Pickaweb -WTF?

[Roland Perry]

I have today completely out of the blue been blitzed with almost twenty
emails from Pickaweb, which I initially assumed was some kind of scam.

One of them, however, had something about it which required further
investigation, and I now find I've "been migrated" completely behind my
back.

And coming here, there's some traffic about this.

Not least they are suddenly claiming to be taking money from my bank
account which I have not authorised, nor have had more than a few
second's notice.
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <Iv$aTkbF9...@perry.co.uk>, at 14:29:41 on Sat, 18 Aug
2018, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> remarked:

"Have a question? For an instant answer chat to us now!"

I'm getting a lot of non-answers, after much delay.

Does not bode well :(

I'm wondering if it's deliberate that their webchat doesn't timestamp
each message, so you can't go back and beat them up about how slow they
are.

About the only concrete thing I've learnt is that while they insist they
are migrating people 7 days a week, come hell or high water, most of
their staff, who could help with issues I have, aren't in until Monday.
--
Roland Perry

[John Hall]

In message <Iv$aTkbF9...@perry.co.uk>, Roland Perry
<rol...@perry.co.uk> writes

Did you not receive anything from Gradwell in advance saying that you
were going to be migrated? If not, that's very odd. ISTM that your main
beef is with Gradwell, for not warning you and for passing over your
bank details without your consent.
--
John Hall
"Hegel was right when he said that we learn from history
that man can never learn anything from history."
George Bernard Shaw (1856-1950)

[Roland Perry]

In message <1sQ4OuHyIIebFwiw@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, at 21:31:46 on Sat,
18 Aug 2018, John Hall <john_...@jhall.co.uk> remarked:

>In message <Iv$aTkbF9...@perry.co.uk>, Roland Perry
><rol...@perry.co.uk> writes
>>I have today completely out of the blue been blitzed with almost
>>twenty emails from Pickaweb, which I initially assumed was some kind
>>of scam.
>>
>>One of them, however, had something about it which required further
>>investigation, and I now find I've "been migrated" completely behind
>>my back.
>>
>>And coming here, there's some traffic about this.
>>
>>Not least they are suddenly claiming to be taking money from my bank
>>account which I have not authorised, nor have had more than a few
>>second's notice.
>
>Did you not receive anything from Gradwell in advance saying that you
>were going to be migrated? If not, that's very odd.

Apparently I was supposed to have been told, by Pickaweb's Sales (or is
that Managing) Director in mid June [according to their chat-support
people].

That turns out to be around when I last got routine admin emails from
Gradwell about my hosting account.

No email about (this) migration, from either party, until suddenly this
flood on the 18th. (Good choice of day, not; a Saturday when
accounts/sales support staff are all away for the weekend).

I do see a couple of emails from Pickaweb in my deleted-spam folder
about renewing domains, but I get that kind of
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Domain_name_scams#slamming> email fairly
routinely.

[Which kind of reminds me, why did the Registries for my various domains
hand them over to a new Registrar without asking me?]

Anyway, that proves Pickaweb did have my email address, and makes it
even odder I wasn't told about either the corporate transfer, nor the
imminent "big bang" migration.

>ISTM that your main beef is with Gradwell, for not warning you and for
>passing over your bank details without your consent.

And Pickaweb for using those details without my consent. Also, isn't it
rather sharp practice to issue an invoice, and then take payment as soon
as an hour and ten minutes later? Isn't there a code of practice for
[Card continuous] Direct Debits that the customer gets two weeks notice?
--
Roland Perry

[rmla...@gmail.com]

I seem to have been migrated today without any warning. I get my email via the BCS (British Computer Society) and use t webmail.gradwell.com to access it but that now redirects to https://phantom.hostingseries.net:2096/ and demands my email and password.

I was not sure whether this was a scam or not but it sounds, from the discussion here, that it might be genuine. I've received nothing from the BCS telling me (though I did get an email from Pickaweb a few months ago which I took to be a phishing attempt) this was going to happen, so I'm pretty unhappy.

The one saving grace is that, with the BCS, mail forwarding is handled separately (via the bcs website) so I have been able to set that up even though I can no longer access my past emails.


Robert Laws

[Roland Perry]

In message <67378745-8857-48b6...@googlegroups.com>, at
09:39:23 on Thu, 23 Aug 2018, rmla...@gmail.com remarked:

>
>I seem to have been migrated today without any warning. I get my email
>via the BCS (British Computer Society) and use t webmail.gradwell.com
>to access it but that now redirects to
>https://phantom.hostingseries.net:2096/ and demands my email and
>password.
>
>I was not sure whether this was a scam or not but it sounds, from the
>discussion here, that it might be genuine. I've received nothing from
>the BCS telling me (though I did get an email from Pickaweb a few
>months ago which I took to be a phishing attempt) this was going to
>happen, so I'm pretty unhappy.
>
>The one saving grace is that, with the BCS, mail forwarding is handled
>separately (via the bcs website) so I have been able to set that up
>even though I can no longer access my past emails.

The usenet.org.uk email system seems to be suffering since yesterday,
see uk.legal.moderated for some of the fallout.
--
Roland Perry

[Charles Lindsey]

Yes, usenet.org.uk was migrated yesterday, and I spent the day fixing
the fallout.

The problem is that everything is run through spamassassin which inserts
a header running to many lines. This is perfectly legal, but some
moderation software seems to be inserting blank lines into the middle of
it. We has this problem on u.r.christian, but Mark Goodge seems to have
fixed it and today's articles there are coming in clean. I shall take
this up with Ian Jackson.

--
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At my New Home, still doing my own
thing-----------
Tel: +44 161 488 1845 Web:
http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Email: c...@clerew.man.ac.uk Snail: 40 SK8 5BF, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9 Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7 65 E8 64 7E 14
A4 AB A5

[Roland Perry]

In message <fua8hl...@mid.individual.net>, at 12:29:56 on Fri, 24
Aug 2018, Charles Lindsey <c...@clerew.man.ac.uk> remarked:

>> The usenet.org.uk email system seems to be suffering since
>>yesterday, see uk.legal.moderated for some of the fallout.
>
>Yes, usenet.org.uk was migrated yesterday, and I spent the day fixing
>the fallout.

Did you have any warning - that it was happening at all, let alone
scheduled for yesterday?
--
Roland Perry

[Martin Liddle]

On 18/08/2018 14:29, Roland Perry wrote:
> I have today completely out of the blue been blitzed with almost twenty
> emails from Pickaweb, which I initially assumed was some kind of scam.
>
> One of them, however, had something about it which required further
> investigation, and I now find I've "been migrated" completely behind my
> back.
>

My experience is different to yours. I did get a notification some
months ago about the migration from Gradwell and then an email on the
12-06-18 from Pickaweb that migration would take place at some point in
the near future and then an email on the 01-08-18 giving details of a
Pickaweb account. All this surprised me as I had closed my Gradwell
account eighteen months ago and moved my web site to TSOHost. When I
contacted Pickaweb they said as they couldn't change the DNS there would
be no charges. The whole thing is a shambles.


