are poor people the only ones who have their own web servers?

i bought a domain from aplus.net (fuck-godaddy.com; can't say i was
surprised that i couldn't register it through godaddy..). anyway,
then i started getting emails from Sam Rooney trying
to sell me a hosting package. i run my own server, and kept telling
him i didn't need the service. then he decided to say this:

People with high incomes can afford paying for a dedicated server.
Their time is precious and they do not get their hands dirty for doing
something manually. People with low incomes can not afford paying for
a server, and that is why they think of various excuses to justify
hosting a website at home.
If you have money, you will purchase a dedicated server.

i'm posting this all over the place on web design and server admin
groups. feel free to tell Mr. Rooney that money doesn't equate to
needing a third-party to host a website. :)

theneonlobster

Re: are poor people the only ones who have their own web servers?

In article <1193178698.974997.171770@q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
theneonlobster@gmail.com says...
> i bought a domain from aplus.net (fuck-godaddy.com; can't say i was
> surprised that i couldn't register it through godaddy..). anyway,
> then i started getting emails from Sam Rooney trying
> to sell me a hosting package. i run my own server, and kept telling
> him i didn't need the service. then he decided to say this:
>
> People with high incomes can afford paying for a dedicated server.
> Their time is precious and they do not get their hands dirty for doing
> something manually. People with low incomes can not afford paying for
> a server, and that is why they think of various excuses to justify
> hosting a website at home.
> If you have money, you will purchase a dedicated server.
>
> i'm posting this all over the place on web design and server admin
> groups. feel free to tell Mr. Rooney that money doesn't equate to
> needing a third-party to host a website. :)
>
> theneonlobster
>
>
I don't think I understand the purpose of this posting. Don't you have
anything better to do than post in multiple groups?

If Mr. Rooney insulted you, then leave - don't expect us to do your
dirty work.

Re: are poor people the only ones who have their own web servers?

SAZ wrote:
> In article <1193178698.974997.171770@q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> theneonlobster@gmail.com says...

[babble]

> I don't think I understand the purpose of this posting. Don't you have
> anything better to do than post in multiple groups?

Just keeping his Google Groper "skills" practiced up. :)


--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project - http://improve-usenet.org

Re: are poor people the only ones who have their own web servers?

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Tue, 23 Oct 2007 23:51:08 GMT
David scribed:

> i bought a domain from aplus.net (fuck-godaddy.com; can't say i was
> surprised that i couldn't register it through godaddy..). anyway,
> then i started getting emails from Sam Rooney trying
> to sell me a hosting package. i run my own server, and kept telling
> him i didn't need the service. then he decided to say this:
>
> People with high incomes can afford paying for a dedicated server.
> Their time is precious and they do not get their hands dirty for doing
> something manually. People with low incomes can not afford paying for
> a server, and that is why they think of various excuses to justify
> hosting a website at home.
> If you have money, you will purchase a dedicated server.
>
> i'm posting this all over the place on web design and server admin
> groups. feel free to tell Mr. Rooney that money doesn't equate to
> needing a third-party to host a website. :)

I really can't understand why you find that so offensive. It may not have
been the most deft of comments but it was hardly a falsehood or obfuscation
of the world-class sort one might expect from Gates or Bush.

--
Neredbojias
Just a boogar in the nose of life.

Re: are poor people the only ones who have their own web servers?

Neredbojias wrote:
> Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Tue, 23 Oct 2007 23:51:08 GMT
> David scribed:
>
>> i bought a domain from aplus.net (fuck-godaddy.com; can't say i was
>> surprised that i couldn't register it through godaddy..). anyway,
>> then i started getting emails from Sam Rooney trying
>> to sell me a hosting package. i run my own server, and kept telling
>> him i didn't need the service. then he decided to say this:
>>
>> People with high incomes can afford paying for a dedicated server.
>> Their time is precious and they do not get their hands dirty for doing
>> something manually. People with low incomes can not afford paying for
>> a server, and that is why they think of various excuses to justify
>> hosting a website at home.
>> If you have money, you will purchase a dedicated server.
>>
>> i'm posting this all over the place on web design and server admin
>> groups. feel free to tell Mr. Rooney that money doesn't equate to
>> needing a third-party to host a website. :)
>
> I really can't understand why you find that so offensive.

