Ixwebhosting.com: Digitalfaq.com (your affiliate) is trashing your company

Ixwebhosting.com has in the past responded to past posts, and I hope they will do so again. Because one of their affiliates is trashing their company. Clearly it makes no sense for Ixwebhosting.com to pay someone that is telling people to avoid Ixwebhosting.com.

A few months ago I encountered Digitalfaq.com, a forum that is trying to be a review site. Despite claiming to be an expert on hosting, they provide nothing that will prove they have used the hosts they recommend or advice to avoid. There is no data that might help prove a host is good or bad.

But when I pointed out that Digitalfaq.com had affiliate links to hosts bash the brand for like Ixwebhosting.com the owner had this to say:


Second, if somebody is stubborn, and going to sign up with one of those hosts anyway — likely due to the lure of cheap “unlimited” — then yes, we’ll take the affiliate commission for it.

Personally if I was the owner of Ixwebhosting.com I would  at least cancel their affiliate membership, if not seek collecting any payments that were made to digitalfaq.com. Their membership id is PID=3235990.

This is what Digitalfaq.com has to say about ixwebhosting.com

So perhaps Ixwebhosting.com may not be sold on that, more proof is needed that Digitalfaq.com is really trashing their brand. Well there is a whole post designated for just that:


IX is a Commission Junction affiliate, and has a payout of $50-150 per sale. (All CJ publishers can readily see what the payouts amounts are, so this is a verifiable fact.) So when you see “review sites” with IX listed as a “top rated” host, you know why. What they really mean is “IX pays us the most, so buy from them so we can get our $50-150”. By contrast, quality hosts generally cannot afford to pay out more than $5-25 per sale, because they actually invest their income in quality hardware, quality bandwidth, quality datacenters (rental or otherwise), as well as trained/knowledgeable support techs.

Every place I look that ixwebhosting.com shows up on Digitalfaq.com I find the clickable link. Clicking the link for I find the following code in the URL for Ixwebhosting.com PID=3235990.

Not to mention some of the hosting companies that digitalfaq.com recommends do a lot of what ixwebhosting.com does.

The following hosts depend on the amount of sales per month. So if you only bring in 1 customer you get the lowest amount, or should you bring in more 10 or more you may get the max per sale.

  • Jaguarpc.com $65 – $110 (65 – $125 per sale through cj.com)
  • Downtownhost.com $40 – $100
  • Arvixe.com $70 – $135
  • Glowhost.com $50 – $125
  • Siteground.com $50 – $150 (cj.com-/$7 – 80 per sale through cj.com)
  • Inmotionhosting.com $50 – $100 ($100 per sale through cj.com)
  • Hostdime.com $40 – $150
  • Site5.com $25 – $100

But some of these hosts upon review find themselves on “review sites”. I search for a few that I knew are frequently on review sites with the term “*host name* reviews” and here is what I found.

  • Arvixe.com – Hosting-review.com
  • Inmtotionhosting.com – webhostinggeeks.com
  • Siteground.com – besthostsdirectory.com
  • Glowhost.com – hostingsthatsuck.com.

Arvixe.com, siteground.com, inmotionhosting.com, and Site5.com all magically appeared on webhostingstuff.com, a review site that charged host for being in the 1 – 25 spots. A small summation how webhostingstuff.com was not to be trusted.


Any surprise that hosts that find themselves on other so called review sites are also on digitalfaq.com? One has to wonder if Digitalfaq.com feels they have not got enough payments from Ixwebhosting.com and changed their stance.

But there are companies that pay out far more than Ixwebhosting.com such as:

Liquidweb.com $60 -$5000 or 5% reoccurring commission.

Back when I first looked at the host Digitalfaq.com recommended I found that 89% of the hosts they recommend have very clear affiliate programs. 2 of the three had affiliate login areas. The one host that did not have a clear affiliate program had WHMCS which has a built in affiliate manager.


Digitalfaq.com goes further to trash Ixwebhosting.com

You’ll see these sorts of hosts referred to as “oversellers” or “unlimited” hosts. This is because they’ll oversell their services, stuffing too many clients onto a single server, which causes everything to run slow. And because resources are finite — there’s no such thing as an “unlimited speed” CPU or an “unlimited size” chip of RAM — you’ll find that there are very narrow limits on what can be done with your hosting account. These limitations are buried in their site documentation, such as the Terms of Service. Unless you’re hosting a teeny tiny little HTML-only homemade site for personal use, then you’ll want to seek better quality services. These are NOT business-grade plans, as uptime tends to be unreliable, and there’s little room for expanding your site (including more traffic as your business becomes more popular). For that matter, it can be unacceptable for a high-traffic personal site.

And to make the situation ironic, many of the better hosts are the same price, or even a little less costly. Go figure. The primary difference is a good host puts a cap on the space and bandwidth you’re allotted. It’s not “unlimited”.

But Digitalfaq.com changed their stance on Unlimited hosts back in March.

Excluding a few well-managed hosts like JaguarPC or Site5, unlimited hosting plans are impossible, made with promises that cannot be kept.


Why Digitalfaq.com change their mind on recommending unlimited should be clear. After all how much did those two hosting companies pay out?

  • Jaguarpc.com $65 – $110 (65 – $125 per sale through cj.com)
  • Site5.com $25 – $100

Most review sites don’t link back to host they don’t recommend. Especially when they make it a point to capitalize on trashing a host while recommending another.

I meant to do this sooner, but as I have stated many times before this site does not pay the bills. That and I have a new house being built, the time table was recently moved up from being finished in late October to late July. Just in case Digitalfaq.com thinks I lost interest. I plan on doing one of these posts for every host that digitalfaq.com chooses to trash like ixwebhosting.com. For those that ask by no means is this a defense of Ixwebhosting.com. I just feel that two wrongs do not equal a right. If digitalfaq.com’s actions did not influence a customer to choose Ixwebhosting.com, than they should not be paid for that referral.

Here is who they recommend instead of Ixwebhosting.com:

Again, if you want an enterprise-grade quality host, look at EuroVPS.

If you want a cheap host, that still has some quality, look at Stablehost or Ninjalion Hosting.

  • EuroVPS.com – $26
  • Stablehost.com – $25
  • Ninjalion.com- $30

I am sure that would include some of the hosts they now recommend that offer unlimited hosting.  Because the current list is between $25 – $500. So the very reasons that Digitalfaq.com uses to claim that Ixwebhosting.com is a bad host, makes them a bad review site.

Just in case Digtalfaq.com decides to change or delete their post here is a screen shot.

Ixwebhosting review  Are they a good host for my website  - digitalFAQ.com Support Forum (1) copy copy

So in short Digitalfaq.com claims that they are a bad host based on their being with CJ.com and offering payouts near the same as the hosts they recommend. Ixwebhosting.com is also a bad host because they offer a unlimited hosting.com.

Ixwebhosting.com has a clause that makes it very clear they can terminate bad affiliates:


F. Defamation/Libel

You agree that in the course of any performance under this agreement or otherwise with respect to any dealings between you and IX Web Hosting that you will not transmit any information which is or might be considered to be defamatory or libelous.

Clearly claims of a high affiliate program (that Digitalfaq.com clearly signed up for) and unlimited hosting are all points to be used against choosing a host like Ixwebhosting.com are grounds for removal.”

So one has to ask, will Ixwebhosting.com take action on this rouge affiliate Digitalfaq.com?

Digitalfaq.com: Top 10 questions for a review site

Digitalfaq.com and hosting-reviews-exposed.com both lack data to back up claims for what hosts are good hosts. Yet only one site recommends hosts and gets paid, the other site is more so about ethics and business practices and not rather a host is a good service provider  (rarely if a host is a bad service provider). One site puts the affiliate disclaimer at the very end of their sales spill, while the other site places it before reasons for buying. One hints that there might be a payment; the other clearly states if a visitor clicks on a link and buys the owner of said site gets paid. Not to mention one has a donation page, the other does not.

Digitalfaq.com’s latest response to my response shows how much the owner may read or worse choose to fabricate. Digitalfaq.com’s owner claims to answer things I was unsure on. Truth is I am not unsure on anything, sure I have questions. But my questions only play into my speculations. Digitalfaq.com’s owner is not ready to answer the questions I have anyway, just the questions the imaginary Benjamin in the owner’s mind has. As to why Digitalfaq.com had affiliate links to companies throughout their post trashing hosting-reviews-exposed.com. It should have been very clear to the owner since I drew attention to those links under “Point 4: What Digitalfaq.com left out”. Something I will get to with the finale point of this post.

