New Abuse Policy

[Logan]

Am I to understand that according to the New Abuse Policy, JH will make one single attempt via a phone call to reach me in the event that they feel my account is abusing the servers/resources/etc. and if I don't answer, JH will disable my account?

This is unreasonable! I am not sitting by my phone 24/7, nor am I sitting at any single phone for more than 8 hours (I also like to sleep at night, so I won't be answering any phone at 2 AM).

I would suggest a more reasonable measure is to send e-mail, call, then give a few hours before taking action, which should allow a JH customer to take action.

 

[devorem]

I thought it seemed pretty reasonable.

It would seem to me that the kind of abuse they are talking about would tend to be intentional or from poor coding. If it was intentional, then I deserve to have my account suspended. If it was due to poor coding, then I deserve to have my site taken offline until I can code responsibly.

As customers, we certainly don't want our sites to be down. As a hosting provider, JodoHost needs to take steps to protect their (which is also "our") network and servers. If JodoHost gets blacklisted, we're all blacklisted. That would stink. There might also be ramifications for the network of the datacenter, of which JodoHost is a client and needs to not tick them off. If one of the servers goes into an infinite loop on some sloppy code that one of us wrote, we all suffer for that, too.

 

[Yash]

Hi

There is no change in our policy apart from the fact that we'd attempt to contact the customer via phone as well. We won't suspend a customer's account immediately unless the abuse is very serious and the customer fails to act on it within a certain time-frame. We've also defined our policy towards resellers (we receive alot of questions about this).

I've not mass-mailed this new policy yet so if you believe there is something that sounds incorrect, please do let me know. The policy is just aimed at calming fears that we won't disable a customer's account immediately (in an extraordinary abuse case) without making at least one phone call.

 

[Logan]

There is no change in our policy apart from the fact that we'd attempt to contact the customer via phone as well.

The wording of your policy impies that no other means of contact will be attempted. It makes no mention of an e-mail. Your wording of "as well" above suggests that you still intend to do something other than call. You need to clarify this.

We won't suspend a customer's account immediately unless the abuse is very serious and the customer fails to act on it within a certain time-frame.

Your post makes no mention of a time frame. It simply states that if you don't reach us by phone, you will disable to the account. If there is a time frame, you must mention it.

The policy is just aimed at calming fears that we won't disable a customer's account immediately (in an extraordinary abuse case) without making at least one phone call.

Your statement (unfortunately) did not calm my fears, as I had none -- but now I do. I'm now afraid that if suddenly one of my images becomes corrupt and causes a slowdown on the server at 2 AM, you will disable my site and I will have to spend hours convincing you that I have fixed the problem before my site will be enabled again, during which I am still paying for service.

I may be acting paranoid here, but I don't think this helps me, and I certainly don't feel better now :-(

 

[devorem]

Logan,

I don't think they're concerned about corrupt images... that just makes your site look like trash. I think they are concerned about SPAM generation and programming errors that take a lot or RAM or CPU time. Those are things that affect everyone. Since I don't create or allow SPAM, I'm not worried about that. I try to program well, but I'm not perfect. I suppose that is the area I might be a little afraid of. But, If my sloppy programming is bringing the server and many other customers' sites down, it still seems reasonable to me to have my site taken down until the problem can be addressed. Certainly, if it was someone else's problems taking my site down, I would want that other site to get fixed or disabled.

Yash,

Am I understanding this correctly?

 

[Atul]

Logan,

I don't think they're concerned about corrupt images... that just makes your site look like trash. I think they are concerned about SPAM generation and programming errors that take a lot or RAM or CPU time. Those are things that affect everyone. Since I don't create or allow SPAM, I'm not worried about that. I try to program well, but I'm not perfect. I suppose that is the area I might be a little afraid of. But, If my sloppy programming is bringing the server and many other customers' sites down, it still seems reasonable to me to have my site taken down until the problem can be addressed. Certainly, if it was someone else's problems taking my site down, I would want that other site to get fixed or disabled.

Yash,

Am I understanding this correctly?

devorem,

Your are absolutely right. You have correctly mentioned JodoHost's intention.

Having been in design and hosting business since 1997, I have seen many times it is impossible to reason with a provider to explain your point of view.

Here at JodoHost we do things differently. We put us in your position and then look at the things. With this approach, be assured that we will always take a reasonable decision.

 

[Logan]

Logan,

I don't think they're concerned about corrupt images... that just makes your site look like trash. I think they are concerned about SPAM generation and programming errors that take a lot or RAM or CPU time. Those are things that affect everyone. Since I don't create or allow SPAM, I'm not worried about that. I try to program well, but I'm not perfect. I suppose that is the area I might be a little afraid of.

Actually, I had an instance a while back, here at JH, where one my images in my DB was corrupt (for still unknown reasons) and when ASPImage tried to load it it causes server CPU problems. So I would suggest, given today's complex technology and un-ending interdependencies and lack of good code, that anything could eventually cause server problems.

I like you share concern with bad programming as I am not perfect either (far from it) but the fact is I don't have a web server at home (if I did, I wouldn't be here hosting with JH) so I will eventually create bad code (it's inevitable). And when that day comes...

I don't generate SPAM, not am I, nor have I ever been a scrupulous (is that how you spell it?) person. I will never intentionally cause problems. However I must believe that JH will always look at the situation from their position inevitable, no matter how hard they try and see things from my position. I, and all customers, will always be on the wrong end of the stick, as JH always has the last say.

JH must, and I cannot stress this enough, must ensure their written policy accurately reflects their intention, without room for confusion, as it will be the policy statement that they hold over our heads when times get tough, and not their intention.

 

[Yash]

I have removed the policy and we'll be issuing a revised and restated policy after discussions.