Before any verdict or resolution can be reached pertaining to this dispute, there are several critical inconsistencies and ambiguities that must first be addressed by the defending party ( @OFFSHOR3 ).
@OFFSHOR3
The following inquiries are to be answered with precision and transparency. Failure to provide satisfactory responses or documentation may adversely impact the evaluation of this case.
What specific data or activity metrics are being monitored by the automated detection systems that were referenced in your statement?
What particular action(s) or behavioral patterns were flagged by these systems as "abusive" and consequently resulted in the server’s suspension or termination?
Are the customer’s files—those alleged to have been lost—still retrievable? If not, please provide an explicit and technical explanation as to why data recovery is not feasible.
Why was compensation extended or offered if, as you have stated, there was no misconduct, negligence, or fault on your end?
Was the server originally suspended or permanently terminated? Furthermore, is there currently any viable method of file restoration or archival recovery available through your system or backups?
Your forthcoming response will serve as an essential determinant in discerning the legitimacy of the claims presented within this report.
It is advised that all assertions be accompanied by the corresponding system logs, timestamps, and back-end records to substantiate your statements and ensure transparency throughout these proceedings.
What particular action(s) or behavioral patterns were flagged by these systems as "abusive" and consequently resulted in the server’s suspension or termination?
Are the customer’s files—those alleged to have been lost—still retrievable? If not, please provide an explicit and technical explanation as to why data recovery is not feasible.
They are not recoverable due termination of his service, we reactivated him clean server
Why was compensation extended or offered if, as you have stated, there was no misconduct, negligence, or fault on your end?
Because maybe was false detection, as any customer can recover his server in clean state without doing same abuse
Was the server originally suspended or permanently terminated? Furthermore, is there currently any viable method of file restoration or archival recovery available through your system or backups?
pernamently deleted, no there is no way of file restoration
This isn’t something that happens often, and here you can see how many clients we have, day by day. https://i.imgur.com/BsRDS3J.png
This kid is talking nonsense, and whatever port he's sending requests to has nothing to do with my server. Yet, what he's offering is nothing but nonsense.
Please, this person shouldn't be here. He's just defending himself for nothing. He has no idea what he's doing.
Upon review of the evidence and statements provided, it becomes evident that the automated systems referenced rely on broad, generalized behavioral metrics such as email or network activity rather than specific user-level identifiers. The screenshots presented (see here) fail to establish any verifiable link between the flagged data and the customer’s actual server usage or account activity, rendering the claim circumstantial at best.
The accusations of “abuse” — particularly the alleged port scanning (see evidence) — likewise lack technical foundation. No demonstrable proof or network trace has been presented that would conclusively attribute such actions to the customer in question. Assertions of misconduct must be substantiated by verifiable log evidence rather than assumptions derived from system heuristics.
Further complicating matters is the statement that the customer’s files are “irrecoverable” due to service termination, followed by the deployment of a clean server instance. If data recovery or archival restoration is truly infeasible, a technical rationale should exist outlining the mechanisms preventing restoration—whether through snapshot loss, retention policy, or deliberate purging of system backups. The absence of such explanation raises valid concerns regarding procedural transparency and adherence to internal data retention standards.
Additionally, the offer of compensation—despite an explicit denial of wrongdoing—appears to undermine the justification for termination itself. Extending financial redress while maintaining that no error occurred suggests an implicit acknowledgment that the detection may have been false or improperly triggered.
This contradiction is compounded by your own Terms of Service, specifically Section 10(b), which stipulates that “upon termination, the customer is responsible for backing up their data as the Company may delete it after a reasonable period.” (source)
In this instance, data was reportedly deleted immediately, without the “reasonable period” the clause presumes. Such immediate and irreversible deletion, absent opportunity for backup or retrieval, diverges from the stated contractual expectations.
Finally, the decision to revoke the customer’s access during an active dispute introduces additional concerns regarding procedural fairness and administrative integrity.
Taken collectively, these elements form a consistent pattern of procedural irregularity, technical ambiguity, and inconsistent application of policy that warrants thorough reevaluation of the actions taken against the customer.
Verdict: Refund the customer in the amount of $ 30.35 USD.
You have 24 hours from the time of this post in which to refund the customer.
@OFFSHOR3
We also need his email address and either his PayPal or USDT (TRC20) wallet address to process the refund. However, since the customer is still actively using the server, we don’t see a valid reason to issue a refund.
![[Image: motion2-Fast-Use-the-uploaded-image-as-b...0-copy.gif]](https://i.ibb.co/JWm3psPq/motion2-Fast-Use-the-uploaded-image-as-base-Keep-the-holographi-0-copy.gif)