For the most part most of this post is based off of http://www.digitalfaq.com/forum/myths/5061-hosting-reviews-exposedcom.html

Digitalfaq.com's reply rant to hosting-reviews-exposed.com



My prior post:


Previous posts links about digitalfaq.com can be found in that post.

Like Digitalfaq.com, I get frequently asked who to choose for hosting. I could have taken the path of putting up a list where 89% of the hosts I recommend have affiliate programs. As I may have used more hosts in the last three years than Digitalfaq.com has in a life time.  But I failed to keep the very records I think all hosting reviews should have. Not to mention if I ever did do hosting recommendations I would have to live to a standard higher than what I think review sites should go by.  So for now the best I can do is provided advice for what to look for when looking for a host.

10 questions for Digitalfaq.com

Since Digitalfaq.com is interested in haphazardly answering what I ask, here are 10 questions for the owner of digitalfaq.com. I am going to keep them short and provide my mentality behind them.

1. Does Digitalfaq.com have any proof they use the hosts they recommend other than Eurovps.com?

The very thing that could have given Digitalfaq.com the rights to declare “The Digital FAQ = Vindicated” (insert some smiley face like the kiddies do) was data. Providing proof of use would have given me little ground to even bother writing a post. Yet what was provided was selectively edited extractions from my posts, insults, false claims of my experience, and at what can be best described as an ego trip.

When it came to discussing who pays Digitalfaq.com the claim was “Some have affiliate programs, some don’t”.  Out of 27 hosts, 3 might not have an affiliate program. So at best 3 of 27 (11% may not, 89% do pay a commision). Digitalfaq.com has a problem with disclosure. Yet he is begging me to go through and figure out the averages of payments “Most shared hosting pays about $20, and the few that we get each month go to pay for this site.” with this little pity party. Especially when it was a $10-$15 average a few weeks ago prior to my write up affiliate payments.

digitalfaq old disclaimer

Also in regards to “And unlike the author of the blog, I know the owners of these companies — I’m not guessing.

No Digitalfaq.com’s owner is really assuming here.

2. What was it that Digitalvfaq.com did from 1977 – 1993?

I realize I am asking a question that was already answered. But I have my reasons.

The business has been around since 1977, when the blogger/author was crapping his Huggies.” Despite the assumption of what my age is, there was no internet back then. But still they give better detail on their about page where I got that quote.

What began in Dallas, Texas in 1977 as a part-time typesetting/layout operation, has slowly morphed as technology developed. By the late 1980s, computers entered our daily operations, and desktop publishing, graphics and advanced layout services were added. ”.

Texas a red state, what a lovely state to hold this view:

It reminds me of those political kook blogs you can find online – mostly Republicans/conservatives these days, but it infects every political spectrum. Or conspiracy sites (9/11, JFK, the moon landing, etc). 

The late 80’s is the best number they can give you for when they were using a computer.  Even though I got a head start with Timex, Texas Instruments, Apple, and Commodore computers from the early to late 80’s. Yet like some hosting companies out there I have encountered they use the start date of a company that had nothing to do with webhosting, and in this case  a company that did not start out using computers. The true web experience for Digitalfaq.com does not start until 1993. But they did not have a website till 2002, which brings us to question 3.

3. Why did Digitalfaq.com wait till 2002 to get a website, and what was the original domain.

Since Digitalfaq.com wants to provide trivia, I had my first site in 1998 with Virtualis.

4. Why did Digitalfaq.com abandon that website in 2004?

Even though I did not keep my first site up, I do keep a redirect up having the domain redirect. The value in this is I have gotten back design clients I had a decade ago. Did digitalfaq.com just abandon their original domain?

5. Does Digitalfaq.com count all the hosts with EIG as 1 or more hosts?

According to Digitalfaq.com a host with a fairly new domain name gets to count the company they are part of for a start date, not the date when the site actually started.  Does Digitalfaq.com count that as one host or by the amount of hosting sites own by a particular group? I ask because many of the providers I have used were bought out, so if I ever do get around to counting how many hosts I have been with I will know that EV1, Fastservers, and Softlayer count as 3 or 1.

6. Where did Digitalfaq.com suddenly get unlimited hosting experience from?

Considering last month Digitfaq.com was against unlimited hosting, how did digitalfaq.com get enough experience over a few weeks to judge an unlimited host as good?

Time machine?  (Sorry had a sarcasm leak)

7. What hosting companies actually employee kids?

Digitalfaq.com made the following claim “A bad host, or “kiddie host”, is often run by minors (children, teenagers) from their bedroom, or even colleges kids from their dorm room.” If this is true Digitalfaq.com could name the companies that do this. Otherwise, Digitalfaq.com needs to reconsider labeling anybody a conspiracy nut.

Considering that many countries have child labor laws it would be a great way to put “kiddie” hosts out of business if the owner would share this information.

8. Is there anyone else that Digitalfaq.com is biased against?

So far it appears that anyone younger than the owner of Digitalfaq.com,  female, and with the Republican Party. Never mind that some of the owners of the companies he thinks are good are younger than me. But here is a little sample of his bigotry.

  • The site is essentially random online rants by one person. It reminds me of those political kook blogs you can find online — mostly Republicans/conservatives these days, but it infects every political spectrum. Or conspiracy sites (9/11, JFK, the moon landing, etc).
  • Females is not the demographic for hosting.”  Him caveman, Him bang chest.
  •  “The biggest problems with teenagers, or even college aged adults, is they move on. That’s why so many hosts fail, sell out, or disappear in under 2 years. We don’t have the time or patience for that.

That last line gets interesting when you pair it with this thought.

digitalFAQ.com is the current online presence for a family-owned media business that started in 1977.

Things that make you say hmmmm.

Digitalfaq.com has already alienated a large part of the population, why stop there?

9. So Digitalfaq.com, what exactly is the conspiracy that Hosting-reviews-exposed.com has?

Generally, when you make a claim you at least back it up.

10. Why is it ok for Digitalfaq.com to profit off of hosts their site blacklist?

The last question is less so a question than a chance for some level of redemption. At the end April if I see affiliate links to companies that Digitalfaq.com openly blacklists, I will contact said companies and see how they feel about Digitalfaq.com’s membership in their affiliate programs.

As a man that I am sure is much older than the owner of Digitalfaq.com (and defiantly far wiser) once taught me as a kid, two wrongs don’t make a right. Of course, the owner of Digitalfaq.com can insult my grandfather. But my grandfather had some wisdom behind that as well which I have been employing.

I may very well agree with the owner of Digitalfaq.com on reasons for blacklisting all of these hosts like Endurance International Group. But the spirit of an affiliate program is to pay those that advertise or recommend their business. Not to reward people for failing to convince someone not to sign up for service.  Being a business owner I would be looking to retrieve any payments made to any individual that did that to my company. I defiantly would not continue to allow a review site like Digitalfaq.com to continue to profit off my program. Especially when they say:

First, it allows us to track (or attempt to track) those who ignore our advice and sign up with one of those hosts anyway. It would mean that our advice is falling on deaf ears, and we’ve not said what was needed — the misleading marketing is winning out over our unbiased information that exposes companies like EIG. That’s unfortunate.

Second, if somebody is stubborn, and going to sign up with one of those hosts anyway — likely due to the lure of cheap “unlimited” — then yes, we’ll take the affiliate commission for it.

So a choice of a post at the end of next month, or Digitalfaq.com can wait until next year for my re-review when they can set things right.

Digitalfaq.com: Intermission – To the Readers of Digitalfaq.com

Digitalfaq.com has told their readers I am a conspiracy nut. So if you came here from Digtalfaq.com, this post is for you.

First off I am not asking you to trust me (far from it). After all Digitalfaq.com and I may have our own agenda, or worse I have my own agenda. Instead I am asking you to rely on your better judgment. This is my argument about what Digitalfaq.com claims I said.

This started out because I had been sent an email by someone who though I should reference Digitalfaq.com. Because they thought we had the same mind set. However I found them being hypocritical of hosting review sites, while doing the same thing as many review sites without providing any proof that they use the companies they recommend,  so far there are only two sites that I can’t confirm have an affiliate program. Not to mention Digitalfaq.com is misinforming people on the very nature of the dark side of hosting reviews (in short they are not always a blog, they are not always about huge affiliate payments, they are not always about affiliate payments, they are not always done on a site they own by, and/or not always about a payment).  I plan to cover the taxonomy of review sites in an upcoming post. But for now I am going to attempt to dissect what was said on Digitalfaq.com.

The counter argument by Digitalfaq.com, did not reference specific posts.

So as an example I am going to point to five links that I am referring to:

The first of which is their top 2013 host list, which started the first three posts on Digitalfaq.com:


Here is the snap shot I took of their post.

