My goodness, Mr. Kuzminski. How does it feel to be on the walls twice?
I have some questions for you.
Would you have put up a support the hosting company link in the event that the server AW was on got shut down? Would you own up to being a responsible party for the harassment that followed the reposting of the email address? Would you pay the refunds to the hundreds of other sites that shared the same space and pay us for lost income because they took their business elsewhere?
How long would you put up with someone screaming in your ears over a nonpaying site? You have no idea how many times I fielded and shielded while I tried to work out a resolution, yet, you talk as if you know everything when you know almost nothing. You have no idea what took place here over the matter. Why should we deal with the hassles? What's in it for us? Certainly not money since the site was overdue and the site owner knew there were issues long before the account expired and chose to do nothing about them in spite of constant urging from us. Certainly no appreciation for our business concerns. Certainly not the right thing to do, either. No one has the right to harass someone else just because they decide the person deserves it. That's why we have laws and courts. Contrary to your expert opinion, it's not allowed on the internet any more than it is offline. About the only thing that's in it for us is the threat of *7000 angry writers going after us*. Well, shucks, those *7000 angry writers* are paying the bills, either.
I have to ask: How have you verified your "facts"? Would your verification process hold up in a court of law? Would your practices hold up in a court of law? Or do you just pick out victims who probably can't afford to take you to court and use them to make a name for yourself? Such proceedings typically take place in civil courts incurring enormous upfront fees on the part of the plaintiff.
On a business level, your opinion means "jack" because you aren't paying our bills nor will you or anyone else who has stated their opinions ever be paying them. It's easy for people to say now that they were thinking of it but in reality never had any intentions of doing so.
Hmm... that's another thing. Can we sue on the basis of lost income given the fact that we now have dozens of emails from individuals stating they were considering our services until what happened to AW? I must ask the lawyer. These people can't very well retract those statements without making themselves liable considering the number and scope of the emails.
On a personal level, my eyes are wide open now.