This page contains and includes our opinions regarding Roe Sanders and Rackspace:
Rackspace Sucks
An editorial by FakeNewspapers.comCopyright (c) 2007 FakeNewspapers.com
-------------------------------------------NOTICE: This page was originally posted in mid August, 2007. It was listed in Google within four days. Since then it has been mysteriously removed from Google many times. Each time it is removed we relist it manually, and within four days it reappears. Each time it reappears it lasts a few days, then is removed from Google again. Does Rackspace have an inside track to removing Google content at its whim? That would seem to be the case. As this process continues to manifest itself over and over and over adnauseam, we are increasingly compelled to conclude that Rackspace has some mechanism at its disposal which allows it to at least temporarily remove any content it wishes. In our experience, this type of behavior fits perfectly with behavior we've personally witnessed and been victim to within Rackspace. If you want this content to remain available, we would suggest mirroring this page. All copyright is retained by us. This page may ONLY be mirrored on the condition that it is reproduced IN FULL, not out of context, and not used for any commercial purpose. Swing away.
-------------------------------------------
We wanted the domain "RackspaceSucks.com", or any variation thereof, for this piece, but it seems Rackspace has already grabbed all of those. --Smart move.
Then we went for cRackspace.com, since some of Rackspace's employees seem to be ON cRack. No joy. That was taken too. We'll have to be happy with this little directory.
After decades of hosting with the likes of AT&T, Comcast, Earthlink, Serve-Path, and dozens of other truly hideously-rotten and unreliable hosting companies, we finally decided that all that changing of hosts and downtime was taking too great a toll on our business, and our piece of mind. We'd been thinking about Rackspace for a few years; their reputation as being reliable was generally good. They're sometimes touted as the "best" in reliability. But we'd heard that before. Due to their prices we shied away for years. Could we afford those kind of rates? Should we? Was it worth it? Or was it just another dung-heap of orchestrated hype? What if Rackspace didn't work out? Where would we go then? Just what in the world did we have to do to find reliable hosting, staffed by knowledgeable, English-speaking support personnel? Really! Inquiring minds wanted to know! What would it take? After becoming absolutely disgusted (read: enraged) with Serve-Path, we figured we really didn't have anything to lose, and we made the plunge to Rackspace. What could it hurt.
Just for giggles, here's a sample of a support response from Serve-Path tech:
From: helpdesk@servepath.com
Subject: Re: [#66356-3225#]
Hello,
Now we doubt that the domain is resolving to a different IP address from your local machine.
Now the IP address of the domain is 69.59.168.240 and it is working fine. Please check out the host file of your local machine whether there is any differnt IP locally set to trixiepixgraphics.com which will cause the url routed to a different server. You may try this from a differnt machine also. We doubt that this is why you cannot able to see any changes we have already done for you.
Best Regards,
Jack [Habib?]
Servepath Support.And what was the native language there?
The switchover to Rackspace was unpleasant and problematic. We chalked much of that up to our own cerebral shortcomings. But honestly, good, clear, well-written instructions would have avoided many tech requests and countless hours of frustration. Those who know a subject should never write its how-to's. Instructions should only be written by the weakest link, the dumbest among us, all the while asking questions of the expert who sits by their side. Only the neophyte knows what questions to ask.
Still, finally, it was done, and our fun little biz was running more or less smoothly on Rackspace. The price was absurd. We could have outright purchased our own new server every single month for what we were paying Rackspace. Literally. And when it turned out we weren't getting Plesk in the high-priced package but had to add $55/mo for it, we began to wonder at the morality of Rackspace administration. But ahhhhh......the support. (Kind of like saying, "Sure it's 129f. outside, but it's a DRY heat...").
Was Rackspace tech really that good? Well, it was pretty darned good. If we had a question, Rackspace tech support actually replied to us. Imagine! A reply! And not only that, they seldom or never seemed put off by the English language. Imagine! Tech support that read and apparently spoke, the Queen's own English! My God. We say MY GOD! It was nearly an orgasmic experience.
Over time we were forced to mark a few ticket responses as "unacceptable", because, no matter how we tried to avoid that label, they were unacceptable. But those were few. Mostly we marked our tickets "good". It was easy to get caught up in Rackspace's "Fanatical" hype. It seems they think everything they do is fanatically wonderful. And a few of our tickets really were handled in a fanatically superb manner. We marked more of them as "Fanatical" than we should have because we were sometimes swept up in the glittery enthusiasm. What Rackspace often thinks of as "fanatical" tech support is, after all, merely competent and timely -- like it's SUPPOSED to be from ANY host. The fact that SO many hosts are SO bad makes it easy for Rackspace to shine, merely by being of average competence. When we were in the business of rescuing ships in the Pacific the United States Coast Guard thought we were amazing. In reality, we were merely of average competence. But compared to them, whom we saved twice, we were, well, "fanatical". Still, all in all, Rackspace support was good. If we had a problem, it got fixed. Over the course of perhaps two years, we began to relax. We began to feel as though we might after all, finally, be "in good hands". The huge cash outlay every month grated on our sensibilities, but we just chalked it up as a business expense and choked it down. What were we going to do, anyway? Go back to the likes of Serve-Path? Not bloody likely.
We found that our up-time on Rackspace was pretty good as well. WHAT?! Only "pretty good"!? We had a few instances of being down for half a day or more. And there were a number of shorter-duration outages. But, well, probably that's simply as good as it gets in the Internet world when your content is located on any single server, and Rackspace always said it wasn't their fault. Who were we to argue? It beat the be-jesus out of Serve-Path or any other host we'd ever tried, so we just went along. We felt we were treating Rackspace well, and we felt they were treating us well in return. All was well. We were all well. All of us were well. The WORLD was WELL.
In August of 2007 we had a bad week. --Not with Rackspace; that was to come later. We had a "bad customer week". Some people have bad hair days. We had a bad customer week. We have very, very few bad customers -- probably fewer than any other business on the net. That's probably because we treat them very, very well. We fix all sorts of problems with their orders that we shouldn't. We often correct their mistakes for free (and sometimes we don't). We guarantee to stay and work all night if required to get all RUSH orders out on time -- and we often actually do work all night. Our rating by the same company that gave Walmart's customer service a 4 out of 5 star rating, gave us 4.5 out of 5. We were hugely disappointed, even depressed that we didn't get 5 stars. But there are some customers who simply cannot be pleased. Read that again: There. are. some. customers. who. simply. cannot. be. pleased. Not a single one of them knows who they are.
In early August 2007 we had two such throw-backs. One began complaining two days before her order was due to arrive. Her beef? She felt she'd been "ripped off" because, she said, no company could have manufactured her order and gotten it out so quickly; therefore, she apparently reasoned, we probably hadn't made or shipped her order at all, but had just taken her money. When we supplied proof of shipment for the second time she retorted that whatever product she received would likely be garbage. She was blocked from ordering from us ever again. But her insults continued even before her item arrived. When we blocked her email address and advised her to cease and desist, she continued from new email addresses. We finally had no choice but to file a police complaint of harassment, and we posted a copy of that complaint online. It's a legal document, utterly protected speech. We'd simply had enough.
About that same time, we received another customer complaint. This represented two complaints in less than a week out of the four to six we normally receive in an entire year. We began to wonder if there was some peculiar astrological alignment that was driving people insane. We still don't know. Perhaps there was. We'd received no complaints at all in the preceding eight months, and have not received one since.
This woman's gripe was that when she placed her order, she was presented with a help-paragraph that described what to type into one of the customization fields of the order form; she elected to ignore that instruction utterly, and entered exactly what she had been explicitly warned not to enter. We processed her order as she had entered it, and shipped her product. She didn't like it. We explained that she had been provided what she'd ordered. She was free at that time to re-order anything she liked. But she became snippety and condescending and we simply cut her off. This woman then filed so many complaints with the BBB that they cut her off as well. She then filed a complaint with the California Department of Justice stating that we had threatened her and she feared for her physical safety. This was the last straw, and we filed a police complaint with the Santa Monica PD against her for lying to the DOJ. Now absolutely fed up with this bizarre mentality we posted that public document on the same website with our other unpleasant customer of the week. Again, we'd simply had enough. We had truly had enough. The combined editorial was posted not on our Rackspace server, but on a domain we had through a host that promised in writing to support First Amendment speech. We'd always worked closely through our First Amendment attorney, and we knew we were absolutely safe posting speech that would be protected by this guy at Ctyme Web Hosting. Marc Perkel is his name. Our content wasn't even in a gray area. It was squarely protected. We linked to that page from our Rackspace server. We'd never even read the Rackspace AUP. Didn't need to. Didn't want to. Our controversial editorial content was always hosted elsewhere, per our attorney's instruction.
