10 ms·

I'm pretty sure most of these patterns were thought up by the brain geniuses on this very site.

MattGaiser 5y ago
It has worked plenty on me. Am I really going to make a phone call over $10 month? For months and months, no, I will not.
- dylan604 5y ago
  I mean, you could be lighting a cigar with that $10, so you're losing out on something. It's much more than $10/month => $120/year. It's the principle of the matter that a shitty company's best way to make money is to make it hard for the people that tried it out to leave. You are just proving their business model works. You (royal you, but you personally as well) are part of the problem.
  - Aeolun 5y ago
    That’s a form of victim blaming. Companies shouldn’t do this shit, and shouldn’t legally be allowed to do this shit.
    - dylan604 5y ago
      I'm not sure I'd agree with that in this case. Knowing you are getting screwed and choosing not to do anything about it seems to be a bit different than someone that is unaware or someone attempting to stop it but just can't beat the company at their game. Blaming the latter I'd agree that would fall under victim blaming, but I don't agree with that label for the former.
      - cgriswald 5y ago
        These companies are using human psychology in immoral ways to victimize people. Whether a person fights back (which isn’t free) or not, they are already being victimized. Some of us do fight back, but not enough to cut into the profitability of these actions. To claim one of these victims is “part of the problem” because they lack the time or capacity to defend themselves is shameful; especially since making such a statement serves to normalize the companies’ immoral actions.
        dylan604 5y ago
        If you think I'm trying to normalize this practice, then you've clearly got some wires crossed. You're riding your emotions a little hard on this one me thinks. The person that started this thread has since admittedly accepted their share of the blame. I clearly stated it was a shitty company for doing these things. There are things in life that are difficult and shitty to have to deal with, but not dealing with them is just sticking one's head in the sand. We've all been guilty of it, at least I know I have and am on other things. It doesn't make it wrong to call me out on it. By actively not doing anything about the only thing I can control (myself), I am allowing them to prey on my $10/month.
        cgriswald 5y ago
        Disclaiming something doesn’t negate other actions. Everyone acknowledges there are things we can do as individuals to deal with the problem. Just because the original poster also acknowledges it doesn’t negate you claiming he is “part of the problem.” That is the essence of victim blaming, and that is what serves to normalize the aforementioned immoral behavior.
        dylan604 5y ago
        We'll just have to agree to disagree, as I just don't feel this is victim blaming. There's a difference of saying that it is the person's fault for this happening to them, and recognizing that a shitty company is preying upon people because they allow themselves to continue to be preyed upon. It is possible to be a willing victim, at that point, the victim blaming shield is no longer applicable. You feel differently, and that's your right. I just choose to not coddle those that choose to be the victim. They've moved into the enabling role.
      - Aeolun 5y ago
        Maybe? Fact is you shouldn’t be getting screwed in the first place. If you are in a position to find out you are getting screwed, it’s not suddenly your fault if it continues. The root cause is still that the company did it in the first place.
    - MattGaiser 5y ago
      Eh, I freely accept my share of the blame in being exploited. It just isn't worth prioritizing fixing though. I have to find an hour or two to deal with it.
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
- stolen_biscuit 5y ago
  I'm the opposite, once you make it difficult for me to cancel a service, my resolve to be rid of you increases 10 fold. It overwhelms any discomfort making a call would put me through.
  - MattGaiser 5y ago
    It is not so much discomfort (although I do hate phone calls), but rather an unwillingness to give up somewhere between a half hour and 2 hours of prime daytime hours waiting on hold.
  - veidr 5y ago
    I used to be like the parent poster, but yours is the position I evolved to, also. And, I make sure to leave a negative review or call attention to the shittiness of the company involved somehow, much as the OP as done. It is annoying, and possibly not the most effective use of my time, but I have come to see it as a kind of civic responsibility.
    - goldforever 5y ago
    - whoibrar 5y ago
      This is the right approach! If everyone decides to stay silent it will only make more companies adopt this. The shit needs to be called out!
  - sokoloff 5y ago
    Blue Apron used this pattern. For over a year, every week I went to Google, typed in a search term that would give me a paid ad from Blue Apron, I clicked through it and made sure my next 4 weeks of meals were skipped. (Along the way, I learned there was a cancel fully online page, but it was not linked in the nav, furthering my resolve to keep doing this.) Eventually a new CEO took over and the cancel online page appeared in the nav whereupon I canceled that way and wrote them a quick note of thanks for putting it in the nav. Worst part was: we genuinely enjoyed the service for over a year and many of their recipes have become part of our regular menu at home. We stopped only when the recipes got somewhat repetitive and then the convenience wasn’t quite worth it. I liked and recommend it (now), but this attempt to goose the retention numbers really sat poorly with me.
notyourwork 5y ago
Thought up or implemented are not always the same.

