Why did the customer use a coupon I gave him and expect it to do exactly what I said it would do? Why didn't the customer intuit that I was bad at this and run my business for me?
Your spiel here shows you’re incapable of existing in a high trust society. Let me help you understand what an actual high trust society looks like:
Jim owns a dollar store, his overhead is decent enough he decides to give a coupon to his regulars because he cares about his customers and appreciates their business.
Jim is now making enough at the dollar store so he decides to add radios, nothing huge price wise, but far higher than anything he sold before, he also decides to do so with a low overhead because he values his customers.
Jim starts rolling out the radios and Bob, one of his regulars still hasn’t used his coupon for the dollar store, Bob would sure love a radio and technically his coupon would work because it covers anything in the store.
Bob, not being a retarded piece of shit, also realizes that the coupon was meant for things far cheaper than the radio.
Bob warns Jim that he made a mistake and that he could lose his shirt if he doesn’t change the coupons.
The seller overreacted, sure, but the customer knew exactly what they were doing.
Do you understand why you had to make it a dollar store in your example? Do you understand why you had to reiterate "dollar store" three times in your example?
It's because without adding a reasonable expectation of item values offered to the example, it doesn't work.
If you think using the coupon unacceptable in this case, why do you suggest it would be acceptable in those cases? Do you think taking advantage of a larger group of people is more "high-trust?"
Why isn't there even more of a burden to warn them? With the larger reach, surely they're even more at risk in a situation like that.
If you think using the coupon unacceptable in this case, why do you suggest it would be acceptable in those cases? Do you think taking advantage of a larger group of people is more "high-trust?"
Do you not understand that high trust goes both ways? Do you think Cabelas and Bass Pro operate on low overhead and don’t try to squeeze money from their clientele? They’re publicly traded companies who value profit margins over clientele, they are low trust by definition.
Why isn't there even more of a burden to warn them? With the larger reach, surely they're even more at risk in a situation like that.
And they’re already a low trust business, they have entire legal teams (shocking I know!) that cover them on everything they do.
I know why you did it. But "it's a dollar store," sounds far more reasonable than, "the customer is expected to know the value of everything in the store," which is what you're actually saying. You're making something seem obvious instead of saying that you expect the customer to look through the entire catalog to determine the average prices of goods and what was added when.
And we're also not talking about a brick and mortar shop with a regular clientele, which is also something you added for extra feels. It's the same reason you gave them names. To project an image on it that differs from reality. We're talking about e-commerce open to hundreds of millions of customers. The scale is different and if a vendor wants to sell at such a scale, they need to be prepared for it.
If he wanted to be on a first name basis with his customers, he should sell in person to a local community. But he is not Jim selling to Bob. He's a representative of "ODGG, LLC" selling to the mass market. It is not reasonable to expect someone shopping on-line to know if a website is a 3 person company, 50 person company, or 100k person company.
I know why you did it. But "it's a dollar store," sounds far more reasonable than, "the customer is expected to know the value of everything in the store," which is what you're actually saying. You're making something seem obvious instead of saying that you expect the customer to look through the entire catalog to determine the average prices of goods and what was added when.
This was the first sale of brand new stock the guy was advertising. It was clearly the most expensive thing he sells. The buyer was a patreon supporter, they also clearly know the sellers catalogue.
And we're also not talking about a brick and mortar shop with a regular clientele, which is also something you added for extra feels. It's the same reason you gave them names. To project an image on it that differs from reality. We're talking about e-commerce open to hundreds of millions of customers. The scale is different and if a vendor wants to sell at such a scale, they need to be prepared for it.
The coupon was for patreon supporters, they’re also clearly are the modern day regular clientele.
If he wanted to be on a first name basis with his customers, he should sell in person to a local community. But he is not Jim selling to Bob. He's a representative of "ODGG, LLC" selling to the mass market. It is not reasonable to expect someone shopping on-line to know if a website is a 3 person company, 50 person company, or 100k person company.
He gave coupons to a local online community aka his patreon subscribers. They clearly knew who he was.
Your spiel here shows you’re incapable of existing in a high trust society. Let me help you understand what an actual high trust society looks like:
The seller overreacted, sure, but the customer knew exactly what they were doing.
Do you understand why you had to make it a dollar store in your example? Do you understand why you had to reiterate "dollar store" three times in your example?
It's because without adding a reasonable expectation of item values offered to the example, it doesn't work.
Do you understand the reason I made the comparison is everything else the guy sells in not in the price range of thermals?
Let's revisit this:
If you think using the coupon unacceptable in this case, why do you suggest it would be acceptable in those cases? Do you think taking advantage of a larger group of people is more "high-trust?"
Why isn't there even more of a burden to warn them? With the larger reach, surely they're even more at risk in a situation like that.
Do you not understand that high trust goes both ways? Do you think Cabelas and Bass Pro operate on low overhead and don’t try to squeeze money from their clientele? They’re publicly traded companies who value profit margins over clientele, they are low trust by definition.
And they’re already a low trust business, they have entire legal teams (shocking I know!) that cover them on everything they do.
I know why you did it. But "it's a dollar store," sounds far more reasonable than, "the customer is expected to know the value of everything in the store," which is what you're actually saying. You're making something seem obvious instead of saying that you expect the customer to look through the entire catalog to determine the average prices of goods and what was added when.
And we're also not talking about a brick and mortar shop with a regular clientele, which is also something you added for extra feels. It's the same reason you gave them names. To project an image on it that differs from reality. We're talking about e-commerce open to hundreds of millions of customers. The scale is different and if a vendor wants to sell at such a scale, they need to be prepared for it.
If he wanted to be on a first name basis with his customers, he should sell in person to a local community. But he is not Jim selling to Bob. He's a representative of "ODGG, LLC" selling to the mass market. It is not reasonable to expect someone shopping on-line to know if a website is a 3 person company, 50 person company, or 100k person company.
This was the first sale of brand new stock the guy was advertising. It was clearly the most expensive thing he sells. The buyer was a patreon supporter, they also clearly know the sellers catalogue.
The coupon was for patreon supporters, they’re also clearly are the modern day regular clientele.
He gave coupons to a local online community aka his patreon subscribers. They clearly knew who he was.