On the date shown below, we received the following from Rackspace. We were perplexed, because the content being referred to wasn't on a Rackspace server, and even if it had ever been, it wasn't when Rackspace complained. And besides, we only had one Rackspace server, and had only ever had one Rackspace server, not the two Rackspace was alluding to. We thought, "Typical geeks". To this day we have absolutely no idea what the second site was that "traced back to our account". We'd pay three bucks cash to know.
2007-08-07 17:16:30 (UTC-7)
Hello,
We have received several complaints regarding the misuse of personal information regarding 2 sites that trace back to your account.
Below I have copied one of these complaints from an Eileen McDermott. Because of the nature of the complaint we are asking that you remove any and all references to Eileen McDermott from your server or any server that you have with Rackspace.
We are not accusing you of any wrong doing but it is apparent that this individual does not want their personal information on your site. Please also make sure that any personal information that you do post is taken down as well, unless you have the express consent of that individual.
Please let us know if you have any questions or concerns please let me know. Thank you.
Regards,
Roe Sanders
Rackspace Managed Hosting
Note that Sanders complains ONLY about content on Rackspace servers, and mentions no problem with any links to content not on Rackspace servers. He also mentions two sites. What two sites? We only had one site referring to Eileen McDermott -- and not even THAT was on a Rackspace server. This guy was out of line straight out of the gate.
This actually irked us a bit. We didn't have time for this, and we resented Rackspace making such an accusation without having checked their facts. We'd been mildly irritated with Rackspace recently anyway, because of an annoying bombardment of unwanted emails (we call it SPAM) inviting us to this event or that forum, usually begging for money for the privalege. In one instance we received eight of the same email. We thought we'd been careful to opt out of all that crap, but it just kept coming. We'd several times asked Rackspace to stop. But they didn't. This new boondoggle over the AUP ticked us off. Even if the content that offended the delicate sensibilities of Rackspace HAD been on a Rackspace server, we DID have permission to post it anyway because no one may contact our website without agreeing to the possible public dissemination of their message! This was a stupid little problem that could be cleared up in barely a paragraph. We fired back as follows, giving it all the attention it deserved:
2007-08-07 17:56:50 (UTC-7)
You will find no reference to Eileen Mcdermott on our Rackspace server.
We would suggest that Rackspace actually do its homework before making such an accusation.
We expected a far higher degree of professionalism from Rackspace, and you have severely shaken our confidence in you-- and probably that of every potential client who reads this.
Do not contact us again if such is to merely waste our time.
Amazingly, Rackspace apologized. But we were still nervous. Would they do something like this again? Was our site endangered? Was our business endangered? Could these people be trusted at all? We readily conceded that Rackspace tech support was really quite good, but we were beginning to wonder if the administrative side of the Rackspace operation was any better than any other back-alley host. We were becoming nervous, and even before submitting the preceding ticket we began researching other hosts.
We asked Rackspace for clarification of the AUP and received no reply whatsoever. By now we were becoming angry. We couldn't do business like this. We needed a simple reply, even if that was to say "we're not going to reply". It was becoming clear that Rackspace operated too much like all the other depressingly unprofessional hosts we'd ever encountered, and that shocked us. We had actually believed we were dealing with a crisply professional company. Clearly we were not. We chose several new hosts and decided to run all of our domains with failovers. We had finally come to understand that there was not a single professional hosting company in operation in the world today. We finally understood that we must post content on many servers, being always ready for one to go belly-up, or become illogical, unreliable, or otherwise problematic. By this time we'd had it with Rackspace, but we wanted to play out this hand, just to see where it would lead. We began moving our sites, but we continued to push Rackspace for some little fleck of rationality and honor. On the date indicated, we submitted the ticket below. We wanted to know what to expect from this company. Maybe we'd yet keep something hosted on Rackspace if their concessions were truly heartfelt, but it wasn't looking promising. After about a week there was no response, so we went to look at the ticket and update it. But it was MISSING. Gone. No longer in existence. Deleted off the server. We posted the following in an attempt to maintain a timeline throughout the fiasco:
2007-08-15 10:06:09 (UTC-7)
This ticket was responded to [refering to the initial contact from Roe Sanders, above]. You closed it, and we re-opened it with further comment. You then refused to reply. We then closed the ticket and marked it unsatisfactory. You then removed those tickets from this record. We feel that is dishonest and misleading. Our experiences with you are being disseminated publicly. You have not even come close to living up to your reputation -- in fact we are thoroughly disgusted by your unprofessionalism. Why have you acted like this?Rackspace ALWAYS responds within 15 minutes to EVERY ticket. But there was no reply whatsoever to this one. So we appealed again:
Posted for the second time:
We've received the email (apology) from your employee "Joanna". Unfortunately we're not appeased. It was reprehensible and unprofessional enough of your staff to respond in the knee-jerk, politically correct manner it did without even checking to see if the content in question was located on a Rackspace server and therefore under your "jurisdiction". That's an issue that has us so angry we're not even willing to discuss it until we've calmed down. But the next most important issue is the capriciousness of your AUP and the wide latitude with which you enforce it. This obnoxious woman (Eileen Mcdermott) complained to you that she didn't like her "personal information" [her name and address] disseminated publicly (it's already disseminated on many sites across the net). However our dissemination of it is absolutely, positively constitutionally protected speech. The ONLY thing we may not, by law, disseminate is her social security number. In this instance we even voluntarily refrained from disseminating her phone number. This instance is not even close to being a gray area. It's so far into the "protected zone" it's not even worthy of discussion. And yet you came at us with a knee-jerk demand to remove it. Forget for a moment it wasn't even on your server and you were twenty seven miles out of line. What if it HAD been on your server? If we had refused to pull it, you would have forcibly pulled it? You might have even shut down our entire business? No, you say? But how do WE KNOW THAT!? We don't. What if we write a negative editorial about George Bush and we report that he lives at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue? That in NO WAY differs from our editorial about problem customers [actually it does - we were fairly foaming at the mouth at this point, and were narrowing down the parameters to make our point]. But you wouldn't pull that data, correct? What if we wrote an editorial about Campbell's Soup, saying we didn't like it, and we posted the address of the corporation and the names of the corporate officers. Would you pull that if the company complained? What about a review of a sole proprietor's business -- a local restaurant, let's say. A restaurant review would necessarily include the address of the restaurant -- in which the owner happens to live just above in the attached apartment. THAT TOO would be dissemination of personal information. Would you jerk that content too, or shut down the business's website that wrote and posted it? You are in effect saying loudly and clearly, YES! Once you embark on a course of trying to be the censors of the world, you're on a slippery slope. As it stands you're sliding badly. Our site contained many business and product reviews, many of them negative. All contained the addresses of the companies, and sometimes their phone numbers. Since some were sole proprietorships, those addresses were also the home addresses of the business owners. Under your AUP all of this content "could" be removed at your whim, at any time. We have now moved ALL review content off of Rackspace because we're not willing to live under the threat of arbitrary AUPs being enforced arbitrarily. We need to know EXACTLY and PRECISELY what is "allowed" content and what is not. If we now must have two servers, one with you, and another whose AUP is clear and precise, why not just have one server -- the one that is clear and professional? We pay, what -- $500 or $700 a month for Rackspace? The server that has a clear and precise AUP charges us $150 a YEAR, and it has been nearly as reliable as Rackspace. Granted your technical customer service is great, but what good does that do us if you shut down our site for some mildly controversial content that YOU deem to be in violation of your AUP? What if we'd been on vacation in this instance and our employees didn't know how to respond to your demand that we remove content that didn't even exist, so they didn't respond at all. What would you have done, shut down our website and our business and robbed us of our INCOME simply because a crazy woman didn't like our content? We notice the Onion out of S.F. is hosted by Rackspace. -- Probably no more controversial entity in the country. They name names all day long. Would you shut them down if someone complained about being talked about in their