Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by creer 342 days ago
That seems disingenuous. (1) in this case, this is a not a tiny fly-by-night wannabe game company. (2) which is good for paying back (or never seeing) the money of chargebacks.

For a new company, the risk of chargebacks might rest on a credit card company (for a little while anyway). But not for a long established one.
1 comments
JimDabell 342 days ago
> That seems disingenuous.

Why are you assuming bad faith? There’s no indication parent is being insincere at all.

link
creer 341 days ago
> Adult content is considered a high risk merchant category

> It has nothing to do with any sort of puritanical premise.

But I have no problem with the parent poster. I'm here hoping for conversation. The argument though is one we hear now and then and like I point out, how can it make sense? Like many things, it looks more like a vaguely possible, plausible explanation or chain of arguments... which on closer look doesn't fly. How can Valve, a long established, apparently solid merchant, be a serious risk for the credit card infrastructure? Should there be chargebacks, they can handle chargebacks. This is not limited to Valve. Many of us have run into the issue. The credit card infrastructure goes out of its way to refuse solid business.

link
JimDabell 340 days ago
> But I have no problem with the parent poster. I'm here hoping for conversation.

If you don’t have a problem with them and you were hoping for conversation, then starting out by accusing them of being disingenuous is a strange way of showing it.

> how can it make sense?

Why didn’t you ask this to begin with instead of assuming they were being deceitful? You know “disingenuous” doesn’t just mean “I disagree”, right?

link