2 ms·
This is a really amazingly tone-deaf response. We may only hope that somebody like the Daily Show takes them properly to task for this.
by angelbob 15y ago
This is a really amazingly tone-deaf response. We may only hope that somebody like the Daily Show takes them properly to task for this.
- jacoblyles 15y ago> We may only hope that somebody like the Daily Show takes them properly to task for this. I'm probably too old to understand this. How does that solve anything?
- angelbob 15y agoThey've already released Regretsy's money (says the tone-deaf, possibly inaccurate response). So solving matters is just to convince them that they will have more trouble getting away with this in the future. I believe Jon Stewart can help with that.
- nroach 15y agoIt really isn't that bad, under the circumstances. They did some things right: 1) Acknowledge a problem in a timely manner (assuming the really did only get escalation one day ago) 2) Provide specific information on what is being done to fix the problem (working w/account holder, making a donation as a mea culpa) 3) Explain limitations on resolution (legitimate constraints on public comment for privacy-protected matter) What wasn't done well was: a) letting it get this far to begin with b) failing to explain how future problems will be prevented by policy changes
- westbywest 15y agoI'm really only seeing damage control as Paypal's motivation behind this statement on their blog. I wonder how many other folks have had the same problems with Paypal's inconsistent application of their policy (when not just outright obstruction), who don't have the same resources to make noise as the woman running Regresty. And whether they will get similar resolution.