Which companies need reviews?

[wlanboy]

I really like this forum, but the reviews are all too "nice and shiny".


I don't think I have seen one negative review.

If I should add information - just ask on the review post.

I am open to any suggestions.

Looking back to the last year I did write some - not so shiny things about providers:

• SecureDragon -> Bandwith cap -> but they withdraw that.
• BlueVM -> me leaving Buffalo through bandwith/routing issues
• Torqhost -> cancel & refund -> read the story about their "service"
• Tactical Florida -> slow HD -> was fixed
• Tactical Los Angeles -> slow network -> Upgrade to 1 GB
• Anynode -> Rebooting without notice -> but changed that.
• Ramnode Seattle -> network problems -> Nicj fixed that and added Upstreams

Why are you not able to read about some of these things in the review?

1. Current situation is resolved.
   I cannot say that the network in Seattle is crap.
   
   
   I would be lying.
   
   
   A reason why I am updating my reviews.
   
2. There is a thread (discussion) about it.
   A reason why everyone should be using "tags".
   
   
   Because IPBoard is giving you a list of related topic at the button of the page.
   
   
   So no need (nasty time consuming work) to link each provider related thread to one review.
   

 

[mikho]

Most important part when doing reviews, if you want them unbiased is that the provider doesn't know that this customer will post a review about the usage ofthat particular vps.

 

[MannDude]

Most important part when doing reviews, if you want them unbiased is that the provider doesn't know that this customer will post a review about the usage ofthat particular vps.

Exactly. So while I don't mind collecting a list of potential providers to review I do not want them to know that they're being reviewed. The order they may or may not receive may or may not just be a regular ol' customer that stumbled onto them from some random depth of the internet.

Since I may have a few people participate in this, I'll ask them to not indicate publicly on here or privately to anyone that they're reviewing this host or that host. I guess I'll just have to trust that they will use the money I send them to pay their hosting invoice and not transfer it out or keep it, too.

 

[NodeBytes]

Have them send you a copy of the invoice after their purchase

Also, I'd be interested in reviewing Crissic. I had a VM with them a while back but never got around to writing a review and I would like to.

 

[MannDude]

Have them send you a copy of the invoice after their purchase

Also, I'd be interested in reviewing Crissic. I had a VM with them a while back but never got around to writing a review and I would like to.

That would be more ideal, assuming they had the needed funds to get started. Would be easier to just reimburse. Otherwise, you show me invoice for $XX.XX or whatever and I send it to you via PayPal, and then you show me 'Invoice Paid' and you have a free VPS to test for however many months.

I like this, this is a good idea. Good way to hook some people up with some VPSes, providers get a random sale, vpsBoard gets some more detailed and quality reviews. Win-win-win for us all.

 

[peterw]

@MannDude and @hellogoodbye. Good idea! I want to know if some bad review hosts are really bad or if they were choosen by the wrong customers. Nobody will risk his own money to proof that they become good.

@blergh I don't like academic benchmarks. Real world usage is not possible for a test vps someone buys for 6 months. Maybe someone have a load balancer or cluster where he wants to add temporary nodes?

@wlanboy. Ignore shovehost, nothing good ever come out of his mouth or hands.

Someone should manage the reviews. I don't want to post a request because the provider then knows about a close review. I want to send a PM to a review manager which then decides what provider will be reviewed in what week. Time managment is needed because the results will be posted after some weeks or months. MannDude can then decide who he is giving money to.

 

[MannDude]

Someone should manage the reviews. I don't want to post a request because the provider then knows about a close review. I want to send a PM to a review manager which then decides what provider will be reviewed in what week. Time managment is needed because the results will be posted after some weeks or months. MannDude can then decide who he is giving money to.

I agree. I started the dialogue in the staff forum to discuss how best to proceed with this. Unsure if Martin and HalfEatenPie are around though right now.

I'm busy enough as-is working a fulltime job, and this site is it's own fulltime job some days as well. While this sounds great on paper, properly implementing it will be more than just, "Here is a VPS, I hope you post a review in 3 months!" I'll have to keep track of who has what so we can determine when to remind them and when to expect the content. Also, there will be limitations in place so not just anyone can get a free VPS. The idea is a trusted member of the community with a real need for one will be able to obtain one or more pending their need and level of trustworthiness. They'll say, "Hey, I'd like a VPS on the east coast with 512MB RAM, 40GB storage, and like... 100GB BW." and I'll locate (or a 'review manager' if I offload this to someone else) a provider for them or give them a couple providers to choose from. That way they can't choose providers that they may be buddies with. "Hey man, MannDude said he's going to give me a free VPS to review so I'm going to choose you. Put me on that new node!" <-- That's not going to work.

