4 ms·
I think they are at a point where they would rather side with a scammer since they generate more money from this situation. I guess they have data that shows t
by jokoon 5y ago
I think they are at a point where they would rather side with a scammer since they generate more money from this situation.
I guess they have data that shows this particular kind of user will almost never buy ads ever again, so at least let a scammer do it.
You're right, this is weird, but if you look at the profit model, it makes sense, and there are no laws that would really protect the user.
- jokethrowaway 5y agoThose transactions are likely to be reversed thanks to the practically unlimited chargebacks practice which is rampant in our banking system.
- nijave 5y agoSure but then the question is "Should we leave an account with history of compromise in place that will lead to chargebacks or should we just permanently disable it"
- OneLeggedCat 5y agoExactly. From the article, "Personally, I think it’s very telling that Facebook acts so swiftly to block out the original user who can stop an ad scam, and so slowly to stop a scam ad that they can still bill for."