It has worked plenty on me. Am I really going to make a phone call over $10 month? For months and months, no, I will not.

dylan604 5y ago
I mean, you could be lighting a cigar with that $10, so you're losing out on something. It's much more than $10/month => $120/year. It's the principle of the matter that a shitty company's best way to make money is to make it hard for the people that tried it out to leave. You are just proving their business model works. You (royal you, but you personally as well) are part of the problem.
- Aeolun 5y ago
  That’s a form of victim blaming. Companies shouldn’t do this shit, and shouldn’t legally be allowed to do this shit.
  - dylan604 5y ago
    I'm not sure I'd agree with that in this case. Knowing you are getting screwed and choosing not to do anything about it seems to be a bit different than someone that is unaware or someone attempting to stop it but just can't beat the company at their game. Blaming the latter I'd agree that would fall under victim blaming, but I don't agree with that label for the former.
    - cgriswald 5y ago
      These companies are using human psychology in immoral ways to victimize people. Whether a person fights back (which isn’t free) or not, they are already being victimized. Some of us do fight back, but not enough to cut into the profitability of these actions. To claim one of these victims is “part of the problem” because they lack the time or capacity to defend themselves is shameful; especially since making such a statement serves to normalize the companies’ immoral actions.
      - dylan604 5y ago
        If you think I'm trying to normalize this practice, then you've clearly got some wires crossed. You're riding your emotions a little hard on this one me thinks. The person that started this thread has since admittedly accepted their share of the blame. I clearly stated it was a shitty company for doing these things. There are things in life that are difficult and shitty to have to deal with, but not dealing with them is just sticking one's head in the sand. We've all been guilty of it, at least I know I have and am on other things. It doesn't make it wrong to call me out on it. By actively not doing anything about the only thing I can control (myself), I am allowing them to prey on my $10/month.
        cgriswald 5y ago
        Disclaiming something doesn’t negate other actions. Everyone acknowledges there are things we can do as individuals to deal with the problem. Just because the original poster also acknowledges it doesn’t negate you claiming he is “part of the problem.” That is the essence of victim blaming, and that is what serves to normalize the aforementioned immoral behavior.
        dylan604 5y ago
        We'll just have to agree to disagree, as I just don't feel this is victim blaming. There's a difference of saying that it is the person's fault for this happening to them, and recognizing that a shitty company is preying upon people because they allow themselves to continue to be preyed upon. It is possible to be a willing victim, at that point, the victim blaming shield is no longer applicable. You feel differently, and that's your right. I just choose to not coddle those that choose to be the victim. They've moved into the enabling role.
    - Aeolun 5y ago
      Maybe? Fact is you shouldn’t be getting screwed in the first place. If you are in a position to find out you are getting screwed, it’s not suddenly your fault if it continues. The root cause is still that the company did it in the first place.
  - MattGaiser 5y ago
    Eh, I freely accept my share of the blame in being exploited. It just isn't worth prioritizing fixing though. I have to find an hour or two to deal with it.
- deleted 5y ago
  [deleted]
stolen_biscuit 5y ago
I'm the opposite, once you make it difficult for me to cancel a service, my resolve to be rid of you increases 10 fold. It overwhelms any discomfort making a call would put me through.
- MattGaiser 5y ago
  It is not so much discomfort (although I do hate phone calls), but rather an unwillingness to give up somewhere between a half hour and 2 hours of prime daytime hours waiting on hold.
- veidr 5y ago
  I used to be like the parent poster, but yours is the position I evolved to, also. And, I make sure to leave a negative review or call attention to the shittiness of the company involved somehow, much as the OP as done. It is annoying, and possibly not the most effective use of my time, but I have come to see it as a kind of civic responsibility.
  - goldforever 5y ago
  - whoibrar 5y ago
    This is the right approach! If everyone decides to stay silent it will only make more companies adopt this. The shit needs to be called out!
- sokoloff 5y ago
  Blue Apron used this pattern. For over a year, every week I went to Google, typed in a search term that would give me a paid ad from Blue Apron, I clicked through it and made sure my next 4 weeks of meals were skipped. (Along the way, I learned there was a cancel fully online page, but it was not linked in the nav, furthering my resolve to keep doing this.) Eventually a new CEO took over and the cancel online page appeared in the nav whereupon I canceled that way and wrote them a quick note of thanks for putting it in the nav. Worst part was: we genuinely enjoyed the service for over a year and many of their recipes have become part of our regular menu at home. We stopped only when the recipes got somewhat repetitive and then the convenience wasn’t quite worth it. I liked and recommend it (now), but this attempt to goose the retention numbers really sat poorly with me.

notyourwork 5y ago

Thought up or implemented are not always the same.