Digitalfaq.com's Hosting-reviews-exposed.com rant

The second is the response to the first two posts (maybe three) of Digitalfaq.com:


Asides for not referencing specific posts, the owner of digtalfaq.com decided to modify my posts, without leaving sentences intact, or leaving the full context of a thought out.

The next three links are posts I made about Digitalfaq.com:

Ground work for my argument against trusting Digitalfaq.com:

This is where I take apart Digitalfaq.com’s guidelines on what makes a good host:


Last I dig into rather or not Digitalfaq.com makes money off the hosts they recommend:


In short only 2 hosts don’t reference an affiliate program, one site has an affiliate login area, while the other cannot be entirely ruled out because they have  WHMCS ( Which has affiliate capabilities).

I am breaking this post into points, as there is a lot to take apart, and I am going to probable miss something. But I made it a point to do this in two hours.

Point 1. Where I might have went wrong

I might have been wrong about Digitalfaq.com on data server ownership. As what I had typed was when I first looked at their top 2013 criteria for a good host seemed to indicate that hosts ownership of a data center. However I made a dumb mistake and failed to make a screen shot of the post when I was reviewing it the first time around. For that matter I failed to take a screen shop the second time as well. It was not until the third time around and the addition of unlimited hosts was added.   Upon my first and second review Digitalfaq.com, they clearly were against unlimited hosting, and original argument against unlimited hosting is still there.

·  good host manages their resources (bandwidth, RAM, storage space), and creates plans that balance intelligent limits with actual costs.

  • ·  A bad host promises ridiculous limits — or no limits at all! Unlimited! Yeehaw!


A bad host tries to hide “gotchas” in their often-buried documents, which are written in butchered “legalese” English, and hide limits such as SQL connections, inodes, email I/O, and file usage that turn so-called “unlimited” accounts into highly limited near-worthless web accounts. Many times, these documents are buried on their site, and thrown in the face of customers as the basis by which to charge them fees or outright deny service or tech support.

Breaking away from what I thought was good advice was what fueled my interest.

Point 2: Where Digtalfaq.com was right

Poor grammar and misspellings aside, the sole author would ramble about all kinds of companies, both hosting and non-hosting: anti-virus software, Amazon.com, WebHostingTalk.com, Cyberhost Pro, 3essentials, Wooservers, BurstNET, Site5, LayeredTech, MediaTemple, etc.

Yes I have spelling errors, at times poor grammar, and yeah I do ramble when I suffer writers block. It also does not help to write on my iPhone, and even on iPad since I have these big hands. Not to mention I try to put a time limit as I have done with this post. I would like to think that I have gotten better. Not to mention I am not above correction. But I plan to correct past posts after I get my new house, unless any one knows a good editor. However I don’t apologize for going off topic, this is after all my time and my money (and it’s not like I ask for donations, or tell people how they can support this site). However I am starting my own personal blog soon and hosting-reviews-exposed.com will stick to hosting reviews based on unethical gains, and hosting related issues like PIPA, spam, fake seo companies, and other items dealing with websites.

Point 3: Where Digtalfaq.com was half right

If you look closely at hosting-reviews-exposed.com’s Facebook “Likes” box, you may notice it has lots of pretty girls. Further scrutiny of these accounts show them to be new accounts, and/or having little use with thin content. 

  • Not using accounts is not the demographic of Facebook. (Especially under-30 females.)
  • Females is not the demographic for hosting.
  • However pretty girls that never use their Facebook account is the modus operandi of fake Fiverr users

Yes I did purchase likes on Facebook. As I could have done this with my Google + and my Twitter account. I did it more so for research on this and three other sites. Before I started I had 260 + fans by my own merits.  I purchased 1,000 likes on this site, and clearly if I wanted to fake it I would have spent far more than what I did (it’s not like I am asking people to donate to me).  My goal was to track how long it took for the seller to respond and enact, how fast the likes came in, where the likes where coming from, general makeup of the likes, and if any activity was generated by the likes (the answer to that is none). Not to mention a decay rate. After all I was at 1,300+ a month ago, and it decayed down to 740 yesterday. Today it is 695 last I checked (so I am literally losing likes as you read this). Though that’s not taking in that I get about 2 likes a week.  I suspect that overtime my likes will return back to a valid number in less than a month as decay appears to be a direct result of frequency of activity on Facebook. But that is a post for a later another date. Though it will probable reveal my inner data crunching geekery.

Now for where Digitalfaq.com is wrong,

The first bullet point makes no sense (spelling/grammar?).

The second bullet point is false all on its own, and I am really trying to refrain from being sarcastic. If you understood my nature I am being very reserved here.

Based on my previous hosting companies’ customer records, females are a demographic.  They were 35% of the client base. Granted even if they were a fraction of a percent, they would be a demographic. Which has always had me wondering what % of Godaddy.com customers are female. Either way gender has never been a determining factor of defining who I will take money from.

Bullet Point 3 assumes that I bought my likes off Fivver.com and that all of the accounts are always controlled by a single user.  In which case Digitalfaq.com is wrong on both. Though it can be the case for both points.  As for pretty girls, Digitalfaq.com is just trying to use derogatory comments to compensate, for what I have no idea. Either way I would love to see how Digitalfaq.com thought bought likes work.

Point 4: What Digtalfaq.com left out

I find it interesting instead of directing people to my posts to discredit me, Digitalfaq.com has links to their affiliate programs throughout their anti Hosting-reviews-exposed.com post. Interestingly enough to some hosts they think are bad.

Breakdown is Company / Affiliate ID / Commission

1&1 PID=3235990 / Earn up to $300
Godaddy.com isc=cjcmsc001t / payment varies 30% commissions on nearly all products
Amazon.com / digitalfaq-20 / 4 – 8% commission
Burst.net / aff=2993 / 15 – 25% commission
Cyberhostpro.com / id=246 / £10.00 – £40.00 (based on number of sales)
3essentials.com / aid=21e7151b $70 – $135
Mediatemple.net / aid=4fb618fb27a17 $80 –  $230 based off sales/product

LayeredTech  just redirects to Digitalfaq.com’s main page.

Hostgator.com (linked despite the claim of being removed as a sponsor) unable to determine the affiliate id, however payments range $50 – $125.

There also many they list in their top 2013 hosts that redirect to their affiliate programs.

But that’s not the only page with affiliate links, like for example:


I find this ID 3235990 interesting when clicking on Ixwebhosting.com, despite being listed as a comment spammer, you would not think I could click on a link to black listed host. By the way Ixwebhosting.com has a deeper history in fake reviews than Digitalfaq.com knows. Details on ixwebhosting.com in another upcoming post.

I am sure they are going to explain affiliate links embedded though out their attempt to trash me and other posts in a similar fashion as this Hostgator sponsored banner.


But when it came to Hostgator.com being a sponsor of Digitalfaq.com, the owner choose this part of my blog “Plus since Digitalfaq.com loves Eurovps.com so much why does Hostgator.com and other companies get a far bigger banner.
Note: hostgator.com (a host that offers unlimited hosting) is a sponsor of Digitalfaq.com.

To explain this away, Digitalfaq.com explains: ”This is false. On about 3/5 the site’s sponsor chose not to renew, and the site ads reverted to filler from a year or two ago — way before HostGator was sold by Brent Oxley to EIG. At that time, it was still pretty good, and was suggested. In addition to that, it was in rotation with several other filler ads for Meritline and SuperMediaStore.com, so this criticism is exaggerated at best. It was removed when caught. As of 3/19, we have a new sponsor anyway.

This does not really address why EuroVPS.com gets the short banner.  Did Hostgator.com cancel Digitalfaq.com’s affiliate membership?  Up till March 19th which was after my three posts, Hostgator.com enjoyed the possible free traffic Digitalfaq.com was pushing their way. As for Hostgator.com choosing not to renew with affiliates after EIG bought hostgator.com, I don’t buy it. I have actually been signed up with them through Commission Junction (cj.com) so that I could get a copy of FCC compliance and Black Friday emails. In almost 2 years Hostgator.com has not canceled my affiliate membership and continues to send me emails.

In short yes Digitalfaq.com may need charity/ donations because the very owner/admin(s) that give advice on websites are too sloppy or done have the time to clean up rotating banners and remove companies not paying for referrals / advertising. Which makes me wondering if they are also failing to update critical areas of their site. So they have this page to tell you how you can support Digitalfaq.com, which has not declared non-profit status.


Nothing stops hosts that were recommend to be avoid from being advertised so long as no one points to the hypocrisy.

So it’s somewhat aggravating to have to take time out of my day, in order to respond to nonsense that was posted on the blog at hosting-reviews-exposed.com. It’s time I could put to better use working, or helping others.

