Yes, GP is simply incorrect to imply otherwise. I understand errors or misunderstandings that were subsequently rectified, but as long as Amazon et al. treat th

Yes, GP is simply incorrect to imply otherwise. I understand errors or misunderstandings that were subsequently rectified, but as long as Amazon et al. treat this as cost-of-doing-business it'll be simply be a disservice not to point problems such as this article explains. An edit: > Edit: I guess the people have spoken. Top 10 issues in tech today includes amazon not refunding this one guy... Again, it'll be reasonable for you to not value this article because you believe that this happens everyday both in Amazon and non-Amazon enterprises, but in my personal opinion the fact that they have bothered a major news organisation knowing that if they've stated is a lie would be judged to be unreliable (both legally and by the public) is an effort too much to simply ignore. For me, it says a lot to the quality of support that Amazon has given on edge-cases and to remind myself that a good company five years ago doesn't necessarily meant that it is good now.