Ethics of Review Incentives

[Senad]

Another amazing thing I found is how you hold a double standard to everything Anad.

You have gone and accused hosts before without proof or without doing any research.

http://www.namepros.com/web-hosting-discussion/139863-unreal-1-2-tb-100-gb.html

Yet I have some forms of evidence including neutral public forums (historical references), such as these and WHT, and yet you discourage this but not your own posts?

Excellent double standard.


You also accuse me of attacking any and every company. False, I accuse ones that have done things and looks like they are clearly doing things in a non-proper manner. As you can tell from that very link above I was defending that company against you.

 

[PolurNET]

Amazing I did not even mention your name and I get accused for accusation. This was a GENERAL statement. Not in any way shape or form as I accusing you on NP based payoffs and if you got that impression I apologize.

Incentives, no matter any form, $NP, PayPal or otherwise, I can sincerely guarantee were never given in any way for any kind of remarks, statements, reviews or otherwise. You used the $NP example, I said that's an excellent way to tell if we used it or not

Ok Anad if it's a lie that you went to a competitors forums and recruiting them... by all means keep thinking that. All of us saw your post and one was even brave enough to make a new post condeming you. You still do not even bother to apologize to your mistakes from the past it's astounding.

Nullnic? I knew Mike of Nullnic fairly well for a month, and we were going to buy them out. We were closing in on a deal, and when they dissappeared, it wasn't the right timing when they were going to cooperate with us.

Apologize? Of course I did, go see yourself. I even took the time to respond to every single accusation, and after my last post, no one replied, as they understood my points.

Interestingly, I recently even apologized to jmweb for the tension that he was also responsible for. He's decided to not discuss and pursue his evidence any longer because of this, but of course he has his own opinions.

After seeing how you distort your companies image without admiting to the situation at hand, words of your are now something that I cannot trust.

Sorry? Distort what?

Make a hard not to yourself that I have been very inactive at NamePros nor do I consider you anywhere close to my competition. You can keep every single NP customer and potential customer there as far as I care. We do just fine without them .

Excellent, then why discuss about us? We have no relation to you, and you have no business in discussing something that does not concern you, as the proof you're basing your statements on comes from a third party.

Here's a challenge. Since we're most popular on NP, I double-dare you to post on there and ask if we offered:

a) incentives of any kind
b) forced people to post positive reviews, on any forum and/or webhostingjury
c) ask their real opinion about us, if they don't think we deserve any of their comments
d) ask if we're a company with bad ethics and ask whether our staff gets the payment they are happy & satisfied with
e) Why many of the admins and staff of Namepros decided to use us for the past year?

So now you claim HD has no neutrality? You said your peice, I have said mine mods didn't delete or close threads for further discussion. I'm sorry but this is more neutral than WHT.

Considering the mods here are the same as WHT, no I don't consider this neutral. I've only posted an intro, a sales thread, and that's about it here. There isn't any neutral staff to check on insults, to maintain forum decorum and to give the benefit of the doubt

Key words there, you asked your customer to go post his experience. You even walked him into that direction. What part of that does not sound fishy to you Anad?

Ahem, mark my words carefully, Senad: he wanted to post his experience somewhere after we helped him dozens of times. As he came from WHT originally, (but he likely forgot where he found us), we recommended he goes back there. He could've easily said no, or post elsewhere or something negative, as we didn't tell him what to post, nor give him anything in return for posting, as you and others called "incentives".

It has a lot do with it. You do not have to PM somebody asking them to change posts so your image can look nice and neat when you make a mistake.

Your sense of ethics is different that mine. An honest mistake and/or miscommunication can be easily rectified, but evidently you don't want to do something another host such as I kindly asks you to. You were under no obligation to do so either.

I've done a lot more and I am digging as deep as I can trust me.

Perfect, you're one of the only ones looking for the truth then. Thanks

What is a reseller for if he cannot be hosted by a company? You make a point here that self-interest is a main source of concern. Him being a web host or buying a space to host a site IS self-interest.

No, he was with us before jmweb came along at all. CH then posted some employment offer, and he wasn't sure what to do with his account with us. But he kept it, and the person who he sold it to is still with us. He wasn't running a webhost with us, it was another type of site

In fact it is the self-interest of each customer to use the space how they want. JM could have easily used this as an off-site emergency notice area in case of network downtime.

It wasn't to do with jm, and I didn't even mention that. I said the fact he works for jm and using the same evidence as his boss gave him, speaks volumes about the nature of the situation. It's not like he's a neutral point of view, and then does his own research and then comes in contact with jm... quite the opposite

 

[PolurNET]

Another amazing thing I found is how you hold a double standard to everything Anad.