He's poor.


--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project - http://improve-usenet.org

Re: are poor people the only ones who have their own web servers?

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Wed, 24 Oct 2007 19:46:39
GMT Blinky the Shark scribed:


>>> i'm posting this all over the place on web design and server admin
>>> groups. feel free to tell Mr. Rooney that money doesn't equate to
>>> needing a third-party to host a website. :)
>>
>> I really can't understand why you find that so offensive.
>
> He's poor.

He's poor? Well so am I, and you don't hear me going around crying like a,
a..., uh..., er... Um, I guess you do at that.

--
Neredbojias
Just a boogar in the proboscis of life.

Re: are poor people the only ones who have their own web servers?

Neredbojias wrote:
> Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Wed, 24 Oct 2007 19:46:39
> GMT Blinky the Shark scribed:
>
>
>>>> i'm posting this all over the place on web design and server admin
>>>> groups. feel free to tell Mr. Rooney that money doesn't equate to
>>>> needing a third-party to host a website. :)
>>>
>>> I really can't understand why you find that so offensive.
>>
>> He's poor.
>
> He's poor? Well so am I, and you don't hear me going around crying like a,
> a..., uh..., er... Um, I guess you do at that.

:)

Well, I can't figure out any other reason he'd get a stick up his ass
about that.

--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project - http://improve-usenet.org

Re: are poor people the only ones who have their own web servers?

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Wed, 24 Oct 2007 22:15:23
GMT Blinky the Shark scribed:

>>>>> i'm posting this all over the place on web design and server admin
>>>>> groups. feel free to tell Mr. Rooney that money doesn't equate to
>>>>> needing a third-party to host a website. :)
>>>>
>>>> I really can't understand why you find that so offensive.
>>>
>>> He's poor.
>>
>> He's poor? Well so am I, and you don't hear me going around crying
>> like a, a..., uh..., er... Um, I guess you do at that.
>
>:)
>
> Well, I can't figure out any other reason he'd get a stick up his ass
> about that.

Now I'm hungry. Your comment reminded me of shish-kabob.

Anyway, I guess we all whine a little now 'n agin. At least us guys come
off a lot better than broads who are incessantly moaning about something or
t'other. I subscribe to the old adage "Women should be seen and not
heard". Of course you might not have the same problem since women fish
probably can't do much more than gurgle or cavitate.

--
Neredbojias
Just a boogar in the proboscis of life.

Re: are poor people the only ones who have their own web servers?

Neredbojias wrote:
> Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Wed, 24 Oct 2007 22:15:23
> GMT Blinky the Shark scribed:
>
>>>>>> i'm posting this all over the place on web design and server admin
>>>>>> groups. feel free to tell Mr. Rooney that money doesn't equate to
>>>>>> needing a third-party to host a website. :)
>>>>>
>>>>> I really can't understand why you find that so offensive.
>>>>
>>>> He's poor.
>>>
>>> He's poor? Well so am I, and you don't hear me going around crying
>>> like a, a..., uh..., er... Um, I guess you do at that.
>>
>>:)
>>
>> Well, I can't figure out any other reason he'd get a stick up his ass
>> about that.
>
> Now I'm hungry. Your comment reminded me of shish-kabob.
>
> Anyway, I guess we all whine a little now 'n agin. At least us guys come
> off a lot better than broads who are incessantly moaning about something or
> t'other. I subscribe to the old adage "Women should be seen and not
> heard". Of course you might not have the same problem since women fish
> probably can't do much more than gurgle or cavitate.

We consider that the result of /more/ evolution.


--
Blinky RLU 297263
Killing all posts from Google Groups
The Usenet Improvement Project - http://improve-usenet.org

Re: are poor people the only ones who have their own web servers?

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Thu, 25 Oct 2007 06:33:53
GMT Blinky the Shark scribed:

>> Anyway, I guess we all whine a little now 'n agin. At least us guys
>> come off a lot better than broads who are incessantly moaning about
>> something or t'other. I subscribe to the old adage "Women should be
>> seen and not heard". Of course you might not have the same problem
>> since women fish probably can't do much more than gurgle or cavitate.
>
> We consider that the result of /more/ evolution.