paper? When we came to Rackspace we "assumed" that your philosophical policies would be as valuable and reliable and progressive and knowledgeable as your technical expertise. We see now that you basically have no philosophical policies -- you could not possibly have given more than 40 seconds of dubious thought to your AUP, or the havoc and chaos it was capable of wreaking if interpreted badly or capriciously. People being talked about in any public forum will almost always scream bloody murder if that talk is in any way negative -- hell, sometimes they scream if it's positive. That's why there is such a thing as the First Amendment. It keeps the flow of information moving. Without it we'd live in one gigantic and terrifying secret society. Your nebulous AUP actually PROMOTES that state of affairs. If a person doesn't like the content of a website they have abundant legal recourse. They can bring the matter before a judge and try to obtain an injunction to stop the dissemination of said content. If the judge believes there is a First Amendment abuse, he can grant the injunction. Fully 97% of these are overturned in the first 24 hours, because the judge wasn't "up" on his First Amendment law. Almost all of the rest are overturned at hearing. Yet Rackspace has taken it upon itself to circumvent that entire process and to grant God-like rights to anyone who doesn't want certain publicly available data about them to be disseminated publicly. That's nuts. And we doubt we are willing to try to run our business under that threat. Even if a piece of information is protected by the First Amendment but dishonestly represented, the offended STILL have recourse -- they can sue, and that's as it should be. We have (had) planned a whole new segment of our website inviting public review of various companies and products. But we have no sure way of knowing at what point you would consider the dissemination of any data to be "too personal". We're not willing to invest the time and money required to set this segment up, only to have it capriciously torn down by some politically correct interpretation of your nebulous AUP. We wonder how many of your customers do not have a clue regarding the threat they operate under at this very moment. We wonder how many of the websites you host COULD BE unceremoniously shut down right at this very moment for content that has existed on them for years. We're sorry, but you've scared us badly. We're afraid to post much of anything on our site now, and if we're afraid to continue to broaden our content because of your AUP, what good are you to us --or any other business-- in the end? This is NOT a rhetorical question! Posted for the second time at 12:28 Pacific on 8-15-07.We should have made better arguments in the above, but honestly, when trying to hold a conversation with a Billy Goat, does the content really matter? The Onion is a "parody" publication and therefore not subject to the Rackspace AUP, you say? Ah! But it IS! The Constitution of the United States of America recognizes an exception for parody speech, BUT RACKSPACE DOES NOT. We could have argued that every single page of every single newspaper in the country and the world would violate the Rackspace AUP --and it would. Every single website hosted on any Rackspace server anywhere in the world which has disseminated any single news story in which the subject's name or, God Forbid, his/her home town, is subject to being unceremoniously SHUT DOWN at this VERY MOMENT based on the whimsical Rackspace AUP interpretation documented on this website. Think about it. Rackspace is saying, flat-out, that "no personal information" about ANYONE, including their address or even their name, may be disseminated on any Rackspace server, regardless of its protection under the US Constitution, without that subject's express permission. Let's clarify one thing for a moment -- Rackspace is not bound by the US Constitution in any way. As a private company Rackspace has no obligation whatsoever to adopt or adhere to any intelligent policy such as the First Amendment. Rackspace may, at its silly whim, impose ANY restrictions on ANY content it so desires. Normally, we expect such restrictions to be, well, sane. And clear. Normal. Rational. Reasonable. Etc. And probably at least MOSTLY modeling the Constitution of the United States of America. We just tend to "assume" they are and will be. What we do NOT expect is a rogue, backwoods, unintelligent company to decide that the dissemination of a story of great public interest (usually called NEWS) will be prohibited on its servers if that story includes (oh, the horror) the subject's name, or address, or even the name of the city they live in, or their picture, present or past employer, etc. A company whose obscure policies prohibit normal content such as that might also prohibit just about anything else under the sun, and how would you ever know until you'd inadvertently violated their interpretation of those policies? What if Rackspace decides, for instance, that it doesn't like content which includes instructions for the gardening of roses. Oh, that would be CRAZY! you say. Is it any crazier than prohibiting regular news? The point is that once Rackspace started down the road of world censorship, where will they stop? No one knows, not even Rackspace. As you continue to read further, you'll discover that not only does Rackspace prohibit the dissemination of content which includes "personal information" about ANYONE, disseminated without their EXPRESS permission, Rackspace also actually prohibits its customers from LINKING TO any content that violates the RACKSPACE terms of service. Read that again if you must because you're probably thinking it was a typo. It's not. You'll feel the fear beginning to creep through your bones in a minute or two.
On 8-28-07, the city of Portland, Oregon posted the name, address and picture of a kid who poured a bottle of dish-washing detergent into a public fountain. It made lots of suds. Some thought it was hilarious. Children thought it was fun. Not so, the city of Portland. We're going to make a statement here, and we're going to represent this statement as fact, based on Rackspace's own written words, copied from their own website and displayed above and below. Here is our statement: If any website on any Rackspace server in the world, links to the story of the city of Portland, Oregon, which posted that kid's picture on the Internet, even to denounce such a story or to merely discuss such a story, that website is subject to being SHUT DOWN by Rackspace with about 56 hours notice. But it's even worse than that, because even if the offending webmaster receives Rackspace's demand to remove the link to Portland's story, and COMPLIES IMMEDIATELY, and makes that fact known to Rackspace over and over and over and over throughout that 56 hour period, Rackspace may, under their TOS, STILL shut down their server. The story and picture of the fountain soaper is legal content. People will (and already are) debating 'till the cows come home whether or not the city "should" have posted what it did. But it was squarely legal to do so, and people have a right to view it and to debate it. Except in Communist countries, people have a RIGHT to view LEGAL CONTENT. Neither Rackspace, nor anyone else in the world, has any moral or logical right to prevent ANYONE from viewing Portland's legal content. Unfortunately, Rackspace not only thinks it has the right to stop you from viewing Portland's page, it thinks it has the right to stop you from even TELLING ANYONE about Portland's page. Portland's page violates Rackspace's AUP clearly and solidly as Rackspace's Roe Sanders describes in writing. Portland's page disseminates personal information about the fountain soaper without his express permission. This is Rackspace's rule, not the rule of law, or even the rule of common sense. This is Rackspace's idiocy exclusively. Rackspace MAY shut down your ENTIRE BUSINESS almost without notice if you LINK to the city of Portland's story. Think this through, BECAUSE IT WAS DONE TO US BY ROE SANDERS, PERSONALLY. Roe Sanders did the EXACT same thing to us. --Not a "similar" thing. But THE. SAME. THING. If you, as a webmaster using Rackspace services, aren't absolutely, profoundly terrified by this, you're brain dead.
This new ticket (shown above in blue italics) was marked "waiting" by Rackspace. We assumed the staff was considering an intelligent reply and would get back to us shortly. When no reply was forthcoming after nine more days we again opened a new ticket and asked that Rackspace respond to our repeated requests to know what was allowable and what was not. All this time, even though we'd moved our websites off of Rackspace, we were still naive enough to believe that SOMEONE within Rackspace would finally reply. That reply might consist of nonsense, rhetoric, denials, lies, or perhaps even logic and reason -- but we still expected a reply. Ours was a legitimate question posed to rational professionals. Rackspace could have replied and said we were out of line. They could have replied and said we must interpret the AUP for ourselves. They could have replied and said they just didn't have time to reply in any lengthy or meaningful manner. But they were utterly unable to muster the simple human decency even for that. We continued to patiently wait for the expected reply, and finally received the following. We received NOTHING from Rackspace until we received the following. This told us, once and for all, of the extreme and profound lack of quality in Rackspace's administrative personnel. We finally understood that we weren't dealing with professionals at all, but with junkyard dogs, lower class, unintelligent, belligerent, stupid, counter-productive, illogical thugs:
2007-08-24 17:12:26 (UTC-7)
Hello,
Your server is in clear violation of our Acceptable Use Policy (AUP) based on the initial notification as seen above in this ticket.
Your refusal to remove the offensive content and/or any links to the material in question from your site constitutes a continued violation of the AUP. Additional actions taken by you are also in violation of the AUP.