--
Martin Liddle, Tynemouth Computer Services
Staveley, Chesterfield, Derbyshire UK

[Jim Crowther]

In uk.net.providers.gradwell, on Fri, 24 Aug 2018 15:07:00, Martin

Liddle wrote:

>The whole thing is a shambles.

I'll say! Although I'd had an email giving notice that it might happen
sometime, there was zero notice of when it would actually happen, which
was four weeks ago. I wasn't given the new email account passwords
until the next day, so no chance of warning twenty-odd people how to
access their email. Complicated by the fact I was in the US until last
week with limited data transfer speed and allowance.

The Gradwell's push of website files was completely buggered, compounded
by the disappearance of several associated databases from Gradwell.

However, there was a silver lining - I eventually found about five
domains that were no longer required or used by 'customers' which helped
considerably, and it was a good excuse to buckle down, find my way
around cPanel, and tidy lots of things up. I repopulated the websites
without the dross that had accumulated over the years, and all in all
I'm much happier with the management system at Pickaweb. At least this
is their core business!

Now we should get a u.n.p.pickaweb newsgroup started - anyone remember
how to do this? ;)

--
Jim Crowther

[Molly Mockford]

On 24/08/2018 15:51, Jim Crowther wrote:

> Now we should get a u.n.p.pickaweb newsgroup started - anyone remember
> how to do this? ;)

http://www.4theweb.co.uk/rfdmaker/ - must be years since this was used,
but I'm sure it still works!
--
Molly Mockford
Nature loves variety. Unfortunately, society hates it. (Milton Diamond
Ph.D.)
(My Reply-To address *is* valid, though may not remain so for ever.)

[David Gibson]

On 24/08/2018 15:07, Martin Liddle wrote:

> I did get a notification some months ago about the migration from
> Gradwell and then an email on the 12-06-18 from Pickaweb that
> migration would take place at some point in the near future and then
> an email on the 01-08-18 giving details of a Pickaweb account. All
> this surprised me as I had closed my Gradwell account eighteen months
> ago and moved my web site to TSOHost. When I contacted Pickaweb they
> said as they couldn't change the DNS there would be no charges. The
> whole thing is a shambles.

... suggesting, perhaps, that they *did* have the means to charge you if
they wanted to. I do hope that is not the case - that Gradwell passed
on your banking details as well as the false information that your
account needed migrating.


--
David Gibson

[DaveG]

Sounds like a good idea to do a subject access request.

--
ad astra tabernamque

[Chris S]

On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 17:31:33 +0100, Molly Mockford
<nospam...@mollymockford.me.uk> wrote:

>On 24/08/2018 15:51, Jim Crowther wrote:
>
>> Now we should get a u.n.p.pickaweb newsgroup started - anyone remember
>> how to do this? ;)
>
>http://www.4theweb.co.uk/rfdmaker/ - must be years since this was used,
>but I'm sure it still works!

It may be well worth reading the following (from a
uk.net.news.announce monthly post on the 16th of this month) as well:

>Archive-name: uk/guidelines
>Posting-frequency: monthly
>Last-modified: Sun Jul 12 17:06:39 BST 2015
>
>The procedures for coordinating newsgroup management within the UK hierarchy
>are contained in three documents, of which this article contains the first.
>
> GUIDELINES FOR GROUP CREATION WITHIN THE UK HIERARCHY
> <http://www.usenet.org.uk/guidelines.html>
> <ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet/news.answers/uk/guidelines>
> VOTING PROCEDURES WITHIN THE UK HIERARCHY
> <http://www.usenet.org.uk/voting.html>
> <ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet/news.answers/uk/voting>
> THE UK USENET COMMITTEE
> <http://www.usenet.org.uk/committee.html>
> <ftp://rtfm.mit.edu/pub/usenet/news.answers/uk/committee>
>
>
>The following Guidelines were originally accepted on 07 Aug 95 by a vote
>conducted on uk.net.news with 93 votes in favour and 11 votes against. They
>were amended by further votes conducted on uk.net.news.announce on 19 Apr 97
>with majorities of 31 or more votes in favour and 6 or less votes against,
>again on 15 April 98 by 47 to 13, again on 26 Sept 98 by the fast-track
>method, again on 28 Nov 1999 by 74 to 2 and 39 to 27, again on 18 May 2000 by
>30 to 8, again on 13 Feb 2001 by 30 to 13 and again on 5 May 2001 by 52 to 27.
>
>
> GUIDELINES FOR GROUP CREATION WITHIN THE UK HIERARCHY
>
>The following words where used in this document have the precise
>meanings shown here:
>
>SHALL - any RFD which fails to follow this guideline will be invalid
>SHOULD - in all but exceptional or unusual cases an RFD ought to follow
> this guideline
>MAY - whilst this guideline is acceptable practice, it remains optional
>
>Requirements for Group Creation:
>
>It is hoped that most creations of new newsgroups within the UK hierarchy
>can be accomplished speedily and without the necessity for voting. When
>dissention arises, however, voting may be the only method of resolution.
>
>These guidelines have the approval of the major UK service providers, who
>have declared that they will only carry and propagate groups created using
>them.
>
>It should be pointed out here that, as always, the decision whether or not
>to create a newsgroup on a given machine rests with the administrator of that
>machine. These guidelines are intended as an aid in making those decisions.
>On the other hand, it should be understood that groups created contrary to
>these guidelines are unlikely to propagate far.
>
>The Discussion:
>
>1) A request for discussion (RFD) on the creation of a new newsgroup
> shall be mailed to con...@usenet.org.uk (as moderator of
> uk.net.news.announce).
>
> Control will cross post the RFD to uk.net.news.announce, uk.net.news.config
> and any other groups or mailing lists related to the proposed topic or
> likely to be affected. The groups to be cross posted into should be those
> requested by the proponent. The proponent may also indicate which groups
> the Followups should be set to. Control may, at his discretion, add
> additional groups to these lists (or remove groups where such cross posting
> is beyond the technical capabilities of the news software).
> Uk.net.news.config shall be included in both the original cross posting
> and followups. Only postings which are cross posted to uk.net.news.config
> will be considered part of the definitive discussion.
>
> The RFD should include as much as possible of the following information
> concerning the proposed group:
> The Name
> The Charter
> Whether it is to be Moderated
> The name of the Moderator (if appropriate)
> A One-line Summary of the charter (max. 79 characters)
> The Initial Time to be allowed for discussion (which must be at
> least 10 days).
> Any of these items missing from the RFD must be resolved during the
> discussion.
>
> The Charter shall make clear what the topic of discussion within the group
> is to be (useful if arguments about what is "on-topic" should arise later
> on). It is also advisable for the Charter to indicate whether or not
> advertisements are welcome within the group, and if so of what sort. The
> same applies to the admissibility of job adverts, etc. Binaries are
> allowed in uk.* only in hierarchies explicitly created for binary posts,
> and having a hierarchy charter stating this. In all other hierarchies the
> group charter shall state that binaries are not permitted. In any uk.*
> hierarchy or group whose charter does not mention binaries, the assumption
> shall be that binaries are forbidden.
>
> Retromoderation, i.e. moderation of a newsgroup by way of content-based
> cancelling of articles, is not allowed, and RFDs which include the
> possibility of retromoderation will not be accepted. This does not affect
> the general power of moderators to cancel articles which have appeared in
> the group as a result of forgery, catastrophic failure of moderation
> software, or in other unforseen emergency circumstances.
>
> The One-line Summary will eventually go into the "newsgroups" file which
> many newsreaders make available to users as a quick guide to the intent of
> each newsgroup. As regards group Names, reference should be made to the
> document "Guidelines on uk.* Newsgroup Names" which is posted periodically
> to uk.net.news.announce.
>
>2) Where it is desired to provide for a large number of newsgroups to be
> created as and when demand emerges, all sharing a common charter, an RFD for
> a "group template" may be submitted, in the same form as an RFD, but
> containing also the scope of subjects for which it shall be available, and a
> standard charter and newsgroups line applicable to them all (with
> placeholders for those words specific to each subject). It may further
> specify a group or groups to which all future notices of quick creations
> must be crossposted.
>
> The scope of subjects shall be clear and finite, it must be possible to
> create a definitive list of potential groups (although it is not required
> that the proponent provides such a list). The scope shall give clear
> instructions as to the formation of group names under the template,
> including any flexibility (to be exercised at the discretion of the
> committee) that is allowed in naming.
>
> A group template RFD may also specify a single group which will be created
> immediately the proposal passes, without need of a quick creation request.
>
>3) If the RFD is in the correct form, and if the name of the proposed
> group falls within the normal accepted practice for the uk.* hierarchy
> (as detailed in "Guidelines on uk.* Newsgroup Names")
> con...@usenet.org.uk (as moderator of uk.net.news.announce) will post
> it. Otherwise, he will refer it to the Committee for resolution (which
> may involve negotiation with the original proponent). A proponent who
> needs help in choosing a name, or is looking for any other guidance
> in the creation procedure, may send email to comm...@usenet.org.uk
> before issuing his RFD.
>
>4) Discussion shall take place in uk.net.news.config and shall continue
> initially for 10 days, and thereafter as required until consensus is
> reached, or at least the important issues have been identified. It should
> be concerned with finding the final form of the Name, Charter, and other
> items listed above. Additional RFDs should be issued if substantive changes
> arise during the discussion. Revised RFDs should be discussed for a further
> initial 10 day period.
>
> Where 90 days have elapsed since the publication of the first RFD, the
> committee may direct that no further RFDs shall be published, but that the
> proposal shall either proceed to a vote within 40 days of the present RFD
> or be withdrawn. Any vote resulting from such a decision by the committee
> shall include the option ROD (re-open discussion). Where the RFD is
> concerned with the committee constitution, and the committee has not acted
> to curtail discussion within 130 days, the RFD shall proceed as if the
> committee had done so.
>
>5) If, by the end of the initial discussion period, a consensus has been
> reached and the proposal appears to be straightforward and
> non-controversial, the proponent may, within 40 days of the original
> publication of the most recent RFD, ask con...@usenet.org.uk to create the
> group by the "fast-track" method. If Control (as advised by the Committee)
> is satisfied of this, he will announce in uk.net.news.announce that, in the
> absence of valid objections, the new group will be created on a date not
> less than 5 days thereafter. In the event of 6 or more objections, or any
> objection which seems to the Committee to be well founded, the fast-track
> procedure shall be halted, and the RFD should either proceed to a vote, or
> have a revised RFD submitted for further discussion. In circumstances where
> the fast-track has failed on only minor problems, the proponent is
> permitted to correct these, and re-submit a fast-track request with the
> corrections, which shall then be conducted as above.
>
> Otherwise, the proponent may, within 40 days of the original publication of
> the most recent RFD, ask the votetaking organisation to conduct a vote.
> Where the vote results from the failure of a Fast Track, and the 40 day
> period has expired, the proponent may request a vote within 10 days of the
> Committee notice that the Fast Track was not successful.
>
> The proponent may, at any stage, withdraw an RFD, or permit another person
> to take over as proponent on the current RFD. The proponent must notify
> con...@usenet.org.uk. Control shall publish a notice of the change of
> proponent or withdrawal to all newsgroups which were included in the
> original RFD.
>
> Note than only con...@usenet.org.uk may issue 'newgroup', 'rmgroup' and
> 'checkgroups' messages which are to be regarded as valid under these
> guidelines.
>
>6) Where a group template exists, a group may be created by the 'Quick
> Creation' method, without any RFD (with formal Charter) being posted.
>
> A 'Quick Creation' request may be made by:
>
> A request for Control to create a group using the template shall
> contain the names and valid email addresses of the proponent and at
> least 11 (maximum 20) supporters. If Control (as advised by the
> Committee) is satisfied that the proposed group lies within the scope
> of the template, he shall announce in the newsgroups specified in the
> template that if a minimum of 11 of the provided list of supporters
> respond as indicated below then, in the absence of valid objections,
> the group shall be created on a date not less than 10 days thereafter.
> Control's announcement shall contain the names/valid email addresses
> of the proponent and supporters.
>
> Control shall email each supporter provided by the proponent informing
> them that they must email a reply within 10 days to acknowledge that
> they support the request and that the request will fail if fewer than
> 11 respond positively.
>
> If the original request is rejected, or fewer than 11 of the listed
> supporters respond positively to Control, then Control shall announce this
> to the same groups as received the original posting.
>
> If, at the end of the 10 day period, the minimum level of support
> has been achieved then Control shall post to the same groups that
> the proposed group shall be created in 5 days unless there are any
> objections.
>
> Objections, which must be emailed to con...@usenet.org.uk, to quick
> creation will only be considered on the grounds that:
> 1) the proposed group lies outside the scope of the template;
> 2) the name is not in accordance with the template;
> 3) the list of supporters contains some irregularity.
>
> The rule specifying the number of objections that automatically prevent a
> fast track shall not apply to any group application by the 'Quick Creation'
> method.
>
> In the event that a 'Quick Creation' request is rejected by the committee,
> expires through lack of support or is overturned following an objection, a
> similar proposal may be submitted for discussion by the normal RFD process
> without incurring a 3 month delay. However, a failed or expired quick
> creation request may not be re-submitted as a quick creation request within
> 90 days.
>
>7) The rules for conducting votes are described in the companion document
> VOTING PROCEDURES WITHIN THE UK HIERARCHY.
>
>8) Only one RFD on any particular subject should be
> allowed at any one time. The first valid RFD received by
> con...@usenet.org.uk should be published, and all others rejected. In
> cases of doubt, the Committee shall adjudicate as to whether two RFDs
> overlap sufficiently to warrant one being rejected.
>
> A proposal which has been the subject of a successful Fast Track, or of any
> valid vote should not be brought up for discussion until at least 3 months
> have passed from the date of the Fast Track notice, or the close of the
> vote.
>
> Where an RFD has been withdrawn, no waiting period shall apply before a new
> RFD can be published.
>
>9) The procedures described above shall be used, with appropriate changes, for
> the removal, renaming, splitting or combining of groups, for changing the
> charter of groups, for introducing major changes to the hierarchy, for
> changing the moderation status, or for forcing a change of moderator (under
> normal circumstances, it is accepted that a retiring moderator appoints his
> successor).
>
>10) All objections and appeals will be decided by the Committee. Their
> decisions will be posted to uk.net.news.announce.
>
>Rule Changes
>
>Any changes to these rules, or those in the companion documents, shall be
>proposed in an RFD in accordance with the GUIDELINES FOR GROUP CREATION
>WITHIN THE UK HIERARCHY, insofar as they are applicable. RFDs for rule
>changes shall be discussed in the newsgroup uk.net.news.management, and
>this will be the definitive record of discussion.
>
>
>
> Creation of UK.NET.NEWS.ANNOUNCE
>
>Newsgroups line:
>uk.net.news.announce For RFDs, CFVs, FAQs, etc. within the UK Hierarchy. (Moderated)
>
>CHARTER
>
>This group is to be moderated by con...@usenet.org.uk on behalf of the UK
>Usenet Committee. Its purpose is to publish RFDs, CFVs, Result of votes, etc.
>produced in accordance with the Guidelines For Group Creation within the UK
>Hierarchy and the Voting Procedures within the UK Hierarchy. It will also
>publish FAQs and summaries relevant to the management of the UK Hierarchy.
>
> Creation of UK.NET.NEWS.CONFIG
>
>Newsgroups line:
>uk.net.news.config Discussions of RFDs posted in uk.net.news.announce.
>
>CHARTER
>
>For discussions concerning the creation, renaming or deletion of newsgroups
>within the UK Hierarchy, especially those arising from RFDs published in
>uk.net.news.announce in accordance with the Guidelines For Group Creation
>within the UK Hierarchy. Discussions relating to connectivity, propagation,
>and other non-configuration issues should take place in uk.net. Discussions
>relating to the management of the uk.* newsgroup hierarchy, the committee,
>officers and guidelines should take place in uk.net.news.management.
>
>Cross-posting between this group and uk.net.news.management is strictly
>prohibited, EXCEPT for formal RFDs and CFVs and announcements approved by
>control. Where cross-posting is allowed, the follow-ups line may include
>either uk.net.news.config OR uk.net.news.management but NOT both.