You have gone and accused hosts before without proof or without doing any research.

http://www.namepros.com/web-hosting-discussion/139863-unreal-1-2-tb-100-gb.html

Yet I have some forms of evidence including neutral public forums (historical references), such as these and WHT, and yet you discourage this but not your own posts?

Excellent double standard.

haha, did you even bother to read my post afterwards? Amazing you don't bother to read after the first line:

However, as you said, without proof (something I pointed out at WHT myself) or factual knowledge about a company, it's not right to talk about them negatively per se. If there are customers from them who'd like to give their opinions that may be something to go on. Till then, we should keep completely neutral and see if they are able to sustain their service offerings.

You also accuse me of attacking any and every company. False, I accuse ones that have done things and looks like they are clearly doing things in a non-proper manner. As you can tell from that very link above I was defending that company against you.

So you want to continue to accuse us, for doing what exactly? Incentives? I thought I already explained this to you?

PS. Let me know about posting the other links

Q.E.D

 

[Blue]

You still haven't explained the amazing coincidence that all of your reviews outside of Namepros show up on Hostingjury, where you know the system can be easily manipulated to get your site ranked #1.

 

[Senad]

No what you only did was make a sincere statement that you did not do so. I will not say anything else until the evidence comes at hand. If the evidence was shown to be wrong then I will apologize but so far as I see it you have are still guilty until proven innocent.

My sense of ethics is to keep an honest and open dialog wherever I post. If I make a mistake I will rectify, admit my wrong doing, and apologize publicly if I have to. No need to go and ask people to change stuff for your own sake, keep it clean and clear. I don't have anything to hide and if I make a mistake I will of course apologize and recognize it. To me it is very distasteful when one has to send a PM asking a poster to change something for something that they said. Would you not find this a little weird/deciteful?

And yes, I did read your post afterwards, you first posted that they are a sham and then I had to correct you. If I did not you maybe would have stuck to your words...maybe not but looking at the other side of the glass gives me a different perspective.

Also in regards to this quote:

Excellent, then why discuss about us? We have no relation to you, and you have no business in discussing something that does not concern you, as the proof you're basing your statements on comes from a third party.

Here's a challenge. Since we're most popular on NP, I double-dare you to post on there and ask if we offered:

a) incentives of any kind
b) forced people to post positive reviews, on any forum and/or webhostingjury
c) ask their real opinion about us, if they don't think we deserve any of their comments
d) ask if we're a company with bad ethics and ask whether our staff gets the payment they are happy & satisfied with
e) Why many of the admins and staff of Namepros decided to use us for the past year?

1) I frankly am not a big fan of the NP community anymore. It seems that they are more keen on getting NP than having a good discussion, one that we are having here. From what I have seen users there will do ANYTHING to get some NP in their hands...once again that is just my perspective. This is the main reason why I am inactive in that community.

2) This would be the same thing as me going to WebHostingJury to get all of my information. IE: It can be staged and what proof do I get from listening to customers who are possibly (I will stress the word possibly here as we have no evidence as of yet to prove you innocent) posting for incentives.

I double-dare me? Lets not go back to kindergarden please. And that just proves another thing. Admins at NamePros clearly stating that they use you is more or less fishy. An admin/mod should keep neutral about situations like this otherwise it's no better than having a monopoly in that community do you not agree? What is worse is that you flaunt these facts.

Ahem, mark my words carefully, Senad: he wanted to post his experience somewhere after we helped him dozens of times. As he came from WHT originally, (but he likely forgot where he found us), we recommended he goes back there. He could've easily said no, or post elsewhere or something negative, as we didn't tell him what to post, nor give him anything in return for posting, as you and others called "incentives".

I find it interesting that he came from WHT yet he forgot where he found you? On your order form you ask where the customer found you as well do you not? I know for a fact that they can login to MB and get that information. I'm sorry it just seems too fishy to me. Also even if a client does ask, I would never lead them to a third party forum such as WHT nor would I recommend places for him to post. If he truly wanted to post then why did he come to you and ask where he should make the post? It should be your own ethical responsibility to tell him that "it is up to him" where he wishes to post but not lead customers to post in certain places.

 

[PolurNET]

You still haven't explained the amazing coincidence that all of your reviews outside of Namepros show up on Hostingjury, where you know the system can be easily manipulated to get your site ranked #1.