If you have not removed the offensive material and/or any links to the material in question from your site by 9:00am Monday, August 27, 2007 CST your service will be terminated immediately.
Regards,
Roe Sanders
Rackspace Managed HostingRead the above VERY carefully, paying particular attention to this phrase:
"and/or any links to the material in question"
NOW you can be scared.
But of course no such content had ever existed on Rackspace, and we had even picked the meat off the copy of the site that we'd left on the Rackspace server in every other area so as to avoid even the barest hint of ANYTHING controversial, and killed virtually every external link (except to the search engines) so as to avoid being accused of even LINKING to content Rackspace didn't like. The copy on Rackspace of TrixiePixGraphics.com had been sacked, gutted, stripped of its marrow. It was a skeleton, left on the Rackspace server to enable us to see whether Rackspace would still complain. At this point we'd stopped all further payments to Rackspace (we actually cancelled the card they were billing from) and the nameservers had been changed.
So now we knew. This sociological prize, "Roe Sanders", had steadfastly refused to even acknowledge our written concerns about this issue for weeks, let alone address them. The best he could manage was perhaps the dirtiest, most dishonorable stunt we could have imagined from any fly-by-night hosting company anywhere. Hell, we probably haven't seen behavior this skullduggerous and odious in any greasy-fingered used car salesman, let alone a "Rackspace Executive". This "man" had waited until close of business on a Friday night to spring his demented little trap. We knew at that moment this was an orchestrated plot to shut down our Rackspace server regardless of any AUP violations that may or may not exist. The question was, for what? Our website had already been moved, the failover systems were propagating, so we really had no concern about our business website. It was serving from several new hosts by Saturday afternoon. But we wanted to allow Rackspace to continue to make a fool of itself. We wanted to see just how far this guy --and/or his minions or cohorts, would go to blacken the Rackspace name -- or rather to reveal its inherent darkness. We wanted to give Rackspace all the rope it could take, and then just a bit more. We wanted to see what made these people tick, what they were made of, how they operated, if they had a single moral or professional bone in their nerdy little bodies. We decided to jump through his hoops to see just what Roe Sanders was capable of. All of the following tickets were posted at the times and on the dates shown. In no case, not one, did we receive a single reply from anyone at Rackspace. The following transcripts, in our view, prove beyond any possible doubt that Rackspace had set us up for a "hit". Rackspace wanted to hurt our business. Period. Rackspace didn't care that we hosted NONE of the content we were accused of hosting. Rackspace didn't care if we were willing to remove any or all content that even remotely offended them or their nebulous AUP, or even the LINKS to such content on the servers belonging to OTHER COMPANIES. Rackspace simply didn't care that they were DEAD WRONG. For whatever mysterious reason, Rackspace decided -- or Roe Sanders decided independently -- that our business should be hurt. This behavior is actionable. It may even be prosecutable. We can't imagine that this guy thought he was going to keep his shenanigan secret. Here are our tickets over the next two days:
2007-08-24 23:52:50 (UTC-7)
We have removed absolutely everything that could even remotely be considered in violation of ANY AUP. This was done a week or more ago. We have logged your own searches on our Rackspace server looking for the content you mentioned a week or two ago, and you have not found it. Please immediately provide the exact URLs of any content you feel is in violation. A screenshot of this message and reference number is being made. For the record, we have not (NOT) refused to remove ANY content, and you know this well. You are apparently simply lying about this, and we want to know why. Please provide us a copy of our refusal to remove ANY content, and please provide that immediately. At this time we feel you are simply making up stories to try to force us from Rackspace. We are bringing in our attorney, [removed from this posting], Seattle. This message of yours shows clearly that you have very serious problems within your company. Again, for the record, and this will be posted publicly, we are demanding that you IMMEDIATELY provide us with the exact URLS of content you feel is in violation of ANY AUP. We are aware of NO such violations, and we have told you previously, in writing, that we would immediately comply with any request you had to remove offending content. That you now state we are refusing to remove content is ludicrous, and we see it as grossly dishonest. We expect these urls within two hours of this posting (23:45 Pacific on 8-24-07), and we are demanding that you provide us with a copy of our refusal to remove said content. No such document exists, and you know that well. You have flushed any remaining credibility as honest businessmen that you may have had, down the toilet. All exchanges in this matter will be posted publicly. Exactly what is wrong with you?We knew this would be ignored, because we had learned this is the type of company that Rackspace is. But we wanted to be able to demonstrate publicly that we had tried to work with Rackspace, and we wanted to be able to demonstrate that Rackspace was unprofessional and obviously dishonest. We continued as follows when the above received no reply:
2007-08-25 00:59:01 (UTC-7)
For the record, once again, and this is being witnessed and screen-printed, and posted publicly, we ask you to advise us WITHOUT FURTHER DELAY of ANY and ALL content, including urls and links to external urls, that Rackspace feels, for whatever reason, might be (MIGHT BE) a violation of Rackspace's AUPs. No, we don't really expect you to reply, because you've demonstrated what kind of businessmen you are. But we are documenting our urgent request to know exactly what content you object to, so it can be immediately removed from your server or corrected. Again, this is posted publicly, and your refusal to reply will be, to say the least, conspicuous. Would we say that you've put your foot in it this time? Yes, we would make that assessment, and in time you'll agree.....We are also demanding at this time that you clarify and be absolutely specific in explaining this statement of yours: "Additional actions taken by you are also in violation of the AUP." We urgently require to know exactly, precisely, what "additional action" of ours you are referring to, which in any way might (MIGHT) violate any of your AUPs, so that we may take steps to terminate such behavior immediately. You do understand this request, correct? Please have a superior explain it to you if you are having difficulty with any of this text.At this point the charade was becoming laughable. By refusing to allow us to do what it asked, Rackspace was demonstrating a kind of fraud -- it was showing its true colors. It was allowing the world to see its seamy underbelly. We laughed in the office in disbelief that any company, anywhere, could be so mindlessly stupid as to allow this to happen to them. Was it arrogance on their part, or actual mental retardation? We didn't really care. We just wanted to continue offering to do "the right thing" because we knew Rackspace would never allow us to do the right thing. We wanted to be able to demonstrate to potential Rackspace victims (correct word) what they were in for at the hands of this outfit. We wanted to be able to show what was at the heart of Rackspace, and Rackspace continued to oblige us magnificently:
2007-08-25 01:41:36 (UTC-7)
We're sorry you have not replied to our repeated inquiries regarding the identification of "offending content" on our Rackspace server. We are absolutely committed to the immediate removal of any and all questionable content. However, we have scoured our site religiously and cannot find any content that even comes close to violating your AUP, nor any links that point to other servers or domains which might violate your sensibilities. That being the case, we have repeatedly asked you to provide urls to any and all offending content. We're sure you would agree that it is in everyone's best interests to be sure any such content is removed as quickly as possible. Unfortunately, if you do not tell us what that content is, we are unable to remove it. Any court will agree with this most reasonable argument. We are opening a new ticket in the hope that your staff will be professional enough to immediately comply with our request to know exactly what content you are referring to. If you persist in refusing to point to that content, and then shut down our server because said content was not removed, you will of course be sued instantaneously for loss of profit, loss of brand recognition, and a host of other damages, and your credibility the world over will become nil (as it should be). Once again, we ask you the following: What are the URLs of the content you feel is offending, and at what urls are the links to outside pages to be found?At this point we can (and do) make the statement that Rackspace could not possibly have had any legitimate issue with the Eileen McDermott content, or even any links to it, because if they (Rackspace) genuinely wanted that content removed from public view they would have ASSISTED us in effecting that. But obviously they did not. They conspicuously REFUSED to assist us in that. They apparently made absolutely SURE that no one within Rackspace assisted us with that. So what DID Rackspace WANT, anyway? It's clear to us that they simply wanted to hurt our business, regardless of any content about Eileen McDermott or anyone else. This was clearly, in our view, merely a Rackspace "hit". Let's see how many around the world agree.
Rackspace could not muster the simple dignity to respond. All of our sites were up and running on new servers around the world, all equipped with failovers. At this point the issue of whether or not Rackspace was going to shut down our server was moot. We were going to shut it down ourselves once this came to a head, but we still wanted to see just how unprofessional and dishonest Rackspace could be, so we kept on with our pleas.
