4 ms·

Potentially abusive use shown in these tweets. http://twitter.com/#!/jonathanscard/status/100347499188977665 http://twitter.com/#!/jonathanscard/status/1003474

Potentially abusive use shown in these tweets. http://twitter.com/#!/jonathanscard/status/100347499188977665 http://twitter.com/#!/jonathanscard/status/10034749918897766... http://twitter.com/#!/jonathanscard/status/100346742842728448 http://twitter.com/#!/jonathanscard/status/10034674284272844... http://twitter.com/#!/jonathanscard/status/100341959557775360 http://twitter.com/#!/jonathanscard/status/10034195955777536... Edit: Any ideas? Edit: It just happened again... http://twitter.com/#!/jonathanscard/status/100356049755844608 http://twitter.com/#!/jonathanscard/status/10035604975584460... Edit: More... http://twitter.com/#!/jonathanscard/status/100362860525395968 http://twitter.com/#!/jonathanscard/status/10036286052539596... http://twitter.com/#!/jonathanscard/status/100364864173776897 http://twitter.com/#!/jonathanscard/status/10036486417377689... http://twitter.com/#!/jonathanscard/status/100365362465476608 http://twitter.com/#!/jonathanscard/status/10036536246547660...

hassanhassan 15y ago
Something does sound fishy. I wonder why someone would ruin the fun for everyone involved.
- JohnLBevan 15y ago
  $100 spent on coffee for the homeless maybe? Just to take an optimistic view on the data.
  - hassanhassan 15y ago
    You could be right, since something similar did take place as can be confirmed in one of the posts below (a large purchase for the homeless). But certainly we can agree that $15, $30, and $100 being drained in minutes to the exact penny must be cause for concern. Edit: draining to $0.00 is OK, as jonathan explains below.
    - jonathanstark 15y ago
      Jonathan here: Draining the card to the penny is not weird. If there is $10 on the card and your purchase is $11.50, $10 will be removed from the card and you have to pay the remaining $1.50 some other way. Expected behavior :) j
      - funthree 15y ago
        There is at least two cases that this doesnt explain. http://twitter.com/#!/jonathanscard/status/100341959557775360 http://twitter.com/#!/jonathanscard/status/10034195955777536... http://twitter.com/#!/jonathanscard/status/100356049755844608 http://twitter.com/#!/jonathanscard/status/10035604975584460... edit: now at least 5, see above
        jonathanstark 15y ago
        Jonathan here: I see what you're saying, and of course it is possible that some jerk is buying gift cards with the card. That said, it's worth pointing out that the tweet stream is not real time and it doesn't have every transaction. The card balance is scraped from the sbux site every minute and posted to Twitter if it has changed since the last tweet. When there are multiple transactions in the same minute, the changes get aggregated. This can result in some strange looking numbers. What I think we're learning here is that if someone wants to reload the card, lots of little transactions over time is better than one big one. Or, perhaps the balance should not be tweeted. Thoughts? j
        michaelschade 15y ago
        I vote that you encourage people to make lots of little transactions over time versus just getting rid of the balance. The balance is really neat to see and it keeps people engaged and thinking about this project, even if they're not actively partaking (like myself, at the moment). The smaller installments of cash also help others realize that it's okay to submit small amounts and increase the likelihood that more than just one person with a large purchase will benefit.
        Cushman 15y ago
  - joezydeco 15y ago
    How about someone buying a coffeemaker (they sell those) and telling the clerk "I've got $100 on the card and I'll pay the rest in cash"?
- jonathanstark 15y ago
  Jonathan here: The beauty of this is that one person can't ruin the fun for everyone involved. Call me a hopeless romantic, but I think people who don't get the concept are in the minority. Their behavior will be overrun 100x by people who do get the concept. We'll see what happens soon enough... j
eggbrain 15y ago
You can't transfer funds onto another card if you do not own the card / have the CSC code.
- funthree 15y ago
  Aha, you are right. I will edit that. Any ideas?
  - dmn001 15y ago
    I wonder if Jonathan is around and is able to look up the transaction history on the starbucks website, and if that shows any information on where the money is spent/moved?
    - jonathanstark 15y ago
      Jonathan here: The transaction info available on the Starbucks site and mobile app is pretty limited, but I can see that the transactions are listed as "In Store Purchase". For example: http://cl.ly/3H1j3g443X0y0O3j2M2L http://cl.ly/3H1j3g443X0y0O3j2M2L Unfortunately, there is no info about which stores the purchases were made in, and the history only goes back about 20 transactions. It does look like some people are making large purchases, which is jerky, but not totally unexpected. Thanks, j
      - dmn001 15y ago
        Thanks for your reply. I noticed an autoreload button in the screenshot and an idea I had is maybe it is possible to utilise 2 cards and reload one with the other when the balance goes below a certain amount? This would stop a person taking a large amount in a single transaction.