End Quote.

I doubt whether it's worth the effort. This ng, uk.net.p.g, is
populated by a small number of ex-Gradwell web/email hosting
customers. (it's extremely unlikely although not impossible, that
there are any Gradwell VOIP customers here). I moved *every* hosting
service to Tsohost several years ago, i.e. do not have any dealings
with Pickaweb. I keep a weather eye on this group, I guess partly out
of nostalgia, but I would not bother to subscribe to a Pickaweb ng
should one be created. Nor do I expect there are many Pickaweb
customers apart from those here, who sadly have even heard of USENET.

Chris S

Demon Customer 1993 - 2015; Gradwell Customer 2002 - 2016; now with Zen for connectivity and Tsohost
for web/email hosting (last Gradwell hosted domains migrated October 2016).

[Martin Liddle]

On 25/08/2018 11:25, David Gibson wrote:
>
> .... suggesting, perhaps, that they *did* have the means to charge you if

> they wanted to. I do hope that is not the case - that Gradwell passed
> on your banking details as well as the false information that your
> account needed migrating.
>

I had cancelled the Gradwell Direct Debit as soon as Gradwell had taken
the money that they had invoiced me for. Can a company set up a Direct
Debit without any authority? I assume the Direct Debit guarantee would
mean that they would be unable to take money if I had contested it.

[Roland Perry]

In message <plrlc8$5mv$1...@dont-email.me>, at 14:25:29 on Sat, 25 Aug
2018, Martin Liddle <new...@tynecomp.co.uk> remarked:

>> .... suggesting, perhaps, that they *did* have the means to charge
>>you if they wanted to. I do hope that is not the case - that
>>Gradwell passed on your banking details as well as the false
>>information that your account needed migrating.
>>
>
>I had cancelled the Gradwell Direct Debit as soon as Gradwell had taken
>the money that they had invoiced me for. Can a company set up a Direct
>Debit without any authority? I assume the Direct Debit guarantee would
>mean that they would be unable to take money if I had contested it.

Without ever informing me, or as far as I'm concerned having any
authority, Pickaweb charged my card about an hour after issuing their
out-of-the-blue invoice which was part of the out-of-the-blue migration.

The problem is (and they have offered) if I were to cancel their
services then I'd have several domains in limbo. I'm going to wait until
I've moved them elsewhere myself.
--
Roland Perry

[John Hall]

In message <16h2od90mtfbrd4mv...@4ax.com>, Chris S
<ugje...@sneakemail.com> writes
<snip>

>
>>On 24/08/2018 15:51, Jim Crowther wrote:
>>
>>> Now we should get a u.n.p.pickaweb newsgroup started - anyone remember
>>> how to do this? ;)

<snip>

>
>I doubt whether it's worth the effort. This ng, uk.net.p.g, is
>populated by a small number of ex-Gradwell web/email hosting
>customers. (it's extremely unlikely although not impossible, that
>there are any Gradwell VOIP customers here). I moved *every* hosting
>service to Tsohost several years ago, i.e. do not have any dealings
>with Pickaweb. I keep a weather eye on this group, I guess partly out
>of nostalgia, but I would not bother to subscribe to a Pickaweb ng
>should one be created. Nor do I expect there are many Pickaweb
>customers apart from those here, who sadly have even heard of USENET.