Yet I inspired Digitalfaq.com to remove an Endurance International Group host off their sponsors. To them I say “Your Welcome”. No telling how many people clicked on the banner taking them somewhere Digitalfaq.com does not recommend.  Though it’s not really clear that Hostgator.com removed Digitalfaq.com as an advertiser. But I suppose that is coincidental in Digitalfaq.com’s opinion.   The moment Digtalfaq.com felt Hostgator.com was a poor option, they should have removed them from their rotating banner (though they may appear in Adsense but that they can be addressed as well).  Not to mention whatever they are using to high light specific word(s) with affiliate links.

Now here is the point where Digitalfaq.com either haphazardly reads my blog, and selectively picks to highlight what I wrote.

I honestly would not have a problem with Digitalfaq.com doing their own recommended hosts if they actually validated their recommendations with facts, not to mention disclosure upfront that they make money if you sign up with a host they recommend.

Digitalfaq.com responded with:

Unlike other sites, we rank hosts based on their merit: uptime, support, server hardware quality, etc. It’s in no way biased by payouts like those fake lists that suggest Godaddy, 1&1, Yahoo, and EIG brands. If the pay commissions, great! We use those funds for the site. If not, that’s fine, they still get our recommendation!

While adding affiliate links to Godaddy.com and 1&1 hosting.

After hatcheting my sentence (that should have been two): “I honestly would not have a problem with Digitalfaq.com doing their own recommended hosts if they actually validated their recommendations with facts”.

He also gives the kind of advice you’d expect from a know-nothing consumer: (1) Use Godaddy, or (2) use Rackspace. The former is terrible, and the latter is overpriced and honestly not that much better these days. (Rackspace is so 1990s!) From 2007-2010, the “site” was nothing more than a one-page rant hosted at Godaddy, and an amateur video on YouTube. In fact, from what I could tell, those are two of the only three main hosts this person has ever used, with Media Temple being the third. Most of the “exposed” posts are completely without merit. 

I don’t actually full out recommend Godaddy.com, I did a review and had an affiliate link (until Bob Parson shot an elephant), and at best recommend them for a starter/ single page website. The full review can be found at:


Even when I had the affiliate links up, I made no money. it proable would helped if I didn’t say things like “Sometimes getting a hosting solution with GoDaddy.com is a roll of the dice” But when they were up I did disclose I made a commission at the start of the review. Not well past the place where people click and are brought to a host.

Rackspace I will get to, as it has been pointed to – incorrectly I only dealt with 3 major hosts, and Digitalfaq.com knows it.

Which brings us back to this “Poor grammar and misspellings aside, the sole author would ramble about all kinds of companies, both hosting and non-hosting: anti-virus software, Amazon.com, WebHostingTalk.com, Cyberhost Pro, 3essentials, Wooservers, BurstNET, Site5, LayeredTech, MediaTemple, etc.

A Burst.net post was a brought into this because a host that I found on Webhostingstuff.com’s fake top 25 was a customer of Burstnet (wooservers).


That and it turns out I was once a Burst.net customer. I guess that means Digitalfaq.com thinks days to get a server rebooted and being unable to contact said company for many days after  were not worth noting.


Which brings us to Layered Tech. I started out with Powersurge.com, than some how I became a Fastservers.net client, and last Layerdtech.com.  Though I am a bit confused about how I transitioned from a Powersurge.com to a FastServers.net customer as I got a roundabout response on that. I have to ask Digitalfaq.com, can I count that as 3 hosts or just 1? But that’s not the only provider I was with that got bought out. The issues I had with Layered Tech (and its counter parts) had to deal with Hurricane Electric among many other things.

And while we are on the subject of hosts that were bought out that I was with there was Virtualis, Dialtone, Server Beach, EV1/ which was bought out by Theplanet who was later bought out by Softlayer,  OChosting (which had been absorbed into a name I forget), and honestly more than that in names that I have forgotten over the last 1.5 decades. We have gone past the number three mark, but really there are more.

Which brings us to Pingdom, Rackspace, Mediatemple,  and another dumb comment:

He also makes the novice mistake of relying on Pingdom to blame hosts (i.e. Media Temple) for downtime that may not have actually happened. As I frequently explain to others, Pingdom can give false results. To truly check uptime, you need to have at least three monitors, and at least two of them should agree before you bother checking it. I don’t mean free services either, but monitoring tools run from your own VPS, such as Nagios. That’s the only way you can know if a sever is up!

There is a good reason that this site is on Rackspace.com and not Mediatemple.net, and it does not have to do with Pingdom. Pingdom only validates the down time I experienced. However It does not validate my service complaints (like moving my databases, and leaving them inoperable). Nor at times what felt like dealing with as Digitalfaq.com would probable call them “teenagers”.

Also Pingdom does not run out of my house. So if I get a message that says my site is down, and when I check and see it is down that probable means my site is offline. But really my reason for leaving Mediatemple.net can be found here:


Which brings us to “He also gives the kind of advice you’d expect from a know-nothing consumer: (1) Use Godaddy, or (2) use Rackspace. The former is terrible, and the latter is overpriced and honestly not that much better these days. (Rackspace is so 1990s!) From 2007-2010, the “site” was nothing more than a one-page rant hosted at Godaddy, and an amateur video on YouTube. In fact, from what I could tell, those are two of the only three main hosts this person has ever used, with Media Temple being the third. Most of the “exposed” posts are completely without merit.”.

I have my doubts Digitalfaq.com knows what this site looked like from 2007 – 2010.  But as far as Digitalfaq.com goes further to say “By contrast, since 1993, the admins/mods/owner of The Digital FAQ have used at least 100 hosts.”.

Digitalfaq.com forgot to tell you I don’t make my living off hosting-reviews-exposed.com (if I did I would have to have beg for charity, and write more than I do), I am a web designer. I don’t I always get to pick where the client hosts. Not to mention if you read this blog you will find that I complain about transfer rates whenever I do design work for a customer that just has to have one of the EIG hosts.  I am often told I charge and arm and a leg, and yet those that are willing to bear what I ask can some times make the mistake of thinking $5 a month host will work. I have been on Hostgator.com prior to it being bought by EIG, and as of today I am on their servers for another client. I am currently using Hostdime.com and Liquidweb.com in addition to Rackspace.com.

The reason hosting-reviews-exposed.com is on Rackspace.com, is I don’t have the time to fuss around with it being down. If it needs more resources I get billed. I can evaluate why it needed the resources at my convenience. Downtime has been minimal, and what I have experienced is well below 99.9%. Not to mention Since January 2012, I have not had a reason to put a support ticket in for any issues. What I pay really does not bother me, and gives me piece of mind that Mediatemple.net did not give me. Not to mention Rackspace.com is far more Word Press friendly.

Oh and he forgot to mention I used to own 5 companies (1 failure (described in the first Digitalfaq.com and other posts), and 4 hosts that still live on), and before that I was a web designer. He completely forgot to mention the origin story of how Webhostingstuff.com was the inspiration behind hosting-reviews-exposed.com. But why be bothered with details?

Point 5: What Digitalfaq.com got wrong (or made up)

The site is essentially random online rants by one person. It reminds me of those political kook blogs you can find online — mostly Republicans/conservatives these days, but it infects every political spectrum. Or conspiracy sites (9/11, JFK, the moon landing, etc).

The main focus of this site is hosting reviews done solely on the basis of profit in an unethical manner. There are probable better people out there to do the job, and if I meet them I will happily hand the keys over. But for now you got me.

I take pride in being called weird, and I make it a point to make fun of myself before I do others. But this comes from a person that believes “Females is not the demographic for hosting.”, “The biggest problems with teenagers, or even college aged adults, is they move on. That’s why so many hosts fail, sell out, or disappear in under 2 years. We don’t have the time or patience for that.”. Yet as I stated before, no one really has any idea of the age of the person they are communicating with, but skill and professionalism are very apparent. Not to mention if you want to see that wisdom does not come with age, you have my personal invitation to view the three big retirement communities outside of Phoenix, Arizona.

So if you’re female, child, teenager, college age adult, and/or Republican/Conservative Digitfaq.com does not respect you. Might as well throw in Yin to the Republican/Conservative Yang; Democrat/Liberal as the Youth and Female votes these days are leaning that way based off the last polling data. But why bother with polling data, I should be outside yelling at kids to stay off my lawn (well I am in Arizona so I should say gravel). Sorry it really is hard to refrain from sarcasm.

In fact, probably half of the blog (or more) has nothing to do with “exposing” others. And that’s a shame, given how fake affiliate blogs pop up almost daily.

