[sofixa]

Depends on the country, but mostly no, and thank fucking $deity. Credit score systems are an abomination that go against privacy and are used to entrap people into debt and keep not knowledgeable people poor. I find it ridiculous when Americans speak about the Chinese social score system - judging people on debt management and spend is marginally better than on communist-aligning speech. Especially when it's done by for-profit companies that have zero incentive to get anything right.

In most EU countries when you want to take out a loan, the bank takes a look at your current status ( employment, expenses, family, etc.) and debt history stored by the central bank ( which is basically you had a loan of 10k for 5 years, don't own anything anymore) and judge based on that if you're credit worthy or not.

[alisonkisk]

You're saying it's OK to order stuff and not pay for it, as long it costs less than the cost of going to court?

[sofixa]

No, it's okay to subscribe to something, stop using it and stop paying it. When your access is cutoff due to non-payment, what's the problem?

[bigwavedave]

> No, it's okay to subscribe to something, stop using it and stop paying it. When your access is cutoff due to non-payment, what's the problem?

Let's look at it from a different perspective. If a coworker and I build a service in my garage from the ground up where I let users pay $100/mo month-to-month, $75/mo for a six month agreement, or $50/mo for a twelve month agreement, you're saying it's fine to agree to the twelve month term, get the 50% discount for a few months, and then cancel your card even though the only reason I offered such a steep discount in the first place is because you promised you'd pay me for twelve months?

[account42]

Yes. You can always demand 12 * $50 up front.

[bigwavedave]

Just to be sure there's no miscommunication here, you believe it's alright to default on an agreement purely because the person you're doing business with is letting you finance it (at a steep discount and without interest of any kind) instead of demanding a lump sum?

[FireBeyond]

Their argument (and to be clear, how much I agree with it depends on the nature of the product/service, and the amount), is that your subscription had an intended duration, and was priced accordingly, and that you received discounts from the "on-demand" pricing that you would otherwise not have been entitled to.