thanks for sharing your opinion, but I was looking for a reply from someone inside fly.io

you have no idea wtf you writing about; it's been a few hours now and it's become clear that someone tagged the post as 'app-not-working, which made the post got 'private' and only available for logged-in users. it's also become apparent that the linked post in on a community forum for users without a support plan.

the dramatic tone and accusations in your reply are not warranted anymore

it would loose the comic appeal though

put this at the end of your ~/.ssh/config

    Host *
     ForwardAgent no

ssh config uses tabs for indentation, make sure you got those right

translation: al-qaeda had a twitter account before the mediocre-man with a middle-life crisis accidentally bought it. Now the nazis have accounts there.

Translation: I only care about what my political enemy is doing will turn a blind eye everything else

Elon bought twitter with the help of the Saudis, so go ahead and tell me how helping out the family that funded 9/11 is somehow fighting al-qaeda

The Saudis were already an owner of Twitter before Elon Musk. In fact they were the largest.

But if you need another reason here’s a dead simple one. All that Saudi money invested in Twitter and musk, at least isn’t going somewhere else to fuel more nefarious things.

I think everyone in the (us) could serve to take a breath, and turn things down and notch or two. We all care about our country and want the best things for it. We just disagree about how to get there and I'm willing to de-escalate when I can in hopes that reciprocity will follow and civility can regain a foothold

> All that Saudi money invested in Twitter

To quote the film How High:

"A drop in the bucket, sucker!"

> will turn a blind eye everything else

incorrect

this is a throwaway and will remain so, but before the troubles people were already complaining about twitter being infested with nazis, it's just that then whatever had been done to get rid of them was undone, thus my comment

I think some of the entries in the Inbound section will inform how to deal with spam, I saw some references to spam assassin there.

https://stalw.art/docs/category/inbound

In particular the DATA (or BDAT) stage configuration; it runs a command and send the headers / data to stdin and receives back the modified message from stdout.

https://stalw.art/docs/smtp/inbound/data/#content-filters

what are those links for?

Reposts get relinked.

I’ve always seen it as a good way to let people new to a topic see the full discussion that’s already occurred. You get more insight

My question is; Why did it get down-voted to oblivion, despite it being a normal practice on other posts?

My guess is usually when I see it, there's at least a single word description with it, such as "dupe" or "see also:"

it can be read as "this has already been posted" instead of "prior art" when the latter isn't explicitly specified

Previous submissions of same project

email addresses are strings, if the website where the registration is being made makes no effort to validate the email address is controlled by the user session registering it, how do you suppose to block it from happening?

you think zuck changed his mind on this?

On the contrary - this quote has stood the test of time. If you are trusting zuck in 2023 then you really are a DF

too vague!

who locked you out? why did you get the hammer?

I have no idea tbh. Never got an email abt it. Saw the charges after a while (my miss) wanted to log back into my account to cancel - couldn’t because account was locked.

The thing that annoyed me most is: they knew the account was locked and I could not used it and still charged me.

1. which company, DO or PS?

2. what kind of project were you running there?

3. CC chargebacks are a thing, do you have receipts.

Paperspace; just tinkering around… Yeah, CC chargebacks work for 3 months or so here in Europe

tinkering around got your account locked?

could that have been triggered by content moderation?

No, I don’t think so. It’s been like a few years since I tried them (2019?). I think it was running some example notebooks - but again, too long ago…

Back to the important questions: 1) Why no user support and explanation? 2) Why lock out users and keep charging them? 3) Why not give them the full refund for the period that Paperspace KNEW I could not access my account but just the 3 months I could do myself by CC chargebacks?

Why do I need to justify myself here? What part of this “we lock you out and charge you” is proper behavior? @mewmew07?

locking and still charging is not proper; if you read my previous replies you'll notice they're focused on why the lockout happened

1) locking out for TOS breach very often happens without feedback, as does automatic flagging systems - no feedback on TOS breach is sometimes done when the effort to provide an explanation would expose the systems internals or considered unnecessary effort, think spam, system resource abuse, content 2) can only come up with technical reasons for that, neither serve as justification 3) see point 2

> Why do I need to justify myself here?

you don't need to

I also never got an explanation or like any feedback from customer support. They randomly charged back a number of charges and deleted my account (!) so I could never find out what happened. Weirdest customer/service experience I had in a VERY long time