2007-08-25 02:30:48 (UTC-7)
Re previous tickets alleging AUP violations, we have just concluded an emergency teleconference with our attorney. He has suggested that he believes it is the intention of Rackspace to prevent us from knowing what content it feels is an AUP violation, and then to shut down our website (our livelihood) on Monday morning for some mysterious AUP violation. The fact that Rackspace waited until late Friday night to make this threat lends much credibility to this scenario. The fact that Rackspace is steadfastly refusing to address a single one of our repeated requests to know what content Rackspace finds offensive, lends much more credibility to that scenario. We believe, therefore, that Rackspace has initiated a premeditated, concerted effort to hurt or destroy our business. That is eminently actionable, and possibly prosecutable as a crime. We are therefore continuing to document our efforts to locate and remove any and all "offensive" material from said server. Again, we append our previous requests below. Gentlemen, you are on a slippery slope. At this time we will offer a reward of $500 to any Rackspace employee who reads this, for documentation (legal testimony) to the effect that they have been advised by their superiors not to respond to this ticket. Such an employee may contact us confidentially by using the contact form on our domain (trixiepixgraphics.com). This reward will be posted publicly in the next few days. We require the name(s) of those superiors, and a legal deposition from that employee. You folks have turned out to be the absolute nightmare [for] any and all Internet businesses seeking an honest, reliable host, and it is our utter crusade to disseminate your actions here today and in the future. Again, our previous requests to know what content, exactly and specifically, you object to, are shown below. We suggest you stop and think for just a moment how the world, and we do mean the world, is going to view your behavior in this fiasco, and how many scared, disgusted customers will leave or avoid you. You are acting as dishonestly and unprofessionally as any group of people we've ever seen, in any developed country at any time. We are actually embarrassed FOR you.No reply. We got tired of writing up new text, so we repeated some of it in new tickets as follows:
For the record, once again, and this is being witnessed and screen-printed, and posted publicly, we ask you to advise us WITHOUT FURTHER DELAY of ANY and ALL content, including urls and links to external urls, that Rackspace feels, for whatever reason, might be (MIGHT BE) a violation of Rackspace's AUPs. No, we don't really expect you to reply, because you've demonstrated what kind of businessmen you are. But we are documenting our urgent request to know exactly what content you object to, so it can be immediately removed from your server or corrected. Again, this is posted publicly, and your refusal to reply will be, to say the least, conspicuous. Would we say that you've put your foot in it this time? Yes, we would make that assessment, and in time you'll agree. Posted to Rackspace at 00:51 Pacific, 8-25-07. We suggest you begin rehearsing your responses for the likes of CNN and Fox when they ask you if Rackspace actually believes (!) it can control and censor what people LINK TO across the Internet. We are also demanding at this time that you clarify and be absolutely specific in explaining this statement of yours: "Additional actions taken by you are also in violation of the AUP." We urgently require to know exactly, precisely, what "additional action" of ours you are referring to, which in any way might (MIGHT) violate any of your AUPs, so that we may take steps to terminate such behavior immediately. You do understand this request, correct? Please have a superior explain it to you if you are having difficulty with any of this text.
Note that after each and every ticket entry, we received the usual Rackspace acknowledgement of receipt. We have omitted them here but they are on file, along with the reference and receipt numbers issued by the Rackspace ticket system, as follows:
This is just a quick note to notify you that we have received your support request. A member of your Fanatical(TM) support team will address your request as soon as possible. Should you need to update this ticket, please log into your myrackspace.com account and click on the Support tab or you may call us anytime at one of the below numbers. We're glad to do what we can to help in any way possible!
Best Regards,
Your Fanatical™ Support Team
Rackspace Managed Hosting ™
Toll Free 800.961.4454
International 1.210.447.4000
UK Office +44 (0)20 8734 2700..And again:
2007-08-25 15:35:39 (UTC-7)
Once again, for the record, at 15:29 hrs Pacific, on Saturday, 8-25-07, we are demanding that you supply to us the exact URLs of any content you feel is "offensive" or which you feel violates your AUP. Please also supply the locations and descriptions of any links to content not even on your server which you feel may violate your AUP. As you know, you've been asked to supply this data many times, and you have steadfastly refused to do so. That is mostly the essence and heart of our complaint against you. Your actions, or rather inactions in this matter, demonstrate to us and to all an utterly unbelievable lack of professionalism, not to mention honor. It is absolutely shocking. To demand that content be removed or a customer's business will be shut down, but then not only fail to supply a description of that content, but to steadfastly and wilfully REFUSE to describe that content despite numerous documented demands that you do so, leaves you in the weakest possible position legally. We urge you to seek the advise of your counsel in this matter. We are bending over backwards in a repeated, concerted effort to comply with whatever it is you want, yet you will not tell us what you want. We do understand what you're doing here: You are purposefully endeavoring to create an environment from which you will feel justified in ruining our business. Trust us -- it won't work. CC: Posted publicly on this date. The absence of your reply is noted as well.We were REALLY getting tired of this, but we now knew just how evil this company was, and we wanted to be able to demonstrate it in a manner and to a degree that was beyond reproach. Again we appealed to rationality, knowing full-well that no rationality existed on Rackspace's administrative side:
2007-08-26 14:30:28 (UTC-7)
Again, for the record, we are demanding to be advised specifically and explicitly of any and all "offending" content on our Rackspace server. We are unable to locate a single reference to Eileen Mcdermott (per your initial request), and we are unable to locate a single link to any other website that mentions Eileen Mcdermott (per your second request). The liability and negative publicity that the actions of the Rackspace employee, Roe Sanders, have subjected Rackspace to are at this point gargantuan. We strongly advise any employee who reads this to make sure that the supervisor of this individual has in hand all copies of all correspondences in this matter, as all are being posted online as we speak. Copies will be sent to your CEO by process server within the next week. Please read this ticket from beginning to end, along with all other tickets in the matter. We were initially advised to remove any and all content referring to one "Eileen Mcdermott". We replied by stating that no such content existed on our Rackspace server, and it documentably did not. Rackspace then apologized. We then asked for clarification from Rackspace regarding what was allowable content, for future reference. Rackspace refused to reply, and, in fact, mysteriously deleted the ticket. We suspect this was personally done by Roe Sanders. We then reinstated the ticket and asked the same question again. There was no reply. We asked the same question again. There was no reply to that or any other subsequent demands. We began to realize that Rackspace was simply too unprofessional to do business with. On Friday, 8-24-07, our suspicions were confirmed when we received an email from Roe Sanders stating that we needed to remove all "offending" content and all LINKS to all offending content that may exist on SOMEONE ELSE'S SERVER, or our entire business would be SHUT DOWN at 9 a.m. the following Monday. Since there had been no offending content on our server, ever, this was perplexing. We had no idea what content Roe Sanders was referring to. We began opening tickets, demanding to know what content we needed to remove to save our business. There has been no reply. To be ultra safe, we killed virtually every outgoing link on our website. We advised Roe Sanders. He refused to reply. We have continued to open new tickets demanding to know what content needs to be removed, or what links need to be killed in order to comply with this individual's request. As you can see by the long and growing ticket list, we have received no reply from Roe Sanders or anyone else. Is this REALLY the kind of employee Rackspace wants.....or needs? With friends like this guy, Rackspace doesn't NEED enemies. We have never seen unprofessionalism of this magnitude. Please be sure this gets to Roe Sanders's superiors, as it will, we guarantee, get to your CEO. As always, posted publicly on this date.Tying up a few loose ends, just for the record:
2007-08-26 18:49:07 (UTC-7)
For the record, we only have one server with Rackspace. We only have one account with Rackspace. We have never had any other Rackspace server or Rackspace account.And a few more:
2007-08-26 23:34:48 (UTC-7)
At this time, 23:29 Pacific, on 8-26-07, we are delivering to our attorney, electronically, a copy of our website as it appears at this moment on our Rackspace server. It will not be modified after this download, and that will be verifiable via the server logs. As an officer of the court our attorney is in a position to swear to the authenticity of this website snapshot. Fact: This website neither contains any material that is in any way a violation of your AUP, nor does it link to any such material. If you shut down this server for an AUP violation, we will sue you, personally, Roe Sanders, in Seattle Superior Court if possible, or in Houston (or wherever needed) if required. You will be named, personally, as a co-defendant with Rackspace. You are, Sanders, quite a piece of work, and that fact will become evident once these transcripts hit the net. We personally believe you are mentally handicapped to have attempted such a backwards, bone-headed, unprofessional, dishonest stunt as you have attempted here. We do not believe any mentally competent individual would have tried this. We don't believe 7-11 needs employees of your caliber, let alone a business like Rackspace that is attempting to project itself worldwide as the epitome of professionalism. They've missed the mark with you. We are disgusted.We had also made several demands to Rackspace, by opening new tickets, for the address and phone number of their legal department. ALL of those demands were deleted without replies, as were many other ticket entries that do not appear on this page.