So you're asking whether our reviews are only on WHJ apart from NP?

Here are a couple of them that I have observed from AWstats

webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=463879
iwebtool.com/talk/t8-polurnet-a.html
dnforum.com/f60/4-months-1-webhostingjury-trusted-dnf-polurnet-communications-specials-thread-132017.html
forosdelweb.com/showthread.php?t=362092
forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?p=395062&highlight=polurnet#post395062
forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?p=494775&highlight=polurnet#post494775 (not even our customer too)
phplinkdirectory.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1809&highlight=polurnet
uniquewebmaster.com/showthread.php?tid=7&pid=1005#pid1005

There's a lot more of course, but just wanted to give a few, I don't want to bring any attention here to our services.

 

[PolurNET]

No what you only did was make a sincere statement that you did not do so. I will not say anything else until the evidence comes at hand. If the evidence was shown to be wrong then I will apologize but so far as I see it you have are still guilty until proven innocent.

Wait, you said intially, I'm innocent until guilty, now it's the opposite? Fine, I don't mind more insults, because I'm quite certain the truth will win at the end.

My sense of ethics is to keep an honest and open dialog wherever I post. If I make a mistake I will rectify, admit my wrong doing, and apologize publicly if I have to. No need to go and ask people to change stuff for your own sake, keep it clean and clear. I don't have anything to hide and if I make a mistake I will of course apologize and recognize it. To me it is very distasteful when one has to send a PM asking a poster to change something for something that they said. Would you not find this a little weird/deciteful?

And I did the same, clarified my mistake. Look outside the PM box, Senad. I asked you to edit your post after I realized my mistake... what's the problem?

And yes, I did read your post afterwards, you first posted that they are a sham and then I had to correct you. If I did not you maybe would have stuck to your words...maybe not but looking at the other side of the glass gives me a different perspective.

I did my review research, as you are doing here about us. I then realized the webhost-webhost connection might be taken the wrong way as you mentioned, so I corrected myself. Is anything wrong here?

1) I frankly am not a big fan of the NP community anymore. It seems that they are more keen on getting NP than having a good discussion, one that we are having here. From what I have seen users there will do ANYTHING to get some NP in their hands...once again that is just my perspective. This is the main reason why I am inactive in that community.

You're saying they're posting reviews for $NP? From whom, I can guarantee most that posted about us are grown adults, many have better things to do than $NP, as they have real businesses, even much larger than us. But they took the time on their own accord to say a few words about us, which doesn't reflect the same general description you're giving them now

2) This would be the same thing as me going to WebHostingJury to get all of my information. IE: It can be staged and what proof do I get from listening to customers who are possibly (I will stress the word possibly here as we have no evidence as of yet to prove you innocent) posting for incentives.

Alright, so you're saying you don't want to believe the facts when I came here on my own to justify myself quite openly when having 5 others or more on this thread ready to attack any statement I made. Fine, so be it, we're still guilty until innocent according to you

I double-dare me? Lets not go back to kindergarden please. And that just proves another thing. Admins at NamePros clearly stating that they use you is more or less fishy. An admin/mod should keep neutral about situations like this otherwise it's no better than having a monopoly in that community do you not agree? What is worse is that you flaunt these facts.

Flaunt? Watch the way you put words into my mouth. I only said that's a place where we mostly received most customers as I was there from the beginning. The admins and mods are neutral 100%, but mentioning that they use a webhost isn't trespassing their code of ethics. They're customers too.

I find it interesting that he came from WHT yet he forgot where he found you? On your order form you ask where the customer found you as well do you not? I know for a fact that they can login to MB and get that information. I'm sorry it just seems too fishy to me. Also even if a client does ask, I would never lead them to a third party forum such as WHT nor would I recommend places for him to post. If he truly wanted to post then why did he come to you and ask where he should make the post? It should be your own ethical responsibility to tell him that "it is up to him" where he wishes to post but not lead customers to post in certain places.