Note the word probable, meaning Digitalfaq.com did not actually check.  There is a reason I don’t cover every review site that is out there, and that can reason can be found by reviewing the traffic scores. I got after sites with traffic, not to mention I try to compose posts that can advise people about how to shop for hosting. Yet he is not the first review site to tell me how to run my site.

hosting-reviews-exposed.com = Pro Kiddie Host

The biggest proof of editing of what I can be found with Digitalfaq.com’s piecemeal extraction of several lines of my posts.

The first two seem to be a knock against the young. Despite all of my years doing business online …

I got started in webhosting at a young age…

Putting that aside there are a lot of teenagers out there that have contributed to the internet, so before you go knocking them make sure you are not using any of their creations. Age does not equal wisdom. If anything Digitalfaq.com has alienated a demographic….

What Digitalfaq.com seems to neglect here is that a new company may be eager to bring in new customers….

Never mind that last line had nothing to do with kids/teenagers/ or as I have now learned college aged adults. It was in response to Digitalfaq.com framing new hosts in a bad light. But they really don’t just have a problem with new hosts.

And unfortunately, probably 80% or more of the industry is comprised of bad hosts.  — You have to be careful who you use!

Probably once again = assumption. Like when Digitfaq.com assumed (or lied) about me only having used 3 major hosts.

I still would like to see proof that there is a web host using kids. After all it was Digitalfaq.com that accused me of conspiracies, the very least they could do is prove what hosts actually use children.

Point 6: What Digitalfaq.com ignored

When it came to reading the terms of service of any company that Digitalfaq.com chooses to refer to this comment by me:

If you think this is the point where you don’t have to read the TOS because Digitalfaq.com read it for you, think again.

Digitalfaq.com’s response “This is false. In fact, there are companies NOT being suggested because we disagree with what’s written. The example that comes to mind most is web-hosting.com (Namecheap-owned) and WebHostingBuzz.com, because of the odd “WordPress modules” clauses. We warned folks about that back in December 2011. SiteGround’s ToS is fine.

I did say that Digitalfaq.com wants you take their word for it, after all “SiteGround’s ToS is fine.”. I don’t care who tells you they read the terms of service for you, read it yourself. Besides Digitalfaq.com has a financial interest in Siteground.com, $50 – $150 per sign up to be exact.

When it came to new companies this is what Digitalfaq.com had to say:

Successful longevity.

  • good host has been around for 5+ years, and is a true test of running a successful hosting business. This business isn’t kind to the ignorant.
  • A bad host usually fails within 1-2 years, if they even make it that long.”

In short Digitalfaq.com claims a host is good if it has been around for 5 years or more. You would think if there were any exceptions those would be addressed in advance, and a valid reason given as to why. After attempting to unravel Digitalfaq.com’s claims about 5 year or older hosts, Digitalfaq.com, chooses to selectively use only part of how I mentioned how to determine the age of a host.

Based off the whois info I can often find out how old a company might be.

However my explanation is much longer than that and more than I care to paste in what is already becoming a very long post. But can be read at http://hosting-reviews-exposed.com/review-sites-exposed/digitalfaq-com.html

The excuse given for the age of some companies is that they are part of another company, which is at best weak. As I am betting despite this company being part of another company, Digitalfaq.com counts by domain name, not hosting group how many hosts they have been with. Like say Endurance International Group with some 40 + sites.  Yet Digitalfaq.com shows that not all the hosts are within the good host limit:

Crocweb.com has been around since August 2009, though it did not operate a public site. It’s a good enough host that ~4 years has been enough to prove themselves.

What I had on Crocweb.com

Crocweb.com, while created in August 9, 2009, does not appear to have an actually hosting page till August 22, 2010.

Evolucix.com is another exception, having been around for ~4 years now. Not just that, but it’s a young-run host! More on that another day. Very impressive!

So what domain for Evolucix.com exist under prior to August 2010?

Perhaps in a later post I will dig into the other hosts that Digitalfaq.com claims to not be less than five years old. These are the two hosts that didn’t have a straight forward affiliate program I mentioned earlier. However as I mentioned, not all hosting review site do reviews for just high affiliate payments.

But here is the kicker

Trivia: If you look up the domain name for digitalFAQ.com, you’ll find that it was only registered in 2004. But we’ve been online since 2002. The business has been around since 1977, when the blogger/author was crapping his Huggies.

Classy, I guess. Assuming that I was a toddler during 1977 despite the fact I am not very forth coming with my age as addressed when I did my post dispelling their claims of what makes a good host. Either way they have mad internet skills from the disco era.

And my two hours are up, on this Digitalfaq.com post.

If Digitalfaq.com or anyone else tells you to trust them without backing their claims with data, that’s the point you find someone that will.

Digitalfaq.com – Hypocrite – whinny disclaimer / excuses Part 3

Digitalfaq.com on my first inspection did not have a disclaimer. But on second review I see this at the bottom of a lengthy fact less sales spill:

Disclaimer: If one of our suggested hosts has an affiliate program, great, we join it, and the funds are used to support the costs of maintaining this site. If not, oh well, good is good, and they still get our suggestion. A few splog owners have contacted us, crying that we’re hypocrites by having some links that earn small affiliate payments ($10-15 average), yet deriding their spammy sites for doing the same. Sorry, but it’s NOT the same — it’s not even close. Our list is based on quality of hosts, not their payouts. If this list was based on payouts alone, it would recommend high-paying ($100+) lousy operations like GodaddyIXWebHosting or Bluehost. Notice that our #1 suggestion, EuroVPS, had no affiliate program for years.


Digitalfaq.com March 19, 2013 Host recommendations

I am not calling the owner of Digitalfaq.com a hypocrite for having affiliate links. As for EuroVPS having an affiliate program, good for them. But is Digitalfaq.com implying that because Eurovps.com did not have an affiliate program that somehow it’s bad for a host to start out with one?  Digitalfaq.com’s disclaimer implies that affiliate program are some how wrong,

I am calling the owner a hypocrite for not providing any data, just stereotypes. After all Digitalfaq.com claims their rankings are based off of server/network performance. That means Digitalfaq.com should have at least data for one of the many measures that determine if a host is good or not. Another detail that would go father is/are domain(s) that were hosted with companies that Digitalfaq.com claims to have used.  Which would allow anyone to see if that more than a single web page was put up, or a full working site(s). Data that is far more valuable than just having the uptime of the hosting companies site’s server ( For those not aware an established host is not going to keep their main site on the same server as their customers). The data would be even better if backed by a third party like Pingdom. Instead like all so called review sites Digitalfaq.com wants you to take their word for it. Never mind there are no list of domains hosted currently with the recommended hosts (not even going to start with domains no longer hosted with the recommended), with a detailed history.  That was after all one of the criteria, detailed reviews. Instead Digitalfaq.com can’t even offer a up time % for any of the hosts they recommends servers.

Digitalfaq.com is doing the same concept that every review site they want you to avoid does. It would be a cleaver (though dishonest) trick if the fake hosting review industry had not already thought about that one. Webhostingstuff.com one of the oldest of fake review sites says “Unlike some dubious “top  10 hosting sites” that promote web hosts based on affiliate commissions, our fair our fair and honest ranking system helps visitors find the real top web hosting companies.”.  Instead webhostingstuff.com (not a blog) had hosts bid on the top 25 positions (the only affiliate program they ever appeared to use was Hostgator.com). The same owner of webhostingstuff.com also owns other sites that does exactly what Michael Low preaches against on webhostingstuff.com on sites like hostaz.com (which runs off affiliate commisions, with so called top 10 format, and no not a blog).

Is Digitalfaq.com the same as all the other so called hosting review sites?

In short yes. What Digitalfaq.com fails to do at the very first in what is a very long post is disclose up front they earn money if you sign up with one of the hosts they recommend. Many so called review sites claim their competitors are being dishonest. Nothing more than a slight of hand trick. Take the obvious and use it for distraction. Instead of providing data like many so called review site, Digitalfaq.com provides stereotypes as a distraction from the lack of facts.The disclaimer reads like one written with a kid caught with his hands in the cookie jar.

the funds are used to support the costs of maintaining this site

I can say the same, what Hosting-reviews-exposed.com brings in does not cover the costs of running it.  Yet I would be lying if I said I would not like it to make insane profits. Also unlike Digitalfaq.com I disclose that I make a commission up front whenever I have recommend a product (example Kindle Fire). Yet some how Digitalfaqcom, whom I seen nothing declaring they were a non-profit organization, though they take donations seems uncomfortable with making buck.

