Tradthots Trolling Trad Simps
(media.scored.co)
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (19)
sorted by:
That's what he gets for simping for OnlyThots. Go figure that he's too retarded to dispute the charge with his credit card company.
It's a screenshot from /pol/, right? Same chance poster never had an OF account and thought it would be funny to preemptively discourage her simps by claiming he wasted $15.
Or poster is bullshitting in an attempt to make people say "no way" and spend $15 to see if it's true as a weird marketing scheme.
Don't take anything at face value.
Chargebacks get you banned from the storefront and he has more thots to simp.
I've used middlemen with storefronts quite a bit. What you say is true, but it's also true that middlemen strongly favor buyers in disputes even to the point of allowing them to perpetuate obvious scams on sellers, and preventing chargebacks is a major reason they do that. They would rather eat the cost of giving a dissatisfied buyer their money back than eat that same cost plus a 20 or 30 percent chargeback fee. So while they ban people who do chargebacks they're also very likely refund the money themselves if asked. Maybe OnlyThots is different. I don't know because I don't simp for ewhores. I will say that the places I dealt with were so eager to avoid chargebacks that even when some pajeet banned me from a storefront they refunded the $200 in pending orders I had even when I got abusive. I'm sure my threats to dispute the charges had something to do with it. Even pajeets who do nothing but mindlessly nuke accounts to reach their daily quota know not to fuck with chargebacks.
... I'd be way too embarrassed to dispute a $15 charge to 'kittenvagina69' or whatever. There's a reason that Playboy used to come in a discrete brown paper packaging.