuyVM stuff... pffft...   Slabbing = right reasons and folks who know the mechanics of such give Buy a thumbs up.  The Batavia stuff, haha yeah,  that was good.   I've used bonded lines for all sorts of things for longer than many of the readers probably have been alive over there.  Folks can dis something like Verizon's FIOS all they want, that business offering on their network is impossible to beat = spectacular offer, throughput, uptime, etc.  I know because I have customers utilizing such at their places of business around the country.

I like BuyVM because they are human, creative and good citizens in the communities.  Never had a problem with their services with mass oversell and crap performance.   Network blips, yeah, overall uptime sure.  Hard to argue or complain at the price point.

It's not going to pan out for CC and CVPS how they think.  That thread is now dead or it will really start backfiring.

I wonder why 123Systems chimes in over there... some useful stuff... Why not a confession that he's currently slabbing his servers?  I mean I've noted that here on vpsBoard...   Good for the goose, not the gander.


----------



## CVPS_Chris

March 2015 is all.


----------



## Hxxx

From what I had read, the whole thing is to just create bad publicity without substantial evidence. More specific to the title. They changed the tittle to something more dramatic. In this way lazy posible new customers which won't read 6+ pages, will skip buyvm.

Chris is so childish  ... He probably have the whole CVPS support team, posting with different usernames, to make the drama bigger. LOL

--

+1 to Francisco for replying decently. We need a little of Aldryic there... ^ ^


----------



## Darwin

drmike said:


> The whole LET thread now is a CC-associates orgy.   The CC crew can't stop climbing over one another in their debauchery.


http://www.southparkstudios.com/clips/183601/unemployed-men-having-sex


----------



## MannDude

Hey Fabozzi, how come you can't even get in the top 5 results for the quarterly provider polls? Doesn't your best friend own the place! 

Someone is butthurt and jealous because they found a company that is not putting 300 VPSes on an e3 with 32GB of RAM like they were...

The slabbing stuff isn't really 'new', either. The basement/office/whatever thing is new to me, but hey, I didn't see anyone complaining about performance...


----------



## DomainBop

hrr1963 said:


> From what I had read, the whole thing is to just create bad publicity without substantial evidence. More specific to the title. They changed the tittle to something more dramatic. In this way lazy posible new customers which won't read 6+ pages, will skip buyvm.


The whole thing is a repeat of what happened last May before LET was hacked: there were several negative threads about CVPS and they (Adam specifically) retaliated by starting a thread accusing BuyVM of shilling.  TL;DR = yawn.



> What is most funny, is that the market (which was always a niche in the first place) is incapable to support even those with a big share


Definitely a niche: 200 servers makes someone a giant in the low end world but a fleaspeck compared to even mid-sized hosts in the overall hosting market. The hosts who rely solely on "the market" (aka LET and LEB free offer posts) for customer acquisition are doomed to fail.  Relying on a forum for the bulk of sales isn't the brightest move, and there are several hosts who have built their entire business plans around LET/B and its $7 price ceiling.


----------



## drmike

... $7 price ceiling ....

and guess what, in the United States, I am nearly certain that constitutes PRICE FIXING.  It's against the law.

Perhaps someone would like to sponsor the campaign to have that taken to task?


----------



## hellogoodbye

All those providers coming out of the woodwork to join in just left me shaking my head. They're so intent on their frenzied witchhunt that they don't even care about anything else, like the impression they're leaving on third parties - especially potential or existing clients - any longer. It's like they've taken on some sort of "if we're going down, we're dragging you with us" mentality. Either that or it's a lame deflection trick to divert people's attentions away from the recent CC/HVH mess, which isn't exactly working and the only true advantage they've gained out of this mess is the ability to change the title to sound as sensational and damaging as possible for Google to pick up. (Speaking of which, I do like how quickly the admins jumped in to change the title once again-- very nice and misleading, cannot praise them enough. /sarcasm)

tl;dr -- My impression of that entire thread is pretty much summed up by this Pirahna gif, especially once CVPS, 123Systems and the LET admins jumped in the fray:


----------



## CVPS_Chris

MannDude said:


> Hey Fabozzi, how come you can't even get in the top 5 results for the quarterly provider polls? Doesn't your best friend own the place!
> 
> Someone is butthurt and jealous because they found a company that is not putting 300 VPSes on an e3 with 32GB of RAM like they were...
> 
> The slabbing stuff isn't really 'new', either. The basement/office/whatever thing is new to me, but hey, I didn't see anyone complaining about performance...


Manndude, you should probably rethink what you just posted. The reason CVPS name is not what it used to be is because of people like Fran and Dustin that run around posting false information. Because they are liked in the community people start to believe them even though the information is false.


Fran does it much worse. He has 20 nodes across 5 servers in Buffalo, again think before you speak.

The reason no one complained is because its false, there was no servers in Batavia its all a lie hes caught in and cant explain his way out of. I find it funny that BuyVM is such a small operation but acts like they are so big. They have around 25-30 servers total at both locations.


----------



## joepie91

CVPS_Chris said:


> The reason CVPS name is not what it used to be is because of people like Fran and Dustin that run around posting false information.


No. It's because you're an arrogant asshole.


----------



## tchen

Mao_Member_no_signature said:


> We found out interesting facts with these things, but in the long run, nobody cares,including most of their customers. All the bashing against me calling me racist, even muslim gipsy had 0 effect on cancellations, at least I dont recall seeing any that says it was because of my opinions.


I can't talk for anyone else but all the provider bashing going around has actually had an effect on my purchasing plans.  For not the very reason you may think but the opposite.  Any provider that's jumping in picking fights and mudslinging automatically notches themselves down in my books.  That went for you (yes, despite you protesting it not being related to Prometeus - you still are the person I deal with there), Aldryic and even Chris.  Ironically, the more each of you mud sling the worse it becomes for your own side.

At this moment, I'm leaning back to paying a helleva lot more on AWS or even take a known crap quantity like Digital Ocean just because its less drama.  Whether there is a real risk of your personal behaviours impacting your technical professionalism remains to be seen but there's obviously a strong lack of basic business filtering being shown.  Defending and correcting is fine, but dishing it back out for revenge or deterrence is not.

Mudslinging might work as a tactic in politics because there's no one else to vote for.  But given that its 2014, there's definitely a lot of alternatives in hosting so it might not be the wisest move.  Again, that's just me.  I might not even be part of your target demographic.  2c.

P.S. I don't have to like you to do business with you.  But I do have to be able to trust you.


----------



## wlanboy

Sigh ... if I would like to read threads like this I would visit LET.


----------



## raindog308

drmike said:


> ... $7 price ceiling ....
> 
> and guess what, in the United States, I am nearly certain that constitutes PRICE FIXING.  It's against the law.


No, I don't think it does.

First, price fixing is usually about _raising_ prices - a bunch of vendors get together and say "we agree not to sell for less than $20".  That would harm consumers.