If Digitalfaq.com had disclosed up front their relationship with the hosts lists, I doubt I would have read any further. Making a commission off a recommendation is not evil. But instead to distract from what they are doing they bring up the behavior of other so called hosting review sites.  Yet that alone was not enough from my attention deficit order from distracting me.   I was only further inspired when they broke from what was a very good recommendation “A bad host promises ridiculous limits — or no limits at all! Unlimited! Yeehaw!” . This only drove me to want to address the inaccuracies in their claims. Clearly getting $25 – $150 + (by plus I mean bonuses when you sign up a certain number) per sign up was hard for Digitalfaq.com to resist.

Digitalfaq.com’s Top Hosts 2013

As I mentioned in my last post, I notices affiliate links the moment I started clicking on hosts listed. Yet that was not my first clue that they were part of a affiliate program. It was the fact that Digitalfaq.com had coupons. After the addition of unlimited hosts I decided to see who had an affiliate program and how much they paid out. Plus on average what is the payout? Was it really as little as $16? I visited every site and found the least each host had was an affiliate login area.  Breakdown is Affiliate page / payout. Those with (NEW) were added after I started, not to imply that they are a new host.

Digitalfaq.com’s Best Web Hosts / Overall Hosts

  1. http://www.eurovps.com/blog/post/affiliate-program 20 Euro = $26
  2. http://www.stablehost.com/affiliates.php $25
  3. http://www.jaguarpc.com/affiliates/ $65 – $110 (based off number of sales)
  4. http://www.hostingzoom.com/affiliate-program.php $65 (NEW)
  5. http://www.downtownhost.com/affiliate-program.php $40 – $100 (based off number of sales)
  6. http://www.mddhosting.com/affiliates.php  $15 – $25
  7. https://affiliates.arvixe.com/ $70 – $135 (based off number of sales)
  8. http://www.hawkhost.com/Affiliate 25% Up to $159.87 based off step 1 of shopping cart on highest plan
  9. https://secure.ninjalion.com/index.php?/affiliates/ $30

Removed from the list is:

http://asmallorange.com/affiliate/ 200% of monthly price up to $200

No explanation to the retraction by Digitalfaq.com.

Digitalfaq.com’s Best Unlimited Hosts

  1. http://www.site5.com/affiliates/ $25 – $100 (based off number of sales)
  2. http://www.jaguarpc.com/affiliates/ $65 – $110 (based off number of sales)
  3. https://affiliates.arvixe.com/ $70 – $135 (based off number of sales)
  4. Glowhost.com – http://www.shareasale.com/shareasale.cfm?merchantID=17701 $50 – $125, + bonus at sale 10 of $100, Bonus at Sale 25, $500. (NEW)
  5. http://www.inmotionhosting.com/hosting_affiliate_program.html $50 – $100 (based off number of sales)
  6. http://support.froghost.com/index.php?/Knowledgebase/Article/View/149/25/do-you-have-an-affiliate-program 50% Up to $215.10 based off highest item found on product page
  7. http://www.wirenine.com/affiliates/ $50
  8. http://www.siteground.com/affiliate_program.htm  $50 – $150 (based off number of monthly sales).

Digitalfaq.com’s Best Reseller hosts

  1. http://www.mddhosting.com/affiliates.php  $15 – $25
  2. http://www.hostdime.com/affiliates/ $40 – $150
  3. http://www.stream101.com/affiliate/ 15% – highest possible is $15 based off order=form.
  4. http://www.site5.com/affiliates/ $25 – $100 (based off number of sales) (new to list)
  5. Geekstorage.com – http://www.geekstorage.com/about-geekstorage/affiliate-program.html $25 – $75 (NEW)
  6. http://www.downtownhost.com/affiliate-program.php $40 – $100 (based off number of sales) (new to list)
  7. http://www.stablehost.com/affiliates.php $25
  8. http://www.eurovps.com/blog/post/affiliate-program 20 Euro = $26
  9. Hostingzoom.com (labeled Reseller Zoom) https://www.hostingzoom.com/affiliate-program.php  $65 (NEW)
  10. http://www.jaguarpc.com/affiliates/ $65 – $110 (based off number of sales)
  11. https://www.crocweb.com/clients/affiliates.php no clear info, but affiliate login area present

Digitalfaq.com’s Best VPS Hosts

  1. http://www.eurovps.com/blog/post/affiliate-program 20 Euro = $26
  2. http://fhpp.futurehosting.biz/  100% – $709.95 based off highest item in shopping cart
  3. Mediatemple
  4. http://www.liquidweb.com/cn/c/refer/index.html One time commission $60 – $5000 or 5% reoccurring monthly
  5. http://www.downtownhost.com/affiliate-program.php $40 – $100 (based off number of sales)
  6. Solarvps.com – http://www.dedicateddollars.com/ Tier 1 ( 0- 9 sales monthly (75% of first bill), Tier 2 (10 – 19 sales monthly) 100% of first bill, Tier 3 (20 + sales monthly). (NEW)
  7. http://www.jaguarpc.com/affiliates/ $65 – $110 (based off number of sales) 125% of first bill.
  8. http://www.knownhost.com/affiliate/ $25
  9. http://www.wiredtree.com/affiliate/ 75% probable $3985.65 based off of highest item
  10. Modvps.com – part of Hostingzoom.com http://www.modvps.com/affiliate-program.php $65  (NEW)
  11.  http://www.hostv.com/affiliates.shtml Double the monthly amount, possible $690 based off order page
  12. BuyVM.net not program found, however WHMCS present and has affiliate capabilities. Domain creation April 26, 2010. (NEW)
  13. Evolucix.com, https://www.evolucix.com/clients/affiliates.php no information available however noticeable affiliate login area from the Client area (NEW)

Two new additions are not 5 years old (as Digitalfaq.com recommends) based off domain creation.

Ecolucix.com – Domain Creation October 19, 2011
BuyVM.net – Domain creation April 26, 2010 (though the design looks like it’s over a decade old).

Other than crocweb.com (which seems like a rip-off of hostgator) and Buyvm.net every host has a clear and present affiliate program. Despite the lack of information for an affiliate program for crocweb.com there is a login area for affiliates, and Buyvm.net has WHMCS which has affiliate capabilities. An average is hard to determine without spending more time taking into account of hosts that pay base on percentage,   $16 does not appear the average, but many of these companies . Once again no data to validate how each host earned a recommendation.

Its worth noting that only one host offers does not offer payments in the U.S. dollar ($), and that is the host that Digtalfaq.com has gone on the record for hosting with Eurovps.com. Which pays more than $16 per signup.

Either the owner of Digitalfaq.com doesn’t understand that not all hosting review sites work the same, or is neglecting to leave it out.

After all Digitalfaq.com’s disclaimer seems to insist that the FCC is going after blogs(As if all review sites were blogs). That the problem was all about affiliate commissions, yet they signed up for affiliate programs if they were there. That assumption alone tells you that Digitalfaq.com is not a source for facts.

My last Digitalfaq.com post will cover what they don’t understand about review sites.

Digitalfaq.com – Hypocrite – Claims of what makes a great host Part 2

Digitalfaq.com’s Top hosts of 2013 post claims to have the magic formula to spot a bad host. Never mind they have their own recommendations on who to host with.  But do the hosts Digitalfaq.com recommends stack up against their advice? Not to mention is the advice valid.

There is a site that has their own advice; it’s a review site that does not always focus on who gives the highest payout. Instead this is one of the few “blog” review sites out there that Digitalfaq.com claims the FTC is after.

I find those sites vulgar and unethical. Affiliate-driven lists are a cancer on the Internet, and to communication in general. In fact, that’s why the FTC has been more involved in blogging since 2009, to combat this nuisance.


An inaccurate statement, designed to draw your attention away from digitalfaq.com’s lack of data on the hosts they recommend. But this post is not the only one I have found that does not deal in facts. I’ll cover that in my last post about digitalfaq.com.

Digitalfaq.com’s attempt at distraction, or what they claim makes a great host.

Most review sites I have encountered are not blogs.  But hostingsthatsucks.com is one of the few exceptions. Sure they have their own top list of hosts. Yes all of the top hosts featured on the list are high payouts. But their approach is not to just focus on the high payouts, but any payout even if it’s a few bucks. The company focuses on being on the top of search engines for a specific kind of search. This is where the blog comes into play, with a theme of “(Hostname) sucks)”.  But seldom do the hosts that show up there actually suck (though that seems to change based on affiliate commissions or their free hosting is shut off). They used to be pretty good at being in the top of that particular search engine result but lately their traffic has been taking a dive. Zyma.com got one of their “reviews”, which was also without fact. Not to mention their site failed to mention that this site was brand new. My counter posts earned me the title of Benjamin the Grumpy blogger because I had addressed why a brand spanking new company had no negative reviews.


