Loud and Proud, Snake-Inc!

[Trel]

Alot and I mean *alot* of adult related sites steal images.

Thats how.

In response to..

Why does it seem that the only people so unhappy about Snake, are from competing companies? If your so confident in your services, why do you argue so vehemently? It sounds as if somebody's a little uncomfortable with competition

I should hope that wasn't directed at me.. :bandit2:

 

[Wojtek]

someone wants to make heaps of money.
he decides to make a porn website,

not having the required capital to make his own pics (camera, place, girls), he decides to take random pics from other websites and put them on his website. He wraps everything up in a nice bought template and installs a paypal payment system.

Someone notices a copyrighted pic on his site, alerts the copyright owner who sues the host. Host has to pay fine, host as no money to continue, host is out of business.

 

[Visarts]

Ok, but that's the same for websites on Musicals (andrew lloyd webber was suing over fan sites using his logo's) gaming systems (technically, hacks are illegal) Music (many people link to mp3's they shouldn't) and just about any other copyrighted materials. I think the issue is that competition can't find anything better to argue about.

Man, I love this forum :cow2:

 

[Wojtek]

thats why most hosts clearly state that they will not tolerate any kinf of questionable content, aka pron, mp3, music, whatever

 

[Trel]

I sure wish I had the girls for an adult site... screw the site, I'll just keep em all for myself... :coolmusic

 

[Visarts]

You'd need the money from the site to support them all ROTFLMAO

 

[striker]

1. Which porn company looks around for any sites that steal their pics and

2. Who has the time to pursue such a suit? So what you lost 10$ business is it really worth the time?

Most porn is stolen anyways so chances are you are stealing from a site that stole their pics from another site, which stole their pics from another site etc....

sry Im getting too off topic.

 

[notnamed]

I am so mad at you people for bashing MJ my hands are shaking. She's just a customer!!! She loves the service here, and so do I! Dammit, people, can't you just accept the fact that you don't own the universe? That maybe somebody might like Snake's services over your's? If you couldn't just be cordial, then why did you post?

While, as I said before, I believe at least parts of Robert's posts were called for, I also think part of yours is too. We have a big problem here at FWS where respected hosts (respected in the community) sign up under second usernames and post 'reviews'. That naturally makes us suspicious when someone posts such a glowing review. Now that it's been confirmed that s/he is indeed a customer, I think that this thread can be closed and we can all get on with our lives. No need to get so emotional over such a trivial issue as this. All that'd been on the line is banishment from the forum, heaven forbid that from anyone...

 

[Wojtek]

Originally posted by striker
1. Which porn company looks around for any sites that steal their pics and

2. Who has the time to pursue such a suit? So what you lost 10$ business is it really worth the time?

Most porn is stolen anyways so chances are you are stealing from a site that stole their pics from another site, which stole their pics from another site etc....

sry Im getting too off topic.

Depends if your stealing from Joe'sPornSite.com or PlayBoy.com
Lawsuits for that can go as high as 100's and 1000's of $ depending on who sues


I do agree with notnamed though, lets all goto sleep and leave this thread alone.

 

[Phairest]

Krikey, do we live on the same planet?!

Wait... OneHost.ws didn't survive because of the cheap prices they had (you said that, not me).. so you sign up with another company with the same prices? that makes no sense.

First off, I didn't speculate at all as to why onehost.ws folded; I don't know, I wasn't there, I just know they're gone now. Second, since you seem to be having undue difficulty understanding the sense of my decision, let me try to put it in terms you'll understand:

Imagine your special ed teacher offered you an apple for lunch for a dollar. Then imagine that you told the lunchlady about it and she offered you another apple of the same size, also for a dollar, even though cafeteria apples normally cost twice as much. Now imagine that you remember one of your classmates (the kid in the helmet) buying an apple from the teacher last week, only to bite into it and find the insides brown and grainy, and half a worm... The cafeteria apples, on the other hand, are renown for being delicious and worm-free. Who would you buy your apple from?!

Uh-huh. Objectionable content can be considered as adult content, pornographic material, niicce. That's what I need.. to host some porno so I can be hit with DDOS attacks and have to risk getting into legal actions with the court systems because some 13 year accessed it.

Oh no! *gasp* Porn! Run for the hills, AGGGHHH! Puh-leeze, don't even try making porn out to be the bad guy- the net woulda never taken off without it and the people that lawfully supply it (due to OUR incessant demand mind you!) do NOT deserve to be treated as second-class citizens, or customers in this case. Moreover, "objectionable content" isn't limited to porn by any means; it can be ANYTHING that rubs a host the wrong way, and if they have a "OC" clause chances are they can suspend your account with indemnity. I'm not comfy working in such a hypocritical, restrictive environment, hence I'm at Snake.

And BTW, your comment about falling victim to a DOS attack really commands confidence in your security measures, and the 13-year-old thing is just too silly to even respond to.