Here, you have a third party (yes, just a minute on that) who says "I'm only going to list offers that are $7 or less".  That is not price fixing.  It'd be like if I set up a car review site and said I'd only review cars that sold for less than $15,000 and told manufacturers they could only advertise cars for less than $15,000.  No one would say "and therefore we can sue Ford".

Vendors can still sell for more or less in the marketplace, advertise wherever they want, etc.  LEB/LET is just a review site with a forum.

I'm aware that CC owns LET, but the LET policies were in place pre-CC, and more importantly, CC does not control all the providers who advertise there.


----------



## nunim

joepie91 said:


> No. It's because you're an arrogant asshole.


Well this is probably part of it, but I'd say it also has something to do with multiple database compromises, poor node performance and IPv6 coming soon forever..

Censoring only the dates is certainly an odd tactics, names and emails maybe but dates? 

I thought the ticket Chris posted was in relation to the SolusVM "hack" that we never heard anything else about and was denied by Solus (although that doesn't mean a whole lot either).

[Edit]  I'm not a BuyVM fanboy, for a multitude of reasons, including their billing policies, but I'd probably give BuyVM a try before ever touching a CVPS again.


----------



## MitchellRobert

How can Solus possibly sue BuyVM? That makes no sense:

1. Making a replacement software isn't illegal. Sure you can claim and hope they decoded your PHP 101 quality code and changed it, but really, using Solus code is the last thing you should do. (in clear language: it's obfuscated, so it will take time to decode, not to mention a first year PHP student writes better PHP than this train wreck known as "SolusVM")

2. Solus, civil lawsuits cost money, a _lot_ of money. Now, where would you get enough money from to pay that because the complainer has to pay it initially, and I'm pretty damn sure you'd lose it unless the US law suddenly changes into something... You get the idea, keep on dreaming.


----------



## MartinD

I think you've missed the point of this thread completely and utterly. Spectacularly, even.


----------



## drmike

nunim said:


> I'd probably give BuyVM a try before ever touching a CVPS again.


Problem is, as you probably noticed, avoiding CC is like avoiding the common cold if you are paying attention.  Who knows what "investments" he/they have in other providers.

That's why I've advocated entirely avoiding CC and those who offer from their network.  Sucks for the honest providers, but like any other MLM the downstream makes daddy on top money.

I'm hoping the boys in Buffalo take note of the messes and change course entirely.  Less of the games, deception, etc.  more focus on their business and competing like normal businesses.   Same applies to BuyVM.  I've never liked the provider attacks, even if I like the provider more or less so.

Did someone use my transparent word over there?   Yeah... Uhhhmmm..  Maybe I'll write ya'all a love letter about the topic.


----------



## raindog308

MitchellRobert said:


> How can Solus possibly sue BuyVM? That makes no sense:


The only possible grounds would be:


Copyright.  But Solus is ioncube'd and they'd have to prove code theft, which is virtually impossible in this case.
Patents.  But I doubt Solus has any patents on a VPS control panel.
Trademark.  But BuyVM is not calling it "Stallion" and the look/feel is quite different
Trade dress/etc. - but Solus could never demonstrated that a potential customer would confuse the two.  BuyVM doesn't even sell Stallion.
Trade Secret - which would require demonstrating that it was stolen.  I doubt one could even be postulated - it's a web-based application that makes calls to other vendors' APIs.
You can't sue just because someone else has the same idea as you or says "I can make the same thing, only better".


----------



## NodeBytes

When will a mod just close this thread?

It's not useful.


----------



## nunim

drmike said:


> Problem is, as you probably noticed, avoiding CC is like avoiding the common cold if you are paying attention.  Who knows what "investments" he/they have in other providers.......


That's not an issue for me, A. I only purchase VPS(es??)  that come with Native IPv6, B. my network is developed enough that I already have a solid provider in all locations that CC offers, aside from Chicago, still waiting on that one.


----------



## CVPS_Chris

@drmike can you please explain to me other than me hiding BuffaloVPS years ago to be double posted, and the whole HVH thing ( which was news to me ), what is it that you have against myself and/or ColoCrossing?

If you take a look at the service etc, ColoCrossing is actually your best choice over many others as far as uptime, network, and quality. Just because you have something against Jon or myself as a person doesnt discount the actual service being provided. Same goes with CVPS, the service we offer is actually much better than most of the hosts out there. You even said it yourself, and there is proof that our service is good, just go and look at the last LEB posting.

Its never made much sense to me where all the hate has come from. Please explain and finally clear it all up.


----------



## CVPS_Chris

raindog308 said:


> You can't sue just because someone else has the same idea as you or says "I can make the same thing, only better".


Fran already admitted in LET thread that he took the code.


----------



## hellogoodbye

CVPS_Chris said:


> Fran already admitted in LET thread that he took the code.


I'm sorry, but he said that with quotation marks and the entire comment was dripping with sarcasm. If you're going to make an argument at least be straight up about it and stop twisting the words of others to fit your narration. Please.


----------



## Francisco

CVPS_Chris said:


> Fran already admitted in LET thread that he took the code.


The only code we used was their web interface and that was available for public download for the sake of creating new skins. You didn't even have to be a paying customer to get it back in the day. I don't know if that's

the case in their bootstrap setup but I know it was during their SMARTY days.

There was countless people that took part in the stallion 2 beta and even in the initial stallion 1 testing. I don't think you still quite understand how ioncubed code works. You can't just go visit a site and it gives you some perfect dump of the code. Someone did just that with solus a few months ago and it showed huge, massive, hunks that were simply not there.

EDIT - Expanding on a thought

Francisco


----------



## drmike

raindog308 said:


> First, price fixing is usually about _raising_ prices - a bunch of vendors get together and say "we agree not to sell for less than $20".  That would harm consumers.
> 
> Here, you have a third party (yes, just a minute on that) who says "I'm only going to list offers that are $7 or less".  That is not price fixing.  It'd be like if I set up a car review site and said I'd only review cars that sold for less than $15,000 and told manufacturers they could only advertise cars for less than $15,000.  No one would say "and therefore we can sue Ford".
> 
> Vendors can still sell for more or less in the marketplace, advertise wherever they want, etc.  LEB/LET is just a review site with a forum.
> 
> I'm aware that CC owns LET, but the LET policies were in place pre-CC, and more importantly, CC does not control all the providers who advertise there.


Price fixing is an interesting topic and one that will probably be discussed more in coming months.

By limiting the price to $7 it by default limits the available pool of companies who can or will sell at such a price.  Now couple that with a provider CC owning the place who funds/supplies to a great number of the companies... and bundle their "friend's" company which has too close ties and that company's propensity towards outlandish and unsustainable market disruptors --- 2GB @ $7, now 2GB $2~...  and the choice to  publish many offers (disproportional number I argue) that directly benefit them (customers or investment interest).