I had that information on MB, not him, that's why I gave it to him. He hasn't logged into MB for months, he had a PP Subscription so there wasn't a need at all in any case. And when we had a live convo, he just really appreciated our help, and wanted to say a few words about us. It was during one of the support requests, at the same convo, where he asked help that I also mentioned WHT, it wasn't like he came days later to say where do I post? The reason I mentioned WHT was because we were talking about his technical questions, and I pointed a tutorial there that helped him; so that's how the WHT thing came up, obviously with no intent for deception or incentive

 

[Blue]

webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=463879
iwebtool.com/talk/t8-polurnet-a.html
dnforum.com/f60/4-months-1-webhostingjury-trusted-dnf-polurnet-communications-specials-thread-132017.html
forosdelweb.com/showthread.php?t=362092
forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?p=395062&highlight=polurnet#post395062
forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?p=494775&highlight=polurnet#post494775 (not even our customer too)
phplinkdirectory.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1809&highlight=polurnet
uniquewebmaster.com/showthread.php?tid=7&pid=1005#pid1005

webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=463879
One post wonder. Never returned.

iwebtool.com/talk/t8-polurnet-a.html
compuXP, a 14 year old from Namepros who will do anything for NP$

dnforum.com/f60/4-months-1-webhostingjury-trusted-dnf-polurnet-communications-specials-thread-132017.html
Chase: no mention of a website. MrDude had been with you for a month.

forosdelweb.com/showthread.php?t=362092
Victork, possibly a good review. Baugy, another one post wonder.

forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?p=395062&highlight=polurnet#post395062
Chelsea: no mention of a site or how long she has been with you.

forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?p=494775&highlight=polurnet#post494775
naqiboy: Not even a customer? Hardly a recommendation.

phplinkdirectory.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1809&highlight=polurnet
microdude431: Either lied about how long he has been with you or the site in his sig is not the one he has with you.

uniquewebmaster.com/showthread.php?tid=7&pid=1005#pid1005
Are there any actual clients in this thread?


Most of these "reviews" are dubious at best.
None of them or even their existance explains the disproportionate number of review on Hostingjury. You keep skirting this issue with no explanation.

 

[Senad]

Wait, you said intially, I'm innocent until guilty, now it's the opposite? Fine, I don't mind more insults, because I'm quite certain the truth will win at the end.

My apologies you are right innocent until guilty. I hope you do win at the end and I'm rooting for you but as it stands I have not seen any hard evidence that either is the case (you being innocent or guilty). The only evidence I see thus yet is more so leaning towards guilty. If that stance changes so will my opinion. I'm an open minded guy after all.

And I did the same, clarified my mistake. Look outside the PM box, Senad. I asked you to edit your post after I realized my mistake... what's the problem?



I did my review research, as you are doing here about us. I then realized the webhost-webhost connection might be taken the wrong way as you mentioned, so I corrected myself. Is anything wrong here?

The problem is that you do not need to PM a person to clarify a mistake. Simply acknowledging (as I have done above) is adequete. PMing seems suspicious to any user.

You're saying they're posting reviews for $NP? From whom, I can guarantee most that posted about us are grown adults, many have better things to do than $NP, as they have real businesses, even much larger than us. But they took the time on their own accord to say a few words about us, which doesn't reflect the same general description you're giving them now

No, once again, I am not stating your company as I do not believe you do so in regards to NP incentives at all. This is another general statement. You cannot expect a justification of being a grown adult to mean that they are truthful an honest can you?

Alright, so you're saying you don't want to believe the facts when I came here on my own to justify myself quite openly when having 5 others or more on this thread ready to attack any statement I made. Fine, so be it, we're still guilty until innocent according to you

Once again...WHERE IS THE EVIDENCE to prove your innocence? As mentioned above I mistyped and I once again apologize.

Flaunt? Watch the way you put words into my mouth. I only said that's a place where we mostly received most customers as I was there from the beginning. The admins and mods are neutral 100%, but mentioning that they use a webhost isn't trespassing their code of ethics. They're customers too.

Yes they are customers of yours, but do you not believe for a single second that neutrality might be jeapordized if they openly state that they use NP?

I had that information on MB, not him, that's why I gave it to him. He hasn't logged into MB for months, he had a PP Subscription so there wasn't a need at all in any case. And when we had a live convo, he just really appreciated our help, and wanted to say a few words about us. It was during one of the support requests, at the same convo, where he asked help that I also mentioned WHT, it wasn't like he came days later to say where do I post? The reason I mentioned WHT was because we were talking about his technical questions, and I pointed a tutorial there that helped him; so that's how the WHT thing came up, obviously with no intent for deception or incentive

That explains a lot thank you for submitting that statement/evidence. One thing though in the future is to never recommend places, let the client find his own. If he's determined enough to post you don't need to tell him where to go, he will find it himself rest assured.

You still are failing to however answer some important questions such as the one blue has brought up or showing of any form of evidence to prove your innocence.

 

[Senad]

I am also going to have to resent the fact that you believe in the PM that I have some sort of personal agenda against you PolurNet.

