4 ms·

This was my exact rant. Even more galling was that Wells Fargo was virtue signaling about something that... had no optics to them. Literally no one knows who ou

This was my exact rant. Even more galling was that Wells Fargo was virtue signaling about something that... had no optics to them. Literally no one knows who our payment processor was, but if you even got as far as "Stripe," a _vanishingly small_ number of people know that Wells Fargo is their banking partner for US transactions. This isn't to suggest that WF should run their merchant processing business with no one watching for fraudulent or wantonly scam transactions, but to step in out of nowhere because the volume of actual real charges for real customers for real products was too high and you were busy clutching your pearls over what was being sold is just insane. As if it could somehow splash back on to Wells Fargo and, what, further sully their reputation? "Sure they may ruin people's lives and spawn fake accounts to hit numbers and silence anyone who speaks up and evict people incorrectly but at least they don't process transactions for flesh colored fantasy sex toys. That, sir, would be a bridge too far."

Le0n_ 6y ago
I think you're misinterpreting the scale of Wellsfargo. The CEO probably doesn't even know what onlyfans is, and they manage almost 2 trillion dollars.
- thrwn_frthr_awy 6y ago
  The CEO knows their business model; it's to scratch out every last penny they can, however they can, just to fulfill some quarterly earnings report. Almost every public company is now a growth company, so it doesn't matter how much they already profit–what matters is that they profit more in the next 90 days. He/She doesn't need/care to know about onlyfans–they simply care about hitting their targets.
  - DaiPlusPlus 6y ago
    ...so why would they want to leave money on the table by forcing Stripe to ditch a clearly profitable client company?
    - jcranmer 6y ago
      Reputational risk. Some journalist gets wind of an ad on Youtube that's playing for a neo-Nazi video, it gets written up as "$COMPANY is supporting Nazis!" despite the fact that it's largely out of the control of $COMPANY, several companies collectively freak out and pull advertising money, and everyone goes hunting for where their pipelines might lead to similar pearl-clutching associations and PR disasters.
      - DaiPlusPlus 6y ago
        But that doesn't explain the documented unethical - if not illegal - conduct of Wells Fargo overall. Otherwise they'd be more like the Disney Co.
- sky_rw 6y ago
  I think you are underestimating the scale of operation choke point.

Le0n_ 6y ago

I think you're misinterpreting the scale of Wellsfargo. The CEO probably doesn't even know what onlyfans is, and they manage almost 2 trillion dollars.

thrwn_frthr_awy 6y ago
The CEO knows their business model; it's to scratch out every last penny they can, however they can, just to fulfill some quarterly earnings report. Almost every public company is now a growth company, so it doesn't matter how much they already profit–what matters is that they profit more in the next 90 days. He/She doesn't need/care to know about onlyfans–they simply care about hitting their targets.
- DaiPlusPlus 6y ago
  ...so why would they want to leave money on the table by forcing Stripe to ditch a clearly profitable client company?
  - jcranmer 6y ago
    Reputational risk. Some journalist gets wind of an ad on Youtube that's playing for a neo-Nazi video, it gets written up as "$COMPANY is supporting Nazis!" despite the fact that it's largely out of the control of $COMPANY, several companies collectively freak out and pull advertising money, and everyone goes hunting for where their pipelines might lead to similar pearl-clutching associations and PR disasters.
    - DaiPlusPlus 6y ago
      But that doesn't explain the documented unethical - if not illegal - conduct of Wells Fargo overall. Otherwise they'd be more like the Disney Co.
sky_rw 6y ago
I think you are underestimating the scale of operation choke point.