You stated you were in the market for hosting 6 months ago, does not mean you've been with them for 6 months.

M'kay, but then RIGHT AFTER THAT I said "But now, after being with them for 6 happy months," which I thought was fairly straightforward.

I don't need beg my clients to come in here and "review" my service, wait I mean place an advertisment that I email them in exchange for discoutn hosting.

I wasn't suggesting that you beg any of your clients to come over and review you, I was suggesting that YOU answer the questions on behalf of your company instead of wasting time trying to piss higher up a wall than me!

Features? Now you want to compare my company to Snake-Inc.com? LOL too funny.

Yeah, looking at your AUP I totally agree; hi-frickin-larious! It's obvious to me now why you've been so keen to avoid comparing your policies, but you might as well say something about it now, before I start pasting from your site.


LH:
I may not have 1000+ posts to my name but I've used FWS for years to find hosts. In fact, I got snake's name from here originally. Can I prove these things? No. Not unless Jan or somebody wants to go and see how far back my IP is in the access log. Anyway the point is I have an opinion and it was assuredly not an ad nor a "big ole heaping pile o spam." I don't know the deal with chronohost or whatever but if he left me in a position where I'll have to do more to convince you of my sincerity, so be it. My site URL (as stated in my original post) is severusforever.us and yes, I have proof of the date of my order with snake. I'm not going to supply the latter however, b/c it's just a text file that I could easily make to say whatever date I want, so either you just trust me when I say July 2, 2003, or you don't. And a thousand apologies- it seems I'm in my 5th month with snake, not 6th as I had previously thought.


Copyright-infringement-people:
People... If some dude is pirating DVD's in his house and gets caught, whom do you think is charged- the guy burning the discs, or his landlord? This doesn't even need to be rhetorical- take the recent RIAA suits against the swappers on Kazaa; not their ISP's, nor Kazaa itself, nor their bloody PC manufacturers, just THEM!

 

[Visarts]

The funny thing about 'objectionable' is that it depends on who's objecting. I have a relative that hosts with Snake as well, and it's a site on the holocaust, and why it's wrong to trivialize it. It used to be hosted by Angelfire, but somebody there must have had something against Jewish people, because for a year - A YEAR - the site was down with a message that said "this site has violated our terms and policies", even though they said it was just a technical problem. But tech problems don't last for over a year. We host with Snake because it dosen't matter if they think the holocaust happened or not. We do. The site stays, and the service has been unbeatable. I was just going to sign up for their free service, but when I saw how great the paid hosting was, I changed my mind. What other host will chat with you online about a minor issue, or reply to every email you send them? And they're nice, too!!! I'm only paying for a 10$ domain for crying out loud, and I get all that and more. Viva la Snake!!!! :applaudin

Long Live Free Speech

 

[Wojtek]

Originally posted by Phairest
Copyright-infringement-people:
People... If some dude is pirating DVD's in his house and gets caught, whom do you think is charged- the guy burning the discs, or his landlord? This doesn't even need to be rhetorical- take the recent RIAA suits against the swappers on Kazaa; not their ISP's, nor Kazaa itself, nor their bloody PC manufacturers, just THEM!

huh...
Why cant they bust kazaa? because it dosnt store anything on its servers as opposed to *rolling drum sound* NAPSTER

Q. Who did they bust the users or the servers? A. The servers

 

[Visarts]

I really, truly believe that that's a nonissue.

Besides, new judgements were enacted that enables RIAA to go after individuals, as most of us have heard about the grandmother or the 12yo girl getting sued. (I have a whole lot of room to talk - I'm on p2p as well)

Here's another question I have:
Why does this forum allow specific hosting companies to be the sponser? Dosen't that become a conflict of interest?
Just curious. :confused2

 

[Phairest]

We host with Snake because it dosen't matter if they think the holocaust happened or not. We do.

Bravo Vis! JUST the thing to get the point across. But don't feel left out kiddies, just fill in the blank!

We host with Snake because it doesn't matter if they think [insert your "objectionable" but legal issue/content/whatever here] or not. We do. :biggrin2:

Woj:
If you were to accurately extend your Napster analogy to a webhost, they would be *directly* offering pirated music for d/l, which of course is illegal. But it's a different story when a legitimate service or device is abused; hosts are NOT libel in that case provided they supply the authorities with all requested information about the client (to refuse is obstruction of justice). Same thing with kazaa- they'd sue em if they could, and they did try, but a judge ruled that kazaa is not an infringing device by itself- like a photocopy machine, VCR, CD-burner, or WEBHOST, it can be used appropriately or illegally, and in the latter case the device is not at fault.

 

[Jan]

Originally posted by Visarts
Here's another question I have:
Why does this forum allow specific hosting companies to be the sponser? Dosen't that become a conflict of interest?
Just curious. :confused2

They pay for their advertising. Any reputable company can approach Peo to advertise and after a check to see if they are above board, they will be accepted.

