Stay away from Damien and his company SupremeBytes. (my review)

[DomainBop]

If I were a SupremeBytes customer, I would be justifiably concerned that Damien might cut off my services on short notice without any consideration to the affect it has on my customers and my business.

Long ago (sometime around 2300 B.C) , someone invented this thing called a signed contract which can help reduce the risk of problems like BitAccel experienced occurring.

 

[Aldryic C'boas]

I would've considered having that much spam a warning, to be honest.  Maybe he could've given more notice, but it really sounds like you could've done a LOT more to keep his IP space cleaner.  There is fault on both sides... but you probably should've just bit the bullet and cursed him out via email or something to work out your rage.  Pretty much the only thing this thread has done is make folks with IP space to rent say "Haha, nope, not renting to this guy, he's just gonna get my network trashy".

 

[coreyman]

I would've considered having that much spam a warning, to be honest.  Maybe he could've given more notice, but it really sounds like you could've done a LOT more to keep his IP space cleaner.  There is fault on both sides... but you probably should've just bit the bullet and cursed him out via email or something to work out your rage.  Pretty much the only thing this thread has done is make folks with IP space to rent say "Haha, nope, not renting to this guy, he's just gonna get my network trashy".

Nope - the exact opposite. I've had several private messages from people here wanting to rent me IP space

 

[coreyman]

Not to add Supremebytes is already announcing and using this space in the Quadranet facility. If it were so 'bad' I don't think they would assign them to new customers

 

[vpsadm]

That's assuming we've heard both sides of the story.. truthfully.  I've been in Damien's shoes - resellers that don't care who they sell to as long as a buck is made, massive amounts of spam, etc.  At the end of the day, it's not his job to worry about the clients of clients of clients of clients.  His job is to worry about *his* company, and to avoid CC-style SBLs that would affect *his* clients.  He shouldn't have to 'work something out' with someone that's blasting such a ridiculous amount of spam, especially if warnings were already issued.

I'm more curious as to how many clients up and walked out.  Not because of the IP issue, but before that: when they suddenly found they couldn't send their legitimate emails due to sharing a net range with spam blasters.

You raise several good points.

I am not using my BitAccel VPS for email, so I would not have noticed any blacklisting if it had occurred. 

Whatever happened with the IP address blacklisting problems (or any other similar issue), the proper approach would have been for Damien to provide escalating warnings to Corey, explaining the problems, the expected corrections, and the consequences if the problems were not corrected. It would be improper for Damien to deallocate the IP addresses on short notice without warning. 

As an end customer, I am not privy to the communications that went on between Damien and Corey. Corey asserts that Damien did not give any warning before announcing the deallocation of the IP addresses. Damien has not denied it. That does not prove that Corey is right, but it lends credence to Corey's telling of the events (along with the other supporting information provided by Corey in this thread). 

Did Corey mess up by not having a signed contract and possibly failing to manage spammers? Absolutely.

Is Damien culpable for deallocating the IP addresses on ridiculously short notice, callously disregarding the impact that it had on innocent bystanders like me? Absolutely. 

The difference? Corey made mistakes. Damien acted with deliberate intent and malevolence. 

 

[Awmusic12635]

Did Corey mess up by not having a signed contract and possibly failing to manage spammers? Absolutely.
Is Damien culpable for deallocating the IP addresses on ridiculously short notice, callously disregarding the impact that it had on innocent bystanders like me? Absolutely. 

The difference? Corey made mistakes. Damien acted with deliberate intent and malevolence. 

Damien is responsible for his IPs, Corey is responsible for his customers. Corey's customers are not Damien's problem. Had Corey signed a contract a large amount of this "problem" would have never happened. A proper contract would have a notification period of IPs being revoked, abuse processes etc.

 

[coreyman]

Damien is responsible for his IPs, Corey is responsible for his customers. Corey's customers are not Damien's problem. Had Corey signed a contract a large amount of this "problem" would have never happened. A proper contract would have a notification period of IPs being revoked, abuse processes etc.

My customers are not Damiens problem but I am a singular customer using the entire range - and therefore I am his problem. None of this means Damien shouldn't have any type of moral responsibility. Contracts are good - I hope if nothing else comes of this everyone is reminded to always get a contract.

 

[coreyman]

Well this is funny - http://167.160.90.5/unsub.php..

seems like there are some people using this range now with a mailing list.

The page says

"Please enter your email address and click unsubscribe to be removed from our email list. Please allow up to 48 hours for your request to be processed."

 

[rds100]

Isn't this what people are calling "beating a dead horse"? What is done is done already, move on with your life.

 

[AnthonySmith]

tl;dr there are conflicting opinions that will never reach a common ground, both sides were at fault for not getting any sort of agreement in place, personally I feel that a "if this continues your space will be revoked" warning should have been sent long ago however as there was no agreement it is what it is.