• Howdy! Welcome to our community of more than 130.000 members devoted to web hosting. This is a great place to get special offers from web hosts and post your own requests or ads. To start posting sign up here. Cheers! /Peo, FreeWebSpace.net
managed wordpress hosting

Community feedback

Yeah. Well, I might respond to that at some point. :(

Right now I'm fed up with those two and I'm just not taking any more crap from them. It's been going on for way too long. Sorry if my patience with others have not been as good as it should have been today. I apologize for that.

Wow. That comment makes me rather emotionally sad. Seriously.
 
theraptor, you make a good point to leave if you dont like it, but, the problem is for people like me and others that have been here longer, we have seen this place change, and not for the better. we are simply making suggestions to try and bring this place back to what it was when we joined and fell in love with FWS. we dont want to leave cause we treasure the good memories here, but, we are leaving because there seems to be no hope at the end of the tunnel

@Peo's last comment about being sick of the two members that he per b& today, that is the type of immaturity that you dont tolerate from the users, so, why is it acceptable from an admin? neither one of those two members really deserved a ban today. yeah, they have deserved it in the past, heck, i have too, but, today, you are in the wrong man. see past your dislike for them.
 
I would appreciate it if the other moderators as they became aware of it add their perspective of the situation and reasoning for the controversial decisions they have made recently. So far it has only been you to reply here, no wonder you're stressed out if moderating the entire place is really being done by one maybe two people. Could you send for the rest of the staff and have them post their standings on this issue?

There is no controversial decision I have made recently that needs perspective to be added.
 
theraptor, you make a good point to leave if you dont like it, but, the problem is for people like me and others that have been here longer, we have seen this place change, and not for the better. we are simply making suggestions to try and bring this place back to what it was when we joined and fell in love with FWS. we dont want to leave cause we treasure the good memories here, but, we are leaving because there seems to be no hope at the end of the tunnel

@Peo's last comment about being sick of the two members that he per b& today, that is the type of immaturity that you dont tolerate from the users, so, why is it acceptable from an admin? neither one of those two members really deserved a ban today. yeah, they have deserved it in the past, heck, i have too, but, today, you are in the wrong man. see past your dislike for them.

But this is exactly what I'm saying. No one hates this place and wants to leave, we want to see it become what it could be.
 
@Peo's last comment about being sick of the two members that he per b& today, that is the type of immaturity that you dont tolerate from the users, so, why is it acceptable from an admin? neither one of those two members really deserved a ban today. yeah, they have deserved it in the past, heck, i have too, but, today, you are in the wrong man. see past your dislike for them.

The problem here is you don't have the full picture, yet you feel you can make a judgement.

The two members banned today have ignored warnings from moderators repeatedly over a very long period of time. Recently they got banned for a couple of weeks. That clearly didn't get the message across to them. What they did today (and a related abuse by one of them yesterday) was just the last straw. I have no regrets about the decision. And to make this clear. No other current long time member is anywhere near this kind of abuse.
 
Since the other thread is closed, and this thread is used for continue the whole discussion, then I think it is appropriate to post this here.



The sad thing is, when we are scolding some of these kiddie host who uses nulled WHMCS, about what they did is wrong, we might get infractions for "Host responding to another host's ad thread." as well.
What part of "Web hosts are not allowed to reply to another web hosts thread, unless it's an offer for servers which the web host is honestly interested in. Web hosts may also not post bad comments about other hosts ("host bashing")" don't you understand?
 
What part of "Web hosts are not allowed to reply to another web hosts thread, unless it's an offer for servers which the web host is honestly interested in. Web hosts may also not post bad comments about other hosts ("host bashing")" don't you understand?

How is calling out a host on using nulled software host bashing? Also under those circumstances, are you saying dedicated/vps/other hosts are allowed to "host bash" and only web hosts aren't? What if people who aren't a host at all called them out on it, would their post also get deleted?
 
Could you send for the rest of the staff and have them post their standings on this issue?

I would have been mad if he had sent for me at 1am :p

Regarding the URL, we have no problem with someone trying to get a competing forum going, but when it is just a forum mainly to abuse FWS and the staff, then action is taken. It isn't the first time and it probably won't be the last. They are become less prevelant now because forums in general are less popular than they were a few years years back. Social networking is where people tend to spend their spare time. Somebody mentioned other forums should be censored also, like WHT. WHT is not a competing forum. It does not allow free hosting and freehosting discussions are directed to FWHT or here. (I don't direct them here either, I don't need to as others are aware of it)

Loss of -rep privileges is also nothing new either, it has happened to a few over time, but they didn't broadcast it around like some. There used to be a sticky regarding what would happen if it was abused.
 
How is calling out a host on using nulled software host bashing?
That is a perfect example of why a host should be able to post in another hosts thread. If a host is doing something illegal or against forum rules, they should be able to point that out so the OP can either remedy the situation or be B&.
What if people who aren't a host at all called them out on it, would their post also get deleted?
One reason I am not a host. I do search out what Tyler mentioned, allowing warez, etc. Clients need to know whether they are going to be safe with a host. If a host has started a service several times and failed within a couple months several times, any prospective client has the right to know that.
 