> Price fixing is an agreement between participants on the same side in a market to buy or sell a product, service, or commodity only at a fixed price, or maintain the market conditions such that the price is maintained at a given level by controlling supply and demand.
> 
> The intent of price fixing may be to push the price of a product as high as possible, leading to profits for all sellers but may also have the goal to fix, peg, discount, or stabilize prices. The defining characteristic of price fixing is any agreement regarding price, whether expressed or implied.
> 
> 
> Price fixing requires a conspiracy between sellers or buyers.


^--- sounds umm in multiple places applicable.



> I'm aware that CC owns LET, but the LET policies were in place pre-CC,


That's funny sort of (good point BTW).  Here's the deal, LET and LEB fail to disclose their ownership to the public on said sites.  Maybe I am blind.  I don't see ToS, Privacy policy, About Us, etc.  So very bad to start with.  Again, like the HVH debacle, the only way to know about the ownership is to linger and read or make mistake of spending money and note who ate your money.  Deceptive.

Just because policies pre-date their acquisition doesn't make those policies legitimate.  In fact the former owner was Australian, and such price capping/fixing might have been illegal under law in Australia.  But you have to remember, LET/LEB was a community and NOT-FOR-PROFIT, so while such may have been illegal both the size of the site then (smaller) and non-commercial operation made it an uninteresting target.

Contrast that to the whole takeover, deceptive BS,  and their clear intentional milking of the market as a FOR PROFIT investment.  FOR PROFIT and manipulating the manipulated capped marketplace.  Operating in New York State (which has gone after price fixers) in the United States (which goes after price fixer).

Place your bets...


----------



## CVPS_Chris

@hellogoodbye, it wasn't with quotations. He went back and later added that ( changing his story ). Doesnt matter though, he deserves what he has coming to him.


----------



## raindog308

CVPS_Chris said:


> Fran already admitted in LET thread that he took the code.


No he didn't.

Are you familiar with quotation marks, sarcasm, etc.?

"you wouldn't be able to have an intellectual conversation with me. Its simple, you are not smart enough."

  -- CVPS_Chris


----------



## CVPS_Chris

@raindog308, read above.


----------



## Francisco

CVPS_Chris said:


> @hellogoodbye, it wasn't with quotations. He went back and later added that ( changing his story ). Doesnt matter though, he deserves what he has coming to him.


True, sort of.

The original statement had me add an 'Uh huh' at the end, but I went back and added quotes because I felt the "uh huh" wasn't sarcastic enough.

Francisco


----------



## tchen

raindog308 said:


> The only possible grounds would be:
> 
> 
> Copyright.  But Solus is ioncube'd and they'd have to prove code theft, which is virtually impossible in this case.
> Patents.  But I doubt Solus has any patents on a VPS control panel.
> Trademark.  But BuyVM is not calling it "Stallion" and the look/feel is quite different
> Trade dress/etc. - but Solus could never demonstrated that a potential customer would confuse the two.  BuyVM doesn't even sell Stallion.
> Trade Secret - which would require demonstrating that it was stolen.  I doubt one could even be postulated - it's a web-based application that makes calls to other vendors' APIs.
> You can't sue just because someone else has the same idea as you or says "I can make the same thing, only better".


There's reverse engineering which is a sideline to standard copyright cases.  You actually don't need to directly copy code in order for those to proceed.  Access to code, either directly provided or indirectly via disassembly is sufficient.  Franciso's been on record numerous times about fixing Solus code* so it's possible for that to at least get started.  Standard defence is fair use, but that onus is on the defendant.

The current EU case law allows you to 'observe' how something works and duplicate it which is what you're thinking of in general.  That's fine.  Fun distinction isn't it?

* My memory isn't perfect.  It sounds like he was referring to just the publicly accessible plugin/theme stuff.  It sounded deeper at least to me at the time.


----------



## hellogoodbye

CVPS_Chris said:


> @hellogoodbye, it wasn't with quotations. He went back and later added that ( changing his story ). Doesnt matter though, he deserves what he has coming to him.


He also had an "Uh huh" at the end, I would say that's plenty sarcastic in itself... unless he also added that in later?

I'm not really sure what you're trying to achieve exactly with this smear campaign but I do have to say, I don't think it's working out as well as you wanted. Will it give potential clients second thoughts about buying plans from any of you (BuyVM included)? Yes, for sure. Some would rather steer clear of any and all drama, but some will also take other factors into account, especially when it comes to things like performance, reliability, quality of support. In that regard, many will nevertheless go with BuyVM because they have a solid reputation around the industry for great service.

I think it would be wiser for you to channel all this energy spent on hating BuyVM into focusing on and enhancing your own services at CVPS if you truly want to show everyone who's the better man.


----------



## tonyg

For what it's worth:

The mudslinging and constant chatter between some of the providers in this and other forums is incredible.

Listen, if you want to talk with your industry buddies about x provider do it in private.
Bringing up this stuff in a public forum can't possibly be good for business.

This shit is getting old.

Carry on...


----------



## drmike

CVPS_Chris said:


> @drmike can you please explain to me other than me hiding BuffaloVPS years ago to be double posted, and the whole HVH thing ( which was news to me ), what is it that you have against myself and/or ColoCrossing?
> 
> Well this is good and constructive ideally.


1. hiding BuffaloVPS, yes.  So you are coming clean on that?  "Officially"  Like you / Jere started it, operated, etc. in entirety?

2. muckery with UGVPS... the late night calls to Crystal, the funky whodunit, the strange money to Tom... the PayPal info change, the wiring out of money on a Saturday evening...

3. KevDam HillstrandNG

screw it... you did a BuyVM laundry list over there... I am not going down that road to beat you in the head.  You damn well know what you've done and so does Jon. 

When you lads pulled the lowend screwjob you signed up for extra attention.  Overdue extra attention.  You guys couldn't stand participating in a market where the moderation and owner routinely brow beat you for bad behavior and playing unfair as a provider and you greedy little pigs saw the money on the table, so you jacked it.  Yeah you paid an intermediary for it and you'd know morally that was wrong if you folks had moral compasses that worked.  Chalk it up to business and being a cut throat throat or "I graduated from business school".



CVPS_Chris said:


> If you take a look at the service etc, ColoCrossing is actually your best choice over many others as far as uptime, network, and quality. Same goes with CVPS, the service we offer is actually much better than most of the hosts out there. You even said it yourself, and there is proof that our service is good, just go and look at the last LEB posting.


Best?!?!?!  Best really?  Again, trying to be reserved, but if you are so proud and so is CC (consult Jon) put your uptime from 3rd party monitoring out in public, all of it. Let others scrutinize what is monitored. Do I think your network is horrible?  Buffalo, yeah has been meh, not so good.  Better now that heavy on Level 3.   Prior round-robin-whatever-the-hell-you-call-that routing, not up to snuff.  Your other locations, you are using facility blend upstreams.  Uptime and quality would be a review of that and not CC per se.  

