I can’t help but think that this is the wrong approach by Kickstarter. I think it should only be possible to ask for refunds if the creator doesn’t make a good

I can’t help but think that this is the wrong approach by Kickstarter. I think it should only be possible to ask for refunds if the creator doesn’t make a good faith effort. I understand that Kickstarter wants to draw a clear and unambiguous line, but I also think that one of things that makes Kickstarter great is the potential for failure. It’s not just a boring pre-order service – or at least I don’t want it to be, at least not exclusively. The potential for failure is already the current reality of Kickstarter but I always feel as though they try to absolve themselves from it. I think they should instead communicate it offensively. Kickstarter can remain a place for boring pre-orders (those projects can be awesome, too, e.g. Smut Peddler). However, Kickstarter could also create a clearly marked higher risk type of project. The product doesn’t exist at the start of the funding period (either completely or nearly completely). Kickstarter could require creators to be more transparent with their budget. Maybe there could also be a, say, $2,500 ceiling for each individual backer or something like that. But Kickstarter could also allow for failure without refunds. I think all of this is doable. People who don’t like risk can still back low-risk pre-order Kickstarters, people who enjoy backing something that could fail can do just that. (That being said, the linked project appears to have been fraudulent and no good faith effort appears to have been made, so it’s certainly appropriate to get the courts involved.)