As stated in my PM:

I do not make up facts nor do I have anything personal against you. I'm sure you are a good person but thus far the facts I'm looking at are not in your favor. You are still failing to address several key questions in the posts. You basically still do not face the facts and try to downplay and ignore the rhetoric at hand. All I want is for this to come out on the truthful side so that customers are not duped into believe what could be a potential situation in which a company is paying off for reviews. As I stated I'm looking at this on all possible levels and have weighed my decision thus far based on historical company patterns, evidence provided and statements made. I'm sure you agree if patterns of fraud in my company came into view you would like to inform everybody as well as the business is full of fraud and deception as is and protecting customers and gaining the trust back in this industry is key.

Even if I lose customers due to this situation at hand then so be it but the truth and evidence should be presented by all parties and evaluated (which it has not been done yet nor are the rest of us informed). The industry needs more hosts to work together to stop potential host fraud/conning customers to purchase their plans by using deception. I'm sure almost all of agree on that PolurNet? Too many customers have gotten burned by this type of behavior from a few irresponsible people's actions. We ask you simple questions and you have either beaten around the bush or ignored the questions at hand or then after several aruguments made the post. Example: Customer at WHT who admited you sent them there. Why do we have to battle it out and why can't people just be truthful and to the point. It makes you look a lot suspicious if you did that rather than argue about it.

 

[Blue]

Polurnet, don't you think it's a bit of a coincidence that the person who started this thread at WHT:
http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=481272

just happened to find webhostjury a week later?
http://www.webhostingjury.com/reviews/PolurNET_Webhosting



Don't you think it's odd that someone who hadn't used your service
http://www.iwebtool.com/talk/t295-deal-polurnet-communications.html

signed up with you one Dec. 24 and only 5 days later was recommending you on two different forums?
http://uniquewebmaster.com/showthread.php?tid=7&pid=1005#pid1005
http://www.freespacechat.com/t214-polurnet-hosting.html

Don't you think that since you are quick to complain about false negative reviews on WHJ you should also contact them about false possitive reviews?
You back to back reviews from a user named Anthony one week apart, in the first one he has 50 sites with you and in the second he has 62. Quite possible he could have gained 12 sites in that time but why would someone with 62 sites discribe themselves as a "newbie" and wouldn't two reviews from the same user make the ratings inaccurate?

Don't you think that it is too much of a coincidence that the user Chelsea from this thread, who doesn't mention a domain name:
forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?p=395062&highlight=polurnet#post395062
also posts a review on WHJ the very same day, (Oct. 26) also with no mention of a domain name?

 

[PolurNET]

webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=463879
One post wonder. Never returned.

Seriously, WHT is not an interesting place to return to for everyone, once you found a host, and you're not interested in computer-related issues, as is the case here.

He mentioned he was a lurker on the review and came from WHT ads directly. He sent sales requests to several hosts, and finally decided on us, as described in his review.

He has the same post on our customer forums and is quite active with us as well:

http://forums.polurnet.com/index.php?showtopic=113

iwebtool.com/talk/t8-polurnet-a.html
compuXP, a 14 year old from Namepros who will do anything for NP$

Interestingly, his mother and sister both host with us as well, but compuXP is like their main resource person to get in touch with us. He may be a kid, but there is no reason for posting about us when he's with us for over 6 mths, and so as his family.

There's also "munt" on the same thread: http://iwebtool.com/talk/showpost.php?p=3525&postcount=18

He's an adult, and has morpheusultra.co.uk with us

dnforum.com/f60/4-months-1-webhostingjury-trusted-dnf-polurnet-communications-specials-thread-132017.html
Chase: no mention of a website. MrDude had been with you for a month.

MrDude posted a month thing on 08-27-2005 .... it's now 7 mths since he's with us (dnforum.com/post2-post-646668.html)

Dimva: arcadenest.com since July 2005
dnforum.com/post2-post-615727.html

Chase: dnforum.com/post61-post-754540.html you can see he expects privacy, so I can't disclose the domain on public forums. PM me if you wish to know his sites

forosdelweb.com/showthread.php?t=362092
Victork, possibly a good review. Baugy, another one post wonder.

Yeah, but Baugy is a customer that hosts pretal.info (he had that posted elsewhere too, I can't find the thread atm) for 2 mths

forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?p=395062&highlight=polurnet#post395062
Chelsea: no mention of a site or how long she has been with you.