It's hard to say where CC ranks in the pecking order.  Being such a weird hybrid mid-tier at best company well, best is something that would have to be earned in different linear offer categories. 

I give credit where it's due.  I've noticed ChicagoVPS appears to be doing better.  I know you said prior you went adding nodes a while back, good.  CC, yeah, network in BUF better lately.  Yeah, you've been keeping a lower profile... if I ignore (cough) grumblings and investments.

Still doesn't change the business-as-usual practices in Buffalo.   Running a company for ~9 months and no disclosure of it (Hudson Valley).  No press either...  Forced out like a pimple.

Look most of the drama could and would go away if you just had a meeting up there in BUF and really thought about the above and ran things a little more business like.   I recommend: Releasing official disclosures/press in timely manner about acquisitions, be proud of your investments so others have trust and faith in using said companies, divest of lowend*.


----------



## MannDude

CVPS_Chris said:


> Doesnt matter though, he deserves what he has coming to him.


Continued success in the industry and continual better community ran and voted quarterly top provider poll rankings?


----------



## Hxxx

Proving that they stole something from Solus will be hard, they will lose more money than what they will gain. Even when Stallion2 if i'm not mistaken is a completely new control panel.

Plus, you can see whatever you want and take whatever you want from a publicly visible code (html) in your browser, in this case i think would be the result of php, so is not even the real code, if we were to debate that.

--

Probably BuyVM is gaining more and more customers, after all if Faboozi hate it, it must be good LOL.

--

Also like somebody said, I would like to see CVPS demonstrating their superiority with their service. So much energy wasted here.

-

Kind of bummer that he pushed the screenshots to the forums, if there was a case you already ruined it. Clearly demonstrate that when a person is angry the brain stop working.

-

Again +1 to Francisco for maintining the responses professional. It for sure demonstrate the quality of the company.


----------



## RLT

I wish they had locations other then nj and Vegas. I would buy one then.


----------



## raidz

@CVPS_Chris

Even with all the stuff that has come out today about BuyVM, I really don't think you should be apart of it. You getting your customers information compromised multiples times is a lot worse than slabbing (has anyone tested that script on your VPS's?) and even their "basement dc". That LET thread really shows your character and what kind of business you run. I had service with both you and BuyVM. I still have a few VPS's with BuyVM. Other than a few random reboots and the possibility/probability that my personal information is now in the hands of people that have even less character than you, my service was decent. Only after I read more threads on LET and saw all of your arrogant posts and stupid #winning bs did I decide I would not renew. I will most likely continue to hold on to a few of my BuyVM VPS's because they are cheap, fairly fast, and stable, and I know my personal information is in good hands. They also have IPv6.

EDIT: Formatting?


----------



## telephone

Taken from LET:
 



CVPS_Chris said:


> We have over 25,000 customers and very very little complaints.


Am I the only one who finds it hilarious that you have "25,000" customers, yet you couldn't even get 5 votes (25 points) to make the top 10 provider poll at LEB?  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:

*Note:* Yes, only x% are on LET, but that's still a real knee-slapper.


----------



## texteditor

raidz said:


> @CVPS_Chris
> 
> Even with all the stuff that has come out today about BuyVM, I really don't think you should be apart of it. You getting your customers information compromised multiples times is a lot worse than slabbing (has anyone tested that script on your VPS's?)


plus Fran only slabs for stability on high-RAM machines, Chris doesn't need to slab because everything they have is an E3, but he does it anyways so he can fit like 300 customers on a node


----------



## MannDude

telephone said:


> Taken from LET:
> 
> Am I the only one who finds it hilarious that you have "25,000" customers, yet you couldn't even get 5 votes (25 points) to make the top 10 provider poll at LEB?  :lol:  :lol:  :lol:
> 
> *Note:* Yes, only x% are on LET, but that's still a real knee-slapper.


I do not buy those numbers anyway, as the data from his DB leaks shows numbers much less than that and I do not believe his business has skyrocketed since the first, second, or third leak of customer data.

Chris is banned from WHT, people don't like him on LET/LEB anymore so sales must be down there. The rest of his sales are from SlickDeals.com where CC brands get listed and circlejerk upvoted but the comments in the threads now indicate that the unknowing consumers there have wised up and used Google to research their purchase. There is RedFlagDeals, too, but I doubt seriously that Fabozzi has seen a large increase in business unless he is doing some local advertising that isn't online.

He runs a company that has developed a reputation for being _cheap_, so he competes with himself with every offer and tries to match or beat his previous offers, hence these recent 3-year deals and annuals where you can get 2GB at the same as $2.5/mo. Much better than previous deals, but customers who seek such things are the same who stick around for a little while, don't renew when their annual is up and are the same who jump ship when a better deal is found elsewhere. I highly doubt he has anywhere near 25,000 clients, let alone active ones for CVPS.

Fabozzi is and will continue to be a habitual liar, over-exaggerator and all-in-all asshole. That's just his character and how he was raised. I don't think he can help it, so I don't particularly hold it against him. It's just comical to see him believe he has finally one upped someone when in fact, he has not. But I'll watch anyway.


----------



## drmike

MannDude said:


> Chris is banned from WHT, people don't like him on LET/LEB anymore so sales must be down there. The rest of his sales are from SlickDeals.com ....


or the obvious, his growth comes from "investments" in other companies.


----------



## GIANT_CRAB

Is the FREE software community making GPLv4 yet????????

Maybe every1 will use it, including solus??????????


----------



## MannDude

Remind me to look into a plugin that removes excess punctuation.


----------



## texteditor

who gave the LET thread that dramatic title?


----------



## jarland

CVPS_Chris said:


> @drmike can you please explain to me other than me hiding BuffaloVPS years ago to be double posted, and the whole HVH thing ( which was news to me ), what is it that you have against myself and/or ColoCrossing?


Thanks for finally admitting that. You've been lying about this for quite some time and we all knew better. That's the thing, you lie and you defend your lies passionately for years. Everyone lies. Everyone. The question is do they lie to cheat and deceive others? For you, it's a resounding "yes." You might say it's just business but I think you know what people think of that kind of business.


You've always had the capacity to be a good person but you've always chosen the opposite. Lord knows I've made mistakes but the things I don't shout from a mountaintop are not things that I hide to cheat and deceive. I can't say that's true for you and I wish I could. Character is not always revealed by actions, but eventually actions can paint a clear image of character and you've painted a picture for years.


You wanna know how to change it? Simple. Start being truthful like you were in what I just quoted. How hard was that? How many cancelation requests just came in from it? It's not even just about other people. If you can't respect yourself enough to have integrity then why should anyone else?


----------



## drmike

texteditor said:


> who gave the LET thread that dramatic title?


I think KevDam / whateverhisnewusername / the OP requested it along the way.

Funny thing is Kossen encouraged it with a Thank!  Meh...  