<snip>

I suspect that Jim was joking, as indicated by the smiley, as I'm sure
that he's well aware of how the UK group creation process works. It
would almost be worth doing to give the UK Usenet Committee something to
do, though, as it must be at least five years since a new group was last
proposed. :)

[Chris S]

On Sat, 25 Aug 2018 20:00:24 +0100, John Hall
<john_...@jhall.co.uk> wrote:

>In message <16h2od90mtfbrd4mv...@4ax.com>, Chris S
><ugje...@sneakemail.com> writes
><snip>
>>
>>>On 24/08/2018 15:51, Jim Crowther wrote:
>>>
>>>> Now we should get a u.n.p.pickaweb newsgroup started - anyone remember
>>>> how to do this? ;)
><snip>
>>
>>I doubt whether it's worth the effort. This ng, uk.net.p.g, is
>>populated by a small number of ex-Gradwell web/email hosting
>>customers. (it's extremely unlikely although not impossible, that
>>there are any Gradwell VOIP customers here). I moved *every* hosting
>>service to Tsohost several years ago, i.e. do not have any dealings
>>with Pickaweb. I keep a weather eye on this group, I guess partly out
>>of nostalgia, but I would not bother to subscribe to a Pickaweb ng
>>should one be created. Nor do I expect there are many Pickaweb
>>customers apart from those here, who sadly have even heard of USENET.
><snip>
>
>I suspect that Jim was joking, as indicated by the smiley, as I'm sure
>that he's well aware of how the UK group creation process works. It
>would almost be worth doing to give the UK Usenet Committee something to
>do, though, as it must be at least five years since a new group was last
>proposed. :)

Whatever happended to nosey smileys? :-) Much easier to spot.

Perhaps we should start a competition for the best name change for
this group. Here's my starter:

uk.net.providers.abandonedbygradwell

There are less polite alternatives! Another more acceptable option
would be a subgroup for ex-customers to let off steam. Not sure
whether I am being serious or not!

Chris S
--

[Mark Undrill]

On 25/08/2018 13:36, Chris S wrote:
> On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 17:31:33 +0100, Molly Mockford
> <nospam...@mollymockford.me.uk> wrote:
>

<snip>

>
>
> I doubt whether it's worth the effort. This ng, uk.net.p.g, is
> populated by a small number of ex-Gradwell web/email hosting
> customers. (it's extremely unlikely although not impossible, that
> there are any Gradwell VOIP customers here). I moved *every* hosting
> service to Tsohost several years ago, i.e. do not have any dealings
> with Pickaweb. I keep a weather eye on this group, I guess partly out
> of nostalgia, but I would not bother to subscribe to a Pickaweb ng
> should one be created. Nor do I expect there are many Pickaweb
> customers apart from those here, who sadly have even heard of USENET.
>

Just so as you know. I'm an ex Gradwell VOIP customer. Still lurking here ;)

--
Mark

Still with Demon until FTTP comes.

[John Hall]

In message <8a04odt0ksq1lc4s2...@4ax.com>, Chris S
<ugje...@sneakemail.com> writes

>Perhaps we should start a competition for the best name change for this
>group. Here's my starter:
>
>uk.net.providers.abandonedbygradwell
>
>There are less polite alternatives! Another more acceptable option
>would be a subgroup for ex-customers to let off steam. Not sure whether
>I am being serious or not!

To be serious for a moment, perhaps it should just be uk.net.providers.
At least that would improve the chances of it getting a reasonable
amount of traffic. Hopefully people could be educated into indicating
which provider they were talking about by mentioning its name in their
subject line.

[Molly Mockford]

On 26/08/2018 10:54, John Hall wrote:

> To be serious for a moment, perhaps it should just be uk.net.providers.
> At least that would improve the chances of it getting a reasonable
> amount of traffic. Hopefully people could be educated into indicating
> which provider they were talking about by mentioning its name in their
> subject line.

uk.net.providers exists; at a quick look, it seems to have nothing but
a bit of spam in it, but that doesn't prevent it being re-taken and used
as originally intended.

[John Hall]

In message <fufqbm...@mid.individual.net>, Molly Mockford
<nospam...@mollymockford.me.uk> writes

>On 26/08/2018 10:54, John Hall wrote:
>
>> To be serious for a moment, perhaps it should just be uk.net.providers.
>> At least that would improve the chances of it getting a reasonable
>> amount of traffic. Hopefully people could be educated into indicating
>> which provider they were talking about by mentioning its name in their
>> subject line.
>
>uk.net.providers exists; at a quick look, it seems to have nothing but
>a bit of spam in it, but that doesn't prevent it being re-taken and used
>as originally intended.

Thanks. As my news provider, NIN, does an excellent job of filtering out
spam I may as well subscribe to it.

[John Hall]

In message <ZsuXPQBotsgbFw26@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, John Hall
<john_...@jhall.co.uk> writes

>In message <fufqbm...@mid.individual.net>, Molly Mockford
><nospam...@mollymockford.me.uk> writes
>>

>>uk.net.providers exists; at a quick look, it seems to have nothing but
>>a bit of spam in it, but that doesn't prevent it being re-taken and used
>>as originally intended.
>
>Thanks. As my news provider, NIN, does an excellent job of filtering
>out spam I may as well subscribe to it.

Embarrassingly, it turned out that I was already subscribed to it, but
didn't have it allocated to a Turnpike newsstand. I've now rectified
that.

[Charles Lindsey]

On 24/08/18 12:29, Charles Lindsey wrote:

> Yes, usenet.org.uk was migrated yesterday, and I spent the day fixing
> the fallout.
>
> The problem is that everything is run through spamassassin which inserts
> a header running to many lines. This is perfectly legal, but some
> moderation software seems to be inserting blank lines into the middle of
> it. We has this problem on u.r.christian, but Mark Goodge seems to have
> fixed it and today's articles there are coming in clean. I shall take
> this up with Ian Jackson.
>

It turns out this is a Bug in CPanel, which is producing
non-RFC5322-compliant headers to report the absence of spam, coupled
with a Bug in Stump.

[Charles Lindsey]

Yes, we knew it was coming, and were indeed pressing them to get on with
it. But we had asked for advanced warning, and there was a serious
technical issue to be sorted out before it could be done, about which I
had been prodding them.

Also, it turns out that what they extracted from Gradwell was the data
for our ancient legacy setup, from which we had been internally migrated
by Gradwell some months before (and which we were indeed able to check
out carefully before initiating the actual switch). So I found out
various forwarding rules which I had deleted months ago, and which had
now reappeared.

Actually, the same arose on migration of my personal account. But
whether the fault lies with Pickaweb or Gradwell is impossible to say.

[Charles Lindsey]

On 24/08/18 15:51, Jim Crowther wrote:

> Now we should get a u.n.p.pickaweb newsgroup started - anyone remember
> how to do this? ;)
>

You could raise an RFD to create it. I think we established that such
groups would not be created if the provider in question objected.

