[jedimastert]

This is incredible:

> absolute joke of a company.

> requested a payment extension as i just got a new job, which means that my date of being paid has changed from the previous one - refused it and then have the audacity to say "we are hopeful that you can find another solution to solve your financial difficulty"

translation: I couldn't keep up my end of the bargain and got mad at them for not giving me free things

[Smithalicious]

I don't think it's unreasonable. Let's say you're usually getting paid on the 21st, server bill on the 22nd - now you switch jobs and get paid on the 28th. Is it unreasonable to ask for a week long payment extension, one-off, to bridge the gap? I grew up living welfare payment to welfare payment and we've had services cut off for this kind of thing. A little kindness goes a long way.

[akerl_]

You’re right: it would be a kindness for them to offer this. Not offering doesn’t make them an “absolute joke of a company”.

[jjulius]

You're right, it doesn't. They way they phrased their response, however, definitely starts heading in the "absolute joke" direction, at least to me.

[akerl_]

What’re they meant to say? “Get rekt”?.

Whichever support rep responded to this ticket clearly couldn’t do what the person wanted, but felt bad, so they ended their response with the hope that the person was able to find another solution.

[jedimastert]

I had an outstanding balance for about 2 weeks with them when I was using them and they didn't suspend my account, and I didn't even contact them. I don't know what the original person was asking for.

[jjulius]

>I don't know what the original person was asking for.

Wouldn't it be better to withhold judgement, then?

[jjulius]

>This is incredible...

>translation: I couldn't keep up my end of the bargain and got mad at them for not giving me free things

What's incredible is that you're judging someone for having a financial situation that appears to be much tighter than your own. That's not a wholly unreasonable request for someone to make.

They asked for an extension and were willing to pay as soon as they got paid. That's the opposite of asking for "free things".

[jedimastert]

Having a tight financial situation is one thing, but it's the entitlement that did it for me. If you ask and they say no, that's that. It's why terms of service exist.

Not to mention that I've missed bills with DO when my own financial situation was tight and they didn't kill everything the instant I missed a payment. I used them all through college as a web server and a dev server, and it looks like they gave me about 2 weeks of an outstanding balance before I paid them.

[jjulius]

>Having a tight financial situation is one thing, but it's the entitlement that did it for me. If you ask and they say no, that's that. It's why terms of service exist.

That's totally fair, and I would've acted as such myself were I in that spot, frustration be damned. That said, it's still disingenuous to suggest that they pitched a fit because they didn't get "free things" when they were clearly willing to pay, just later than usual.

[aksss]

No, come on. :D What's the limiting principle on these exceptions? The terms of the agreement are the most logical. The obligation of the consumer if they have risky finances is to save a contingency fund (one month of extra payment) for such scenarios. It's not DO's responsibility to accommodate crap financial planning for every person on the planet. The prospect of losing hosting (for whatever reason) is why every DO customer should be backing up their content/config/etc on a regular basis.

[jjulius]

Please re-read my comments in this thread. I haven't said DO was obligated to have acquiesced here, in fact I've said that I would've taken their "no" and accepted it if I were in this person's situation, frustration be damned.

I simply think it's a poor move to judge one's financial situation and accuse them of asking for "free stuff" when, in point of fact, they were still trying to pay, albeit late.

[aksss]

DO bills in arrears, so it’s stuff they already delivered and have not been compensated for. To my knowledge DO will keep your system alive for like 60 days for resurrection after you stop paying (ask me how I know). Some companies, like Meraki, are pretty flexible when you need an extension of time, but to my knowledge it’s limited to twice per customer lifetime. But there you have customers with significant investment in equipment with much to lose if they don’t eventually pay. DO’s customers are far less sticky and there’s really nothing securing their commitment.

[jjulius]

Again, you and I agree there. Without repeating myself, I really don't know how else to tell you that you've missed my point, and that's fine.