 

[peterw]

I agree. I started the dialogue in the staff forum to discuss how best to proceed with this. Unsure if Martin and HalfEatenPie are around though right now.

I'm busy enough as-is working a fulltime job, and this site is it's own fulltime job some days as well.


The idea is a trusted member of the community with a real need for one will be able to obtain one or more pending their need and level of trustworthiness.

Hard working man. You need some helping hands time to increase your staff and delegate work.

Totally agree with trusted members. A review is nothing if you do not trust the reviewer.

 

[Boltersdriveer]

I was hoping to be reviewed here

 

[vRozenSch00n]

Reviews from @wlanboy are reviews of a competent Linux user who can administer his own box and find a workaround should any problem arise, without having to open a support ticket when issues can be self handled. Up to my knowing he hasn't done any biased review as the reviews come with supporting data. 

I've also seen reviews, (not in this board obviously), from incompetent Linux users who judged a provider as a bad provider when they tried to install something in an unmanaged VPS but the installed application didn't  work because the user miss-configured the system, then the user start opening multiple tickets within 15 minutes, and an hour later the user made a review titled "<Company Name> is a scam stay away from <Company Name>"

My point is, a Linux/BSD/Windows savvy user might publish a better review than a Linux/BSD/Windows illiterate user, and I hope @MannDude keeps a high standard on who would be eligible to post a review.

I also hope @drmike continue to be a detective to get "deeper insight", so a provider might improve what their lack of, and end users know what they are expecting from a provider.

Edit: typo

 

[peterw]

Reviews from @wlanboy are reviews of a competent Linux user who can administer his own box and find a workaround should any problem arise, without having to open a support ticket when issues can be self handled. Up to my knowing he hasn't done any biased review as the reviews come with supporting data.

Based on his guides he knows what he is doing. I like that he writes on reviews what is running on the server.

I like the layout of his reviews. All reviews should have the same structure. Hardware info, what the server is used for, support and ticket quality and the network.

My point is, a Linux/BSD/Windows savvy user might publish a better review than a Linux/BSD/Windows illiterate user, and I hope @MannDude keeps a high standard on who would be eligible to post a review.

I think that the reviews should be usable for non linux experts too. Some basic questions should be asked. Support should have friendly answers for simple questios.

 

[Aldryic C'boas]

Support should have friendly answers for simple questios.

To that end, my suggestion is that Curtis (and participant) not announce that they're doing a review until after the fact - that way the replies from the support department in question are unbiased and natural.

 

[XLvps]

Count me in!

 

[Awmusic12635]

Sounds like a cool idea.

We are always of course up to being reviewed

 

[k0nsl]

Well, I can recommend Dr.Server and so as to make more people aware of their (really good) service, why not put them on the list for reviews? I will be investing in more VPSes with them next month. But so far, not a single noticeable hiccup with regard to the service they provide.

I will do a review of it when more time has passed, so far only 25+ days. But it gives me a somewhat good feel about the service, even for such a limited time period

I was approached with an idea by a community member and I thought it was a great! In short, I'll be funding 3 - 6 months worth of service from several companies so that he can write detailed and unbiased reviews. I thought this would be a great opportunity to have some of the lesser known hosts that contribute positively here to have a detailed, honest and thorough review written about their service.

So, any particular companies here you'd like to see be reviewed? Why?

 

[Roger]

This is a great idea that should help us all providers improve what we might be failing to accomplish, without even noticing.

 

[Tactical]

I think this is a really good idea! We all need feedback to know what we are doing good and what I suck at (Not that type of porn suck). 

 

[FHN-Eric]

The idea is a trusted member of the community with a real need for one will be able to obtain one or more pending their need and level of trustworthiness. They'll say, "Hey, I'd like a VPS on the east coast with 512MB RAM, 40GB storage, and like... 100GB BW." and I'll locate (or a 'review manager' if I offload this to someone else) a provider for them or give them a couple providers to choose from. That way they can't choose providers that they may be buddies with. "Hey man, MannDude said he's going to give me a free VPS to review so I'm going to choose you. Put me on that new node!" <-- That's not going to work.

Or, you could program a system in php that has a form for ram, disk space, bandwidth, region, and what it would be used for. When the form is submitted, a ticket is created, and the status of the ticket is set to pending review. If the request is accepted, they would be given a list of hosts to choose from next time they login. The host they choose would be added to their profile, along with the plan information.

 

[NodeWest-Dan]

If you decide to do shared hosting we'd be happy to have a review.

 

[shovenose]

I think the main problem with having the hosting providers (or "users") submit a form is you'd get a bunch of spam. But still, if ShoveHost got reviewed rather than not even being given a chance, it would be much fairer than currently.