I see that Pickaweb have no user forum, and to persuade them to
introduce one would be an alternative.

[Chris S]

Just as well I qualified my "unlikely" then! :-) Is all not well in
Gradwell VOIPland?

Chris S
--

[Roland Perry]

In message <plp3e3$aar$1...@dont-email.me>, at 15:07:00 on Fri, 24 Aug
2018, Martin Liddle <new...@tynecomp.co.uk> remarked:

>> I have today completely out of the blue been blitzed with almost
>>twenty emails from Pickaweb, which I initially assumed was some kind
>>of scam.
>> One of them, however, had something about it which required further
>>investigation, and I now find I've "been migrated" completely behind
>>my back.
>>
>My experience is different to yours. I did get a notification some
>months ago about the migration from Gradwell and then an email on the
>12-06-18 from Pickaweb that migration would take place at some point in
>the near future and then an email on the 01-08-18 giving details of a
>Pickaweb account. All this surprised me

It might also surprise to occasional GDPR compliance officer!

>as I had closed my Gradwell account eighteen months ago and moved my
>web site to TSOHost.

If, as Charles is now reporting, the files upon which this migration to
Pickaweb is based are from the *legacy* platform, rather than the
Gradwell-cloud, perhaps that's where your zombie-persona arose from.

I didn't get the 12th June emails, and perhaps not surprisingly
therefore also didn't get a "coming soon" email earlier in August; but I
did get

the blitz of largely "sales department" emails at around 1pm on
the 18th (which is what caused me to post here),

*followed" a few minutes later by emails from Tech Support about
the migration beginning,

but no email about log-in details until I contacted their
chatline later in the afternoon and demanded to know what was
going on.

What would have been polite was an email, perhaps on the 13th, warning
about the impending crisis specifically on the 18th (rather than a vague
'soon').
--
Roland Perry

[Martin Liddle]

On 27/08/2018 09:36, Roland Perry wrote:
>
> If, as Charles is now reporting, the files upon which this migration to
> Pickaweb is based are from the *legacy* platform, rather than the
> Gradwell-cloud, perhaps that's where your zombie-persona arose from.
>

As I understand it the Gradwell Cloud was just Gradwell acting as a
reseller for an Ingram Micro product and you had to request to be
transferred.

[Mark Undrill]

On 26/08/2018 23:39, Chris S wrote:
> On Sun, 26 Aug 2018 10:19:58 +0100, Mark Undrill
> <sp...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 25/08/2018 13:36, Chris S wrote:
>>> On Fri, 24 Aug 2018 17:31:33 +0100, Molly Mockford
>>> <nospam...@mollymockford.me.uk> wrote:
>>>
>> <snip>
>>>
>>>
>>> I doubt whether it's worth the effort. This ng, uk.net.p.g, is
>>> populated by a small number of ex-Gradwell web/email hosting
>>> customers. (it's extremely unlikely although not impossible, that
>>> there are any Gradwell VOIP customers here). I moved *every* hosting
>>> service to Tsohost several years ago, i.e. do not have any dealings
>>> with Pickaweb. I keep a weather eye on this group, I guess partly out
>>> of nostalgia, but I would not bother to subscribe to a Pickaweb ng
>>> should one be created. Nor do I expect there are many Pickaweb
>>> customers apart from those here, who sadly have even heard of USENET.
>>>
>> Just so as you know. I'm an ex Gradwell VOIP customer. Still lurking here ;)
>
> Just as well I qualified my "unlikely" then! :-) Is all not well in
> Gradwell VOIPland?
>
> Chris S
>

Dunno. It was working fine until we left. We just didn't need it anymore.

--
Mark

[Roland Perry]

In message <pm0e7b$t1r$1...@dont-email.me>, at 09:54:03 on Mon, 27 Aug

2018, Martin Liddle <new...@tynecomp.co.uk> remarked:

>On 27/08/2018 09:36, Roland Perry wrote:

>> If, as Charles is now reporting, the files upon which this migration
>>to Pickaweb is based are from the *legacy* platform, rather than the
>>Gradwell-cloud, perhaps that's where your zombie-persona arose from.
>
>As I understand it the Gradwell Cloud was just Gradwell acting as a
>reseller for an Ingram Micro product and you had to request to be
>transferred.

That may have been the case originally, but after much delay Gradwell
did the stragglers whether you wanted it or not (October 2016 iirc).
--
Roland Perry

[Chris S]

On Mon, 27 Aug 2018 09:54:03 +0100, Martin Liddle
<new...@tynecomp.co.uk> wrote:

>On 27/08/2018 09:36, Roland Perry wrote:
>>
>> If, as Charles is now reporting, the files upon which this migration to
>> Pickaweb is based are from the *legacy* platform, rather than the
>> Gradwell-cloud, perhaps that's where your zombie-persona arose from.
>>
>
>As I understand it the Gradwell Cloud was just Gradwell acting as a
>reseller for an Ingram Micro product and you had to request to be
>transferred.

AFAIR without checking back through ng posts and email, although
pre-'cloud migration' legacy sites remained on Gradwell's servers,
Gradwell's management interface was at some point replaced by an
interim 'Ingram Micro' look-alike management interface. Some
iinformation from the old interface became inaccessible as a result,
even to Gradwell aupport staff (possibly Ingram Micro staff acting as
Gradwell support).

[Roland Perry]

In message <plp3e3$aar$1...@dont-email.me>, at 15:07:00 on Fri, 24 Aug

2018, Martin Liddle <new...@tynecomp.co.uk> remarked:

>I did get a notification some months ago about the migration from
>Gradwell and then an email on the 12-06-18 from Pickaweb that migration
>would take place at some point in the near future and then an email on
>the 01-08-18 giving details of a Pickaweb account. All this surprised
>me as I had closed my Gradwell account eighteen months ago and moved my
>web site to TSOHost.

Genuine question (I have a specific reason for asking this): did you
migrate every domain you had registered via Gradwell, and its hosting,
or did you leave any zombie domains behind registered via Gradwell, but
without hosting either at Gradwell or TSOHost?
--
Roland Perry

[Martin Liddle]

On 27/08/2018 19:31, Roland Perry wrote:
>
> Genuine question (I have a specific reason for asking this): did you
> migrate every domain you had registered via Gradwell, and its hosting,
> or did you leave any zombie domains behind registered via Gradwell, but
> without hosting either at Gradwell or TSOHost?

I migrated every domain I had registered with Gradwell.