Let's say for a moment, for the sake of argument, and although the odds are nearly nil this COULD be the case, that there WAS some scrap, some shred, some tiny remnant of offensive html code left somewhere on our 2300 page website that escaped our diligent efforts to find and kill it, which offended Rackspace (it looks like pretty-much everything offends Rackspace and we wonder how they drive to and from work every day without being mortally offended by just about everything they see en route). One would SUPPOSE that Rackspace would be honorable enough to respond to ANY of our dozens of requests to be made aware of the location of such content so that it could be removed. If it was ACTUALLY the intent of Rackspace to see to it that their AUP was adhered to, then Rackspace would have ASSISTED us in removing any errant code by telling us what it was and where it was, instead of having made it impossible for us to do so by wilfully and purposely keeping the location of the code a secret, assuming such offending code or link even existed on their server. Rackspace simply cannot argue itself out of its atrocious, dishonest behavior.
At 2 p.m. on Monday, August 27, we checked the Rackspace ticket page and found one email from Roe Sanders. It said our Rackspace server had been shut down due to "past and present AUP violations". We walked into another office to pull up the content on another computer so as to print it out, but in that short time, approximately 30 seconds, the content was no longer available.
We went out and enjoyed a nice lunch, secure in the knowledge that our content was now spread around the world on failover systems, that we were saving about $4000 a year by being out from under Rackspace, that the reliability and availability of our data was virtually 100% as opposed to Rackspace's less than 100%. And that we had been able to show the inner workings, the very heart of (im)morality at Rackspace from a perspective that perhaps no one has ever seen before.
Do we expect retaliation from Rackspace for the dissemination of this information?
You bet. Absolutely. We've seen and demonstrated only the barest whiff of what we believe this company is truly capable of. We believe Rackspace is more insidious, more downright evil than, say, Hewlett Packard, or even Microsoft.Do we expect that retaliation to be of an immoral nature? No surprises there.
Do we expect that retaliation to be of a criminal nature? No surprises there.
Do we expect Rackspace to use dirty, underhanded, even illegal tactics to try to trace out our servers and kick them offline? Absolutely. We'll be stunned if they don't try.
Do we expect Rackspace to be successful in killing this content? Yes. They'll win some battles. Let's see who wins the war. The redundancy that IS the Internet may or may not withstand an assault by Rackspace. Won't it be fun to see how this unfolds. Can Rackspace actually TAKE OVER the Internet and control ALL INFORMATION IN THE WORLD? If it can, then the Internet will have deserved it.
To Rackspace we say: Bring it on.
We feel that every single Rackspace customer should be terrified of losing their business without notice. Rackspace apparently believes it can control the entire Internet. In its staggering arrogance Rackspace seems to believe that they are the Supreme censors of the world. Rackspace has already documented that it believes it can prevent you, as a Rackspace customer, from linking to any content in the world that it, alone, finds offensive. If such content were illegal, Rackspace might have a case. But that Rackspace feels it can make up any capricious, arbitrary AUP it so desires, and then enforce that OPINION onto every website under its control, is exactly in line with Hitler's very same illusions. If you were to walk through a bookstore, and find that a book you wanted to buy wasn't carried by that store, but that it was carried by the store down the street, and you mentioned this in passing to your friend, would you expect the bookstore owner to come running from behind the counter with a club and drive you from the store? That would be madness. We say, what difference between that, and what Rackspace has done here today?
Chances are high that almost every single domain and website on a Rackspace server at this very moment violates the Rackspace AUP in some way. If it isn't obvious, it's still open to interpretation by some very questionable minds at Rackspace administration. The point is, after seeing what Rackspace has pulled here, is there a single Rackspace customer who should not sleep tonight in abject fear of losing his/her ACTUAL BUSINESS TOMORROW for some real, imagined, or utterly manufactured AUP violation? And if not from content on your own website, then from content you LINK TO! What if you've linked to content that Rackspace doesn't object to -- AT THE MOMENT. But then changes its mind about later on. Or how about the acceptable content you've linked to two years ago that has changed since you last viewed it. Will Rackspace physically ruin your business with one weekend's warning? No, you say? They'd be "reasonable", you think? But, you see, this page documents the FACT that they won't.
What else will Rackspace shut you down for posting?
Do you host any Real Estate data? Such data will contain addresses and owner's names, none of which you'll have "express permission" to post. Do you even LINK to your county assessor's website? Rackspace says you can't LINK to a site that violates its AUP, and every single county assessor's site in this country and around the world violates the Rackspace AUP. Have you quoted any news stories out of newspapers that mention, say, the Green River Killer and the fact that he once worked for Kenworth trucks? Do you have the Green River Killer's "express permission" to disseminate his past employment record? Of course not -- so you're in violation of Rackspace's AUP and your site is subject to immediate shut down if you don't comply -- but of course we DID comply, and our server was shut down anyway. And yours may be too. After awhile, one really begins to wonder what the highest prices in the web hosting industry are buying you. Your server will be very reliable -- right up to the moment it's capriciously and mindlessly SHUT DOWN for no reason that makes any sense whatsoever to a single citizen of this country. Do you link to CNN, FOX, ABC News, MSNBC, CBS or any other news source or feed? ALL of those entities disseminate information which violates the Rackspace AUP, and Rackspace says if you link to them, (LINK TO THEM!), it will shut down your website. It's not an idle or empty threat -- this page documents that they've actually done it! Twenty seconds of brainstorming will provide thousands more examples of everyday, perfectly legal content that Rackspace will punish you for disseminating. Can anyone spell R-E-D C-H-I-N-A?
Do you have any publicly available court documents posted on your Rackspace website? Virtually any court document includes someone's address. Do you have EXPRESS permission from that person (not "implied" or merely legal, but EXPRESS, as Rackspace demands), and from all other persons or companies named in those docs to disseminate their names, addresses, etc.? No? Then you're in violation of Rackspace's AUP and your site is subject to being shut down virtually without notice. Even if you reply to Rackspace and say, "Oh, Gee, sorry -- we didn't realize that was a violation, and we'll be moving our business to a sane and normal hosting company forthwith, but in the meantime we believe we have removed the content that offends you, and all LINKS to other people's content on other people's servers that offends you(!), and we are now no longer in violation -- or if we are, please tell us how and where so we can correct it -- so BACK OFF" -- do you think that will buy you a reprieve? It won't. We've proven on this page that it won't. Does your site LINK to any court websites? Yes? Then you're at risk, because those other websites violate the Rackspace AUP. Many, many web hosts are trying to emulate the Rackspace Insanity (RI).
Here's only one point of an insane AUP that we stumbled across in passing. We don't recall the name of the hosting company, but you can likely do a string search and find the page. This is only ONE of the things you might inadvertently do to get your server shut down by these hapless imbeciles:
l. Using the Service to upload, post, e-mail or otherwise transmit or post links to any material, or act in any manner, that is offensive to this AUP.
So, you, as a business person, are going to invest a huge capital in installing a large and intricate website onto THAT host's server? Not bloody likely.