How is calling out a host on using nulled software host bashing? Also under those circumstances, are you saying dedicated/vps/other hosts are allowed to "host bash" and only web hosts aren't? What if people who aren't a host at all called them out on it, would their post also get deleted?

CS Squad didn't just respond to nulled software ads, he puts his 20 cents worth on many other host's offers and the same goes for the some of the others complaing "over there".
 
CS Squad didn't just respond to nulled software ads, he puts his 20 cents worth on many other host's offers and the same goes for the some of the others complaing "over there".

I'm not even referring to CS Squad right now. I'm trying to get a better understanding of what is allowed and not allowed here when it comes to people calling out other hosts on using nulled software or other hosts calling out on other hosts who are breaking the rules.
 
Sain Cai, I can agree with the idea that potential clients should be made aware of those things. We have strict rules on ad threads since we feel that you should be able to post your ad without getting trashed by competitors. Abusers like the ones you mention should not be allowed to advertise at all. I think again one part of the solution to this problem is to report abuse like this to us instead of replying in ad threads. You think that kind of ad thread should be removed? Or it should stay in public?
 
Regarding the URL, we have no problem with someone trying to get a competing forum going, but when it is just a forum mainly to abuse FWS and the staff, then action is taken. It isn't the first time and it probably won't be the last. They are become less prevelant now because forums in general are less popular than they were a few years years back. Social networking is where people tend to spend their spare time. Somebody mentioned other forums should be censored also, like WHT. WHT is not a competing forum. It does not allow free hosting and freehosting discussions are directed to FWHT or here. (I don't direct them here either, I don't need to as others are aware of it)

Abuse FWS and the staff? You're being a bit dramatic now. That forum is simply a place for regulars to hang out -- an alternative to FWS. It's never going to get popular and it will never replace FWS, so I don't see what the issue is. If you're going to ban a URL from the entire forum because it's a competing forum, then you need to do the same to freewebhostingtalk, webhostingtalk, freevps, and any other forum that is even remotely like FWS.

And yes WHT is a competing forum because they allow paid hosting offers -- much like this forum does.
 
We already said we have no problem with competing forums. If you don't see insults aimed at myself and Peo over there then you are blind. Maybe I should join over there and tell some of the members what I really think about them personally. Let's see how long I'd last!
 
Sain Cai, I can agree with the idea that potential clients should be made aware of those things. We have strict rules on ad threads since we feel that you should be able to post your ad without getting trashed by competitors. Abusers like the ones you mention should not be allowed to advertise at all. I think again one part of the solution to this problem is to report abuse like this to us instead of replying in ad threads. You think that kind of ad thread should be removed? Or it should stay in public?

I think it should stay public but receive a notice that the host in question is not fully compliant with standard business practices and may be a risky choice.

That way it suggests that the host is doing something wrong and may not be trustworthy without openly accusing them of things that kind of are their business to deal with. But by all means if they are doing something illegal they should be marked and it made known in some way.

We already said we have no problem with competing forums. If you don't see insults aimed at myself and Peo over there then you are blind. Maybe I should join over there and tell some of the members what I really think about them personally. Let's see how long I'd last!

They took their complaints over there because it was felt that if they openly shared their concerns here they would be punished for it. I don't see how that is such a problem, although it is careless of them to let it overtake the community like it has.
 
Tyler, the abuse of fws and the staff is real. It's what happened and what continue to happen even if you can't see it. Some of it is private over email, reputation and pm. Some is in the open or it has been removed from the forum. We don't ban forums or hosting sites. Why would we do that? We don't. In this case though it's two recently banned and disgruntled now former members running more or less a copy of this site while simultaneously trashing this forum.
 
Sain Cai, I can agree with the idea that potential clients should be made aware of those things. We have strict rules on ad threads since we feel that you should be able to post your ad without getting trashed by competitors. Abusers like the ones you mention should not be allowed to advertise at all. I think again one part of the solution to this problem is to report abuse like this to us instead of replying in ad threads. You think that kind of ad thread should be removed? Or it should stay in public?

For hosts that state they allow illegal material, whether in the thread or on their site itself, I personally would permaban them immediately and delete the thread. For hosts that cannot stay alive after repeated failures, I would keep the thread open, since they have done nothing wrong except on the "business" end. Clients should be aware of the risks as no one should have to bounce from host to host. I know people can do web searches for reviews, but those can be easily replicated by the host themselves (which I am sure happens quite often).

If a host mentions how a competitor has gone under several times in a short period of time, that should have no consequence as they are not really trashing the ad, but stating a fact. Things like that I personally would overlook, but if they said stuff like "You oversell" or the like, then I can see that as ad bashing.
 
If a host mentions how a competitor has gone under several times in a short period of time, that should have no consequence as they are not really trashing the ad, but stating a fact. Things like that I personally would overlook, but if they said stuff like "You oversell" or the like, then I can see that as ad bashing.

It is host bashing, and if it comes from you it is ad trashing. Just because a host has gone under before doesn't mean it will happen again. For goodness sake give them a chance to redeem themselves.
 
With all due respect, if a host has gone through the motions 4 times (as was stated by a host earlier this month) then that person has proven himself unreliable. Whether the problem was funding, choice of providers, etc, the client should still have the right to know of the history of a specific host.

Hosts have the protections given by the forum rules, clients should also have that protection when choosing a host for their content.
 
Back
Top