[Roland Perry]

In message <pm1to0$jj5$1...@dont-email.me>, at 23:25:04 on Mon, 27 Aug

2018, Martin Liddle <new...@tynecomp.co.uk> remarked:

>On 27/08/2018 19:31, Roland Perry wrote:
>> Genuine question (I have a specific reason for asking this): did you
>>migrate every domain you had registered via Gradwell, and its hosting,
>>or did you leave any zombie domains behind registered via Gradwell,
>>but without hosting either at Gradwell or TSOHost?
>
>I migrated every domain I had registered with Gradwell.

I wonder, then, if that was after the snapshot of the legacy platform's
data, which Pickaweb is allegedly working from, happened?
--
Roland Perry

[Charles Lindsey]

Who allegedly said that?

Because I have observed that what was migrated to me came from the
legacy platform, so that forwarding rules etc that I had deleted months
ago suddenly appeared again.

[Roland Perry]

In message <ful6iq...@mid.individual.net>, at 16:03:53 on Tue, 28

Aug 2018, Charles Lindsey <c...@clerew.man.ac.uk> remarked:

>>>>  Genuine question (I have a specific reason for asking this): did
>>>>you migrate every domain you had registered via Gradwell, and its
>>>>hosting, or did you leave any zombie domains behind registered via
>>>>Gradwell, but  without hosting either at Gradwell or TSOHost?
>>>
>>> I migrated every domain I had registered with Gradwell.

>> I wonder, then, if that was after the snapshot of the legacy
>>platform's data, which Pickaweb is allegedly working from, happened?
>
>Who allegedly said that?
>
>Because I have observed that what was migrated to me came from the
>legacy platform, so that forwarding rules etc that I had deleted months
>ago suddenly appeared again.

You - 26 August 2018 21:35:15;

and potentially symptoms:

Martin - 24 August 2018 15:07:00;
Jim - 24 August 2018 15:51:45
--
Roland Perry

[Martin Liddle]

On 28/08/2018 16:26, Roland Perry wrote:
>
> and potentially symptoms:
>
> Martin - 24 August 2018 15:07:00;

My data was migrated to TSOHost by me long before Pickaweb were involved
and was definitely current data. I have no idea of what may or may not
have been copied from the redundant Gradwell account.

[Roland Perry]

In message <pm3urt$tk6$1...@dont-email.me>, at 17:56:29 on Tue, 28 Aug
2018, Martin Liddle <new...@tynecomp.co.uk> remarked:

>> and potentially symptoms:
>> Martin - 24 August 2018 15:07:00;
>
>My data was migrated to TSOHost by me long before Pickaweb were
>involved and was definitely current data. I have no idea of what may
>or may not have been copied from the redundant Gradwell account.

That doesn't help much, because the Pickaweb thing has only been around
since perhaps this June, and the alleged zombie data from Gradwell is
probably a year older than that.
--
Roland Perry

[Roger Hayter]

One almost wonders if for some commercial reason the info suddenly
became unavailable from the 'cloud provider' and Gradwell had to
resurrect old backup data from their servers recorded before the
'cloud'[1] took over.

[1] AFAICS a cloud is just a server remote from one's own premises; so
why was Gradwell's service not always a 'cloud' as far as users were
concerned? Could cloud just be marketing hype for a server in a
different building, or does it actually mean something`?

--

Roger Hayter

[Roland Perry]

In message <1nu9mu8.c41j4q191wkm8N%ro...@hayter.org>, at 23:10:00 on
Tue, 28 Aug 2018, Roger Hayter <ro...@hayter.org> remarked:

>Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> In message <pm3urt$tk6$1...@dont-email.me>, at 17:56:29 on Tue, 28 Aug
>> 2018, Martin Liddle <new...@tynecomp.co.uk> remarked:
>> >> and potentially symptoms:
>> >> Martin - 24 August 2018 15:07:00;
>> >
>> >My data was migrated to TSOHost by me long before Pickaweb were
>> >involved and was definitely current data. I have no idea of what may
>> >or may not have been copied from the redundant Gradwell account.
>>
>> That doesn't help much, because the Pickaweb thing has only been around
>> since perhaps this June, and the alleged zombie data from Gradwell is
>> probably a year older than that.
>
>One almost wonders if for some commercial reason the info suddenly
>became unavailable from the 'cloud provider' and Gradwell had to
>resurrect old backup data from their servers recorded before the
>'cloud'[1] took over.

There could also be a legal reason, to do with transfer of personal data
and banking information.

>[1] AFAICS a cloud is just a server remote from one's own premises; so
>why was Gradwell's service not always a 'cloud' as far as users were
>concerned? Could cloud just be marketing hype for a server in a
>different building, or does it actually mean something`?

The essential characteristic of a "cloud" service is that it's spread
automatically over a number of physical machines in potentially a number
of locations.

Think 'scaling and load balancing', more than necessarily 'in the
distance'.

It's likely that Gradwell's legacy platform really was just one machine
to begin with, although later they talked about "clusters". However, I
think each customer was allocated resources on a specific member of the
cluster, so it wasn't really a 'cloud', and was very likely in-house.

The attraction of moving to a third-party cloud is that much of the
operational side is contracted out, to someone with numerous customers
and hence an economy of scale in keeping it running correctly.

As a marketing gimmick, it's that aspect which might give some of any
smaller company like Gradwell's own customers some greater comfort.
--
Roland Perry

[Chris S]

On Wed, 29 Aug 2018 09:02:44 +0100, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk>

wrote:

>In message <1nu9mu8.c41j4q191wkm8N%ro...@hayter.org>, at 23:10:00 on
>Tue, 28 Aug 2018, Roger Hayter <ro...@hayter.org> remarked:

[snip]

>>[1] AFAICS a cloud is just a server remote from one's own premises; so
>>why was Gradwell's service not always a 'cloud' as far as users were
>>concerned? Could cloud just be marketing hype for a server in a
>>different building, or does it actually mean something`?
>
>The essential characteristic of a "cloud" service is that it's spread
>automatically over a number of physical machines in potentially a number
>of locations.
>
>Think 'scaling and load balancing', more than necessarily 'in the
>distance'.
>
>It's likely that Gradwell's legacy platform really was just one machine
>to begin with, although later they talked about "clusters". However, I
>think each customer was allocated resources on a specific member of the
>cluster, so it wasn't really a 'cloud', and was very likely in-house.

[snip]

[The following comments are from memory; unfortunately, I don't have
the time to trawl back through emails and ng posts.]

I recall a specific server allocation and all domains under my
developer account where hosted on that server. Can't recall the name.

For a year or more Gradwell, I think it was Peter Gradwell, claimed to
be developing a new cloud-based hosting service.

Then out of the blue, they announced their 3rd-party Ingram Micro
cloud-based system.

I'm reasonably confident the legacy system remained on Gradwell
in-house servers although I wouldn't bet my life on it. What did
change for the legacy system, as I mentioned earlier in this thread,
was the management interface, i.e. the Gradwell panels replaced by
subset/bespoke Ingram Micro panels.