hassanhassan 15y ago

Something does sound fishy. I wonder why someone would ruin the fun for everyone involved.

JohnLBevan 15y ago
$100 spent on coffee for the homeless maybe? Just to take an optimistic view on the data.
- hassanhassan 15y ago
  You could be right, since something similar did take place as can be confirmed in one of the posts below (a large purchase for the homeless). But certainly we can agree that $15, $30, and $100 being drained in minutes to the exact penny must be cause for concern. Edit: draining to $0.00 is OK, as jonathan explains below.
  - jonathanstark 15y ago
    Jonathan here: Draining the card to the penny is not weird. If there is $10 on the card and your purchase is $11.50, $10 will be removed from the card and you have to pay the remaining $1.50 some other way. Expected behavior :) j
    - funthree 15y ago
      There is at least two cases that this doesnt explain. http://twitter.com/#!/jonathanscard/status/100341959557775360 http://twitter.com/#!/jonathanscard/status/10034195955777536... http://twitter.com/#!/jonathanscard/status/100356049755844608 http://twitter.com/#!/jonathanscard/status/10035604975584460... edit: now at least 5, see above
      - jonathanstark 15y ago
        Jonathan here: I see what you're saying, and of course it is possible that some jerk is buying gift cards with the card. That said, it's worth pointing out that the tweet stream is not real time and it doesn't have every transaction. The card balance is scraped from the sbux site every minute and posted to Twitter if it has changed since the last tweet. When there are multiple transactions in the same minute, the changes get aggregated. This can result in some strange looking numbers. What I think we're learning here is that if someone wants to reload the card, lots of little transactions over time is better than one big one. Or, perhaps the balance should not be tweeted. Thoughts? j
        michaelschade 15y ago
        I vote that you encourage people to make lots of little transactions over time versus just getting rid of the balance. The balance is really neat to see and it keeps people engaged and thinking about this project, even if they're not actively partaking (like myself, at the moment). The smaller installments of cash also help others realize that it's okay to submit small amounts and increase the likelihood that more than just one person with a large purchase will benefit.
        Cushman 15y ago
- joezydeco 15y ago
  How about someone buying a coffeemaker (they sell those) and telling the clerk "I've got $100 on the card and I'll pay the rest in cash"?
jonathanstark 15y ago
Jonathan here: The beauty of this is that one person can't ruin the fun for everyone involved. Call me a hopeless romantic, but I think people who don't get the concept are in the minority. Their behavior will be overrun 100x by people who do get the concept. We'll see what happens soon enough... j

eggbrain 15y ago

You can't transfer funds onto another card if you do not own the card / have the CSC code.

funthree 15y ago
Aha, you are right. I will edit that. Any ideas?
- dmn001 15y ago
  I wonder if Jonathan is around and is able to look up the transaction history on the starbucks website, and if that shows any information on where the money is spent/moved?
  - jonathanstark 15y ago
    Jonathan here: The transaction info available on the Starbucks site and mobile app is pretty limited, but I can see that the transactions are listed as "In Store Purchase". For example: http://cl.ly/3H1j3g443X0y0O3j2M2L http://cl.ly/3H1j3g443X0y0O3j2M2L Unfortunately, there is no info about which stores the purchases were made in, and the history only goes back about 20 transactions. It does look like some people are making large purchases, which is jerky, but not totally unexpected. Thanks, j
    - dmn001 15y ago
      Thanks for your reply. I noticed an autoreload button in the screenshot and an idea I had is maybe it is possible to utilise 2 cards and reload one with the other when the balance goes below a certain amount? This would stop a person taking a large amount in a single transaction.