3 ms·

Mmm sure but I think your comment is a little "seeing the forest for the trees" regardless of whether Walter is lashing out the fact that this was one of the fe

by Grimm1 6y ago

Mmm sure but I think your comment is a little "seeing the forest for the trees" regardless of whether Walter is lashing out the fact that this was one of the few avenues he had to get help is telling about Google. They don't care about their users whether that is site owners, ad buyers or searchers. Walter should have never had to have had the interaction in the first place where Matt has to make the decision to help him because there should have been support avenues and no secret penalties in the first place. That's like blaming the abused.

_cs2017_ 6y ago
The fact that it's hard to get Google customer service to respond is a well-known and unfortunate problem. That does not mean it's ok to call people who try to help, "liars". I don't know how much Walter was "abused" by Google's bad customer service; maybe a lot, maybe not at all. But given that I only have Walter's side of the story, and I don't see him as a reliable / honest source of information, I choose to discard this complaint as "probably nothing serious".
- Grimm1 6y ago
  Okay, I see large co vs independent site owner and I cut google absolutely 0 slack. They don't need the protection and in my opinion at this point given the continuous string of recent revelations shouldn't be afforded benefit of the doubt either. You're well within your rights to have your opinion but I think it's the wrong one.
  - _cs2017_ 6y ago
    Yeah, every one of us has their own prior (in this case, on how likely it is that big corp is at fault versus a small business owner is at fault). We then update our priors based on our interpretation of available information. Both of these steps are highly subjective. Especially the choice of the priors, since they are based on years of unique personal experiences and personal analysis of those experiences. I would never attempt to change or challenge anyone's prior. I don't know whether human civilization will some day develop a way for people to converge to similar priors, but it's certainly not happening this century, so it won't be relevant to me.
    - deleted 6y ago
      [deleted]
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]

by Grimm1 6y ago

_cs2017_ 6y ago

The fact that it's hard to get Google customer service to respond is a well-known and unfortunate problem. That does not mean it's ok to call people who try to help, "liars". I don't know how much Walter was "abused" by Google's bad customer service; maybe a lot, maybe not at all. But given that I only have Walter's side of the story, and I don't see him as a reliable / honest source of information, I choose to discard this complaint as "probably nothing serious".

Grimm1 6y ago
Okay, I see large co vs independent site owner and I cut google absolutely 0 slack. They don't need the protection and in my opinion at this point given the continuous string of recent revelations shouldn't be afforded benefit of the doubt either. You're well within your rights to have your opinion but I think it's the wrong one.
- _cs2017_ 6y ago
  Yeah, every one of us has their own prior (in this case, on how likely it is that big corp is at fault versus a small business owner is at fault). We then update our priors based on our interpretation of available information. Both of these steps are highly subjective. Especially the choice of the priors, since they are based on years of unique personal experiences and personal analysis of those experiences. I would never attempt to change or challenge anyone's prior. I don't know whether human civilization will some day develop a way for people to converge to similar priors, but it's certainly not happening this century, so it won't be relevant to me.
  - deleted 6y ago
    [deleted]
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]