Are you a judge who uses a Rackspace server to disseminate your legal findings and opinions, as most judges do? If yes, you're subject to having that entire server unceremoniously shut down immediately. No, you say? You don't use Rackspace, so you're safe from this mindlessness? But do you KNOW you're not on a Rackspace server? HOW do you know? Rackspace is a huge, International hosting company (just ask IndyMedia). It sells reseller accounts to tens of thousands of hosting companies who have no reason (until now) to tell you if THEY use Rackspace servers. Many, many small resellers do! We did! And the other sites we hosted were also SHUT DOWN by Rackspace, even though Rackspace had no beef with them whatsoever. And that's a fact. You may have no content whatsoever on your website that offends Rackspace (though that would be hard to believe), yet you may wake up one morning to find your website not only down, but evaporated. --Because one of hundreds of sites on the same server annoyed the likes of Rackspace. And if your web host, XYZ Fly-By-Night Backyard Webhosting LLC, uses Rackspace, they won't have anything to say about the matter when Rackspace comes knocking. They won't only shut down your little legal site, they'll shut down your reseller and ruin his business too! But it's even worse! You may be buying webhosting from a company who buys webhosting from a company who buys webhosting--- from Rackspace! It may be virtually impossible to tell if you're dealing with these zombies at all-- until Rackspace comes a-knocking.
Remember how the Nazis went door to door, demanding the books in every household be surrendered so they could be burned in the streets? Exactly what is the difference here? Seriously -- this is not a rhetorical question! Let's debate it! The Nazis were working toward political and "philosophical" ends -- who's to say Rackspace is not, or would not in the future if struck by the whim? Once you have CONTROL over that much information, you can decide to do anything you want with it anytime you want. What if one political party makes a deal with Rackspace and entices them to be on "special lookout" for information hosted on their servers that could damage their party, or the opposing party (and you can BET that the phone calls are being made FIVE SECONDS after sleazy politicians read this -- and what politician isn't sleazy enough to do this). Such information could then be selectively ignored and allowed to stand, or erased, at the political whim of Rackspace or any other company in complete and total control of said information. My GOD that scares us, and it should scare every single politician in the country not able to make THEIR OWN deal with an unscrupulous company who controls the information they also want to control -- and we ain't once called Rackspace scrupulous.
So what if Rackspace comes calling to the Honorable Judge Barty McFreedy, and informs him that the legal opinion he has tendered and posted publicly on case number 123456 on his Rackspace-controlled server, which of course, being a legal document, displays the names and addresses of all parties involved in the case, has been disallowed and that server will be shut down virtually without delay, and there is no appeal. Ah! But the Honorable -if naive and clueless- Judge McFreedy counters by insisting Rackspace would never do that, because, well, it would be UNREASONABLE. Rackspace as well argues that they shouldn't be regulated because they "would never do that". So you shove in their faces the transcripts of what they have done to US as demonstrated on this very page, and you've asked Rackspace to explain why one case is different from another, and Rackspace answers, "Well, in the ONE case we FELT that ----"
Whoa! Rackspace FELT!?
Rackspace FELT....what, exactly? Rackspace FELT that it, and it alone is in a position to utterly judge and control the flow of information in this country and the world!? We're sorry, but Rackspace has clearly demonstrated that it is neither stable nor intelligent nor fair nor educated nor enlightened nor even remotely cognizant of the very reason the First Amendment was adopted by the founding fathers in the first place, and that was because the founding fathers and all who came after them UNDERSTOOD AND mostly still UNDERSTAND now that NOT EVEN THE GOVERMENT CAN BE TRUSTED WITH CONTROL OVER THE FLOW OF INFORMATION, let alone some scum-bag, twisted, clueless rogue company like Rackspace. We're not willing to entrust the viability of our business to what some thick-witted "executive" at some company across the country FEELS. We want facts, written guidelines not open to interpretation by every new employee who rotates through. We want clear, crisp, ruler-straight RULES that spell out exactly, specifically, explicitly what content is allowed or not-- not emotions and vague ideologies, opinions or moods or whims or whimsical interpretations. No one can run a business based on a disseminating entity relying on that crap. One doesn't invest in a new car or a home with a warranty that reads, "If our workmanship turns out to be incompetent, we may fix the problem, or we may not; it all just depends on how we 'feel' at the moment, and whether or not we like you at that particular time." But that's exactly the kind of slippery AUP Rackspace and others expect businesses to operate under. Remember the story in about third grade about the man who wanted to be King, so the King gave him a taste of it -- and the man sat on the Throne, then looked up to see a long, razor-sharp sword hanging directly over the top of his head by a single hair. THAT is what it's like setting up a business on a Rackspace machine. You just never know when that hair will part, and there's no one at Rackspace willing to step up and catch the sword when it falls. What an honorable outfit.
So our Judge McFreedy simply decides to move his content elsewhere. Free enterprize and all of that. Lots of options to choose from, he says. But silly MacFreedy doesn't yet GET that by leaps and bounds a few companies like Rackspace are grabbing up huge portions of the information-dissemination market around the world, and it's getting more and more difficult -- some would argue already impossible -- to find a venue for the dissemination of free and LEGAL speech that is protected by the Constitution. Rackspace can, and obviously does, impose its whacked and bizarre AUP on many other information-oriented companies downstream from it. Trouble is, Rackspace keeps moving farther and farther UP-stream. Where will it stop? It's not even against the law!
Many Third World countries only HAVE one media outlet. And they live in utter darkness. America still has many independent media outlets, true enough, but NONE of any value or size that are still accessible to any appreciable degree to THE PEOPLE. That's why it is as vital to protect the Internet as it is to protect our shores from physical outsider attack. It's really one and the same thing.
Do we see Rackspace and companies of similar thinking and designs as a threat to the American Way of Life? That's a silly question. Answer it yourself. They may in fact be potentially our most mortal enemy.
This is the cancer that has infiltrated our flow of information in America and around the world. It's insidious. It's power-seeking. It's more than dangerous, partly because it's just not very smart-- it has the potential and the capability of changing our government to and at its whim by the blockage of information it alone does not like or which is not in line with its agenda, whatever that agenda may be. Consider for a moment the situation we'd be in if 75% of all webhosting was owned and operated by radical Muslims. Think about it. It will slowly dawn across your sleepy brain, and you'll be frightened, then terrified, then, hopefully, spurred to ACT by urging the government to begin forcing private companies to adhere to at least a semblance of the First Amendment, (which is, after all, only a measure of common sense), if not the amendment in totality. Companies which struggle to subvert and circumvent the First Amendment are potentially more lethal to our way of life than any terrorist organization, and certainly harder to root out and neutralize, because Rackspace and those with the same agenda of seeking power over others operate more or less legally! You can't legally stop them from blocking, redirecting, or changing the information that any free society REQUIRES if it is to remain free. YOU CAN ONLY AVOID THEM (if possible), and be diligent in making sure you don't unwittingly allow them power over YOU. And work for legislative change. We're not saying government should begin regulating the flow of information through private companies; we're saying government should begin STOPPING private companies from BLOCKING that flow. We have demonstrated, we think, beyond any reasonable argument, that Rackspace will not act responsibly with the power over the flow of OUR information that it has silently amassed. Therefore, Rackspace's control over that information should be removed -- forcibly, by law, if Rackspace won't voluntarily relax its disgusting choke-hold on information that BELONGS to the people of the country, and not to Rackspace exclusively. To control a thing is to own a thing; We submit that Rackspace is so arrogant it believes it can OWN the information of the world.
Private companies are not required to adhere to the First Amendment. We say: They should be.
Sleep well, webmasters. You've got nothing to fear. Except Rackspace itself.
Oh yeah. There's one more nightmare to consider. Think this one through carefully, just as you drift off to sleep:
Will Rackspace be content to only shut down your business because you've linked to perfectly legal content it merely happens to dislike? Or does absolute power corrupt absolutely, and Rackspace will ruin you because you linked to a site that is linked to a site (that is linked to a site) that Rackspace doesn't like? Remember, Rackspace can do anything it wants.
We already know the answer. Are you willing to bet your livelihood that Rackspace will stop at just one link? Did Hitler stop with just one country?
In Rackspace we found a host that had mostly figured out how to keep our sites up technically, but were everyone's worst nightmare from a professional and moral point of view. Any security we imagined due to their technical expertise is more than negated by their rotten-to-the core manner of doing business. Doing business with Rackspace was a colossal liability, far worse than any minor technical glitches we suffered through ANY other web hosting company. You gotta wonder what people like that think about all day. You gotta wonder if people like that THINK.
