In this case I'm sure it could have been handled better by the seller and not shitting on the dude publicly. But this whole idea of you can get away with it cause it's legal doesn't mean you aren't abusing a vendor. I read the buyer made some donations so he was clearly more interested in supporting the seller so that's cool.
I'd say if you are within your own community it makes sense to think beyond terms and conditions and consider it more by the golden rule of do unto others what you want them to do unto you.
In this case I'm sure it could have been handled better by the seller and not shitting on the dude publicly.
Absolutely. At the heart of this was a normal and reasonable way this could have been settled without it becoming a Major Battlefield of the Culture War, where nobody ends up upset and everything ends kosher. None of those reactions were taken by the seller here and because of that he deserves every bit of mockery.
Especially as, it seems quite obvious of a thing you can restrict to prevent it from happening in the first place like literally every other coupon in existence. You know you offer coupons, and you should know you didn't build in restrictions to them for your shop (unless you outsourced it). So you yourself have plenty of accountability to take for this happening too.
you can get away with it
This seems to be the heart of the schism here. You guys keep talking like this is some sneaky nigger trying to abuse a system and loophole to "get away with" stealing something. When its quite obvious by his followup actions nothing nefarious was in his mind and he could clearly afford it at full price anyway, he simply didn't think anything was wrong and proceeded thinking he was getting a good deal.
We can turn it around and say he was trusting enough that he assumed this Right Wing Macho Man wasn't so stupid he wouldn't forget to put a limit on it, and thereby it must be allowed by not being so.
This perspective of him being this sneaky devil only works if you assume the maximum worst possible scenario for the buyer, and the maximum most "dindu nuffin, ever at all, he was just being taken advantage of" for the seller. Which is more nigger behavior than any amount of using a fucking coupon.
How much money do I have to donate to this faggot until I’m no longer jewish?
Don’t worry, you made it abundantly clear you love low trust societies, do you have your own coin clipper or are you waiting for a coupon on it?
Damn, didn't know using coupons was illegal activity.
Someone better start locking up all our grandmas for their hobby of saving money at the grocery store.
In this case I'm sure it could have been handled better by the seller and not shitting on the dude publicly. But this whole idea of you can get away with it cause it's legal doesn't mean you aren't abusing a vendor. I read the buyer made some donations so he was clearly more interested in supporting the seller so that's cool.
I'd say if you are within your own community it makes sense to think beyond terms and conditions and consider it more by the golden rule of do unto others what you want them to do unto you.
Absolutely. At the heart of this was a normal and reasonable way this could have been settled without it becoming a Major Battlefield of the Culture War, where nobody ends up upset and everything ends kosher. None of those reactions were taken by the seller here and because of that he deserves every bit of mockery.
Especially as, it seems quite obvious of a thing you can restrict to prevent it from happening in the first place like literally every other coupon in existence. You know you offer coupons, and you should know you didn't build in restrictions to them for your shop (unless you outsourced it). So you yourself have plenty of accountability to take for this happening too.
This seems to be the heart of the schism here. You guys keep talking like this is some sneaky nigger trying to abuse a system and loophole to "get away with" stealing something. When its quite obvious by his followup actions nothing nefarious was in his mind and he could clearly afford it at full price anyway, he simply didn't think anything was wrong and proceeded thinking he was getting a good deal.
We can turn it around and say he was trusting enough that he assumed this Right Wing Macho Man wasn't so stupid he wouldn't forget to put a limit on it, and thereby it must be allowed by not being so.
This perspective of him being this sneaky devil only works if you assume the maximum worst possible scenario for the buyer, and the maximum most "dindu nuffin, ever at all, he was just being taken advantage of" for the seller. Which is more nigger behavior than any amount of using a fucking coupon.
Also I pointed out legality vs morality and you went back to justifying it based on legality. I think you're missing the point. Very Judaic of you lol
Comment Reported for: Rule 16 - Identity Attacks
Comment Removed for: Rule 16 - Identity Attacks
Do not assert that poor behavior is innate to an identity group.
What if poor behavior is innate to an identity group?
Rule 16 just reads "You can't say true things if Dom doesn't like them."
Not all of them, but always them
Morality isn't innate.