Sure I was accused of not liking new hosts, but I am more hurt by the fact that this site was not referenced (ok not really). The fact that Zyma.com had no negative reviews  (or any reviews) worked perfectly into Hostingsthatsucks.com’s formula. Which is to be on the first page, and better yet first result for when every you searched for “(hostname) sucks”, and than claim that the company has few negative reviews, or few valid negative reviews therefore the hosting company which they happen to be an affiliate for does not suck. Going through the searches myself I often found more than the claimed “few” results. It does not take a lot for them to make a page and spin the concept of less “sucks” results for a host = “good”, “so no need to look further click now, oh and we have coupons”. Hostingsthatsuck.com didn’t follow FTC compliance until I brought it up with Endurance International Group. But they are a blog, yet they don’t always go for the highest payout. But I will get into that with my last post.

Just like Hostingsthatsuck.com, they want you to see a lengthy post and than buy from one of the hosts on the list. But do any of these points have merit and/or do all the hosts live up to these standards?

Digitalfaq.com’s Points: Professional skills./ Wisdom only by age

The first two seem to be a knock against the young. Despite all of my years doing business online I have yet to come to a point where I suspected the person on the other side was a child. Though this may be an interesting point should Hostgator.com manages to find itself on the list. I have to ask is there anyone that knows the exact age of the person they are communicating with? There are times I don’t even know the gender on the other end.   Decades of good living have people checking my id and doing a double take whenever I buy over the counter allergy drugs. I hope that they are not just flattering me and that I do look more than a decade younger than I am.  Talking to your host generally involves dealing with them by phone, ticket, chat system, email, possible a forum, and maybe if you really like them their social media. You generally do not get to see how old the person is on the other side. While age is not apparent in communications, professionalism and skill are.

I got started in webhosting at a young age, and my current age is one of those facts I don’t care to share as its bad enough by this point I am reminded of my own mortality. My start came about from someone who had found my design work online he had helped me to get more clients and eventually to start 4 hosting companies. He was about 30. However it would be our other business associates that would be the road blocks to success.

If you read my blog earlier you will know about two of my business partners. The first of which was a man (age 52) who had 5 years of technical experience, 20 years’ experience of running his own company. We will call him Bob.  However at the greatest hour Bob freaked out. In a mere week we had over 5000 clients.  My first business partner and I were ecstatic, especially after months of work and spending our own finances it appeared we were near reaping the fruit of our labors. Not to mention this was miles beyond our expectations. For which everyone but Bob was working on how to adapt. Instead of remaining calm and hiring more people and buying more servers, Bob decided to lock us out. It was sheer lunacy. Talks of hiring more people and buying more equipment despite growing profits had alarmed him.  He had never had an influx of customers on this scale before. The first Business partner held control of the domain. Two weeks after the site launched, it died.  To this day my first business partner owns the domain, it’s a sad reminder of what might have been.

My first business partner and I went on to form 4 more hosting companies after that, to this day they are still around. Years later after launched a successful company he sent me an email wondering if we had a place for him. I blocked his email.

Due to a non-disclosure agreement I can’t discuss names. But I am not restrained from telling about our second business partner/CTO and how he almost killed our second attempt at a hosting company. We will call him Bruce. Bruce was 48, (64 now) more than double my age. He had 4 years of experience of running his own private hosting company and despite his failures continues to run it to this day. He also had 7 years of hosting tech experience. On top of that he had 7 years of software development experience. Despite all those years of experience, Bruce did not have the wisdom for success. Our CEO and I (CFO) had no idea how bad he was, because he appeared to be doing his part until a month after the launch. Between poor choices of script installment, bullheaded behavior towards hiring more techs despite a huge influx of customers, and apathy when it came to any form of a business meeting it was clear he was not someone you wanted in your company. Not to mention if he had been left unchecked he would have been cramming customers like sardines.

The nail in the partnership was when Bruce claimed to be taking time off for a funeral. Funny thing is his mom sent pictures of him para-sailing to the CEO’s mother

Putting that aside there are a lot of teenagers out there that have contributed to the internet, so before you go knocking them make sure you are not using any of their creations. Age does not equal wisdom. If anything Digitalfaq.com has alienated a demographic.

Digitalfaq.com’s Point: Ownership and investment

In short the claim is ownership equals a reason to stick around. This may be true for many hosts, however there is no true data available to make a rational grounds for holding against a host not owning their own data center or servers. After all hostgator.com uses softlayer.com (formerly theplanet.com). I have no idea if they lease or own the servers. Note: hostgator.com (a host that offers unlimited hosting) is a sponsor of Digitalfaq.com.

But while we are the subject of companies like hostgator.com that use softlayer.com’s data centers; the following hosts that appear on digitalfaq.com’s top hosting list are also with Softlayer.com.

  • Asmallorange.com
  • Hawkhost.com
  • Site5.com (theplanet network info)
  • Froghost.com
  • Futurehosting.com

Furthermore the following hosts that do not appear to have their own data centers:

  • Downtownhost.com – Delaware U.S. owner, server in Argentina
  • Ninjalion.com – (belongs to downtownhost.com based off whois info) Delaware U.S. Owner, server in Buenos Aires
  • Stream101.com – private network info
  • Knownhost.com – private network info
  • Hostv.com – Osogrande.com servers

I can’t say with 100% certainty that they don’t own their own data centers. Nor would I know if they are not if they own their own servers.

Needless to say there is one unifying factor that all hosts find a reason to stick around rather they own their servers and data centers, and that is reoccurring income.

On a side note, Hostgator.com is a sponsor of Digitalfaq.com.


Digitalfaq.com’s Point: Earned reputation

This is where I call bull shit, and yes I used a colorful metaphor. Reviews even with great detail may not tell the whole story. Just as all so called review sites may not be in it for large payouts.

One thing that I personally kills a review no matter how detailed as I have previously mentioned sif a domain is missing from the hosting review it is worthless. I see no data with this list of stereotypes that indicates any sites that are hosted with these “approved hosts” Domains give you a chance to look at the whois to see how old the site is and if they actually are hosted with whom they claim to be hosted with to see how long they have been hosted with the company they claim to be with. Not to mention actually looking at the site gives you some back ground into what kind of customer they may be. A just bought domain name, with a single page website can also make a review worthless. Another part to the domain is if the Whois info tells you that the hosting company owns the domain in the review (something I have caught some hosts doing).

Just as positive reviews are not an end all indicator of service; the same can be said of negative reviews. Happy customers are far less likely to write a review than an unhappy customer when it comes to hosting. A webhost is not going to get the same fandom like say Star Wars. Not to mention who is to say if detailed reviews are not being written by a host, and detailed negative reviews by competitors or customers that no one can please. Over the last few years I have found fivver.com, where surprisingly you can pay people to buy a cheap kindle book and give it 1 or more positive reviews. At the same time there are those that offer to buy your competitors book and write negative reviews.  For that matter the amount of likes on Facebook, followers on twitter, or other social media that can be bought as well.  I have seen 12,000 likes on Facebook for as little as $5. There are companies out there that specialize in nothing more than providing a false start, many calling themselves Reputation experts/SEO experts.

Speaking of companies that deal in providing reputation some of the companies on Digitalfaq.com’s recommendation list I have caught dealing with one of the worst hosting review sites out there, webhostingstuff.com:

These hosts paid not in affiliate commissions, but bid against one another for positions in a top 25 host list on webhostingstuff.com

Digitalfaq.com has no links to any solid reviews.

Digitalfaq.com’s Point: Successful longevity

As a general rule most businesses are likely to fail in the first 5 years, however that does not mean that a company will stand the test of time after 5 years. In my time hosting has greatly evolved. Social Media, Unlimited, Cloud and VPS hosting was not even a concept when I first started. FrontPage used to be something we highlighted to bring customers in.  Making your site compatible for a phone would have been a laughable concept. But here we are.

What Digitalfaq.com seems to neglect here is that a new company may be eager to bring in new customers. They have more at stake than an established company with a steady source of renewals. So ruling a company out because they are less than 5 years old does not make a lot of sense. At the same time reoccurring income is a great motivator for any company to keep going, and eventually get their own data center and servers. I for one was guilty of loving the reoccurring customers more than new customers.  Remarkable there are hosts out there that manage to scrape by on 10 year old concepts and terrible service. Like Burst.net.

Digitalfaq.com has another area they failed to disclose, and that is not every host on their list is 5 years +. One method I have to find out how old a site is by reviewing whois info. My preferred site is: http://centralops.net/co/DomainDossier.aspx

I have found many companies in the past that will try to claim they are a certain age. Like a company called mindshark.ca. They claimed that they started in November 2006, despite their domain being registered in 2010.


