Removal of Paid Services Section

[jTynne]

Before anyone even says it, "But wouldn't that affect you as well?", yes. Yes, it would. But I'm sick of seeing underhanded hosting tactics being used left and right and people from within their own "company" posting false "reviews" and "testimonials".

Paid services. On a free to use message board, as part of a free to use database website.

If nothing else, some sort of filtering process in who gets to post, and an extensively long list of things allowed/disallowed, and/or make it so you have to pay RMS monthly to advertise on there, because there's a few "companies" just reselling Fran's services slapping it with their own label, and using RMS as a free method to do so. Not to mention people who are reportedly scamming their users as well.

If you want to advertise your "l33t h4x" hosting services, that's what http://www.webhostingtalk.com/ is for. Just sayin'.

People are complaining about getting scammed, and I've seen far less done than one would hope for in such instances. Sure, it's the user's responsibility to "not get scammed", but to allow such "companies" (see: small groups of people from country-X) to advertise without much of a strict filtering process is just.. eh.

So, please. Consider this at the very least, yC/Riotblade. Frenzi's thread (specifically Riot's response) is proof enough, http://www.ratemyserver.net/forum/index.php/topic,17074.msg120896.html#msg120896

Too many BS reviews from people within Frenzy.
...
Topic is going to remain lock until this circle jerk stops.

[Judas]

sounds like good ideas

[yC]

That was considered before I decide to rewrite the paid section rules that is going into effect starting December 1st, 2010.  That's my move to "give it a chance for now, we'll see what will happen next".

The section will stay (for now).  IMO scammers are everywhere.  WHT isn't bulletproof but of course I too like it there when I look for hosting.  Sometime back in 2009 or around the beginning of the year I had 2 VPS companies ran away with my money one after another.  Basically one closed and I signed up for another and it closed again, one served me a little more than one month another was just 2-3 weeks.  I found them in WHT and they had some good reviews too ... before everything broken apart.

[Judas]

so guess we have to see how things will pan out

[Yukino]

I would like to keep the section because it's not only the hosting companies that have posted there. There are graphic designers, scripters, map designers, and other types of services available/offered by people. And so far, they have done quite well. It's just one of those moments: "Does the whole group fall because of some?"

Anyways, not all hosting companies are bad. There aren't that many decent RO hosters out there now, and players are getting pretty desperate I guess (some at least). I would like to see how the section turns out with the improved rules. Just make it so that it's not as bland as eAthena's. They don't have much going there; hence, people come here to view the services after all.

[Erebus]

well now anything thats pre-made is shot down essentially cutting down on 50% of the scripting/programming listed in the paid section. No mention of pre-made graphic work and its just as hard to prove who's graphic work belongs to whom as it is scripting. Just seems a bit biased to me but I really never post here, so my opinion isnt worth much lol

[jTynne]

That was considered before I decide to rewrite the paid section rules that is going into effect starting December 1st, 2010.  That's my move to "give it a chance for now, we'll see what will happen next".

The section will stay (for now).  IMO scammers are everywhere.  WHT isn't bulletproof but of course I too like it there when I look for hosting.  Sometime back in 2009 or around the beginning of the year I had 2 VPS companies ran away with my money one after another.  Basically one closed and I signed up for another and it closed again, one served me a little more than one month another was just 2-3 weeks.  I found them in WHT and they had some good reviews too ... before everything broken apart.

Bb, I'm looking forward to seeing how it pans out, because there's just nonsense going on right now. Things were fine when it was just designers and scripters posting there.

@Erebus; That's what online portfolios are for and building up your presence. I'm by no means a professional, and web design's just a hobby, but people who do their research (by visiting my portfolio site, for example) know that what I make is my own. Though that can't be said for eeeeeeeveryone, it's easy enough to spot a design by Meimiko, Renn, Jigs, or myself. We put a credit link/image somewhere on the design, after all.

I'm just hoping there's a stricter policy enforced, as it's discouraging to advertise on here and potential clients having to sift through posts where there's slander/fights breaking out between competitors. Granted, great for page views/ad impressions, but at the same time, turns *some* people away, not everyone, but some.

[Warock]

A special section for Scripting services & seperate section for hostings
In hosting you can ask a hosting provider or a reseller  Whether they have enough customer to sustain their business and t can ask for number clients and proof that their are satisfied with the services even though after verification you can still  Disclaim saying RMS cannot guarntee about the services

[Tom~]

Exactly what Justin said. There were no problems when only scripters and designers posted. However, when this "pr0 hosting services" started to appear... the section went downhill. Lots of underhanded tactics to "become more popular", scams, complaints... drama.

But for now, let's just see if this new rules work.

[Warock]

Rules are there but unbaised would be good

[Immortal]

Perhaps a change in the payment method would help..

I have used many of the scripting, spriting, and graphics services listed in the "Paid Services" section.  At most the people providing those services have requested a deposit on the service to be provided and several have had the completed work before requesting payment. Thus allowing me to be sure I was getting what was requested and agreed upon prior to transferring money to them. In addition, most of those that requested a deposit on my first order have not bothered to do so on later orders.  I attribute this to both the professional interactions we had and the promptness that payment was made upon completion.

Perhaps a similar arrangement would help keep the other services in line. I do realize that when you are providing a "hosting" service you would be risking your time and resources with the possibility of receiving nothing or less then you deserve. But the Server you could shut down for lack of payment would have more to lose in the long run. I am not suggesting that you let customers pay for Hosting Service at the end of a time period on a monthly basis. But perhaps changing how much is to be prepaid. Maybe for the first 3 months you only require 50% of the monthly charge at the beginning of the month and the rest at the end of the month.  This might help minimize the possible losses to both parties?

I understand that this is a risk to those offering services but word would spread very quickly on what owners do not fulfill their agreements.

[Judas]

interesting suggestion

[Warock]

Some scripters do that in can be partial payment a deadlock where customer pays ---> X------>Selller  payment would be with X for specified days if seller doesnt shows quality in service X can refund to customer but it would be like another paypal issue its best to deal with existing mechanis just stricting the rules is enough rather than complicating it

[Yukino]

Immortal's suggestion is pretty interesting. It'll be similar to how some designers work (pay half first, they do the work. Pay the other half, and you receive the work). I think server hosters can somehow alter that so that this method can be tested to see if it's better for both sides. If the server hosting company does not want to do it for 3 months, just do it for even one month so that the player gets a good idea of the hosting service itself (customer support, lag, whatever else). This is to avoid situations like EternityHost where they turn off their whole company and that players cannot get their money back.

[Judas]

i like Immortal's suggestion as well. I mean EH could easily refund, it's a matter of can or I won't refund. Mostly it's up to the company if they are good and not scam to give the money back. Paypal even allows you to do SO!