[michaelmrose]

You make a very strong statement regarding a data point of one, that is to say yourself.

Immediately thereafter you list a way you can get flagged through no fault of your own because a friend who was flagged shipped things your your address as a gift.

I don't want to have to establish a strong background of years of membership in order not to get treated like trash. I'm not interviewing for a job or a date I just want to give you my money for goods that aren't counterfeit.

When you have a large minority of fakes and problem shipments you are going to have outliers. People whom you shipped 5 fakes/broken stuff in a row.

Banning these people means that not only can I not trust you to sell me a legit good I can't trust you not to turn your back on me afterwards.

[mimimihaha]

Haha, I did a lot of research back in the day when I first started using prime to make sure that all the crap I received that I believed warranted a return wouldn't have my account banned. I wasn't just using my own experiences, but my research experience as well. I do agree with the rest of your statement though. Although if you ran Amazon you'd probably have to also agree with banning people that take extreme advantage of the system (obviously extreme, not semi-advantaging the system). Unlike Walmart or Best Buy, when you return things to Amazon you also have to account for shipping to and from the customer. I understand why Amazon does it-- if even 0.5% of the Amazon population took advantage it would be ridiculously unprofitable for Amazon to be running.

Now the fact that they sell fake crap and expect people not to use the return policy is obviously ridiculous. If you're going to continue selling fake crap, then you better be willing to allow people to return that fake crap without consequences. So I definitely agree with your point.