Based off the whois info I can often find out how old a company might be. There have been a few sites like iweb.com that has removed the start dates from their sites because I have pointed out their creation date was after their “start date”.

The following sites based off whois info did not exist 5 years ago.

  • Ninjalion.com – created August 26, 2010
  • Crocweb.com – created August 9, 2009


However domain creation dates do not always equal start date. I have 2000 + domains that clearly did not start when I got them, at best they have ppc page.  Sites may start weeks, months, even years after the domain’s creation. Which is where another site called archive.org comes in handy. It gives you snap shots of how a site looked in the past all the way back to 1996. Using this site I found a few interesting points about the following sites.

  • Froghost.comDomain creation January 6, 2004. Froghost.com’s Facebook page says they were founded in 2009, they joined Facebook January 2011, first post was March 12, 2011. Their first tweet was on March 11, 2011. However archive,org shows a standard domain registration page launch page till February 18, 2010.
  • Crocweb.com, while created in August 9, 2009, does not appear to have an actually hosting page till August 22, 2010.
  • Futurehosting.com – Domain creation July 10, 2001, shows a coming soon page till December 8, 2008.

Froghost.com and Futurehosting.com could be classified as aged domains. Domains that are sometimes purchased for the sake of selling later. But are prized for having long creation date behind them. I have about 2000 domains that I have bought over the last 15 years. All of which I had planned to start something with. About 20 of them are hosting domains, all of which are 10 years or older.  Currently I am cleaning house and I put sites up for sale to bring in new design customers. You would be surprised that one of the biggest selling factors is the age of a domain. Aged domains are the reason why archive.org is a very important tool when reviewing a host or any site claiming to have years of experiences, regardless if someone recommends it or not.

Digitalfaq.com’s Point: – Knowing the limits

When I first looked at this section digitalfaq.com was clearly anti-unlimited hosting. But now clearly they are not immune to the huge payout to companies like site5, Arivixe, Inmotion, and Siteground.com who I have found buying top spots with webhostuff.com (or what webhostingstuff.com likes to call ppc advertising), Details about the payouts for these companies and their affiliate programs in the next post.

Unlimited resource accounts are not for the serious site owner.

Digitalfaq.com’s Point: Transparency

If you think this is the point where you don’t have to read the TOS because Digitalfaq.com read it for you, think again. I cannot stress enough that you should read the terms of service with any company.  What is really missing here is what to look for in the terms of service.

Since I don’t have a lot of time I am going to deal with one company I know that operates like many hosts that Digitalfaq.com considers the worst offenders. Which brings me to Siteground.com. What was it Digitalfaq.com said?

good host has easy-to-understand policies, rules and agreements.

A bad host tries to hide “gotchas” in their often-buried documents, which are written in butchered “legalese” English, and hide limits such as SQL connections, inodes, email I/O, and file usage that turn so-called “unlimited” accounts into highly limited near-worthless web accounts. Many times, these documents are buried on their site, and thrown in the face of customers as the basis by which to charge them fees or outright deny service or tech support.

For starters Siteground.com has 12 web pages in regards to terms of use. That alone makes it harder to understand the company’s policy as the SiteGround Terms of Service web page is lengthy on it’s own (and opens up in a pop up window). This web page is 21 pages long, 15,185 words. The word refund appears 35 times over 11 different sections.

In addition this is what they consider unlimited space for “Unlimited web Space applies to your use of web pages only (html, php, etc.). All other files are considered as premium storage for which our Fair Use policy shall apply.. The phrase “fair use” appears which translates to unspecified limits. :”Fair use” appears 20 times in 4 sections. Which translates to when you become no longer profitable they can give you the boot.

Digitalfaq.com’s Point: Upgrade paths

One of the big problems with hosts like many that appear in so called hosting review sites is they are very limited in their offerings. There is no way Endurance International Group (EIG) will allow you to host something on the scale of Google.com or Amazon.com with one of their unlimited plans. Never mind that’s the impression they want you to have as you look over their nutritional mock up on fatcow.com where it uses words like “oodle” and “free”. The sad truth is there are many out there that don’t even know that EIG has 40 + hosts, and leaving one in angst they may go to another expecting better service (never mind this EIG host may be cheaper than the last one). Considering how companies like EIG operate, you may have picked their most expensive host, but may very well be subjected to the same restraints/service as their cheapest hosting plan. The hidden limit at which they kick you off or put a bottleneck on your account is determined by profit. All hosting is about profit (well maybe except when it comes to charities). That is not to say making money is bad, but there is a problem when you don’t know how far you can expand. But if a host tells you they are not concerned about profit, I tell you don’t walk away, run.

With companies like Rackspace.com I know if I exceed my borders I get billed for it. Which to me seems better than wondering at what point I get the boot. I have design deadlines to worry about not rather my site will be up or not. No sorry that’s not a recommendation, as I myself have not prepared or kept enough data to make that recommendation. So no affiliate links, perhaps the stray Rackspace Google ad.

In short Digitalfaq.com’s recommendations fall short of what makes a great host

I don’t fault any one for recommending a host, and getting paid to do it.  On other sites that’s how I make money. Making money is not evil, nor the root of all evil. The method used to make money is a different story.  Digitalfaq.com uses sterotypes. Teenagers are bad, so they would not know how to operate a server and are dumb. In which case I ask, what hosting companies are employing teenagers, or better yet kids? Hosts that own their data center and servers ” For them, failing is not an option.”.  Yet that did not stop companies like Enron and Hostess.  Not to mention Blockbuster is just around the corner, seriously they are shutting down all over where I live, being replaced by competitor’s vending machines. Than your supposed to go by reputation, yet some of these companies have bought and paid for it, and some even build their own review sites like siteground.com.

In the end Digitafaq.com offers nothing but hearsay and stereotypes with hosts that fall at the standards that were set.  Digitalfaq.com has done nothing to prove the hosts that they recommend are worthy of your patronage, just provide a distraction and affiliate links.

Digitalfaq.com – Hypocrite doing what other Hosting review sites do Part 1

Digitalfaq.com finds its way here because of an email I got from someone that did not know better but thought Digitalfaq.com was a great resource. The person who emailed me thought I might want to reference digitalfaq.com as an unbiased source.  The page on Digitalfaq.com I am referred to claims to be against “affiliate splogs (spam blogs/sites)”.  Going further to claim “These splogger sites simply list the companies that pay the best commissions, and the top site is always the one with the highest payout.“. Now to add to the interest digtalfaq.com adds their own top lists. No surprise but I don’t see a company that does not offer an affiliate program. Which I notice while I am clicking on those hosts I am getting affiliate cookies.


Once again (because apparently a few hundred times may still not be enough), I am not against making money or affiliate programs. But I am against what Digitalfaq.com is attempting to do.

I have often been called a hypocrite because I have ads on this site. I am not sure how me having ads (which can often not be about webhosting), makes me the same as someone claiming hosts on a list are the best, giving out “awards”, or unverified reviews all for the sake of a payout. Also the payout when it comes to reviews sites is not always focused on high payments. Some companies like Alreadyhosting.com, hostingsthatsuck.com, and hosting-review.com have ways of profiting off the really low.  Hostingsthatsuck.com was promoting a host that pays out less than $5 per sign up (zyma.com).

I don’t endorse the ads on this site (i.e. making false claims about some company being too good to be true). Digitalfaq.com is engaging in the very hypocrisy that I have been often accused of. While I on the other hand don’t mind anyone being suspicious of me having personal agenda, so long as you realize that it’s very possible that the sites I am trying to warn you about may have their own agenda as well. If you’re not open to exploring the possibilities of what I am trying to disclose read no further

I honestly would not have a problem with Digitalfaq.com doing their own recommended hosts if they actually validated their recommendations with facts, not to mention disclosure upfront that they make money if you sign up with a host they recommend. Instead when I first reviewed it there was no disclaimer, now there is one that is at the very bottom of their long winded fact less “trust me just buy from these guys”. I suspect digitalfaq.com has been called out by others that saw “hostname here”/affiliate/(affiliate id) when their browser was redirecting to one of the digitalfaq.com’s recommended hosts.

Never mind how much Digitalfaq.com tout they have been with Eurovps.com, their domain whois information suggests Digitalfaq.com last change something back in November 14, 2012. Plus since Digitalfaq.com loves Eurovps.com so much why does Hostgator.com and other companies get a far bigger banner. Bigger banner means a better chance of the ad being clicked on. I suspect from the ads I have been seeing they are all affiliate programs.

Over the next couple of days I will be posting a dissection of what Digitalfaq.com is doing and how they are like most of the hosting review sites out there.