Remind me to request scandalous SEO title changes as we go on threads and kick the moderators here to give me thanks as we do.  There will be popcorn and elephants.  It might resemble a circus.


----------



## maounique

tchen said:


> I can't talk for anyone else but all the provider bashing going around has actually had an effect on my purchasing plans.  For not the very reason you may think but the opposite.  Any provider that's jumping in picking fights and mudslinging automatically notches themselves down in my books.  That went for you (yes, despite you protesting it not being related to Prometeus - you still are the person I deal with there), Aldryic and even Chris.  Ironically, the more each of you mud sling the worse it becomes for your own side.
> 
> At this moment, I'm leaning back to paying a helleva lot more on AWS or even take a known crap quantity like Digital Ocean just because its less drama.  Whether there is a real risk of your personal behaviours impacting your technical professionalism remains to be seen but there's obviously a strong lack of basic business filtering being shown.  Defending and correcting is fine, but dishing it back out for revenge or deterrence is not.
> 
> Mudslinging might work as a tactic in politics because there's no one else to vote for.  But given that its 2014, there's definitely a lot of alternatives in hosting so it might not be the wisest move.  Again, that's just me.  I might not even be part of your target demographic.  2c.
> 
> P.S. I don't have to like you to do business with you.  But I do have to be able to trust you.


 AWS is certainly trustworthy and will always be more trustworthy than a small family business, nobody can compete with billions, agreed (despite failing hard now and then, even to social engineering because they employ humans too). People choose small business over big ones for entirely different reasons, one of them being the "pleasure" of dealing with me or Aldryic 

People which base their purchase decisions on personal hatred are, of course, better off elsewhere. Nobody can deny my right to an opinion, not the government, not my (indirect) employer, and certainly not some forum admins. If they dont like my opinion, fine, come with arguments, I am not absurd, but attempts to leave me jobless because of it will not be tolerated and ANY decent human being should resist such attempts out of principle if not because they will sooner or later be in the same situation.


----------



## Darwin

I have posted that on LET, and while I wait for buyvm to provision my new vps, I will post here what I think was really fun (from buyvm whcms). 



Oh and thanks Chris, your attitude made me order a buyvm vps. If you hate them so much, they must be good.


----------



## DomainBop

> very very little complaints.



Congratulations Chris on the latest  CVPS ROKSO listing!  http://www.spamhaus.org/sbl/query/SBL212040

...and on the other 3  current spam related SBLs for CVPS: http://www.spamhaus.org/sbl/query/SBL211993 , http://www.spamhaus.org/sbl/query/SBL211992, http://www.spamhaus.org/sbl/query/SBL211634 ,

Meanwhile, over on the CVPS LEB offer a customer is complaining because his emails are bouncing because the IP block his server is in is blacklisted...



> Jonathan:
> 
> 
> Does ChicagoVPS get blacklisted a lot? I’m having serious trouble with getting blacklisted all the time and can’t send email to anyone because everything I send out gets bounced right back considered as spam. When I do a blacklist check hundreds of domains come up and half of them are blacklisted. My particular host is not in the list, but since all IP’s are shared and there is much over selling I think it is causing normal users (ones not trying to spam the world) to get all blacklisted and have problems with their service. There is no ChicagoVPS forums or community anywhere so that’s why I posted this here. If there were a forums or an affiliated place to post comments I would have done so. I did submit a ticket to support, but what will support do if the entire server has been blacklisted? Seems like it would just be an ongoing problem, never to end. Thank you.





> Jonathan:
> 
> 
> I was told by support it is basically my fault and Chicago would just change my IP address. I take one look at my logs and it is real easy to see these guys are targets for just about anyone trying to hack into something. The last VPS I used maybe had 3 SSH login attempts in a period of 3 months. With Chicago I get 20+ a day. If that’s happening to a fairly new IP, I have a feeling it will just continue to happen with other IP’s. There is only so much you can do with your time and a firewall. I suspect hackers know those systems aren’t managed at all and Chicago just lets it happen. My renewal decisions have been made today. “You get what you pay for” applies here if you are interested.


----------



## drmike

^--- can we get you a proper username and a signature now Mao?

I choose small businesses because like 85%+ of all businesses are small businesses.  Plus it gives me a chicken neck to run after if they do some actual harm/stupidity/breech/etc.

Fact is I try to always spend with local/regional small businesses when I can, even online.  Doesn't work so well for hosting, so far... so just small businesses.



> Congratulations Chris on the latest CVPS ROKSO listing!


That lowend* segment sure is hard to deal with.  Lots of abuse.   I know more providers that won't go near it than will.  I sympathize on this, just don't let me catch IPs-for-spamming wind or I'll make a stink about it.


----------



## CVPS_Chris

MannDude said:


> Continued success in the industry and continual better community ran and voted quarterly top provider poll rankings?


Hes dropped from 1 to 5. Expect it to keep on going.


----------



## drmike

CVPS_Chris said:


> Hes dropped from 1 to 5. Expect it to keep on going.


Curious here, but is that your intent? To see their rankings be lowered?


----------



## zzrok

CVPS_Chris said:


> Hes dropped from 1 to 5. Expect it to keep on going.


Ok, if you can predict the downfall of BuyVM, when can we expect CVPS to make the top 5?  Maybe that should be of more concern for you.


----------



## texteditor

CVPS_Chris said:


> Hes dropped from 1 to 5. Expect it to keep on going.


lol this is precious


----------



## jarland

zzrok said:


> Ok, if you can predict the downfall of BuyVM, when can we expect CVPS to make the top 5? Maybe that should be of more concern for you.


As soon as he makes forum accounts first least 15 of those 25,000 members. They sure are the most quiet bunch of people. Not saying they don't exist, I don't have their numbers, but man I've seen a lot more words come out of a lot less people.


----------



## CVPS_Chris

@jarland @drmike

BuffaloVPS went down exactly how I said it went down. I helped out a friend, he couldnt handle it so I took it over. BuffaloVPS only was posted once on LEB while under my control. Would I have kept posting it along with CVPS, probably but we cant predict the future and what would or wouldnt have happened.

Ive always told the truth, you just choose not to believe it. How can I continue to have a civil discussion when the person I am talking to takes nothing I say as truthful. Its a downhill battle talking to you that I just dont care to have.

Just remember in the back of your mind your attacking a guy that never did anything wrong and is not associated with the things you are putting on me ( Ex. LEB take over, HVH, and whatever other dealings related to ColoCrossing ). You continue to group me in with ColoCrossing drama that 99% of the time I am just learning for the first time along with you when its posted. Im not as well connected as you think, yes Im friends with Jon in real life and thats where it ends.


----------



## jarland

CVPS_Chris said:


> @jarland @drmike
> 
> 
> BuffaloVPS went down exactly how I said it went down. I helped out a friend, he couldnt handle it so I took it over. BuffaloVPS only was posted once on LEB while under my control. Would I have kept posting it along with CVPS, probably but we cant predict the future and what would or wouldnt have happened.
> 
> 
> Ive always told the truth, you just choose not to believe it. How can I continue to have a civil discussion when the person I am talking to takes nothing I say as truthful. Its a downhill battle talking to you that I just dont care to have.
> 
> 
> Just remember in the back of your mind your attacking a guy that never did anything wrong and is not associated with the things you are putting on me ( Ex. LEB take over, HVH, and whatever other dealings related to ColoCrossing ). You continue to group me in with ColoCrossing drama that 99% of the time I am just learning for the first time along with you when its posted. Im not as well connected as you think, yes Im friends with Jon in real life and thats where it ends.


For what it's worth I believe more of the words you say than most people so give me a little bit of credit when I speak. Yeah I'm a dick when I wanna be, who isn't.


In the interest of truth, why don't you explain the lie that I proved beyond a shadow of a doubt at the first post in this thread: http://lowendtalk.com/discussion/18497/should-providers-be-banned-for-deceiving-consumers/


The part you need to keep in mind before responding is this statement I made: "PayPal takes 3-5 days after submitting paperwork to change a business contact name. If it isn't a business account, you literally cannot change the name without legally changing your name and proving it."


That is absolute truth. Now explain why you lied and how that ties together with always telling the truth.


----------



## Hxxx

CVPS_Chris said:


> @jarland @drmike
> 
> BuffaloVPS went down exactly how I said it went down. I helped out a friend, he couldnt handle it so I took it over. BuffaloVPS only was posted once on LEB while under my control. Would I have kept posting it along with CVPS, probably but we cant predict the future and what would or wouldnt have happened.
> 
> Ive always told the truth, you just choose not to believe it. How can I continue to have a civil discussion when the person I am talking to takes nothing I say as truthful. Its a downhill battle talking to you that I just dont care to have.
> 
> Just remember in the back of your mind your attacking a guy that never did anything wrong and is not associated with the things you are putting on me ( Ex. LEB take over, HVH, and whatever other dealings related to ColoCrossing ). You continue to group me in with ColoCrossing drama that 99% of the time I am just learning for the first time along with you when its posted. Im not as well connected as you think, yes Im friends with Jon in real life and thats where it ends.


I think is probably because all the bragging and arrogance you usually do (from what I've seen). One earn respect by giving it.

I think diffamation can be penalized, still possible nowdays?


----------



## maounique

drmike said:


> ^--- can we get you a proper username and a signature now Mao?
> 
> .


Not yet the warning for the non-existant signature violation is still in place. As long as people get punished because their opinions are not convenient, it will stay there. It is also a reminder of how friendly the admins are in this friendly forum.

It remains to be seen if anyone understood anything in the end.


----------



## drmike

Holy shit, big boy pants!

*"a guy that never did anything wrong and is not associated with the things you are putting on me"*

The BuffaloVPS stuff went on and was good popcorn on LET and LEB.   I'll leave it in the cemetery over there for now.

You can dance out of LEB/LET theft and HVH.   That's fine.  I won't push you on it.  But if that was my friend pulling that or even my VENDOR, I'd pack up and get some new relationships.  Call me petty like that.

CC has no financial interest or "investment" in ChicagoVPS? Nor does VSNX or any of the other permutations of Biloh and Clarke Inc.?

Did you or did you not work for Velocity / VSNX / Mohawk / ColoCrossing / Biloh and Clarke Inc?  If not why the mixed up tales that were never corrected back in LEB of ole days?

When can we expect ChicagoVPS to pack it's bags, grow up and move on out of CC?


----------



## MannDude

Mao_Member_no_signature said:


> Not yet the warning for the non-existant signature violation is still in place. As long as people get punished because their opinions are not convenient, it will stay there. It is also a reminder of how friendly the admins are in this friendly forum.
> 
> It remains to be seen if anyone understood anything in the end.


That is not true, and I explained this to you already via PM. I'm sure you're getting a kick out of this, but if you wish you can stay at LET if you feel that their admins and moderation team are less biased and provide you more freedom.



> Also, usernames can only be changed by yourself once per every 60 days. This isn't a limit for you only, it's a forum wide thing. Let me know know if you want to keep what you have now or want it changed back, either one is fine with me. If you want it changed back I need to do this for you manually.


To which you responded:



> Yes, can you change it to rMember, like this Mao_rMember ?


To which I responded:



> Since the rule is one username change every 6 months when you do it yourself, I can either set it back to Mao like it originally was or leave it as it is now. There is and always has been a limit on how often you can change your display name and this has nothing to do with you personally, as I am sure you will interpret it as such.



Now all name change requests are handled like how WHT used to handle them, and they're per request and now stricter. Also @CVPS_Chris can be mad at you for me not changing his name to 'pubcrawler' as he requested, and now I am going to deny him the ability to change it to 'DeadPony', which he has requested instead of 'pubcrawler'.

Though if you're concerned about this, feel free to start a separate thread.


----------



## DomainBop

> now I am going to deny him the ability to change it to 'DeadPony', which he has requested instead of 'pubcrawler'.
> 
> Though if you're concerned about this, feel free to start a separate thread.


Can I have permission to change my name to AssKisserSpirit?


----------



## FHN-Eric

hellogoodbye said:


> I'm sorry, but he said that with quotation marks and the entire comment was dripping with sarcasm. If you're going to make an argument at least be straight up about it and stop twisting the words of others to fit your narration. Please.


He twists everyone's words, even his own to his advantage. Nothing new.


----------



## tchen

jarland said:


> As soon as he makes forum accounts first least 15 of those 25,000 members. They sure are the most quiet bunch of people. Not saying they don't exist, I don't have their numbers, but man I've seen a lot more words come out of a lot less people.


I doubt the 25k are all active but the thing is, there's so much vitriol against CVPS who in their right mind would randomly post 'hey, I have CVPS boxes and they're fine'. He doesn't prompt people to post reviews on his behalf like some providers at WHT so where's the impetus? For the record, I have quite a few CVPS boxes and they perform just fine. A few came with issues but a few professional exchanges with tech cleared them up. Are they stellar enough that I'd go out of my way to enrage half the vocal community? No. But for the price I paid, they do an admirable job.


It's probably testament to how broken this community is when I had to give pause before posting this.


----------



## drmike

tchen said:


> Are they stellar enough that I'd go out of my way to enrage half the vocal community? No. But for the price I paid, they do an admirable job.
> 
> 
> It's probably testament to how broken this community is when I had to give pause before posting this.


No worries @tchen.  No one is going to attack you for saying that I'll be there by your side.   CVPS was never 100% broke, but they were at least three time broken-into.  That's a point I can't get over along with the post mortems.

The nodes have always been hit or miss and if you didn't mind downtime and shuffleboard too often to another server were find for leisure servers.  Never managed to get real things running that utilize resources.   Always was artificial barrier, failure, or complaint.  Buy 2GB use 200MB.   ...But it has been a long time since I wrote them off, companies change.

Hope they continue to do well by you.


----------



## CVPS_Chris

drmike said:


> but they were at least three time broken-into.


Why does this keep coming up? You and I both know it had nothing to do with the security of ChicagoVPS, but everything to do with Solus and WHMCS exploits that no host could protect themselves against. So please tell me why the blame is passed onto me still after knowing that was the case.


----------



## drmike

CVPS_Chris said:


> Why does this keep coming up? You and I both know it had nothing to do with the security of ChicagoVPS, but everything to do with Solus and WHMCS exploits that no host could protect themselves against. So please tell me why the blame is passed onto me still after knowing that was the case.


 Because it happened.   I know you didn't hack yourself.    Your staff and CC's staff, hell, yeah, little hackaroonie tendencies out of those guys and I am not talking about hacky sack, might want to audit your circle.  Just saying...

It's a strange repeat violation.   Probably semi-rare distinction in the industry.  Truly sorry it is the one you suffer under.

Never thought your company did proper cleanup though.   I won't go into 3rd party "consultants" and other random admin types helping.  It's all troubling.


----------



## tchen

CVPS_Chris said:


> Why does this keep coming up? You and I both know it had nothing to do with the security of ChicagoVPS, but everything to do with Solus and WHMCS exploits that no host could protect themselves against. So please tell me why the blame is passed onto me still after knowing that was the case.


For what it's worth, I was actually impressed that you guys set up remote logging alerts after the second? breach. It didn't fully stop the third try but at least you managed to catch and stop it in progress. People don't tend to deal with security on a daily basis and don't know how it works - so you'll likely never see props for that outside this post.


----------



## texteditor

CVPS_Chris said:


> Why does this keep coming up? You and I both know it had nothing to do with the security of ChicagoVPS, but everything to do with Solus and WHMCS exploits that no host could protect themselves against. So please tell me why the blame is passed onto me still after knowing that was the case.


maybe if you weren't kicking hives all the time, the bees might sting someone else first, ya know?


----------



## MartinD

Fwiw, there was never any hard proof those hacks had anything to do with Solus. Only 'my tech said so before he left' Noone else was affected at that time.


----------



## raidz

CVPS_Chris said:


> Why does this keep coming up? You and I both know it had nothing to do with the security of ChicagoVPS, but everything to do with Solus and WHMCS exploits that no host could protect themselves against. So please tell me why the blame is passed onto me still after knowing that was the case.


Maybe if you didn't have such a big mouth and weren't such a prick you wouldn't have made your company and your customers a target.


----------



## peterw

> When they kept on questioning him, he straightened up and said to them,
> 
> 
> "Let any one of you who is without sin be the first to throw a stone at (insert target here)."


I don't like circles so stop this and bring this to an end.


----------



## Time4VPS

Wow! Entire post dedicated to bash and troll. Not the best time to close the thread?


----------



## Darwin

I find silly that "Not our fault" thinking. You bought a crap software, you make money using the crap software and it is not your fault if data is leaked?

Don't care if others buy that software too. There are smaller providers, i.e which don't have 25k clients, that have custom solutions. Btw both Solus and whcms provide an api that can easily be used to create a secure front end to these products.


----------



## Virtovo

Lots of bad feeling here


----------



## DomainBop

Darwin said:


> I find silly that "Not our fault" thinking. You bought a crap software, you make money using the crap software and it is not your fault if data is leaked?


You're not the only one who finds it silly. Visa's best practices guide on how to handle a breach recommends not trying to play the victim or trying to pass the blame onto a 3rd party  by saying _"it's not our fault, the Solus and WHMCS developers are to blame, etc"_, in your public statements to customers following a breach.

http://usa.visa.com/download/merchants/cisp_responding_to_a_data_breach.pdf

 



> *Take ownership.*
> 
> Immediately acknowledge
> 
> responsibility for the breach and express
> 
> regret for its impact. Once you’ve done
> 
> so, you can quickly move to talking
> 
> about the solution (what you are doing),
> 
> rather than the problem. Avoid the blame
> 
> game, which might include placing
> 
> responsibility on an employee or vendor.
> 
> •
> 
> *Don’t play the victim.*
> 
> Ten years ago,
> 
> when announcing a data breach, it may
> 
> have been possible for companies to
> 
> successfully portray themselves simply as
> 
> fellow victims. Today, this is a flawed and
> 
> dangerous strategy. Although you may have
> 
> had a crime committed against you, the
> 
> public and business press will still hold you
> 
> accountable and will not consider you a co-
> 
> victim. Best practices recommend that rather
> 
> than announce that your company was the
> 
> “victim of a criminal computer hacker,” you
> 
> should announce that you became “aware
> 
> of unauthorized access to our computer
> 
> system,” or some alternate phrase.
> 
> •
> 
> *Express regret.*
> 
> Apologizing is a critical
> 
> step in taking ownership. Avoid qualified
> 
> or conditional apologies. For example,
> 
> “We don’t think anyone was affected but
> 
> regret if anyone is inconvenienced” might
> 
> be worse than not apologizing at all.


----------



## drmike

So, I've been sitting on the picket fence wondering what has been poking me for a long time.

I don't think it's time to shutter the thread and people should have at it.  Everyone needs to stop using excuses and man up to things.  I could spend half of eternity beating points into resisting heads.  I could find Jimmy Hoffa's body under the CC daycare and folks would say OCD/foil/theorist, etc. It's tiring.  

Nothing is going to change and general atmosphere in the world today is ME ME isms.  Get rich and do it quick, even at others expense.  This market is a youthful hyperactive version of  piranhas feeding (kudos to the person that posted the graphic).  It is stuff like letting guys that work for you stiff their wife, family, etc.  It's HORRIBLE and makes me sick.

It's talking smack on a guy long in the communities who has helped damn near everyone freely and most folks/competitors can't even decently thank or be kind.

So, make the excuses about slabs and cabs and customer counts... run shells companies, manipulate markets.... Hell if I care... Rip your clients off.  Lie about dates, spin the fucking moon for all I give a damn.   Each the cheese and choke on it.

It's damn clear it isn't the micro nature of the market as to why everything runs the way it does and continues.  Hell if I know who or what is doling out free tickets, but they aren't at my lunch counter.  I know these communities are mostly sell-shit markets.  Plenty of smart people with scruples that ought to be cobbling and keeping folks honest (thanks to the slab-detector author) pick up the slack.

Folks need to pay attention out there.  Behind the monitor.  Outside.   This stuff, none of it is real other than the harm.  Me I think it's all a honeypot.  Maybe all the companies will starve if we just ignore them.

Unsure where I am going, certainly not emo [i let someone else play that role].  Stepping back, lowering the cannons, cleaning the firearms.... shooting some stuff for fun. Taking a self imposed time out.  To enjoy real life.   Oh, but I'll be back and hopefully the usuals hold it down.