Will we sue this scurrilous enterprise? That we have grounds is fact. But what would we recover? A few thousand bucks at best, and Rackspace would learn nothing, because, as the investigative and regulatory committees which handled NASA's screw-up of the Columbia disaster said about NASA, "This is an entity incapable of LEARNING...." Not one of us would spend one night in a miserable city like Houston for a few thousand bucks anyway, and a trial would take a week or three, especially given that we'd have to sort through the dishonesty that would certainly be forthcoming from Rackspace; they haven't exactly acted in an honorable manner to date and we wouldn't expect them to be honorable in the courtroom. There may be a way to file in our own city -- we'll have our attorney research it. But again we wonder what would be the point of winning a small suit. If their Olmos Park CEO, Graham Weston (even the preceding five words violate Rackspace's AUP), hasn't learned morality by now, he never will, and the buck stops with him for hiring and maintaining the employment of the Roe Sanders ilk. Punitive damages? Possibly, but very hard to prove. Loss of income? We had already moved our sites. How about criminal charges? Fraud? We believe there very well may be criminal activity here -- at least criminal intent. But try to get a Houston Police department, who is absolutely flooded with crack-heads and assorted south-Texas vermin, of which there is an uncanny abundance, to try to sort through the intricacies of a case like this. We COME from law enforcement; we know what cases get priority. Yuppy crimes are low on the list, which may even be as it should be. We could spend a week in Houston working with the D.A. to build a case, but honestly, we don't believe people like Roe Sanders would learn to be better human beings even from a conviction; it's just not in their nature to try. We'll document this fiasco and provide the case to Houston PD and the D.A., Attorney General, FCC, the usual, but we don't expect them to push it if we don't push it, and we're just too busy pushing other cases right now in New York and Santa Monica.
One might assume we'd be extra angry at Poland and Mcdermott for bringing the Rackspace thing to a head. Not so. We do feel they are two human beings almost completely devoid of any redeeming social value whatsoever -- in fact we see them as a burden upon society, but in this instance, in their all-consuming crusade to cause us grief, they've actually accidentally done us -- and every other webmaster on the planet -- a favor. They've given Rackspace all the rope it needed to tie its own noose. Rackspace then voluntarily stepped into it and stood there smiling, and perhaps this website merely jerks the lever. Certainly Rackspace has been pulling this kind of despicable crap for years; this can't have been the first such travesty. But this may be the first time it's really been split wide open and gutted for public viewing. The sooner we got away from any company like that, the better. And, in so doing, we've saved thousands of dollars per year (all the more loot for our First Amendment attorney), our websites and content are far more reliable, technically and philosophically, and we've provided a valuable service to the information world, if not the world in general which has a God-given right to know just how threatened the free flow of information has become, and exactly who's responsible for the suppression. Companies like Rackspace are as responsible for putting free speech on the endangered-species list as Exxon is for polluting Prince William Sound. There is a direct and documented correlation in both instances, action to effect.
We've come to the conclusion, as we prepare to vacate the U.S. for good, that the best we'll ever get in current American society is the right to simply tell the story-- accurately, as clearly as possible, and to by God make that statement stand against all comers, large or small, private, corporate, or governmental. If we can't obtain justice for the misdeeds and disgusting acts of others, at least we can describe it. Since that right is the very last thing we have left, we'll defend it with our very lives. With our very lives.
We had intended to deliver a copy of this web page to Graham Weston personally by process server, but, honestly, what would be the point? He has already made the decision to employ people like Roe Sanders. Perhaps that's punishment enough. But Weston will hear this story soon enough, and that'll save us the hundred and fifty bucks to have him served. Besides, what's he going to do -- apologize? That would have about the same value to us as receiving one of those notices in the mail from Publisher's Clearing House Sweepstakes that says, "YOU MAY HAVE ALREADY WON!"
We were to learn from this experience that the market place is now home to many honest, moral, scrupulous, competent and professional web hosting companies. Virtually ALL are more reasonably priced than Rackspace, most by a wide margin.
Our advice: Find one. Then go forth and prosper.
Does Rackspace suck? Yes. Rackspace Sucks.
Note1: It's ironic to realize that this problem with Rackspace was instigated and perpetuated by the two women, Maegan Poland, and Eileen McDermott, who were struggling to hide from public view our editorial about their conduct as customers. In antagonizing Rackspace into this unbelievable demonstration of unprofessionalism and dishonesty, these two have inflamed this issue such that it is becoming a firestorm of controversy around the world. Every stupid stunt they continue to pull only adds to this content. This issue can become as large as either of them wishes.
Note2: We have reason to believe (a little bird told us, let's say) that as of 8-29-07, Roe Sanders had read (and copied) this page. If that's true, we wonder how long it will be before he brings it to the attention of Rackspace CEO Graham Weston. Or, well, you know, maybe Sanders will just "forget" to get around to it. Could happen.
Note3: We have been forced to terminate our bank account to stop Rackspace from attempting to debit it for September, 07. Conclusion: Rackspace is a real class act [Read: Smoke and Mirrors].
UPDATE 7-2008: We've now been with Servint for one year. We have two other servers set up with our critical domains, but we've not needed to use them once. We're knocking on wood as we say this (literally, we really are), but to date (to date!) Servint's tech support has been absolutely 100% perfect. Servint's tech support has significantly and documentably surpassed that of Rackspace. We say this sincerely -- the difference is conspicuous and measurable. Uptime, at least for this past year, has been 100% with the exception of a scheduled reboot (4 minutes). The bells and whistles surpass Rackspace offerings (too bad we don't use or need them). Cost is roughly 1/3rd of what we were paying Rackspace. We're allotted significantly more bandwidth and disc space than with Rackspace. We can only hope this situation continues. We can't believe we put up with Rackspace as long as we did. Particle-board qualifies technically as "wood", right?
UPDATE 11-2008: Nearly a year and a half after "The Rackspace Debacle" we're still happy with Servint. Since we don't completely trust any host, we knock on wood every time we praise Servint. We do that literally. We'll probably never stop doing it. But the truth is, we don't have one single complaint about Servint. Not one. Knock on wood again! We've never had this kind of up-time; we've never had ZERO problems; we've never had better tech support, or even nearly as good. In our experience SO FAR, Servint is by an order of magnitude better than Rackspace, at a fraction the cost. If Servint starts screwing up, we're certainly not afraid to post a Servint Sucks site, and we'll put a big, fat link to it right on this page. But for now, if you NEED reliable hosting, so you can concentrate on BUSINESS, as we did, we can't recommend them highly enough. We hope it lasts. We have no reason to believe it won't. Click the ad below if you'd like to switch.
UPDATE 5-2009: We're noticing that the "Rackspace Sucks" pages are growing exponentially. We also noticed what appears to us to be a "Rackspace Damage Control" page, or at least an inept stab at it. The page even quotes a line from this page -- out of context, of course, but we've come to expect that as the norm from Rackspace or its minions. The "Rackspace Damage Control" page says "numbers don't lie" (citing all the pages referring to Rackspace in one way or another, but which don't actually include the word "sucks"). Our rebuttal is simple and clear: NEITHER DOES THIS PAGE LIE. If there was the slightest hint of even the slightest misrepresentation about Rackspace on this page they would have sued us long ago. They haven't and they won't because this page is 100% accurate and true -- in fact we've omitted a good deal of derogatory information just to avoid any gray areas (which we're more tempted every single day to post). The REAL bottom line is this, straight-up: If you're comfortable with the possibility of being treated by Rackspace the way we were, as portrayed accurately on this page, then sign up with Rackspace today and God Speed. But if you demand or even prefer HONOR in your business relationships, avoid Rackspace like the Goddamned plague. We're angrier today about Rackspace's profound and staggering unprofessionalism and downright skullduggery than we were two years ago. Time does NOT heal all wounds; if the wounds are deep enough, time can inflame them. We grow closer every month to filing suit against Rackspace, especially when we see garbage like THIS.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
We've been hosted by Servint for two years now (2009) and we could not possibly be happier. Please excuse us while we knock on wood-- but if this nearly perfect relationship continues, we will ALWAYS be hosted by Servint.
CLICK THE BANNER BELOW
Copyright © 2007 TrixiePixGraphics.Com, All Rights Reserved
