# GVH suspended after minor use of 100TB plan



## devonblzx (Jan 26, 2014)

Well, I signed up for the 100TB plan on GVH because, why not? I was suspended after 2 days of using the resources in my plan.

*RAM*

I wanted to benchmark to see how the system would handle if I actually consumed the resources, so this is what I found.  I ran a script to allocate 3GB of RAM.  What I found was that instantly, the system would start swapping out the RAM to the swap and the system would slow down to a halt, even though there was "free" RAM on the system.  So it would be impossible for a reasonable person to be able to use the 4GB of RAM they include in the system.   This leads me to believe that their systems are out of RAM and are swapping or their swappiness is set way too high for a proper VPS system.

*Upload Speed*

I have quite a few servers, so I was running upload tests to them to see how it would handle.  One day after having my server setup I was warned about uploading at 7.2MB/s from the disk.  So I cancelled the upload and said, it doesn't make much sense for you to offer 100TB if you are saying I can't use 7.2MB/s from the disk (that would only be 17TB total served from the disk).

Either way, I loaded up a tmpfs and served the files from the RAM.   It wasn't long before I was capped at 160mbps (20MB/s).  I could tell this because between 3-6 threads and 3 locations, the upload speed was exactly the same as my graph proved over 12 hours.

160mbps is actually more than I was expecting but it does go to show you that they aren't allowing customers to actually use 100TB.

*Downloading** & Load Average*

Since I was warned about the disk speed, I set up a 100gb download but limited wget to 4MB/s.  Prior to the download my CPU usage was around 15% of one CPU and my load average was around 0.5 from the scps through tmpfs.  After starting the wget, the CPU usage of wget was around 5% but my load average and disk wait shot up greatly.  The load average went from 0.5 to 1.7 just from downloading with a limit of 4MB/s.  This shows me that the disks are extremely taxed.

Two hours after starting the download and getting some things setup through yum, I get my system shut off, refunded via PayPal, and sent a notice:

"It's obvious that you are just abusing the resources here and not actually use the VPS for any legitimate reason."

Apparently, downloading a file at 4MB/s is abusing the resources.  But what can you expect from a $5 100TB plan.


----------



## Jack (Jan 26, 2014)

They aren't just going to let you abuse it though are they? If you're just wget'ing files constantly that's not really using it fairly.


----------



## devonblzx (Jan 26, 2014)

I wasn't wgeting constantly.  It was one big file limited to 4MB/s.  Either way, it really shouldn't matter how a person uses the system.   I was just testing it for a couple days to see how the speeds held up and I was in the process of setting it up as a free proxy service for users.


----------



## Mun (Jan 26, 2014)

vnstat
Database updated: Sun Jan 26 15:11:01 2014

venet0 since 01/23/14

rx: 128.00 GiB tx: 913.08 GiB total: 1.02 TiB

monthly
rx | tx | total | avg. rate
------------------------+-------------+-------------+---------------
Jan '14 128.00 GiB | 913.08 GiB | 1.02 TiB | 3.94 Mbit/s
------------------------+-------------+-------------+---------------
estimated 154.81 GiB | 1.08 TiB | 1.23 TiB |

daily
rx | tx | total | avg. rate
------------------------+-------------+-------------+---------------
yesterday 12.22 GiB | 415.70 GiB | 427.92 GiB | 41.55 Mbit/s
today 5.48 GiB | 195.70 GiB | 201.17 GiB | 30.87 Mbit/s
------------------------+-------------+-------------+---------------
estimated 8.66 GiB | 309.33 GiB | 317.99 GiB |

That is my GVH server, and it is constantly uploading at around 4MB/s


----------



## MCH-Phil (Jan 26, 2014)

There are, FAR better, more legitimate uses of the resources than what you were using them for. I think this is the problem. Maybe I'm wrong :/


----------



## MartinD (Jan 26, 2014)

So this was locked....


And now unlocked. 2 parties involved have asked for it to be reopened so it can be resolved.


----------



## Nett (Jan 26, 2014)

lol to GVH


----------



## devonblzx (Jan 26, 2014)

MCH-Phil said:


> There are, FAR better, more legitimate uses of the resources than what you were using them for. I think this is the problem. Maybe I'm wrong :/


I guess we can argue about legitimacy all day, but using my allocated bandwidth and resources and not doing anything illegal seems legitimate to me.   All I did was test the resources within my limits (even less than my limits as I only used 3GB of RAM out of 4 and ~2TB over the 2 days I had the server), my CPU usage never used more than 100% CPU (usually around 10%), the load average only went high when I was using the disk.

The download/upload tests were only a few threads and were served from RAM after I was confronted about the 7.2MB/s disk speed so it barely affected the CPU and didn't affect the disks. I was only testing it yesterday and today., I was downloading the 100gb test file to put up on a web site as a test download for users. I chose to download it rather than create it via dd since dd would hammer the disks a lot more than downloading at 4MB/s.  I was allocated 250GB of disk space and 100TB of bandwidth, so 100GB test file seemed fine to me.

The proxy server was installed and running and I wanted to realistically see if I would ever be able to use the 4GB of RAM and 100TB of bandwidth, which seems like a legitimate thing for anyone to wonder.


----------



## Hxxx (Jan 26, 2014)

Maybe it would be better in offers with so much high resources to specify something like : *Resources will be monitored and only the ones with legitimate use will be allowed. Aka no memory allocation for testing or speedtest downloads to waste bw.


----------



## devonblzx (Jan 26, 2014)

hrr1963 said:


> Maybe it would be better in offers with so much high resources to specify something like : *Resources will be monitored and only the ones with legitimate use will be allowed. Aka no memory allocation for testing or speedtest downloads to waste bw.


Sure, but a normal host should not be monitoring what processes you are running unless you get an abuse report.

I guess you can think of it this way, for someone buying a 4GB RAM server, it should be able to handle 3GB of RAM, so my usage to test the RAM seems legitimate.  For someone who buys a server with 250GB of space and tries to transfer over all their files from another host would need to transfer at 4MB/s for 18 hours in order to start using the service, so downloading a 100GB file at 4MB/s seems legitimate to me.


----------



## NodeWest-Dan (Jan 26, 2014)

I won't lie. It's 2 legit 2 quit.


----------



## MannDude (Jan 26, 2014)

Call me crazy, but I subscribed to the mindset that you should be able to utilize what you're sold.

100TB/mo is around 3.33TB a day. If you can, somehow, use 3.33TB a day via legitimate means while also not going over your CPU allocation or straight up raping the disks, you should be able to.

Sadly this is all a marketing gimmick to get people to talk about GVH, which obviously it has worked. They've been the word-of-the-day for the past week now. This isn't to offer you a great service at a low cost, it's to get people talking. GVH this, GVH that.

What they should have done was just called it 'unmetered' instead of trying to place a 100TB cap on it. Saying that they came with a 100TB limit was foolish and obviously was going to be met with a challenge. "Unmetered" doesn't sound nearly as bad, and is more or less 'as much as you realistically need for legitimate purposes' as opposed to, "Do everything in your power to use 100TB in one month"


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 26, 2014)

Sounds to me like he's starting to panic about overage fees from the owners.  I believe Mun is still running his torrent box... but he went in making it clear his usage would be legit - Jon can't afford to shitcan him without an excuse.  I'm curious if anyone else that signed up was able to keep their VM, or was everyone thrown out for "resource abuse"?


