3 ms·

> People need to have personal responsibility. Do people need to have personal responsibility when they operate a business? Why is responsibility any less ther

> People need to have personal responsibility. Do people need to have personal responsibility when they operate a business? Why is responsibility any less there? I think it's irresponsible to exploit other people's mistakes (unless they are a competing business, and not always then either). It happens incidentally sometimes at minimal cost, but at high cost or when it can be avoided, it's the businessperson's responsibility to not do it. Every one makes mistakes; you too. Forgive us our tresspasses, as we forgive those who tresspass ...

robertlagrant 3y ago
> Why is responsibility any less there? It's not. They should be ensuring the service being paid for is available. That's their responsibility.
- wolverine876 3y ago
  You really think it's responsible to knowingly take people's money for nothing? I think that's textbook irresponsibility - it's an assertion of irresponsibility as ok.
  - robertlagrant 3y ago
    Well, you'd have to put work in to know. If I get a physical magazine subscription, the magazine doesn't know if I read it, unless they put in the work to phone me and ask. They aren't being irresponsible at all.
    - mtlmtlmtlmtl 3y ago
      That's a strawman. It is indeed hard for a magazine to know. It's trivial for someone like Netflix to know, and they probably already track it.
      - robertlagrant 3y ago
        The responsibility shouldn't change just because it's easier. Should businesses track you (whether that's easy or difficult) and auto-unsubscribe you, or should you decide when to cancel?
        mtlmtlmtlmtl 3y ago
        If it shouldn't change because it's easier, why did you make a point about it requiring work? Just admit your argument made no sense, instead of pretending your argument was just an irrelevant aside. It does matter that it's easier. In fact it can be automated. If a user is inactive for 30 days, the subscription could be disabled and automatically reenabled if and when they decide to use it. You wanna argue that would be a lot of work to implement? And yes, I think this would be reasonable for someone like Netflix, and unreasonable for a paper magazine. What's so hard to understand about that? they're just not comparable.
        robertlagrant 3y ago
        > why did you make a point about it requiring work? Because a previous comment said it wouldn't require work. Now you also are saying they'd need to implement it. So we agree it needs work. > Just admit your argument made no sense Framing this as "admit" might make it seem like a fait accomplis, but I need a higher bar than that to be persuaded. Biased language only fools very basic readers. > they're just not comparable. Why not?
        mtlmtlmtlmtl 3y ago
        Sigh. If you're not capable of admitting when you're wrong I feel bad for you. There's no shame in it you know. I'm wrong about stuff frequently, but at least I'll happily admit it. Life is too short to waste energy clinging onto bad arguments simply out of spite or poor self-esteem. Embrace cummingham's law. Have a good life.
        3y ago

robertlagrant 3y ago

> Why is responsibility any less there? It's not. They should be ensuring the service being paid for is available. That's their responsibility.

wolverine876 3y ago
You really think it's responsible to knowingly take people's money for nothing? I think that's textbook irresponsibility - it's an assertion of irresponsibility as ok.
- robertlagrant 3y ago
  Well, you'd have to put work in to know. If I get a physical magazine subscription, the magazine doesn't know if I read it, unless they put in the work to phone me and ask. They aren't being irresponsible at all.
  - mtlmtlmtlmtl 3y ago
    That's a strawman. It is indeed hard for a magazine to know. It's trivial for someone like Netflix to know, and they probably already track it.
    - robertlagrant 3y ago
      The responsibility shouldn't change just because it's easier. Should businesses track you (whether that's easy or difficult) and auto-unsubscribe you, or should you decide when to cancel?
      - mtlmtlmtlmtl 3y ago
        If it shouldn't change because it's easier, why did you make a point about it requiring work? Just admit your argument made no sense, instead of pretending your argument was just an irrelevant aside. It does matter that it's easier. In fact it can be automated. If a user is inactive for 30 days, the subscription could be disabled and automatically reenabled if and when they decide to use it. You wanna argue that would be a lot of work to implement? And yes, I think this would be reasonable for someone like Netflix, and unreasonable for a paper magazine. What's so hard to understand about that? they're just not comparable.
        robertlagrant 3y ago
        > why did you make a point about it requiring work? Because a previous comment said it wouldn't require work. Now you also are saying they'd need to implement it. So we agree it needs work. > Just admit your argument made no sense Framing this as "admit" might make it seem like a fait accomplis, but I need a higher bar than that to be persuaded. Biased language only fools very basic readers. > they're just not comparable. Why not?
        mtlmtlmtlmtl 3y ago
        Sigh. If you're not capable of admitting when you're wrong I feel bad for you. There's no shame in it you know. I'm wrong about stuff frequently, but at least I'll happily admit it. Life is too short to waste energy clinging onto bad arguments simply out of spite or poor self-esteem. Embrace cummingham's law. Have a good life.
        3y ago