Well you wanted exclusively non-namepros, but here it is:

http://www.namepros.com/showpost.php?p=826370&postcount=5

chelsea is hosting a reseller with main domain abcbookings.com with us FYI

forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?p=494775&highlight=polurnet#post494775
naqiboy: Not even a customer? Hardly a recommendation.

He's enquired about our vps before, and knows about our reputation, that's why I brought that one up

phplinkdirectory.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=1809&highlight=polurnet
microdude431: Either lied about how long he has been with you or the site in his sig is not the one he has with you.

y1v.net is a relatively new site of his, he sold his other domain that was with us for quite a while. He has a reseller with several domains, but I need his permission to list them here

uniquewebmaster.com/showthread.php?tid=7&pid=1005#pid1005
Are there any actual clients in this thread?

uniquewebmaster.com/showthread.php?tid=46&pid=93#pid93

MGS and pairbrother and I believe another member from that thread, but I can't confirm

Most of these "reviews" are dubious at best.
None of them or even their existance explains the disproportionate number of review on Hostingjury. You keep skirting this issue with no explanation.

Perhaps Namepros & some other places is a better indication.

http://www.stepform.com/kiyaku.shtml (beware: in japanese)
http://www.hostdetective.net/details/1131.html (although review site is known to be owned by hostgator)
http://www.dnp.in/showthread.php?t=844
* seems to be down, check google cache:
http://72.14.207.104/search?q=cache....php?t=844+polurnet&hl=en&gl=ca&ct=clnk&cd=10

http://www.dnlodge.com/showpost.php?p=5586&postcount=4
http://www.diskobee.com/site/site.html
http://webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=474051 (if you want to know more, he's also on our forums: forums.polurnet.com/index.php?showtopic=198&pid=974&st=0&#entry974)

http://namepros.com/showpost.php?p=1001909&postcount=1
http://namepros.com/showpost.php?p=1002111&postcount=2
http://namepros.com/showpost.php?p=1002565&postcount=22
http://namepros.com/showthread.php?t=147872
http://namepros.com/showthread.php?t=112269
http://namepros.com/showthread.php?t=121522
http://namepros.com/showthread.php?t=112875
http://www.namepros.com/showpost.php?p=1065619&postcount=6 ( a year with us so far)
http://www.namepros.com/showpost.php?p=1013116&postcount=9
http://www.namepros.com/showpost.php?p=1015839&postcount=2
http://www.namepros.com/showpost.php?p=1044794&postcount=18 (with us for 5 mths)

 

[PolurNET]

Polurnet, don't you think it's a bit of a coincidence that the person who started this thread at WHT:
http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=481272

just happened to find webhostjury a week later?
http://www.webhostingjury.com/reviews/PolurNET_Webhosting

The link to webhostingjury is clearly shown on the left hand side of our site (www.polurnet.com and all subpages as well on the left hand info bar).

So no, many people visit our site, and noticing of WHJ link is quite normal.

Don't you think it's odd that someone who hadn't used your service
http://www.iwebtool.com/talk/t295-deal-polurnet-communications.html

signed up with you one Dec. 24 and only 5 days later was recommending you on two different forums?
http://uniquewebmaster.com/showthread.php?tid=7&pid=1005#pid1005
http://www.freespacechat.com/t214-polurnet-hosting.html

Certainly, it's suspicious. But when you look at the facts, his friend was already with us for 5 mths, and he wanted to know if we accpeted unverified paypal. Once he began hosting with us, he likely realized what his friend told him was true, and decided to spread the word.... quite normal for people who love their host so-to-speak

Don't you think that since you are quick to complain about false negative reviews on WHJ you should also contact them about false possitive reviews?
You back to back reviews from a user named Anthony one week apart, in the first one he has 50 sites with you and in the second he has 62. Quite possible he could have gained 12 sites in that time but why would someone with 62 sites discribe themselves as a "newbie" and wouldn't two reviews from the same user make the ratings inaccurate?

He's user antmay from Namepros. He's a really active buyer & seller, as you probably realized. I believe the reason for the double review post was the first time he thought they didn't post it, but then when WHJ finally refreshed their systems with the new approved reviews, they put both of his. Basically a double-post, but I've already told the WHJ staff about it, seems they haven't updated it for a while by removing it...

Don't you think that it is too much of a coincidence that the user Chelsea from this thread, who doesn't mention a domain name:
forums.digitalpoint.com/showthread.php?p=395062&highlight=polurnet#post395062
also posts a review on WHJ the very same day, (Oct. 26) also with no mention of a domain name?