Oh, I quite agree. Anything that gets a blithering woman to shut up is
progress. Perhaps in the future of terrestial civilization, the judicial
branches of the more progressive governments will impliment "gag orders" to
repeat offenders in a more literal manner than is currently the case...

Yeah, I know. Dream on...

--
Neredbojias
Just a boogar in the proboscis of life.

Re: are poor people the only ones who have their own web servers?

"David" wrote in message
news:1193178698.974997.171770@q5g2000prf.googlegroups.com...
>i bought a domain from aplus.net (fuck-godaddy.com; can't say i was
> surprised that i couldn't register it through godaddy..). anyway,
> then i started getting emails from Sam Rooney trying
> to sell me a hosting package. i run my own server, and kept telling
> him i didn't need the service. then he decided to say this:
>
> People with high incomes can afford paying for a dedicated server.
> Their time is precious and they do not get their hands dirty for doing
> something manually. People with low incomes can not afford paying for
> a server, and that is why they think of various excuses to justify
> hosting a website at home.
> If you have money, you will purchase a dedicated server.
>
> i'm posting this all over the place on web design and server admin
> groups. feel free to tell Mr. Rooney that money doesn't equate to
> needing a third-party to host a website. :)

It probably works out cheaper to use a SHARED host than to run your own
dedicated host at home. Don't misunderstand me, I run my own server at home
too, and it gives me a great deal of flexibility - but I don't use it for
any of my serious websites. Early in the year I bought myself one of those
gadgets for measuring how much electricity devices are using, when I came to
measure how much electricity my server (server, ups, router & cable modem)
were using it became clear why my electricity bill was so high. That said,
its still cheaper to run a server at home than pay for a dedicated server
although clearly you won't have the same bandwidth at home as would/should
be available for a dedicated server.

As for what you were told, it sounds like a salesman trying to shame you
into buying their hosting services. If you feel bad about the treatment
you've received then I suggest posting to webhostingtalk.com instead of
airing on newsgroups.
--
Brian Cryer
www.cryer.co.uk/brian

Re: are poor people the only ones who have their own web servers?

On 24 Oct, 15:49, Neredbojias wrote:

> I really can't understand why you find that so offensive. It may not have
> been the most deft of comments but it was hardly a falsehood or obfuscation

It certainly is obfuscation, because they've constructed a false
dilemma and dressed it up as the law of the excluded middle.

Their position is that you can choose EITHER: dedicated servers
(expensive) or self-hosting (unreliable).

The reality is that there's a perfectly satisfactory middle ground of
shared-server hosting. This is both cheap and reliable. So long as
your demands are modest, then it suits most sites (and the majority of
sites are static and modest) very well.

Re: are poor people the only ones who have their own web servers?

Well bust mah britches and call me cheeky, on Thu, 25 Oct 2007 09:34:17
GMT Andy Dingley scribed:

> On 24 Oct, 15:49, Neredbojias wrote:
>
>> I really can't understand why you find that so offensive. It may not
>> have been the most deft of comments but it was hardly a falsehood or
>> obfuscation
>
> It certainly is obfuscation, because they've constructed a false
> dilemma and dressed it up as the law of the excluded middle.
>
> Their position is that you can choose EITHER: dedicated servers
> (expensive) or self-hosting (unreliable).
>
> The reality is that there's a perfectly satisfactory middle ground of
> shared-server hosting. This is both cheap and reliable. So long as
> your demands are modest, then it suits most sites (and the majority of
> sites are static and modest) very well.

Bah! Not addressing "the middle" does not equate to excluding it. Here
is the relevant portion of the OP's original message:

>>
....then he decided to say this:

People with high incomes can afford paying for a dedicated server.
Their time is precious and they do not get their hands dirty for doing
something manually. People with low incomes can not afford paying for
a server, and that is why they think of various excuses to justify
hosting a website at home.
If you have money, you will purchase a dedicated server.
>>

Zilch was said one way or the other about people with moderate incomes.
I find nothing larcenious in the remark and believe the OP was merely
being over-sensitive in conjunction a less-than-excellent logical
perspective. You may not agree with the conclusion of the referenced
remark (and I don't), but it isn't a scam or spam or anything seriously
untoward, and it wasn't obfuscated in the least.

--
Neredbojias
Just a boogar in the proboscis of life.