[MichaelZuo]

So they have no durable principles for deciding who or what to refund… doesnt that make them look even worse…?

[necovek]

Or they do, and two sentences from two different experiences don't tell a full story?

[MichaelZuo]

Okay “they do” based on what more compelling evidence?

Its not like the credibility of the two prior HN users are literally zero…

[necovek]

I am saying there is no evidence either way: they had contrasting experiences and one GP established this means that company has no standardized policies. Maybe they do, maybe they don't — I don't think we can definitively conclude anything.

[MichaelZuo]

So if you acknowledge the prior claims have more than literally zero credibility… then what’s the issue?

That I dont equally weigh them with all possible yet-to-be claimed things?

[necovek]

I object to your conclusion that "they have no durable principles": not sure how do you get to that from two different experiences documented with a single paragraph.

[MichaelZuo]

Because I can assess things via probability… without needing 100% certain proof either way?