LOL, nice try, but she's with us for over 6 mths, and an active NPer. She also followed the link on our site and/or advertisement threads, as those are th real places where we have WHJ's link posted publicly

 

[PolurNET]

Even if I lose customers due to this situation at hand then so be it but the truth and evidence should be presented by all parties and evaluated (which it has not been done yet nor are the rest of us informed). The industry needs more hosts to work together to stop potential host fraud/conning customers to purchase their plans by using deception. I'm sure almost all of agree on that PolurNet?

Certainly. But giving the benefit of the doubt is only right when there's no clear one-sided evidence.

Too many customers have gotten burned by this type of behavior from a few irresponsible people's actions. We ask you simple questions and you have either beaten around the bush or ignored the questions at hand or then after several aruguments made the post. Example: Customer at WHT who admited you sent them there. Why do we have to battle it out and why can't people just be truthful and to the point. It makes you look a lot suspicious if you did that rather than argue about it.

Beating around the bush? Now that's what I resent. I took the time to answer by reply & reply, and yet you say I'm avoding something.

Answer to your Example: It's been answered that he initially asked for a place to recommend us, and thus the conversation, as it already talked about a WHT tutorial, and he's originally referred from there, we just said why not post your experience there too.

http://webhostingtalk.com/showpost.php?p=3653430&postcount=22

Lily (Nilufer) went on her own accord, and she's honestly afraid of all these consipiracy theories, as are we.

Here's another comment about us, and NOT from a one-poster on WHT:

http://webhostingtalk.com/showpost.php?p=3654093&postcount=32

 

[PolurNET]

also posts a review on WHJ the very same day, (Oct. 26) also with no mention of a domain name?

Just wanted to add, WebHostingJury does ask the domain on the form, but does not actually post it publicly, as that's up to the customer. They independently verify the actuality of reviews, email customers and check their whois information. Quite an intense process, so the dates are not necessarily accurate, as there's a long delay when they are actually posted and when it was orginally written

 

[Senad]

Answer to your Example: It's been answered that he initially asked for a place to recommend us, and thus the conversation, as it already talked about a WHT tutorial, and he's originally referred from there, we just said why not post your experience there too.

Too? How many places did he post his experience in? You state most customers who love their host post reviews...this is really the exact opposite from what the norm is.

Most customers who are happy will usually not post anything, sure we even have a few who did, but most will post complaints as soon as something goes wrong. It is kind of odd and nice that you hold a different view though hopefully that trend will continue.

Anad from that last PM I seriously am having doubts in regards to what you say but then again I may have misinterpreted it...but it does seem somewhat interesting to claim one thing without acknowleding the other especially in this situation.

But...

I for one do not have sufficient evidence to say anything else in regards to this but for me it is still somewhat suspicious, however doubts can rise on both sides now...

I DO congratulate you for maintaining an open dialog. This also shows the very integrity you have. I also encourage you to further discuss the jmweb situation more openly because it seems that he may be the cause behind a lot of this squabbling if all of this proves to be untrue.

JMWeb states, "We have multiple confirmed reports that PolurNet uses incentives to have their users post these "testimonials". I want to see those reports as soon as possible otherwise jmweb is going to be held in the lowest standards possible in regards to his credibility.


Personally I think most hosting forums should not allow posts/reviews/incentives to be made by users until a certain period of time. The reason I think is that we can all see how one-post wonders can cause initial confusion and chaos in certain times.

 

[PolurNET]

Too? How many places did he post his experience in? You state most customers who love their host post reviews...this is really the exact opposite from what the norm is.

Most customers who are happy will usually not post anything, sure we even have a few who did, but most will post complaints as soon as something goes wrong. It is kind of odd and nice that you hold a different view though hopefully that trend will continue.

There are exceptions, especially when they had terrible experiences with other hosts in the past. This one is a good example of such an issue, and I don't see anything particular about it. Surely we won't do the mistake of alluding to any forum again, however, this one has nothing to do with incentives, as originally accused. The customer also clarified this

Anad from that last PM I seriously am having doubts in regards to what you say and how you are able to alter your statement because to say one thing...when with evidence I have that you are not telling the truth only to rectify and alter it means a lot in regards to this very situation as well.

Well I already said we're still collecting more solid evidence for our side, I stated two possible issues doing this:
a) abiding by our privacy policy at all times, thus will make the process a little longer
b) the fact we don't know what constitutes as counterevidence in this case, since we already provided some, and so far WHT has not sided with the other side

I for one do not have sufficient evidence to say anything else in regards to this but for me it is still somewhat suspicious, however doubts can rise on both sides now...