I rebuilt all my domains on Tsohost and made them live in a very
staggered schedule, I think over a year+. The Gradwell hosted
originals remained on the legacy system until individually superseded,
i.e. were never migrated to the 'Ingram Micro' cloud.

I have no first-hand knowledge of what happened with the Gradwell
hosting service after I cancelled my account with them. However, if
anyone cares to trawl back through this ng, there is a timeline of
'significant events' as reported by customers and, earlier on, even
Peter Gradwell himself.

[Roland Perry]

In message <pm3urt$tk6$1...@dont-email.me>, at 17:56:29 on Tue, 28 Aug
2018, Martin Liddle <new...@tynecomp.co.uk> remarked:

>My data was migrated to TSOHost by me long before Pickaweb were
>involved and was definitely current data. I have no idea of what may
>or may not have been copied from the redundant Gradwell account.

I have finally (it took three hours on their chatline) got access to the
cPanel.

The issue with access was that every time they sent me login details
(thrice in total) the username was missing the first character. Which
turned out to be a lower-case l, but during most of their web-based
fault-finding looked like a vertical-bar.

Who uses an ambiguous character like that in usernames??

I've now been able to check the email forwarding rules, which seem
pretty intact, but it doesn't explain why they haven't been working the
last few days. Unless the cage-rattling today has forced them to
actually perform the email migration.

What's interesting to this sub-thread is that the domains in question
*don't* include one which I moved off Gradwell to TSOHost as a kind of
pathfinder around the time the original move to Gradwell Cloud was
threatened. If I'd ever got the June emails warning of Pickaweb, I'd
have pushed the rest of them.

Bad news is they've not migrated *any* of the website files, but simply
set up some empty directory structure on a web server (which currently
looks like a classic FTP-view).

Very luckily, none of the websites in question are mission critical,
although one was until quite recently.

I haven't had time to see if they've migrated the mailing list setup
(and lists of subscribers, obviously) from one of the email domains.
--
Roland Perry

[John Hall]

In message <lOmBLKqd...@perry.co.uk>, Roland Perry
<rol...@perry.co.uk> writes

>The issue with access was that every time they sent me login details
>(thrice in total) the username was missing the first character. Which
>turned out to be a lower-case l, but during most of their web-based
>fault-finding looked like a vertical-bar.
>
>Who uses an ambiguous character like that in usernames??

I had a similar problem, but in my case it was the last character and
with the font I was using lower case "l" looked like the numeral "1".

[Roland Perry]

In message <h8qGvmDEAthbFwIM@jhall_nospamxx.co.uk>, at 17:55:32 on Wed,
29 Aug 2018, John Hall <john_...@jhall.co.uk> remarked:

>>The issue with access was that every time they sent me login details
>>(thrice in total) the username was missing the first character. Which
>>turned out to be a lower-case l, but during most of their web-based
>>fault-finding looked like a vertical-bar.
>>
>>Who uses an ambiguous character like that in usernames??
>
>I had a similar problem, but in my case it was the last character and
>with the font I was using lower case "l" looked like the numeral "1".

My username also has two "ones" in it, but luckily the font displaying
them distinguishes them from non-numeric characters, not least because
the entire username originally given to me was entirely numeric.

However, the bigger problem is why they three times sent me a username
*without* the prefix lower-case l, before going on to very poorly
communicate what the missing prefix was.
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <lOmBLKqd...@perry.co.uk>, at 16:59:25 on Wed, 29 Aug
2018, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> remarked:

>Bad news is they've not migrated *any* of the website files, but simply
>set up some empty directory structure on a web server (which currently
>looks like a classic FTP-view).

Mysteriously, one of my websites has now gone live.

Pickaweb support still in deep denial and claiming it was all done ten
days ago. Which is clearly untenable.
--
Roland Perry

[Roland Perry]

In message <n9CxHbvO...@perry.co.uk>, at 19:34:54 on Wed, 29 Aug

2018, Roland Perry <rol...@perry.co.uk> remarked:

>>Bad news is they've not migrated *any* of the website files, but
>>simply set up some empty directory structure on a web server (which
>>currently looks like a classic FTP-view).
>
>Mysteriously, one of my websites has now gone live.
>
>Pickaweb support still in deep denial and claiming it was all done ten
>days ago. Which is clearly untenable.

Webchat people have now thrown in the towel and claim I need to email
support. Not that they've replied to much I've asked them so far.

I have, however, managed to fight my way through the labyrinthine cPanel
interface and find some orphaned emails accessible by webmail. Attempts
to forward them to a slightly less useless way of reading them have
failed so far, and they only go back two days (not to the point Pickaweb
insist the migration happened ten days ago).

Once again, they've insisted I was given advance notice, despite the
email whose subject line they quoted being actually received an hour
after the blizzard of unexpected migration messages I first complained
about.
--
Roland Perry

[David James]

No, that's not the case. I was still on the Gradwell legacy platform
before I was migrated to Pickaweb.

[Roland Perry]

In message <pmgqp1$6jd$1...@dont-email.me>, at 14:06:25 on Sun, 2 Sep 2018,
David James <da...@tcs01.demon.co.uk> remarked:

That's news to me. I was migrated with extreme prejudice as described
above. What did you have to say to cling on?
--
Roland Perry

[David James]

My legacy hosting was on either shell.gradwell.net or turtle.gradwell.net
(I still have shell.gradwell.net in my PuTTY files, but I think
connections were actually ending up onturtle.gradwell.net).

Web-sites and MySQL databases at Gradwell were still working for me after
the migration to Pickaweb up to 15:56 on Friday 31st August (when Pingdom
reported the web-sites at Gradwell as having gone down).

Today, I no longer have access to a shell on the legacy Gradwell server.


The migration to Pickaweb was a complete shambles - they migrated most of
my web-sites, though they managed to get the file system hierarchy
completely wrong, they didn't migrate any of my other files off the
Gradwell server, and they didn't migrate my MySQL databases. They did
appear to migrate email (and forwarding rules) correctly.

I copied a lot of files myself!

They did eventually copy the MySQL database (after a bit of prompting),
but were unable to determine the MySQL users, so I had to re-create them
myself.

The latest small glitch I found (on Friday) was that Pickaweb's default
version of PHP did not have the mbstring extension enabled. To my
surprise, a ticket on that to Piuckaweb's technical support was actioned
(in just over 2 hours) and they enabled the extension.

[David James]

I didn't say anything. I was expecting (dreading) the migration to happen
and it never did.

I did suffer the control panel changing from the old control panel to a
mixture of old and new.

I think my account was originally called a "developer" account - I don't
know if that had anything to do with it.