4 ms·
Firstly, Sam's antics would've been a good discussion if he had taken out $10 out of it and given it to a charity. But the sheer scale of 'hack' i.e. to take a
by neebz 15y ago
Firstly, Sam's antics would've been a good discussion if he had taken out $10 out of it and given it to a charity. But the sheer scale of 'hack' i.e. to take a grand total $600 out of the card when the average single expense on the card is hardly $20-40 is plainly out of the way. In my personal opinion, that was never the part of the experiment.
Secondly, the idea that he actually makes a blog post which suggests buying an iPad and then ends up advising to donate it to a charity. It all makes everything very fuzzy. What exactly are his intentions ? Is he just trying to link-bait? If he done something similar with the penny tray, I am sure he would've been taken to the cleaners by the people alongside him.
- gegegege 15y agoI think both the original Jonathans Card post and Sams post are blatantly obvious link-bait. Also, people clean those penny tray things out all the time. You just don't hear about it because there are tens of thousands of them and no one tray contains $600++
- 100k 15y agoHis taking the money and auctioning it for charity DID make the experiment more interesting, but I understand the anger. Partially, it's the amount he took took, as you say. $100 would have been more reasonable. I think it was also Sam's tone in his blog post. Perhaps buying strangers coffee is not as worthy as buying food for starving children, but it made people feel good. Sam essentially dismissed it. I think that's mean spirited. There's a lot of needs in the world, and different people are interested in different things. Do we really want to get into a debate over whether giving money to MSF is better than an animal shelter? Indeed, I can both donate to stop hunger AND buy a stranger a coffee.