I must say, even after I responded to every statement and cleared the information Blue stated as you asked for, getting such a remark shows that some people can never be satisfied. That's fine since of course, most of us need hard proof before taking any sides. However, staying neutral at this point would likely be the best option, IMHO

I DO congradulate you for maintaining an open dialog. This also shows the very integrity you have.

Thank-you, I've been responding to all queries left, right and center, and not given up our stance yet. I'm sure this will be resolved soon enough positively, and in any case, we are happy the way things are going within our company, despite external pressure and comments

JMWeb states, "We have multiple confirmed reports that PolurNet uses incentives to have their users post these "testimonials". I want to see those reports as soon as possible otherwise jmweb is going to be held in the lowest standards possible in regards to his credibility.

jmweb and I already discussed via MSN, and he is not in the position to pursue this matter outside from where it already is, after we mutually agreed to drop our tensions between us. However, if there is information needed by WHT, in addition to what they already have from him, he'll be cooperating with them.

Just as a side note, he says confirmed reports for the single evidence he has; but apart from the one piece of shady evidence, there is no other "multiple" proofs, which shows what ambiguous wording can do to a statement.

I hope this issue rests in peace, but demonstrates that clear communication between parties is a step forward in resolving conflicts. There are several instances where companies have decided not to clarify information, and would only put them in a position of distrust; we on the other hand, believe that there is enough answers to questions here to address most concerns you guys had, so hopefully that will put an end to the exchange of insults that used to take place here

Personally I think most hosting forums should not allow posts/reviews/incentives to be made by users until a certain period of time. The reason I think is that we can all see how one-post wonders can cause initial confusion and chaos in certain times.

Considering those customers were with us for more than a month, but were not registered on WHT until they decided to post, how would this solve any problem(s)?

 

[Senad]

The problem is not with valid customers posting the problem Polur, it is with the hosts who spoof as a new user to make posts (positive ones) about their company.

Also you state that I am not satisfied with the evidence thus far. On the contrary, looking further into this only shows me more and more insight and my thought about the situation is turning around (in case you have not noticed). JMWeb not answering basically looks to me as though he took all of us on one hell of a ride and I can only apologize for being taken on it. But with life we live and learn and experience something new. As I am sure most of us have today. Thus far things seem to be clearing up for me at least.

But I want to thank you again for keeping an open dialog and apologize if I was a little too aggressive but things like this really do burn me up. Not because of competition, but for the very sake of customers. I'm sure we all have been burned in some way shape or form by false advertising.

 

[jmweb]

JMWeb not answering

Should I even respond to this? I got a pm from you on WHT 20 minutes ago! I take it you must have been reading our website where our average response time is 20.1 minutes. That is for all tickets submitted via my.Chronichosting and NOT WHT.


John

 

[PolurNET]

The problem is not with valid customers posting the problem Polur, it is with the hosts who spoof as a new user to make posts (positive ones) about their company.

Yes, definately. But that's easily detected, looking at IP, email, etc. And most of the hosts that do this have no ethics or kids to start with, so doesn't mean much.

But in this case, they are valid clients, but they posted a one-post review type of thing, not an active WHT member... that also poses controversy as seen here...

Also you state that I am not satisfied with the evidence thus far. On the contrary, looking further into this only shows me more and more insight and my thought about the situation is turning around (in case you have not noticed). JMWeb not answering basically looks to me as though he took all of us on one hell of a ride and I can only apologize for being taken on it. But with life we live and learn and experience something new. As I am sure most of us have today. Thus far things seem to be clearing up for me at least.

Thanks for the change of mind. We do have a history of tensions (esp. on Namepros) between us. As it is right now, jmweb did accept our apology, and although personally detests us, he agreed not to further complicate the matter in any way, and stay out of the discussion of it, as long as his forum accounts are not affected. So far, WHT admins have also closed this matter (all tickets closed), so I think it's turning out to be a lack-of-concrete-evidence situation.

But I want to thank you again for keeping an open dialog and apologize if I was a little too aggressive but things like this really do burn me up. Not because of competition, but for the very sake of customers. I'm sure we all have been burned in some way shape or form by false advertising.

Thanks for the apology, I do appreciate that you're not one-sided and instead posed the right questions. I believe we equally answered the questions with significant details and proof of our reputation, as we're quite solid with our current customer base, and wish to improve our services as usual. Of course there are certain "low-down" times like these when mistakes can happen, but in the end I think it will be clear who the right party is.

Man, now back to regular scheduled programming, I've missed lunch over this :news: