NOT HOT! Just FYI: Cyberwings - Received an email from DomainsPricedRight.com

Page 19 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Status
Not open for further replies.

RSG2

Member
Sep 20, 2001
166
0
71
On the other hand, numerous people traced the previous problems to "looping routers", though I'm not enough of an internet expert to spell out what that really means. (A routing to B routing to A to B to A ...?)

That's pretty much the gist of it - I'd explain better, but I've been neglecting my CCNA studies to read this thread (It's much more entertaining than daytime television). In dynamic routing routes to other networks are advertised by each router. If a route goes down before the next update, a loop can possibly occur, depending on the protocol used (If your routers A and B are using some form of Open Shortest Path First routing, and the shortest link from A to C is through Router B, then B gets used. Now say the link fails from B to C, and B defaults back to A (maybe the only other link). Except the dynamic routing table updates hasn't taken place yet, so A still doesn't have any idea that the link from B to C has failed, and keeps sending stuff through it - you can see the rest of the picture).

The sad part is that even the lowest of CCNA candidates should know to plan for and protect against such loops - pretty much every protocol in use has some means of protecting against them. They're easy to trace and fix as well, which is why Wolfgang has a leg to stand on in his arguments. LightShip refused to fix the problem (I'd heard about it and I wasn't a customer). People could see the packets bouncing between their routers, long before it got to Cyberwings segment.

Now while the CEO is harming his own credibility with his false statements, loopy behavior, and then the coming to light of his past stuff (which is only circumstantial evidence, but damning in the light of this catastophe he faces now), Lightship still hasn't been completely forthcoming in their tech support (they never would admit to the looping, when anyone could see it). While it may be highly likely that Cyberwings may just be a screwy company, a decent spin doctor COULD make people see it Shawn's way (the true believers that we've all been seeing). I personally don't believe that Wolfgang falls into this catagory - he's just putting out an alternate view that while largely discounted, could have just the tiniest ring of truth to it. (If this were a court of law, and CW had a good lawyer, this would be possibly enough reasonable doubt to keep them out of real trouble - they probably be offered a plea bargain.)

Either way, Shawn better get something done, and fast. It'll be a miracle if he can survive as it is. Much more, and he could be looking at standing in court as the defendant, not the plaintiff.

And that thread at F*twallet (this is forbidden? Geez, it's like being in the CW chat room in here)? I read the last post (currently) on page 49. Now there's a conspiracy theory for you. Company initiates a class action suit against itself to get favorable terms to its friends. Rest of real customers get squat, and guilty parties get to walk away relatively unscathed, possible to commit more fraud. Interesting. I wondere if anyone's ever tried that angle before? It's risky, but I guess if you're in trouble that deep, and are clever, you might pull that off...:disgust:

And for all you naysayers, I still don't know why you dont get on that Atari or Vic-20 plan. Both are excellent prospects. With cartridge technology you can have a server rebuild in seconds!
 

labgeek

Platinum Member
Jan 20, 2002
2,163
0
0
Originally posted by: Wolfgang
I've still no idea why anyone (well, anyone paying attention) is surprised at what LS is saying now. Their line has been predictable (and predicted) for a week or more, but people are treating it like news.

It guess it's moved from the obvious LS stand to the expressly stated LS stand--but so what? To old-timers on this thread, there's no new information.


Question for those who have been trying to get info out of lightship: What do they say about the lethal pipeline problems CW was having in the weeks before LS limited bandwidth and then pulled the plug?

I imagine it'd either be "What problem", or "not our problem!", or perhap even the non-answer "At Lightship, we're eager to help our customers resolve any technical problems." Probability for something along those lines: about 99%.

But who knows, maybe this time they could say something genuinely surprising: "We were having serious, recurring difficulties with one of our routers, but this does not warrant a client's unilaterally terminating any contract without paying all fees associated therewith." But that's a 1% probability IMHO--not when there's a bunch of money at stake, and (who knows) not when it may not be their fault at all, and presumably absolutely isn't from their point of view. (I mean, presumably if they thought they had some defective equipment or software or something, they'd have fixed it.)


My problem with this response is simply this... Lightship has made no statements that have turned out to be false that I know of. Cyberwings has made repeated statements that have been at the very least misleading, and at the worst outright lies. Who you gonna believe? (Wolfie that's a rhetorical question btw... we already know who you believe)
 

labgeek

Platinum Member
Jan 20, 2002
2,163
0
0
Originally posted by: DealLurker
gfgray posted:
> "He talks like a con artist. He keeps trying to get more money even though he is not delivering on the last promise he gave us. "


As was said by more than one person before: Ponzi, Ponzi, Ponzi!

Wasn't Ponzi a character on Happy Days?

Have to a little humor (and it is admitedly just a little humor) into this thread every now and then.

Oh and if he's not a techie as Wolfie likes saying so much, why's he the one up to 4am configuring servers? And do you really want a server he configured, being not a techie and all?



 

MontyBurns

Platinum Member
Feb 29, 2000
2,836
0
0
You know Wolfie, for a guy who keeps screaming "why don't you READ the posts here," you sure have your head pretty deep in the sand.

Have YOU read any of the posts here? Or WebHostingTalk? Or the Yahoo group? Or Usenet? There's no end of information available about Shawn and Cyberwings, but you don't appear to have absorbed ANY of it.

 

Wolfgang

Senior member
Feb 7, 2001
457
0
0
MontyBurns,

Criticism from you is a compliment, I'm afraid--especially when it's along the lines of "you have your head in the sand."
 

nealr

Senior member
Dec 20, 2000
771
0
0
I think the company has closed down and shawn is just stalling while he sells remaining assets, and pockets the $, at which time, he will say they didn't have enough $ to keep it going.
 

Wolfgang

Senior member
Feb 7, 2001
457
0
0
Labgeek,

I'm very sympathetic to what you're saying.

Shawn is used to hype, and just doesn't seem to realize that comments he can't back up, even a well-intended comment that he plans to back up but then something happens and he doesn't, destroys his credibility.

I'm sympathetic to him--I think he means well, and I think this is pretty clearly not a scam. But there are ways to hurt customers other than scams--such as repeated reckless and sloppy claims.

As one person put it (paraphrasing): "he doesn't distinguish between plans and reality." Which means he presents his plans are basically accomplished facts (especially when he's not being scrutinized, when he's free to revert to type), which of course, they;re not, especially when there are obstacles or opponents in the road ahead. Disastrous.


Supposedly, he's been "growing" a lot very recently, realizing that small-time hype and winging it just doesn't work with htousands of customers. But if this is true, and I hope it is, it sure seems like 5 steps forward, 4.5 back.
 

texazed

Member
Mar 29, 2001
173
0
0
Cyberwings is not responsible for any damages your business may suffer. Cyberwing does not make implied or written warranties for any of our services. Cyberwing denies any warranty or merchantability for a specific purpose. This includes loss of data resulting from delays, non-deliveries, wrong delivery, and any and all service interruptions caused by Cyberwings.
 

Wolfgang

Senior member
Feb 7, 2001
457
0
0
RSG2,

Thank you for your technical explanation here of "router looping". We needed that badly, since the term has been floating around for weeks without explanation.

And on a personal note, thanks for understand what I'm trying to do (point out entirely possible, sometimes IMHO very plausible alternatives, even if they aren't mainstream here, and especially point out that it's not a scam, even though it's neither a well run business yet), and what I'm NOT trying to do (NOT saying CW is sure to recover, or that it's critics are always unfair [many are, a number aren't], or that [shudder!] customers shouldn't be angry because it's not CW's fault--I think they have every right to be furious).

I appreciate your recognizing this, and in this climate, your saying this.

Wolfgang
 

XFreebie

Banned
Dec 12, 2000
1,414
0
0
i disagree, he knew and many of us knew from the beginning, u cannot make money by selling a year's worth of web hosting for $3.90. other companies charge $3.90 a month, there was absolutely no way shawn could magically do it from 12 times less and make money, and he knew it. lets hope that the airport security guard frisk him extra hard when he's on his plane trip to the bahamas to retire with enron and worldcom execs

if u still beleive shawn didn't know what was going on, then u must also believe worldcom's accounting scandal was a mere accident, maybe somebody forgot the carry the one [for billion times]
 

scuzy

Member
Dec 2, 1999
61
0
0
i don't get how some are still die hard believers of this con. If this was a real hosting service they would accept credit card payment instead of paypal. From day one you can tell this is a one man show. Shawn the CEO/employee/network admin/sysadmin/ and so forth.

to those that believe they got their money's worth it's not about getting one month of service it's the trouble of backup your website and moving it to a real service. Just for that i rather pay a little more and not have the headache of most CW users are having right now.
 

labgeek

Platinum Member
Jan 20, 2002
2,163
0
0
Ok Wolfie,

I think you're a very trusting soul. That's not a bad thing, the world could use some more of them. I too tend to be one, until a person destroys his credibility with me, after that it takes quite a bit to rebuild any respect or trust for that person again. If a person tells me one thing and it turns out to be false, I may even give them the benefit of the doubt. But when they do it over and over, I have no use for these people. Mr CEO is in that boat now. He's not only in it, it's sailed away. He has made repeated assertions that are simply false. And even if he is planning on it, stating it as fact is at the very least misleading. People are making decisions based on what he says. He needs to be aware of that, and act in a more appropriate manner. I have no trust in him what-so-ever anymore. He has proven to be untrustworthy. Regardless of his intentions, he has not followed through on ANY of the recent promises.

Scr*w me over once, shame on you.
Scr*w me over twice, shame on me.

I don't know if there are any actions he can take at this point to regain credibility. I kind of doubt it.

Merriam Webster defines FRAUD as:
1 a : DECEIT, TRICKERY; specifically : intentional perversion of truth in order to induce another to part with something of value or to surrender a legal right
b : an act of deceiving or misrepresenting : TRICK
2 a : a person who is not what he or she pretends to be : IMPOSTOR; also : one who defrauds : CHEAT
b : one that is not what it seems or is represented to be

Notice 1a. "the act of deceiving or misrepresenting"
Deceive is defined as " to cause to accept as true or valid what is false or invalid"

He has made lots of statements he know not to be true, even if they might become true later. He did not say "our goal is...", he stated them as fact. Some may argue with me on this point, but I don't think he's so stupid as to not to be able to tell fact from fiction (goals while may become fact, are not fact at that point). He intentionally and knowingly made statement he knew to be false. There are too many examples to cite, server specs being the latest.

Whether intentional or not, he has hurt hundred if not thousands of people by his action. He needs to now pay the price. I personally think that ought to be in the legal arena.
 

mccall

Senior member
Sep 5, 2000
514
0
0
To follow in labgeek's footsteps, here are just some of Shawn's deliberate, willful misrepresentations regarding "his" datacenters:

From the web chat on July 8:

"... we were able to maintain a very low level of pricing and still providing quality hosting services as well as open our own data center in Maine . Cyberwings would like to take the next step in hosting services by creating a Premier Cyberwings Data Center (PCDC) in Virginia, USA."

"The costs of building such a Data Center are significant enough to ward off any small business from doing it initially, but as we have grown, it is becoming a necessity."

"Here is my list of goals I have put together, and would like to get everyone's support on:
1) Develop the PCDC in Virginia to house dedicated, colocated & web hosting servers. The PCDC will have 1 primary data carrier and 3 redundant "On-A-Usage-Basis" data carriers."

"As we have grown, and piece-mealed our growth together by adding space, developing our first data center , etc."

"Instead of adding space and data centers as we go, let's build the Premier Cyberwings Data Center with enough capacity to expand into it for at least 3-4 years."

Well, I think that pretty much says it all. I bet the current owners of the datacenter in Virginia, in which he's colocating (presumably), are surprised that Shawn wants to "develop" it in order to house dedicated and coloctaed servers, since that's what they're doing with it right now.

Oh, and one more thing, the "user questionaire" that Shawn wants every customer to fill out to get their accounts active again has not yet materialized. On July 15 at 2 pm he said it would take 24 - 48 hours, so I guess he's now shooting for the second half of that estimate.

 

slycat

Diamond Member
Jul 18, 2001
5,656
0
0
routing loops not looping routers...
Yes! there is a difference.

btw, my easy-to-comprehend explanation:
*continuous forwarding of data packets due to a network fault, usually caused by non-payment, so we'll shut off yer router...
:D
 

NightHawk21

Junior Member
Jul 15, 2002
7
0
0
Fresh from LS:

From: "Lightship: Info" <Info@lightship.net>
Date: 2002/07/16 Tue PM 04:53:02 EDT
Subject: Cyberwing Update


>Good afternoon. Lightship wishes to explain its ongoing attempts to
> resolve its current situation with Cyberwing.
>
> Contrary to Cyberwing Communications' assertions, the ongoing outage being
> experienced by Cyberwing customers has resulted from Cyberwing's repeated
> failure to pay to Lightship certain contractually-agreed amounts. Due to
> this ongoing situation and after repeated resolution attempts by
> Lightship, we discontinued service.
>
> Lightship remains interested in achieving an agreement with Cyberwing, in
> the interests of Lightship, Cyberwing and Cyberwing customers. Lightship
> was always willing to provide Internet services to Cyberwing, including
> technical support. As of this writing, Cyberwing has not resolved its
> obligations to Lightship.
>
> Lightship understands the effects of Cyberwing's actions on their
> customers, and on Lightship itself. Please understand that because
> Cyberwing customers are not Lightship customers, Lightship can not legally
> release any data located on Cyberwing servers.
>
> Please contact Cyberwing, and not Lightship, regarding any service,
> support and data-related issues. We will do our best to keep you
> informed.
>
> Lightship Telecom
> 877-548-7447
> www.lightship.net



LS word against CW word. I think it's pretty obvious who's word weighs A LOT more.
 

NightHawk21

Junior Member
Jul 15, 2002
7
0
0
Latest from LightShip (posted a few mins ago...didn't see post...2nd try...sorry if dbl post):

From: "Lightship: Info" <Info@lightship.net>
Date: 2002/07/16 Tue PM 04:53:02 EDT
Subject: Cyberwing Update

> Good afternoon. Lightship wishes to explain its ongoing attempts to
> resolve its current situation with Cyberwing.
>
> Contrary to Cyberwing Communications' assertions, the ongoing outage being
> experienced by Cyberwing customers has resulted from Cyberwing's repeated
> failure to pay to Lightship certain contractually-agreed amounts. Due to
> this ongoing situation and after repeated resolution attempts by
> Lightship, we discontinued service.
>
> Lightship remains interested in achieving an agreement with Cyberwing, in
> the interests of Lightship, Cyberwing and Cyberwing customers. Lightship
> was always willing to provide Internet services to Cyberwing, including
> technical support. As of this writing, Cyberwing has not resolved its
> obligations to Lightship.
>
> Lightship understands the effects of Cyberwing's actions on their
> customers, and on Lightship itself. Please understand that because
> Cyberwing customers are not Lightship customers, Lightship can not legally
> release any data located on Cyberwing servers.
>
> Please contact Cyberwing, and not Lightship, regarding any service,
> support and data-related issues. We will do our best to keep you
> informed.
>
> Lightship Telecom
> 877-548-7447
> www.lightship.net

Pretty obvious who is at fault, and in default here people.
 

RSG2

Member
Sep 20, 2001
166
0
71
Originally posted by: slycat
routing loops not looping routers...
Yes! there is a difference.
:D

True, Slycat, jast as there is a difference between routing and routed protocols...Maybe I missed clarifying that in my post (I was feeding the newborn at the time...):D
 

Cocytus

Senior member
Jan 13, 2001
220
0
0



Legally? Nah...he'll just blame it on everytyhing else, then the court will just decide that he ran the business poorly, didn't pay his bills, then lied about it. Slap on the wrist at best.

But we can burn him down. Put the word out....all the forums...all the consumer ratings...every public place that techies congregate on the internet. Let the names Shawn/Cyberwings be known to be synonymous with the word CHARLETON. This get-rich-quick fiend better learn to find other arenas to prey on the unsuspecting.

We're past the hot deal. We're past the intitial shock and confusion. We're through examining this issue with a reserved, unattached attitude.

You people are an angry mob....and now I'm handing out the torches!




 

RandomCoil

Senior member
Feb 22, 2000
269
0
0
MCCALL: I'm not sure those statements you highlighted are as "obviously false" as you concluded. I don't think the concept of a "Cyberwings Data Center" needs to imply they own the building; I take it as meaning that they are simply not reselling space on someone else's servers (as they were doing with RackShack). If you define Cyberwings Data Center as a cluster of servers that Cyberwings owns, the statements make perfect sense and are consistent.

Plus, you gotta love the fact that Shawn thinks it's necessary to call the "Permier Cyberwings Data Center" the "PCDC". Sheesh.
 

mccall

Senior member
Sep 5, 2000
514
0
0
Well RandomCoil, we'll have to agree to disagree over that point.

When Shawn talks about the cost of building a datacenter being prohibitive to a small business but because of growth was a necessity for his company, when he uses phrases like "instead of adding space as we go ... let's build" a premier datacenter, when he talks about "developing" his new data center in order to host dedicated and colocated servers when he is in fact leasing space in a facility that already has that ability (obviously, since he's colocating there), that, to me anyway, goes past an issue of semantics or misstatements and crosses the line into deliberate misrepresentation.

And, if that weren't enough, when he was confronted with the fact that he consistently referred to the Lightship datacenter in Maine as being "ours" (implying CW owned the facility) he explained it by implying that he was in negotiations to buy that facility. From the Q&A on the CW Status site:

Q: Shawn, why have you said it's your own DC, when the servers are with LS?
A: There were other talks going on behind the scenes about the facility that I cannot get into - moot at this point.

Now, with their current problems, I don't think that even his most ardent supporters can possibly believe that he was ever in a position to buy that datacenter from LS, if indeed they were ever interested in selling it in the first place.

I could go on, but focusing on just the datacenter issue I think his statements are willful and deliberate misrepresentations.



 

BarneyFife

Diamond Member
Aug 12, 2001
3,875
0
76
What I don't understand is the cult following of Cyberwings. There are a large group of people that defend this company non-stop and believe everything Shawn says. The same Shawn who is selling secrets on newsgroups for $5 and looking for a gay roommate. Why so much loyalty to this guy? He is constantly lying and delaying. I'm not a customer of his but I find this story quite fascinating. Look at Anandtech. There is some guy named Wolfgang who would walk over lava to defend Shawn. Why?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.