----------



## MannDude (Jan 26, 2014)

Aldryic C said:


> Sounds to me like he's starting to panic about overage fees from the owners.  I believe Mun is still running his torrent box... but he went in making it clear his usage would be legit - Jon can't afford to shitcan him without an excuse.  I'm curious if anyone else that signed up was able to keep their VM, or was everyone thrown out for "resource abuse"?


I think I know someone else who is using theirs a good amount, so that's two people, at least.


----------



## devonblzx (Jan 26, 2014)

MannDude said:


> I think I know someone else who is using theirs a good amount, so that's two people, at least.


Yes, the bandwidth use didn't seem to be an issue, although it did seem they silently capped me at 160mbps a few hours into my upload tests.

Ultimately I was suspended because my load was above 1, which happened anytime I used the disk.  So I think my problem was that I was on an oversold node that the server was swapping a lot (as seen* from my RAM tests) and the disks were already being taxed so my disk wait (and subsequently my load average) would shoot up when trying to access the disk.  It wasn't like I was running dd tests or random I/O either, just the single threaded sequential download.


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 26, 2014)

Y'know, I was _almost_ hopeful for the kid last night.  He came into IRC and PM'd me, some big rant about changing his ways for the better, admitting to his lies and sticking to the truth (no mention of what said lies and truth were).  Saw the thread on LET.. which honestly struck me more as insulting than anything else.  (I did notice he hasn't bothered apologizing to this community - I suppose he realizes that won't quite fly here).

And then, 15 minutes after this supposed fresh start... "We have 18 staff members" <_<.


----------



## DomainBop (Jan 26, 2014)

devonblzx said:


> I wasn't wgeting constantly.  It was one big file limited to 4MB/s.  Either way, it really shouldn't matter how a person uses the system.   I was just testing it for a couple days to see how the speeds held up and I was in the process of setting it up as a free proxy service for users.


Testing a server before putting it into production use is a perfectly legitimate use although it may be a foreign concept to many low end hosts who I've seen push a node into production hours after receiving the server without doing any burn-in testing.

It's not surprising that some hosts would consider burnin testing to be "abuse" since some of these hosts are so inexperienced and clueless that they don't even bother to check the peering and do traceroutes on their rented servers before posting an offer, and some of these hosts don't even know which city their frickin' server is actually in (recent example: NodePacket posted an offer recently advertising an NYC location and didn't realize that their server was actually in Buffalo until people pointed out to them in the offer thread that the test IP they gave was Buffalo not NYC )



> I guess you can think of it this way, for someone buying a 4GB RAM server, it should be able to handle 3GB of RAM, so my usage to test the RAM seems legitimate.



Truthfully, if you're buying a 4GB $5 plan on a 32GB RAM E3 there is no need to do any testing to find out it can't handle the RAM you are supposedly guaranteed.  It can't.  Selling 250GB-300GB of RAM on these E3's is common and I've seen as high as 400GB-500GB on an E3 (DigTheMine, selling 2GB RAM Minecraft slots with a full /24 worth of accounts sold per node...do the RAM math on that one)

edited to add:



> Saw the thread on LET.. which honestly struck me more as insulting than anything else.


I saw the thread on LET and had trouble telling it apart from a similar sob story "I was a bad boy, I promise I'll change" thread he posted on WHT last year.  He didn't change after the WHT thread and I'm not holding my breath waiting for him to change after this latest sob story thread.  Maybe he'll surprise me and actually change but I'm more inclined to believe it will be more of the same.


----------



## devonblzx (Jan 26, 2014)

I'm not here to thrash GVH as I don't know much about them.  I think it should be a lesson for them to prepare their nodes or disclose expected usage speeds before offering a plan that consists of 4GB RAM, 250GB space, and 100TB of bandwidth as I saw that trying to use any of the limits resulted in some sort of cap or complaint.   I figured this would be the case prior to signing up, as with experience in this business, it was far too good to be true, but I think it is still important to show the results of my usage.


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 26, 2014)

Hello sir,

Thank You for sharing your experiences. I know that this thread has been closed in it's early stage however I've requested Martin to reopen it as we don't wish to hide from our problems and we wish to work with you to resolve this issue.

I've recently stepped down in my frequency of supervision of GreenValueHost and was not aware that this incident happened until this thread was brought to my attention. I checked in with my team and it turns out that one of our new supervisors has been doing internal audits of our VPS hosting nodes and have singled out your virtual server for abuse as you were found to be performing tasks in which the supervisor considered unnecessarily wasteful and inconsiderate to other clients in the virtualization environment.

If you would like to email [email protected], one of our quality assurance and/or relations personnel will get back to you and reach a final resolution/agreement with you on this issue as soon as possible. Since I was not involved in this incident, I do not have much knowledge of the situation at hand however I have assigned this thread to a few of our managers to look after and public questions will be answered by them in this thread as soon as they have a chance.

I still do recommend emailing us though however as we really would like to work with you and get to the bottom of this to ensure your satisfaction. I can assure you that the response that you have received, "It's obvious that you are just abusing the resources here and not actually use the VPS for any legitimate reason." is not considered an appropriate way for one of our staff members to act and I will re-address the issue of treating our clients with utmost courtesy to our staff to make sure that this does not happen again.

If anyone would like to contact me directly, you may do so by emailing me at [email protected] however some of our other managers will be available in this thread shortly to assist.

Thank You,

Jonathan.


----------



## DomainBop (Jan 26, 2014)

> one of our quality assurance and/or relations personnel...
> I have assigned this thread to a few of our managers to look after...



...and with that post GVH-Jon just proved that nothing has changed.


----------



## Virtovo (Jan 26, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> Hello sir,
> 
> Thank You for sharing your experiences. I know that this thread has been closed in it's early stage however I've requested Martin to reopen it as we don't wish to hide from our problems and we wish to work with you to resolve this issue.
> 
> ...



I know you're trying to turn a new leaf; however; 'supervisors', 'quality assurance and/or relations personnel' and 'our managers'.  The bullshit train just keeps on running!


----------



## vRozenSch00n (Jan 26, 2014)

devonblzx said:


> I'm not here to thrash GVH as I don't know much about them.  I think it should be a lesson for them to prepare their nodes or disclose expected usage speeds before offering a plan that consists of 4GB RAM, 250GB space, and 100TB of bandwidth as I saw that trying to use any of the limits resulted in some sort of cap or complaint.   I figured this would be the case prior to signing up, as with experience in this business, it was far too good to be true, but I think it is still important to show the results of my usage.


Somehow the plan offered tickles many of us to proof whether they can really pull it out or not in a spirit of curiosity (supposing GVH have new techniques which proven not to be the case).   

This reminds me of the curiosity when SSD cached drive enters the low end market for the first time.


----------



## tmzVPS-Daniel (Jan 26, 2014)

Oh boy, here comes another massive thread 

@GVH-Jon I have absolutely nothing against you, but I recommend you take my advice. I don't care if you have 100 staff, that is good for you, but stop posting in this forum or any other form about things related to your company. Only answer to clients and/or potential clients and do your thing. 

"Wise men, when in doubt whether to speak or to keep quiet, give themselves the benefit of the doubt, and remain silent."

- Daniel


----------



## Jack (Jan 26, 2014)

tmzVPS-Daniel said:


> Oh boy, here comes another massive thread
> 
> @GVH-Jon I have absolutely nothing against you, but I recommend you take my advice. I don't care if you have 100 staff, that is good for you, but stop posting in this forum or any other form about things related to your company. Only answer to clients and/or potential clients and do your thing.
> 
> ...



Do you run the WHT account? http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showpost.php?p=8580730&postcount=21


----------



## drmike (Jan 26, 2014)

The OP's situation sounds odd.  

The sort of use described and low throughput shouldn't be setting anything in normal monitoring off at any provider.

The bandwidth cap/shaping sounds like a hard set limit and frankly, I'd expect it in light of the mass attempts to  test these plans, use 100TB, etc.  Happy about it?  No.  But there is a realistic limit to use in multiple user environments where being choked by say a single gigabit NIC (if doing these plans, GVH needs bonded NICs at minimum).

Too many folks likely, saw, and took    or generally the offer has attracted more "misuse" than a functioning server would sustain.   At some point, to regulate the insanity and stem the blood flow, owners and admins have to clamp down.   Quite possible that for some reason Devon's account tripped over something or did so at the wrong time.  It happens.

I'll put out there, that yes, I am aware of at least one account at GVH on one of these plans that has collectively has network moved above 1TiB of data a day without ban/abuse/flagging.   That's 1/3rd of what it would take sustained to hit 100TB.

I am rather blah about unmetered, unlimited, etc.   They are effective marketing lures, but often very deceptive in nature.  Putting a high water mark of 100TB up compared to use, while caring about CPU, disk IO, etc. means the likelihood one could achieve that while playing within the rules takes a good bit time, thought, trial and error and a rather interesting use.


----------



## tmzVPS-Daniel (Jan 26, 2014)

Yep I sure do. I realized that there is no need to prove anything to anyone, that's why I am giving him advice. I've been through the same situation, I just stopped and continued doing my thing. 

- Daniel


----------



## tmzVPS-Daniel (Jan 26, 2014)

drmike said:


> The OP's situation sounds odd.
> 
> The sort of use described and low throughput shouldn't be setting anything in normal monitoring off at any provider.
> 
> ...


Well said. 

- Daniel


----------



## k0nsl (Jan 26, 2014)

I raise you a Lincoln, tmzVPS-Daniel. *REMEMBER:* Lincoln was a lawyer and a good liar. And he said, it's better to keep quiet and be thought a fool than open your mouth and prove it.   



tmzVPS-Daniel said:


> Oh boy, here comes another massive thread
> 
> @GVH-Jon I have absolutely nothing against you, but I recommend you take my advice. I don't care if you have 100 staff, that is good for you, but stop posting in this forum or any other form about things related to your company. Only answer to clients and/or potential clients and do your thing.
> 
> ...


----------



## tmzVPS-Daniel (Jan 26, 2014)

Thats even better!



k0nsl said:


> I raise you a Lincoln, tmzVPS-Daniel. *REMEMBER:* Lincoln was a lawyer and a good liar. And he said, it's better to keep quiet and be thought a fool than open your mouth and prove it.


----------



## MartinD (Jan 26, 2014)

drmike said:


> The OP's situation sounds odd.
> 
> 
> The sort of use described and low throughput shouldn't be setting anything in normal monitoring off at any provider.
> ...


Are you now working for GVH/Jon?


----------



## GVH-Nick (Jan 26, 2014)

Hello everyone!

 

My name is Nicholas and I'm excited to be a part of this community!

 

I am currently employed in GreenValueHost's Executive Leadership Team as Vice President of Operations and I'll be more than happy to assist with any questions or concerns that anyone may have.

 

If you could please email [email protected] or email me directly at [email protected], I would love to get in touch with you and have this issue looked into as soon as possible.


----------



## texteditor (Jan 26, 2014)

MartinD said:


> Are you now working for GVH/Jon?


Remember that GVH/Jon requires minimum 5 years experience in the field, a RHCE, and a willingness to accept title changes at any moment, all so they can earn what is probably less than minimum wage


----------



## texteditor (Jan 26, 2014)

GVH-Nick said:


> Hello everyone!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Is that a damn prom photo?


----------



## yolo (Jan 26, 2014)

I can see that GVH is an avid user of http://www.bullshitjob.com/title/ to find job names!

Yolo

-Regional Program Specialist


----------



## serverian (Jan 26, 2014)




----------



## GVH-Nick (Jan 26, 2014)

texteditor said:


> Is that a damn prom photo?


No, it's a photo of myself taken recently before I attended a family member's wedding.


----------



## Mun (Jan 26, 2014)

Aldryic C said:


> Sounds to me like he's starting to panic about overage fees from the owners.  I believe Mun is still running his torrent box... but he went in making it clear his usage would be legit - Jon can't afford to shitcan him without an excuse.  I'm curious if anyone else that signed up was able to keep their VM, or was everyone thrown out for "resource abuse"?



It is still running, http://192.3.31.219/  and you can check its uptime if you like.

If anyone wants to download some torrents you are more then welcome to.

https://nodeping.com/reports/uptime/rn6mowtb-r93r-4ux6-8dy6-m1089fzjpyvc

Mun


----------



## drmike (Jan 26, 2014)

MartinD said:


> Are you now working for GVH/Jon?


Working for, no.  But if you consider *mentoring* someone and recommending they step back, breath, go for a jog, stop the employee head count stuff, focus, etc. then that could get mixed up.  

I have been in touch with Jon though semi-actively in the past < 24 hours. 

Some  folks were being rather nasty on IRC (yesterday) and that concerned other providers. I was asked to intervene and try to slow down the various issues (want 50 more GVH threads next week?)(want more emo Jon when the stress racks up?).


----------



## MartinD (Jan 26, 2014)

You may want to advise him a little better then as he thinks otherwise.


----------



## Mun (Jan 26, 2014)

https://secure.greenvaluehost.com/cart.php?a=add&pid=192


----------



## mcmyhost (Jan 26, 2014)

GVH-Nick said:


> No, it's a photo of myself taken recently before I attended a family member's wedding.


Multiple Hosts?







If that doesn't work, view it here


----------



## DomainBop (Jan 26, 2014)

GVH-Nick said:


> Hello everyone!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Welcome 17 year old Vice President of Operations.  I'm curious, did you decide to take the job as GVH VP because you're "bored and thought I  you could really make something of it. "

Will you be bringing your fondness for racist memes to GVH to entertain the customers with?


----------



## Francisco (Jan 26, 2014)

DomainBop said:


> Welcome 17 year old Vice President of Operations.  I'm curious, did you decide to take the job as GVH VP because you're "bored and thought I  you could really make something of it. "
> 
> Will you be bringing your fondness for racist memes to GVH to entertain the customers with?


Looks to be wiped clean.


----------



## k0nsl (Jan 26, 2014)

Yup. It was there only briefly, literally seconds after @DomainBop posted it  -_-



Francisco said:


> Looks to be wiped clean.


----------



## Francisco (Jan 26, 2014)

k0nsl said:


> Yup. It was there only briefly, literally seconds after @DomainBop posted it  -_-


Should take screenshots next time 

Francisco


----------



## Mun (Jan 26, 2014)

I added an automated DD test at midnight so we can keep track of there "performance" .

http://192.3.31.219/dd.txt <-- shows the most recent

http://192.3.31.219/dd_historical.txt <-- will show a time lapse over time.

(it might be suggestible for a few of you to pull this file on occasion to keep logs of it in case my server randomly disappears.)


All tests are run with: 'dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync; unlink test'
Mun


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 26, 2014)

Mun said:


> I added an automated DD test at midnight so we can keep track of there "performance" .
> 
> http://192.3.31.219/dd.txt <-- shows the most recent
> 
> ...


The performance of our ny1 node is going to be fluctuating a bit however we have plans to deploy a few 6x Intel 512GB RAID-10 SSD nodes to transfer some accounts from our existing nodes over. We're just waiting for ColoCrossing to sort their things out in Buffalo.


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 26, 2014)

Mun said:


> http://192.3.31.219/dd.txt <-- shows the most recent


11.8?  Yikes, that's pretty painful.


----------



## Mun (Jan 26, 2014)

Aldryic C said:


> 11.8?  Yikes, that's pretty painful.


Usual is 20.

If anyone wants me to re-run the script, please let me know.

Mun


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 26, 2014)

Mun said:


> Usual is 20.
> 
> If anyone wants me to re-run the script, please let me know.
> 
> Mun


That's odd actually, usually it's around 150 for most of our nodes. ny1 is *really, really *old though, and that's why we're replacing it with a pure SSD node as soon as CC clears up room.


----------



## mcmyhost (Jan 26, 2014)

Mun said:


> Usual is 20.
> 
> If anyone wants me to re-run the script, please let me know.
> 
> Mun


There's why the person say that the connection is limited to like 100Mbps.


----------



## Mun (Jan 26, 2014)

mcmyhost said:


> There's why the person say that the connection is limited to like 100Mbps.



Yes.


----------



## Mun (Jan 26, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> That's odd actually, usually it's around 150 for most of our nodes. ny1 is *really, really *old though, and that's why we're replacing it with a pure SSD node as soon as CC clears up room.


Well, I'll gladly give you another 5$ a month for the same plan and setup the same scripts on another node. Just PM me.

Mun


----------



## DomainBop (Jan 26, 2014)

Francisco said:


> Should take screenshots next time
> 
> 
> Francisco


I prefer to wait to post the screenshot until after I get the amusement of the clown rushing to their site to delete the photo I linked to. )


----------



## Francisco (Jan 26, 2014)

I'm sorry but i'm laughing my ass off right now.

Francisco


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 26, 2014)

I'm actually facepalming myself at that meme, you guys aren't alone. Glad Nick removed it though. -_-



Mun said:


> Well, I'll gladly give you another 5$ a month for the same plan and setup the same scripts on another node. Just PM me.
> 
> Mun


Would you accept Dallas, TX in CoreXChange? You can have as much IPv6 as you'd like.


----------



## Mun (Jan 26, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> I'm actually facepalming myself at that meme, you guys aren't alone. Glad Nick removed it though. -_-
> 
> Would you accept Dallas, TX in CoreXChange? You can have as much IPv6 as you'd like.



Sure I'll take another server, should I put a PM (i mean ticket) in?


----------



## drmike (Jan 26, 2014)

Mun said:


> I added an automated DD test at midnight so we can keep track of there "performance" .
> 
> http://192.3.31.219/dd.txt <-- shows the most recent
> 
> http://192.3.31.219/dd_historical.txt <-- will show a time lapse over time.


Yeah paltry numbers there.

This is from some other BUF node on an account I've had access to.

dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync; unlink test


16384+0 records in


16384+0 records out


1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 6.45542 s, 166 MB/s

GVH would do well to move valued customers (some of them) off that NY1 node.


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 26, 2014)

Mun said:


> Sure I'll take another server, should I put a PM in?


I put one in stock for you. https://secure.greenvaluehost.com/cart.php?a=add&pid=192


----------



## sv01 (Jan 26, 2014)

Jack said:


> They aren't just going to let you abuse it though are they? If you're just wget'ing files constantly that's not really using it fairly.


why not fair? since you buy 100TB plan??? I still don't get it.

for example I run backup script every 1-2 hours, and consume about 500 GB that not allowed??


----------



## tmzVPS-Daniel (Jan 26, 2014)

DomainBop said:


> I prefer to wait to post the screenshot until after I get the amusement of the clown rushing to their site to delete the photo I linked to. )



Honestly, I CANNOT stop laughing hahahaahaha. My wife think's i'm nuts and my new born is making faces. 

- Daniel


----------



## Jack (Jan 26, 2014)

sv01 said:


> why not fair? since you buy 100TB plan??? I still don't get it.
> 
> for example I run backup script every 1-2 hours, and consume about 500 GB that not allowed??


That's a fair use... but wget'ing files to run up a bandwidth quota isn't.


----------



## texteditor (Jan 26, 2014)

Why did the botanist choose GVH to host his tulip image database?

He heard the staff had loved working with petal-files


----------



## SkylarM (Jan 26, 2014)

sv01 said:


> why not fair? since you buy 100TB plan??? I still don't get it.
> 
> for example I run backup script every 1-2 hours, and consume about 500 GB that not allowed??


To be fair, there's a difference between utilizing your VPS and abusing resources for the sake of abusing resources. I've terminated and refunded many people who wget cron test files to fill up disk space then rm -rf it, or consume large amount of network for no valid reason.

If you're going to use your resources, use them properly. Don't be a dick. I will say that 100tb plans are practically begging for people to do that though.


----------



## Dylan (Jan 26, 2014)

I'm on ny1 (signed up at about the same time as Mun, I think) and I haven't even hit 20MB/s once in a DD test. This is actually a pretty high result for me (usually it's about 11 MB/s):

dd if=/dev/zero of=test bs=64k count=16k conv=fdatasync

1073741824 bytes (1.1 GB) copied, 61.6477 s, 17.4 MB/s

Though that's downright speedy compared to the IOPS:

ioping -c 10 .

10 requests completed in 10431.1 ms, *7 iops, 0.0 mb/s*

 

I'm so glad my brand new VPS was provisioned on a "_really, really_ old" node :\


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 26, 2014)

Well, that's pretty much all you can expect when the provider can't afford their own gear.


----------



## Mun (Jan 26, 2014)

Aldryic C said:


> Well, that's pretty much all you can expect when the provider can't afford their own gear.



<.< >.> between you and me, I think it is over selling....

Mun


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 26, 2014)

Aldryic C said:


> Well, that's pretty much all you can expect when the provider can't afford their own gear.


We actually are going to be buying our own Dual L5420s and colocating them in our own rack space, however as you may have been aware of already, ColoCrossing is currently having issues with space in their facilities and we're waiting on them to get the things that we need to get done. Our 1st priority right now is improving conditions for our existing clients by moving them over to pure SSD raid 10 nodes as soon as possible.


----------



## Jack (Jan 26, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> We actually are going to be buying our own Dual L5420s and colocating them in our own rack space, however as you may have been aware of already, ColoCrossing is currently having issues with space in their facilities and we're waiting on them to get the things that we need to get done. Our 1st priority right now is improving conditions for our existing clients by moving them over to pure SSD raid 10 nodes as soon as possible.


L5420s love power..


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 26, 2014)

Jack said:


> L5420s love power..


Based on tests I've seen they run about 1.5 amps to 2 amps consistently however though it's worth it for their capabilities vs. CC's standard E3 server line.


----------



## Francisco (Jan 26, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> We actually are going to be buying our own Dual L5420s and colocating them in our own rack space, however as you may have been aware of already, ColoCrossing is currently having issues with space in their facilities and we're waiting on them to get the things that we need to get done. Our 1st priority right now is improving conditions for our existing clients by moving them over to pure SSD raid 10 nodes as soon as possible.


Come back to this quote when they get another /14 in a month or so.

Francisco


----------



## tragic (Jan 26, 2014)

This whole GVH fiasco never ends


----------



## Jade (Jan 26, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> Based on tests I've seen they run about 1.5 amps to 2 amps consistently however though it's worth it for their capabilities vs. CC's standard E3 server line.


Based on what tests exactly? Have a looksie here:

http://cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=Intel+Xeon+L5420+%40+2.50GHz&id=1259&multi=2

http://cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=Intel+Xeon+E3-1240+V2+%40+3.40GHz&id=1190

By the way... Nice suit


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 26, 2014)

Jade said:


> Based on what tests exactly? Have a looksie here:
> 
> http://cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=Intel+Xeon+L5420+%40+2.50GHz&id=1259&multi=2
> 
> http://cpubenchmark.net/cpu_lookup.php?cpu=Intel+Xeon+E3-1240+V2+%40+3.40GHz&id=1190


I was referring to their capabilities to handle a bigger work load


----------



## Jade (Jan 26, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> I was referring to their capabilities to handle a bigger work load


How can something perform a bigger work load when it is far less efficient, slower, and a dinosaur in processor years compared to an E3.

A single E3 will run circles around a dual L5420 and will use half the power


----------



## texteditor (Jan 26, 2014)

Jade said:


> How can something perform a bigger work load when it is far less efficient, slower, and a dinosaur in processor years compared to an E3.
> 
> A single E3 will run circles around a dual L5420 and will use half the power


but but our tests

I'm so compelled to lie that I even try to bullshit benchmarks


----------



## Jade (Jan 26, 2014)

texteditor said:


> but but our tests
> 
> I'm so compelled to lie that I even try to bullshit benchmarks


Just stating the facts. I don't know where his "tests" came from but wanted to clear that up..


----------



## Hxxx (Jan 26, 2014)

So much anger in this industry ^ ^


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 26, 2014)

Jade said:


> How can something perform a bigger work load when it is far less efficient, slower, and a dinosaur in processor years compared to an E3.
> 
> A single E3 will run circles around a dual L5420 and will use half the power


When you sell the plans that we do, it'll be more beneficial to have extra RAM and extra cores. Primarily for the extra RAM though, we'd prefer the Dual L5420.


----------



## Jade (Jan 26, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> When you sell the plans that we do, it'll be more beneficial to have extra RAM and extra cores. Primarily for the extra RAM though, we'd prefer the Dual L5420.


You say for more cores? They both primarily have the same amount of cores. The L5420 may have more physical cores than the E3's, but no hyper threading like the E3's. When it comes to work load they out perform the 5420's. You want to be able to put more RAM into a 5420, however the problem you'll face will happen far before you could even use the amount of RAM you're looking to put in one.

& By the plans you sell, are you wanting to add more RAM to a 5420 to be able to over fill the node so much that its I/O is completely un-bareable?


----------



## jarland (Jan 26, 2014)

devonblzx said:


> Sure, but a normal host should not be monitoring what processes you are running unless you get an abuse report.
> 
> I guess you can think of it this way, for someone buying a 4GB RAM server, it should be able to handle 3GB of RAM, so my usage to test the RAM seems legitimate.  For someone who buys a server with 250GB of space and tries to transfer over all their files from another host would need to transfer at 4MB/s for 18 hours in order to start using the service, so downloading a 100GB file at 4MB/s seems legitimate to me.


Situational, but a host should absolutely be monitoring processes. Not like snooping on a VPS but when you get an alert, which could be from anything not necessarily you, you start looking at what is slamming the node. If you're up there, damn right they're going to see the process on OpenVZ. You're not hidden from top and iotop, your processes are right there and they need to know what is running hard when the node is tanking. If you fit the bill as a part of the problem, expect to hear it, unless you're on a provider that doesn't care. Some may even choose not to talk to you about the specifics, but rest assured on OpenVZ...they see them.


----------



## drmike (Jan 26, 2014)

SkylarM said:


> To be fair, there's a difference between utilizing your VPS and abusing resources for the sake of abusing resources. I've terminated and refunded many people who wget cron test files to fill up disk space then rm -rf it, or consume large amount of network for no valid reason.
> 
> 
> If you're going to use your resources, use them properly. Don't be a dick. I will say that 100tb plans are practically begging for people to do that though.


^--- that's spot on.  

You of course know I am rabble-rouser  and recommended certain tactics to utilize your paid for resources (i.e. reserving disk for later and the 100TB challenge).  Fine line in areas between testing and just setting something on fire to watch it burn.  

Important on the provider side to have a level and somewhat slow to smack hand as a provider.  There are lots of creative folks, some that are just being on poor behavior before nap time and others that didn't read the ToS or slid around them.  Sometimes even the best management and tools snags a false positive.    That's possibly what may have happened with the OP.



GVH-Jon said:


> When you sell the plans that we do, it'll be more beneficial to have extra RAM and extra cores. Primarily for the extra RAM though, we'd prefer the Dual L5420.


54xx series is capable, but that's not suitable for these plans at this point in time.  Shared hosting, cPanel, yeppers fine.   Hosting for local/regional/real companies not in the active tech space, suitable.   Pitting a 54xx against the 56xx and newer stuff, meh, maybe if you are getting extra low pricing or buying a rack full for a song.  Not advised though.



GVH-Jon said:


> ColoCrossing is currently having issues with space in their facilities and we're waiting on them to get the things that we need to get done.


Officially, I've heard from customers, 3+ weeks wait time for CC servers.  No one knows why.  Power?  Liquidity tapped?   This is the hazard of renting and why businesses tend not to do rentals like folks in the lowend* market do.   If rentals, businesses pre-buy, pre-rack and are paying months ahead of deploying.   Just-in-time style fulfillment of rentals stinks other than for limited cash flow stretching.


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 26, 2014)

Jade,


We're not going to be using RAM as an excuse for more overselling. If you look at the plans we sell and do the math, the extra RAM capability of the Dual L5420 is needed to maintain a low RAM overselling ratio. I understand they use up a lot of power, but that's not our main concern. Our main concern is our customers.


----------



## SkylarM (Jan 26, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> Jade,
> 
> We're not going to be using RAM as an excuse for more overselling. If you look at the plans we sell and do the math, the extra RAM capability of the Dual L5420 is needed to maintain a low RAM overselling ratio. I understand they use up a lot of power, but that's not our main concern. Our main concern is our customers.


On second thought, go for it!.....


----------



## Jade (Jan 26, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> Jade,
> 
> 
> We're not going to be using RAM as an excuse for more overselling. If you look at the plans we sell and do the math, the extra RAM capability of the Dual L5420 is needed to maintain a low RAM overselling ratio. I understand they use up a lot of power, but that's not our main concern. Our main concern is our customers.


I would think if your main concern was your customers you'd be more worried about performance than doing the math on mainaining a low RAM overselling ratio by packing more RAM into a box.


----------



## DomainBop (Jan 26, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> When you sell the plans that we do, it'll be more beneficial to have extra RAM and extra cores. Primarily for the extra RAM though, we'd prefer the Dual L5420.


When you overload nodes the way you do you need to get something like online.net's 40 core/80 thread 4 x E7-4870 with 1TB RAM

When you sell the plans you do you also need more processing power than an aging dual L5420 will offer so go for something like a dual E5-26xx, X56xx/L56xx, etc.


----------



## drmike (Jan 26, 2014)

I'll say I've seen plenty of ratios of real RAM to sold RAM...

1-3 to 1-5 are the range most folks run.

GVH container per server count I suspect (no I don't know firsthand) is laughably low comparatively, has to be.  But that is offset and made bad by two things:  1. High RAM per VPS sold;  and, 2. Likelihood the abusers are using the resources.

Again 54xx's will work, but mass packing on them no way.   Sexy e-penis competition, they come up short.


----------



## Jade (Jan 26, 2014)

drmike said:


> I'll say I've seen plenty of ratios of real RAM to sold RAM...
> 
> 1-3 to 1-5 are the range most folks run.
> 
> ...


It seems the only reason why he wants to go with the 54xx's is to pack them. I may be wrong, but that's the information I gather from what he says. You want to add more RAM to your box so you can put more clients on it... However adding more RAM to a box that you'll never be able to use that much RAM on before the I/O is done seems a wee bit pointless if you ask me. Just my thoughts.


----------



## drmike (Jan 26, 2014)

Spot on @Jade.

If my upstream couldn't deliver gear in weeks, I'd be making other plans.  Colo is one option, if their DC has the space, power, etc.  Heck if I honestly know.  Someone does.

Any time a provider wants to buy some gear I am all for it.  Shows a bit of proper thinking often.  Leasing has it's allure if you have the networth and proven track record.  But even that needs done correctly or quickly squandering income.


----------



## Mun (Jan 26, 2014)

We have a new record... DING DING DING

http://192.3.31.219/dd.txt


----------



## devonblzx (Jan 26, 2014)

SkylarM said:


> To be fair, there's a difference between utilizing your VPS and abusing resources for the sake of abusing resources. I've terminated and refunded many people who wget cron test files to fill up disk space then rm -rf it, or consume large amount of network for no valid reason.
> 
> 
> If you're going to use your resources, use them properly. Don't be a dick. I will say that 100tb plans are practically begging for people to do that though.


I've stayed out of this thread since the beginning but who decides what *proper* use is?  A VPS is a virtual *private* server, hence, as long as they are using the resources they are given in the package, then it shouldn't ever matter to the host how they use it.  The host should not be concerned with how their customers use their service as long as they aren't breaking the acceptable use policy.  If you don't want users to use the resources you are giving them, then stop overselling so much.

Abuse is relative.  In a plan providing 100TB of bandwidth and 250GB of disk space, then using 4MB/s or even 7.2MB/s shouldn't be considered abuse.  As seen from the dd tests posted here, the disks are taxed and therefore 4MB/s was causing the system load to go up.


----------



## Jade (Jan 26, 2014)

drmike said:


> Spot on @Jade.
> 
> If my upstream couldn't deliver gear in weeks, I'd be making other plans.  Colo is one option, if their DC has the space, power, etc.  Heck if I honestly know.  Someone does.
> 
> Any time a provider wants to buy some gear I am all for it.  Shows a bit of proper thinking often.  Leasing has it's allure if you have the networth and proven track record.  But even that needs done correctly or quickly squandering income.


Really reseller business's don't have a viable source of income. If their upstream just up and vanishes that leaves them to crash hard. Business's that invest heavily into their own hardware/equipment will be around a lot longer than business's who resell services.


----------



## drmike (Jan 26, 2014)

Jade said:


> Really reseller business's don't have a viable source of income. If their upstream just up and vanishes that leaves them to crash hard. Business's that invest heavily into their own hardware/equipment will be around a lot longer than business's who resell services.


This is true.   It's hard to differentiate the nature of deals at some of these providers/DC's.  

Unsure about GVH's arrangement with upstreams.  If really a straight rental (HVH is known for month-to-month rentals) or something funkier.  Assuming rental in this muck though.

My rule with dealing with upstreams is to know who owns what, how financially viable they are and balance the idea of them selling/buying out.  If a company is pitifully small/self funded startup I might deal with them, but likelihood they default on financial obligations, leases, etc. is high.  So I probably would deal with colo in a place like that.

CC for all their finger in the beehive trying to rob some honey behavior and recent inventory issues is in things for the long haul and positive on cash flow.   I've talked about what I perceive their exit plans to be and timeline on that is out in future with IPv4 allocation is gone.  Even if they go tits up, there is a collection of stuff there is worth enough that someone would gracefully buy and continue running.   In reality outside of BUFFALO, all other locations are pods, racks, limited gear, so costs known, manageable, etc.  Seamless transition on a buyout / acquisition and something I've long watched for 

Now that other white label reseller racket... that's another beast / doom model.  It's first couple months in good idea and for folks who have customers but don't want to necessarily be a provider.   Those arrangements are too odd/stressful for me to ever consider.   See people done wrong on them all the time.


----------



## Mun (Jan 26, 2014)

Saw this on LET, maybe this is how he can get 18 staff members.....

Mun


----------



## Francisco (Jan 27, 2014)

Mun said:


> Saw this on LET, maybe this is how he can get 18 staff members.....
> 
> Mun


As I said, he likely uses an outsourcing group which does all of his support. That company probably has 30+ employee's. He doesn't have 18 dedicated to him, simply because his bottom line doesn't cover that kind of a staff.

As for the L5420's, you might be able to get 64GB on them if you can find 16GB sticks or something, but they aren't cheap.

You'll be doing 32GB RAM which an E3 can do. Granted, the L5420 w/ 24GB RAM can be had for a couple hundred, where as an E3 is going to run you $500+.

Francisco


----------



## Jade (Jan 27, 2014)

Francisco said:


> As for the L5420's, you might be able to get 64GB on them if you can find 16GB sticks or something, but they aren't cheap.


But how much of that 64 GB will you be using before everything starts going crazy on a 5420..?


----------



## Francisco (Jan 27, 2014)

Jade said:


> But how much of that 64 GB will you be using before everything starts going crazy on a 5420..?


I don't know 

We use L5420's for a while with 24GB ram and it was a stretch.

Granted, our customers have always been monsters when it comes to treating the nodes nicely.

Francisco


----------



## Jade (Jan 27, 2014)

Francisco said:


> I don't know
> 
> 
> We use L5420's for a while with 24GB ram and it was a stretch.
> ...


I just don't see their vision of using the 5420's to satisfy customers more, I see it as an overselling gimmick, but that's just me. If you're going to put over 24 GB+ of RAM on a 5420 you might as well put it on a 56xx or better. I'm not here to rag on other providers or anything just giving my two sense.


----------



## drmike (Jan 27, 2014)

Mun said:


> Saw this on LET, maybe this is how he can get 18 staff members.....
> 
> Mun


And this is why someone advised Jon to cool it   To take a long run, read a book, do some yoga, etc.  Put down IRC, stop the social stuff in the industry, and regroup.

It's nice to see people helping or trying to (Jon), but deals like this are why I raise holy f'n hell on providers and especially this group.

I just read Biloh a bit ago on LET coming out and saying the HVH "About Us" page is going to be upgraded to define the relationship a bit more.  I doubt what gets spat out will do much to quiet folks and stem the bloodflow/distrust.   Thinking this and other Jon posting gems might have contributed to Biloh getting pinched and hand forced.

To be clear, HVH seems to pass all billables through to CC, all credit cards, banks, PayPal bear CC's name, not HVH.  Refunds seem to be all CC too.   We saw that eons ago with a credit card statement and this week with a botched refund HVH won't approve.

HVH has their own support staff that has varied and rotated over past year.  Separate from CC.   They certainly boost their support heard count via outsourcing (who doesn't?).  If they aren't proud of that revelation, then oh well hire employees and deal with the ugly financial implications of that in today's America.


----------



## Francisco (Jan 27, 2014)

> To be clear, HVH seems to pass all billables through to CC, all credit cards, banks, PayPal bear CC's name, not HVH. Refunds seem to be all CC too. We saw that eons ago with a credit card statement and this week with a botched refund HVH won't approve.


Alright?



> HVH has their own support staff that has varied and rotated over past year. Separate from CC. They certainly boost their support heard count via outsourcing (who doesn't?). If they aren't proud of that revelation, then oh well hire employees and deal with the ugly financial implications of that in today's America.


Mhmm?



> I just read Biloh a bit ago on LET coming out and saying the HVH "About Us" page is going to be upgraded to define the relationship a bit more.


OK.

Wild guess but could be on the mark. If this is a 100% come clean, it's possible CC will mark HVH as their fully managed brand and "sell" off the unmanaged (read: LE priced) customers to address possible conflict of interest concerns.

The managed part is a likely, where as the budget users? who knows.

Peoples problems with Jon and CC is that there's just so many lies and when things finally leak/get confirmed, they reply with "Well we never denied it, people just didn't ask the right way". Again, another lie because I had a conversation with Jon during our first few months at CC over the phone where he denied any involvement in LE and that it was strictly a client<>host relationship.

Francisco


----------



## drmike (Jan 27, 2014)

Jade said:


> I just don't see their vision of using the 5420's to satisfy customers more, I see it as an overselling gimmick, but that's just me.


I don't see this happening, unless someone has a pile of them and nearly free / pay me later.  He's scrambling to find solutions while on self inflicted fire.  CC can't deliver more servers and been waiting for such for weeks.  Thus his trying to buy out dissatisfied customer on LET thread.

The kid needs to focus, clean up his nodes of actual abuse, deal with his shit vendors/bad configs (like those DD speeds)  - like who in the heck said that would make a good node with "old" issue/slow disk/whatever else?  That plus good administration would go a long way.  It's what separates the real hosts with users that use resources from the crack slinging imaginary brands with buyers who never use resources.


----------



## drmike (Jan 27, 2014)

Francisco said:


> Wild guess but could be on the mark. If this is a 100% come clean, it's possible CC will mark HVH as their fully managed brand and "sell" off the unmanaged (read: LE priced) customers to address possible conflict of interest concerns.
> 
> 
> The managed part is a likely, where as the budget users? who knows.


It's close, like always.  Just depends on how much spin gets thrown on that curveball.  Always over the target, always.

Honestly, in a bargain climate and in a bargain site LET/LEB where you are known for firesales and dealing with clients that often leave a lot to be desired, demanding, etc. while leaving little coinage on table, it has to be kicking CC's ass.   It's cutthroat downward business, sell more to stay at same level, support increased 300x.   "employee" costs balloon and margins shrink.  I've seen some of the quotes for server rentals out of BUF,  really getting nuts to close a deal .... Low low prices.

They no doubt are self cannibalizing (eating their own arms and justifying with scale - competing with themselves - other voice in their head/brand on who is going to eat their other leg).

Only way out of that is to redefine a premium line and push the low end over and "out".  So, we might be seeing that in the HVH arm of things.


----------



## GIANT_CRAB (Jan 27, 2014)

hi guise,

y r u guys stil not using the 512GB SSD to replace all the RAM?????

u can offer 100 cores if u use AMD processors XDddd DDD


----------



## peterw (Jan 27, 2014)

> After the barrage of threads about us recently on LowEndTalk and vpsBoard, I have been going through emotional distress, trying to fight a battle within myself on my personal ethics and morality. I have realized now that my past actions have caused a lot of trouble, anger, and hatred from people in the community and I have decided that it is time for me to open my eyes to reality and come clean to everything.
> 
> I want to start by saying that I owe everyone here an apology. Through my actions and through my words, I realize now that I have been arrogant, rude, egotistical, greedy, and disrespectful. Everyone that I have encountered has every single right to be angry with me for my actions, and the things that I have did, and I could not express in words right now how disappointed I am at myself and how much I feel like dirt. I had things going well for me, and once had the respect of many hosting industry pioneers, such as Aldryic, Martin, and Skylar, and I went down the wrong path with my greed for low end market share, power, and money. I foolishly decided to hide behind marketing tactics and superiors, and realize now that I was in the wrong, and that I am to blame. I wanted mass expansion, I wanted growth, I wanted market share, but it was not until when things started collapsing on me did I realize that the path I was going on wasn't the right path to go on.
> 
> ...


Without any comments.


----------



## tmzVPS-Daniel (Jan 27, 2014)

Where was this posted? 

- Daniel


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 27, 2014)

On LET.  Apparently he felt that there was no need to apologize to the members of this community.

He also went right back to the claims of "14 non-outsourced staff", etc immediately after.  Nothing but a publicity stunt.


----------



## Reece-DM (Jan 27, 2014)

Aldryic C said:


> On LET.  Apparently he felt that there was no need to apologize to the members of this community.
> 
> He also went right back to the claims of "14 non-outsourced staff", etc immediately after.  Nothing but a publicity stunt.


That's been it all along.


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 27, 2014)

Oh, you should've seen the PM that the kid sent me (and presumably others).  Gems such as _"I feel like I've treated you the worst out of everyone"_ and _"It's people like you that I should have listened to. It's people like you that have achieved success in this industry and you deserve to be looked up to"._

I typically only see that level of cocksuckery when someone's begging not to be terminated for TOS violations or such.


----------



## Hxxx (Jan 27, 2014)

Being offtopic, that racist joke is epic. LOL .


----------



## drmike (Jan 27, 2014)

Aldryic C said:


> Oh, you should've seen the PM that the kid sent me (and presumably others).  Gems such as _"I feel like I've treated you the worst out of everyone"_ and _"It's people like you that I should have listened to. It's people like you that have achieved success in this industry and you deserve to be looked up to"._
> 
> I typically only see that level of cocksuckery when someone's begging not to be terminated for TOS violations or such.



