5 ms·

wut. if the book isn't good why would one feel ashamed of returning it? is there a moral obligation to keep a bad product?

markdown 8y ago
After you've used it, absolutely. I wouldn't dream of using something I paid for and then demanding money back after I've used the item. > is there a moral obligation to keep a bad product? No, but I feel there's a moral obligation to not ask for your money back for a product you didn't like after using it. This of course doesn't apply if the product is faulty/broken such that it can't be used. Do you do that for other things in your life, like demanding money back after watching a movie you later decide you don't like, or do you just walk out of restaurants without paying if you decide you didn't like the food (after eating it)? A cultural difference, I guess.
- cthalupa 8y ago
  It's not a fiction book you read for entertainment. Books of this nature are meant to be a reference and resource you continue using.
  - markdown 8y ago
    I feel that's beside the point. The vendor can no longer sell it as a new book. You've deprived them of some value, and you refuse to pay for what they've lost. I feel there's in inherent risk in any trade. You rarely know for certain that you'll love what you're paying for, and you should accept that risk. One shouldn't feel entitled to 100% satisfaction when one makes a purchase, and certainly shouldn't deprive the vendor of money just because you decided after the fact that you didn't like what you bought. I suppose this is to be expected from people raised in an environment where multi-billion dollar corporations compete for customers and can afford to offer "just because I didn't like it" returns free of charge. It's foreign to me.
    - dragonwriter 8y ago
      > The vendor can no longer sell it as a new book. Returns generally can be, and usually are, sold again as new unless damaged or returned for defect, AFAIK.
    - xxpor 8y ago
      >I feel there's in inherent risk in any trade. And why should the consumer accept that risk and not the vendor?
      - markdown 8y ago
        Because the buyer is making the decision to purchase. It's their choice, and particularly in this case they have very good data to support the decision (actually leafing through the book in a bookstore, reading the countless reviews available online, etc). Caveat emptor. If OP had bought the book from Samin Nosrat selling her own book out of a stall, I highly doubt he'd return the book a week later demanding his money back just because he didn't like what he read... that'd be a shitty thing to do. The reason he felt no shame in this was because there was a faceless corporation between him and the author.
        lorenzhs 8y ago
        As Tomte noted, EU law requires that you be able to return online (and catalogue, phone, and other distance marketing) purchases within 14 days, exactly because in those cases you don't have the possibility of leafing through a book or having a product demonstrated at a store. Reviews aren't a substitute for that. Full detail can be found at https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/guarantees-returns/index_en.htm https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/gua...
        markdown 8y ago
        Thanks for that.
    - leetcrew 8y ago
- mlevental 8y ago
  >A cultural difference, I guess. which culture do you think you're a part of that i'm not? just curious. >After you've used it, absolutely. I wouldn't dream of using something I paid for and then demanding money back after I've used the item. so cars that have defects that have been used shouldn't be subject to recalls?
icelancer 8y ago
I don't understand the mass downvoting here. If the book isn't good and the owner got nothing out of it, what's so wrong with returning it? EDIT: People read books that I write and return them all the time saying they suck / it wasn't for them / etc. That's kinda the point of a return policy. I don't take it poorly.

markdown 8y ago

After you've used it, absolutely. I wouldn't dream of using something I paid for and then demanding money back after I've used the item. > is there a moral obligation to keep a bad product? No, but I feel there's a moral obligation to not ask for your money back for a product you didn't like after using it. This of course doesn't apply if the product is faulty/broken such that it can't be used. Do you do that for other things in your life, like demanding money back after watching a movie you later decide you don't like, or do you just walk out of restaurants without paying if you decide you didn't like the food (after eating it)? A cultural difference, I guess.

cthalupa 8y ago
It's not a fiction book you read for entertainment. Books of this nature are meant to be a reference and resource you continue using.
- markdown 8y ago
  I feel that's beside the point. The vendor can no longer sell it as a new book. You've deprived them of some value, and you refuse to pay for what they've lost. I feel there's in inherent risk in any trade. You rarely know for certain that you'll love what you're paying for, and you should accept that risk. One shouldn't feel entitled to 100% satisfaction when one makes a purchase, and certainly shouldn't deprive the vendor of money just because you decided after the fact that you didn't like what you bought. I suppose this is to be expected from people raised in an environment where multi-billion dollar corporations compete for customers and can afford to offer "just because I didn't like it" returns free of charge. It's foreign to me.
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    > The vendor can no longer sell it as a new book. Returns generally can be, and usually are, sold again as new unless damaged or returned for defect, AFAIK.
  - xxpor 8y ago
    >I feel there's in inherent risk in any trade. And why should the consumer accept that risk and not the vendor?
    - markdown 8y ago
      Because the buyer is making the decision to purchase. It's their choice, and particularly in this case they have very good data to support the decision (actually leafing through the book in a bookstore, reading the countless reviews available online, etc). Caveat emptor. If OP had bought the book from Samin Nosrat selling her own book out of a stall, I highly doubt he'd return the book a week later demanding his money back just because he didn't like what he read... that'd be a shitty thing to do. The reason he felt no shame in this was because there was a faceless corporation between him and the author.
      - lorenzhs 8y ago
        As Tomte noted, EU law requires that you be able to return online (and catalogue, phone, and other distance marketing) purchases within 14 days, exactly because in those cases you don't have the possibility of leafing through a book or having a product demonstrated at a store. Reviews aren't a substitute for that. Full detail can be found at https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/guarantees-returns/index_en.htm https://europa.eu/youreurope/citizens/consumers/shopping/gua...
        markdown 8y ago
        Thanks for that.
  - leetcrew 8y ago
mlevental 8y ago
>A cultural difference, I guess. which culture do you think you're a part of that i'm not? just curious. >After you've used it, absolutely. I wouldn't dream of using something I paid for and then demanding money back after I've used the item. so cars that have defects that have been used shouldn't be subject to recalls?

icelancer 8y ago

I don't understand the mass downvoting here. If the book isn't good and the owner got nothing out of it, what's so wrong with returning it? EDIT: People read books that I write and return them all the time saying they suck / it wasn't for them / etc. That's kinda the point of a return policy. I don't take it poorly.