Be kind to each other.  Not me to blame for it now


----------



## FHN-Eric

Darwin said:


> I find silly that "Not our fault" thinking. You bought a crap software, you make money using the crap software and it is not your fault if data is leaked?
> 
> 
> Don't care if others buy that software too. There are smaller providers, i.e which don't have 25k clients, that have custom solutions. Btw both Solus and whcms provide an api that can easily be used to create a secure front end to these products.


If he did use api, I wouldn't count on it being any more secure. All databases can still be hacked, even with api.


----------



## Darwin

The api ins't secure, you are right. But what I am suggesting is: code something to use the api and sanitize all the user values that you pass to the api.

Bulletproof? No, but should make you endure most of these 0-day exploits. If it was a direct db hack, not using sql injection, then omg someone need a better sysadmin...


----------



## tchen

Darwin said:


> The api ins't secure, you are right. But what I am suggesting is: code something to use the api and sanitize all the user values that you pass to the api.
> 
> 
> Bulletproof? No, but should make you endure most of these 0-day exploits. If it was a direct db hack, not using sql injection, then omg someone need a better sysadmin...


They did that with SolusVM. I miss my Solus CP.  The WHMCS 0 days hit anyone who didn't have modsecurity up and running. And even if you did, chances were good you disabled some of the sql injection rules because the admin backend passes queries in the post. Sure, some people find coding to be a hobby and go beyond modsec and build a shell api, but that doesn't make this feel less like a case of blaming the victim.


----------



## tchen

DomainBop said:


> You're not the only one who finds it silly. Visa's best practices guide on how to handle a breach recommends not trying to play the victim or trying to pass the blame onto a 3rd party  by saying _"it's not our fault, the Solus and WHMCS developers are to blame, etc"_, in your public statements to customers following a breach.
> 
> http://usa.visa.com/download/merchants/cisp_responding_to_a_data_breach.pdf


It's good to be neutrally bland in the PR. Incident reports do need to detailed enough. Even Ramnode's post incident report mentions Robert Clark by name along with Solus***. That one didn't generate a stink so where's the line drawn?


My guess, separate the PR from the IR. Nick uses twitter first which gives him just enough space to follow VISA's guidelines. No one remembers the post incident release since it wasn't news by then and people have had time to cool down. Don't be silent, waiting for all the facts to come in before letting your customers know someone's on the job. Mix the two types of reports and they'll end up combing through that first post and seeing what they want to see, not what you wrote.

*** Actually, i've had a chance to sit down at my workstation now and went through the email logs.  I don't see mention of Robert in the RamNode incident reports.  I also have the CVPS reports from the same time and they're pretty neutral too (although the spelling is atrocious ).  I guess it goes to show that say something enough times on the Internet and it suddenly becomes truth.


----------



## HN-Matt

tchen said:


> I can't talk for anyone else but all the provider bashing going around has actually had an effect on my purchasing plans. [...]
> 
> At this moment, I'm leaning back to . . . or even take . . . just because its less drama.


Same here. I PM'd @drmike the longer version of this, but as a host with no dog in the LET/vpsBoard fight, the main reason we left CC was because we didn't want to be dragged into all of the e-detective rage comic narratives surrounding them (and _not_ because of any lack of quality with CC's hosting--likewise, I'm sure BuyVM is also a quality host).



MartinD said:


> I think you've missed the point of this thread completely and utterly. Spectacularly, even.


http://supb.ro/nies


----------



## drmike

HN-Matt said:


> Same here. I PM'd @drmike the longer version of this, but as a host with no dog in the LET/vpsBoard fight, the main reason we left CC was because we didn't want to be dragged into all of the e-detective rage comic narratives surrounding them (and _not_ because of any lack of quality with CC's hosting--likewise, I'm sure BuyVM is also a quality host).


Is that really why you left ColoCrossing?   Really?  Positive? 100% sure.   I don't want to see any accidents involving a bus full of fake nuns and a tractor trailer or anything.

I seem to remember you never even dealt with ColoCrossing directly that I know of.  You were mucked up in some downstream perhaps via HVH via GVH via reseller hosting ??? Something like that.

HVH back then was it's own company, or so the story was perpetuated.   

You left on your own volition due to internet foil hattery activity?

You are telling me that a sacrilegious parody purporting to be a hosting business is more worried about little old me rather than the billions of adherents you caustically bang in the head?

Did someone put you up to this?   You may have picked the dumbest day in history to jump up again.


----------



## willie

HN thread about slab detection script now links to LET Buyvm bashing thread:

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7148723#up_7150768


----------



## DomainBop

> I also have the CVPS reports from the same time and they're pretty neutral too (although the spelling is atrocious ).



The reports they emailed were neutral, now if only they had thought to put a muzzle on Chris...



> but as a host with no dog in the LET/vpsBoard fight, the main reason we left CC was because we didn't want to be dragged into all of the e-detective rage comic narratives surrounding them



That is a mother[venial sin redacted] [venial sin redacted] reason for making a business decision but not surprising given how heavily some [venial sin redacted] small hosts unwisely rely on forums for the bulk of their sales.


----------



## CVPS_Chris

DomainBop said:


> The reports they emailed were neutral, now if only they had thought to put a muzzle on Chris...


I dont need a muzzle, no one has control of me sir. I own the company, and I will keep saying it until I am blue in the face. Get it through your head.



DomainBop said:


> small hosts unwisely rely on forums for the bulk of their sales.


I agree, it is a shame. Thats why RLT got burned so bad. Every company they bought out relied on LEB for sales and they did not realize that. As soon as they stopped posting sales went to 0.


----------



## drmike

CVPS_Chris said:


> I agree, it is a shame. Thats why RLT got burned so bad. Every company they bought out relied on LEB for sales and they did not realize that. As soon as they stopped posting sales went to 0.


RLT got burned by their quick and extreme location moves, support that was unacceptable and basically abandoning the routine of participating in LET BS.  All of that was self inflicted and could have been handled much better.

RLT getting burned?  It may involve your pal and a lawsuit potentially... Of course the constant BS slamming of URPad isn't helping. Shame when the contract holder batters you with his owned asset / website.

As far as sales and 0, there is far more to the world and VPS than LET/LEB.   They drive sales obviously, but nature of those sales is low cost, too often youthful type and with propensity to be a PITA..  Plus they have low attention spans and little provider loyalty.

A good for instance of a company deploying a mass of containers is Digital Ocean.   You don't see the corporate troll account saying provider X sucks.  Nor do you seem them once a week posting an offer.   Other than happy customers, they are really not represented over there.


----------



## zachh

peterw said:


> Your imaginary vps in your imaginary DC are very stable and fast, for imaginary vps.


Someone get this man a trophy. Post of the year.


----------



## MartinD

...and as we've dropped the other mud slinging threads..this one goes too.


----------