Hahaha!   That term is funnnnnneeeeyy!  Almost as funny as that Clinton meme.  He was the first black president, the media told me that multiple time.  Bro plays the sax.

I am all about second chances, heck I give people a few more if they don't inflict harm on others in ugly ways.  If nothing else, I think GVH-Jon is being candid, and honest about how he feels.   Humanity isn't something we see enough of around here.  If he hosed someone too bad, sure, we want to hear about it and slap him some more.

It's tear jerking when you have to clean the bed pans and change the diapers.  Life sometimes just give you what you earned and he fessed up to that.   Not my route of going about re-routing the ship lost at sea, but hey, better than the braggadocios stuff.  #1 GO TEAM 18 STRONG!


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 27, 2014)

Second chances are great, when a person actually makes an effort to change.  The only effort I saw was FAR in the opposite direction (http://imgur.com/bq3aHXZ), and this isn't close to being his _second_ chance anyways.  How many times have we seen this repeat itself now?


----------



## SkylarM (Jan 27, 2014)

devonblzx said:


> Abuse is relative.  In a plan providing 100TB of bandwidth and 250GB of disk space, then using 4MB/s or even 7.2MB/s shouldn't be considered abuse.  As seen from the dd tests posted here, the disks are taxed and therefore 4MB/s was causing the system load to go up.


My post wasn't directly targetted at the specific case of abuse in this thread, but was more of a wider "this is an issue" post. Sure you're allowed to use the resources you've paid for, but people that wget files repeatedly are simply doing it for the sake of being inconsiderate to others on the node using it for legitimate purposes. THAT particular case SHOULD NOT cause performance issues, so if I saw it I'd likely let it happen.

The example I gave, a user was wgetting large files to disk and then deleting them, and running it over and over causing our disk IO to tank as a result of these needless writes.

As far as TOS/AUP goes, there's a fine line between what should be abuse and what shouldn't be in this case. I have considered adding a "don't be a dickwad" clause, but haven't NEEDED to add it (we don't beg for abusers to use us with 100TB BW packages). That case doesn't fall under any real "abuse" as it isn't directly causing performance issues for other clients (assuming your node isn't overloaded beyond to hell and back), but again was just a more generalized "I dislike people who do that" type thing.


----------



## GVH-Jon (Jan 27, 2014)

Aldryic C said:


> Second chances are great, when a person actually makes an effort to change.  The only effort I saw was FAR in the opposite direction (http://imgur.com/bq3aHXZ), and this isn't close to being his _second_ chance anyways.  How many times have we seen this repeat itself now?


The screenshot above was not the entire conversation; I was attempting to negotiate a deal to acquire NodePacket to run as GreenValueHost's subsidiary premium brand however didn't get to finish the conversation with Tim as of yet. If the deal goes through, I believe that Tim should have a right to meet and get to know every person that would be participating in the operations of his company. I was throwing out ideas for terms of the acquisition.


----------



## raindog308 (Jan 27, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> The screenshot above was not the entire conversation; I was attempting to negotiate a deal to acquire NodePacket to run as GreenValueHost's subsidiary premium brand however didn't get to finish the conversation with Tim as of yet. If the deal goes through, I believe that Tim should have a right to meet and get to know every person that would be participating in the operations of his company. I was throwing out ideas for terms of the acquisition.


You use words like "subsidiary" and "brand" and "acquisition" and we giggle.

Children, you evidently read BusinessWeek to pick up the lingo, but you should be aware of the following:

1. No one takes you seriously because we know you're 17-year-olds.

2. Because you're ColoCrossing-powered, second-hand even, the assumption is that your service sucks.  

3. Experience proves this.

4. Your claims of staff are completely hilarious to us.  You have generated more derisive laughter in your short existence than any other "company" I can think of.  I do thank you for that, by the way.

5. The *best* providers in the LEB world do not have an Executive Leadership Team.  They do not have a Quality Assurance Team.  They do not have 18 staff.  I don't think even non-LEB providers have 18 staff.

6. You cannot fool us with your silly big business lingo.  *Every time you try to sound grown up, you sound more childish.*

7. After your "plea for forgiveness" on LET, you really need to leave the hosting industry, finish high school, and get a job.  That post will be linked every time you ever show your name on the Internet for the next 10 years and probably will show up every time a potential employer googles your name.

Wait, what am I saying...with your vested stock options, executive compensation terms, transnational corporate interests, and potential acquisition of Google via junior subordinated perpetual zero coupon debentures, you'll surely never have to work again.


----------



## Aldryic C'boas (Jan 27, 2014)

GVH-Jon said:


> The screenshot above was not the entire conversation; I was attempting to negotiate a deal to acquire NodePacket to run as GreenValueHost's subsidiary premium brand however didn't get to finish the conversation with Tim as of yet. If the deal goes through, I believe that Tim should have a right to meet and get to know every person that would be participating in the operations of his company. I was throwing out ideas for terms of the acquisition.


I saw more of the conversation.  It was a cry for help - and at this point, euthanasia would be the best assistance someone could offer.


----------



## drmike (Jan 27, 2014)

Aldryic C said:


> I saw more of the conversation.  It was a cry for help - and at this point, euthanasia would be the best assistance someone could offer.


Lucky that new abortion movement only aims to prune kiddos up to age 3.



raindog308 said:


> Wait, what am I saying...with your vested stock options, executive compensation terms, transnational corporate interests, and potential acquisition of Google via junior subordinated perpetual zero coupon debentures, you'll surely never have to work again.


You rock!   That's a good swab of downright silly laughter.  Thanks for it!



GVH-Jon said:


> The screenshot above was not the entire conversation


Unsure why such a private conversation was leaked out like that.  Ahhh hmmmm.   I think there was more contributing drama rama around the whole thing.  No need... shhh!  No children were harmed in the process and everyone settled down after a proper nap and some warm milk.  Now to staff a wet nurse for the kids here in our version of play school.


----------



## DomainBop (Jan 27, 2014)

raindog308 said:


> 6. You cannot fool us with your silly big business lingo.  Every time you try to sound grown up, you sound more childish.


Truthfully, the silly big business lingo he's using now indicates he's matured greatly in the short time period since his Mickey Mouse/Taylor Swift storytelling days.



> Mouse Mickey immediately said “OH YES!! YES!! I LOVE HORSES!! YES!!!!” and out of nowhere, Taylor Swift pushed him into the horse and he and the horse fell down.


----------



## AuroraZero (Jan 27, 2014)

@DomainBop Hey you!!! Yeah You!! leave Taylor Swift alone. She is kind of hot in the I have to much make up on, I am a prettied up make up doll kind of way. I had another way to put it but decided to be nice for once. Nice to Taylor I have nothing against DomainBop at all.


----------



## texteditor (Jan 27, 2014)

AuroraZero said:


> @DomainBop Hey you!!! Yeah You!! leave Taylor Swift alone. She is kind of hot in the I have to much make up on, I am a prettied up make up doll kind of way. I had another way to put it but decided to be nice for once. Nice to Taylor I have nothing against DomainBop at all.


She's also pleasantly gif-able



whitegirllean.gif:


----------



## mitsuhashi (Jan 27, 2014)

"Fire" one of "your" techs and you won't have to tremble at spending a couple hundred bucks more for a decent CPU.


----------

