cdx

Good day to you too.

"Its pretty clear.. that you are a SHILL (or a community fan of LowEndBox) as you phrase it... whatever you want to call it. your impact is still negative and the same."

Open community, ne?

"I find it highly suspicious that your ACCOUNT STARTED the SAME TIME this was posted."

Of course, I found that this site/post even existed through a community.

"You are FAR too sensitive to deem comments as an ATTACK on the site; or deem it as non-valid. Frankly, there is nothing for you to defend. As I stated; theres nothing wrong with his technical write-up. I just highly question the motivations of being posted on HN with such a title, promo code, ads, etc."

I'm just defending the 'questionability' part - there is nothing questionable about this article being posted here, nor is it complete spam.

"FRANKLY, what you are doing text book 'Gaming HN'."

It's not a very fun game, if a game at all.

"And Heres WHY: 1) You just started your account today for this post"

Yes. I only found out that this place existed through a community.

"2) You have your comments upvoted and down vote dissenting comments by your confederates"

Sure, someone else might have been voting me up, but I don't have access to downvote anyone. Please try again. (I've also upvoted some other members of HN's group here - eh)

"3) You keep on telling people to go to " BuyVM .net" which by the way has LowEndBox.com as its biggest advocate"

It's only the "biggest advocate" because it won a voting contest - if another company won the vote they would be listed.

"4) You have a very intimate knowledge of how LowEndBox operates, (if he does affiliate links, or has a WebHostingTalk account, or if he makes money from his ads)"

It's kind of easy to figure out if you actually visit the/any site often. Who doesn't make money from ads?

"Come on you can tell me if you are Francisco Dias - the guy that runs BuyVM and markets almost exclusively at LowEndBox (You just got caught!)"

Nope. I'm not Francisco, sorry. I'm just a satisfied client.

"Please stop trying to Game HN and HN users."

There is no "game," sir, I don't know what you're trying to play.

Nope, just a community fan. I'm sure you/others would do the same to defend this site if it came under attack for something you deem as non-valid. There is only one person who works for LEB and that is LEA.

Of course any VPS can host 18 static sites. The main point is even one with as little memory as 64mb can host static sites, whilst the majority opinion over at WHT is that it wasn't possible. I'm sure the OP of the WHT post wasn't intending to put out 'flamebait,' merely ask a simple question which the majority said nei. I don't believe LEA (the admin) had a WHT account, so he made a writeup via his blog. Who knows if he gets affiliates? The providers would have to make it though the promotional codes that are directly emailed to him (he does not post direct affiliate links that I can see), but the offers posted on WHT would get no affiliate income. I do see money being made via the side banner adds however. Some see it as 'flame bait,' others see it as an disproving article. I guess no one can win, ne?

Why must you assume that is spam? It could very well be from the front pages of LEB.

Have a look at this thread - http://www.webhostingtalk.com/showthread.php?t=765561 . The title of the blog post retorts what is generally said in that thread (No, you can't run 18 static sites on a 64mb VPS). It's a (more detailed) reply - nothing more. The offers (which, LEA most likely doesn't make money on - just the sidebar ads) were there about a month or so before the post. So, what else is wrong with it?

Nah, just a supporter of LEB. If you actually looked at the post in a sensible way you'd come to the same realizations.

Hostigation. Another good one would be BuyVM at $15/y =)

I do see your point, but I think the little more time setting things up manually is worth it in the end rather than using more memory (or needing a higher tier VPS)

Nope. Try again, bro. The host mentioned was in the original thread that this blog post was a response to.

"Kinda." The article says it might be possible to take it one step further to run a low volume wordpress/basic PHP install.

Agreed. Using apache on a lowendbox is not a smart idea. Lighttpd serving static sites takes ~5MB in practise. That's also including a SSHd and other services.

The title at the top was because (if you read the article) the blog post spurred from a post on WebHostingTalk asking the community if it was possible to host 18 static sites on a 64MB VPS. A lot of people said no, so this post was made to disprove them.

Have a look at BuyVM.net - $15/year for 128MB.

This article is more aimed to the type of user who would use a command line interface. If they require cpanel, they should look elsewhere. Negating this article because of a potential user deficiency is ludicrous.