I haven't read all of this thread as yet, it grew too fast, but I will go through it.

 

[Robert]

Originally posted by Snake316
Haven't had any one posted here in a while.

Wow, Robert is it?

First off, thank you guys for the post - Sodfather and M.J. Your feedback is always appreciated.

Let me clear a few things up. I do not own Snake Inc, I am Sales person for the company, the lead sales staff to be honest. This post in fact, was NOT as the 'friendly' Robert thought it was, a mere advertisement. Phairest has been a customer of ours for a long time now, and it seems she appreciated the service, as many others did. She just took the liberty of posting something about it…what did she get in return? A straight out bashing from the ‘respected’ Robert. It seems this forum needs better management, because something isn’t right.

As for the adult websites, we have one major client in charge of adult hosting, all adult sales are processed to him and placed on the machines he leases from us. So adult, or high risk websites,(as you ‘experts’ seem to call them), are not on the same servers.

In any event, Robert you have tried to compare your company to us, if you wish to think your better, then you may. We are all allotted to our own thoughts. The fact of the matter is, we are both hosting companies in business to provide customers with their hosting needs. Some will find us as their choice for hosting, and some will find you as their choice for hosting… and lets not forget about others that will find companies such as hostrocket, onehost, or whatever other hosts are out there, as their choice for hosting. If you wish to take your time out, and ‘bash’ Snake Inc, then…well…I need not continue.

Again, I must make a comment this forum needs better management if you are going to have a member with around 1k+ posts come out with insults to mere comments.

Have a good day everyone.

-David
Senior Sales
http://snake-inc.com

David,

I was out of line. However, the review that your client postted, IMO was an advertisement. He hardly stated why he liked you, rather, he compared you to other hosts. My comment about comparing, I laughed. You cannot compare 2 web hosts, there are no controlled variables to compare 2 hosts. You just can't. So what we are in the same line of business, our equipment is different, the location of our servers, the software we run. etc. Nobody is better than nobody, we are all different.

It is very rare to see someone post a review for their host, and the times we have seen them, they were false and made up BY the host. Matter of that, something similiar to the "review" your client posted above, we saw posted a few days ago and it's my belief and from what I've seen here, that the owner posted that review.

I think this has gotten out of control. My intentions were never to bash you, your company or your staff. But to make sure that these "review", unlike the few we've seen before, wasn't false.

My last post was "Ok." and my intention was that's it, to leave it alone.

Dave, my email is robert@verohost.com if you wish to speak to me, feel free to do so.

Have a great day.

Robert C. Rodriguez

 

[darkcurves]

This thread is so immature. Anyway, i agree with Lifeless hosting, i mean the girls part.

 

[Visarts]

Not immature, fun ROTFLMAO But I can tell
you for a fact, Robert, that MJ -Phairest-
is not in the employ of snake. You can
check out our forum if anyone still
thinks so.
I appreciate your post, though. It explains
things a little better.

 

[Phairest]

You cannot compare 2 web hosts, there are no controlled variables to compare 2 hosts.

I beg to differ, b/c all hosts share a common function via varying means, and these means (which we consumers know better as our accounts) ARE comparable.

Let's start with *Webspace, *Bandwidth, and *Cost, arguably the three most important common variables of hosting. All other things being equal, more of the first two for less of the last is simply better.

*Features. Such a small designation to encompass so much, but comparison is not nearly as difficult as knowing what to ask. For things such as cpanel/plesk, FTP access, or the presence of php, the answer is either 'yes' or 'no' (and the more 'yes's' the better). For things such as subdomains, email accounts, or mysql databases, the answer will again be 'yes' or 'no' and, if the answer is 'yes', be supplemented by the amount you are permitted. Again, all other things being equal, more is simply better.

*Support. What options does the host offer to contact them? Circle all that apply: Email, forum, 3rd party chat, telephone, fax, street address, telepathy. And how many staff members are employed to address everyone's queries/issues? More is better!

*Hardware. A server is a server... NOT! Server's are no different from PC's in that they can be high-end, medium-grade, or outright dinosaurs, and if you can appreciate the difference between a

A) 400MHz Celeron-based sys with single channel 256MB mem and a 5400RPM Deathstar HD, and a

B) 2500+ Athlon-based sys with dual channel 1GB mem and a 10,000RPM Raptor HD

you're well-qualified enough to evaluate your host's server specs as well.

*Connection. Again, just like the PC you're on now, servers need a net connection too, and for all you know your host could be using our equivalent of dialup, so ASK: What's their connex (max upstream/downstream) and how many machines does it support? The faster the connection the better, and supplying as few machines as possible.


These things are a mere sampling of the MANY common variables that hosting companies share, and IMHO a prospective customer would be foolish to NOT compare. In keeping with my original message, I strongly suggest you pose these questions to any prospective hosts, else you might be in for some unpleasant surprises later.

 

[Visarts]

Makes sense.