Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

PayPal Freezes Mailpile Campaign Funds

mailpile.is

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 366 posts

Re: PayPal Freezes Mailpile Campaign Funds

#321

Post by _pius »

tptacek wrote: post #316
_pius wrote: post #313

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Pretty glib. Your argument might be stronger if it didn't rely on labeling ... The argument doesn't rely on labeling, though it does call a spade a spade. A definition of "apologism" is "a defense or excuse, a speech or written answer made in justification." I'd love to hear why this is an incorrect characterization of the comment. The short answer to your question is that you should concern yourself (not sympathize)…

No. Were you to retain Matasano, you'd discover that our relationship would be governed by a series of contracts. If you were of any significant size, those contracts would be scrutinized on your side by your counsel. If you were a typical client of size, your counsel and management would likely have questions or concerns about those terms, which would then be the subject of negotiation. Our risk tolerance and cost s…

Our risk tolerance and cost structure would very much matter to those negotiations.

Sure, those negotiations would happen before significant money or services are exchanged. And, presumably, we wouldn't enter into an agreement unless we were mutually satisfied. But arbitrarily deciding to withhold payment for your services after the fact, pending an audit of your workplace practices, for instance, would probably land me on the wrong end of an adverse action from you. And deservedly so.

Regarding the label you used: what makes it absurd is the notion that Patrick would be motivated by an urge to justify the actions of a 3rd party business he's barely engaged with.

I didn't (and wouldn't) claim that. I do however think that his well-reasoned, but irrelevant argument for why Paypal feels justified in holding $42,000 of Mailpile's money does indeed serve as apologism in the thread, motivations aside. If you think I'm arguing that Patrick is some shill for PayPal, you're barking up the wrong tree.

Here it pains me to cite Paul Graham's "Things You Can't Say" on the semiotic significance of deploying labels to make arguments.

And it's painful to watch. The argument hardly relies on this supposed labeling and I'd be surprised if you actually believe that. At this point you've already done more labeling, imputing of motives, and purely rhetorical arguing than you seem to think I have.

Re: PayPal Freezes Mailpile Campaign Funds

#322

Post by danbmil99 »

adamnemecek wrote: post #16

I've always wondered why this policy is in place. Is it just to screw people over or is there some legitimate use? Are they trying to prevent money laundering?

I think they do have to contend with legitimate fraud, and their automated systems simply can't deal with a true FOSS project where the people donating know precisely what they're getting into, and the developers are obviously not some gang from Nigeria

Re: PayPal Freezes Mailpile Campaign Funds

#323

Post by tptacek »

_pius wrote: post #321
tptacek wrote: post #316

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No. Were you to retain Matasano, you'd discover that our relationship would be governed by a series of contracts. If you were of any significant size, those contracts would be scrutinized on your side by your counsel. If you were a typical client of size, your counsel and management would likely have questions or concerns about those terms, which would then be the subject of negotiation. Our risk tolerance and cost s…

Our risk tolerance and cost structure would very much matter to those negotiations. Sure, those negotiations would happen before significant money or services are exchanged. And, presumably, we wouldn't enter into an agreement unless we were mutually satisfied. But arbitrarily deciding to withhold payment for your services after the fact, pending an audit of your workplace practices, for instance, would probably land…

I don't understand what the difference is between Paypal's handling of payments and remittance of funds, which are governed by its contracts, and the terms and conditions of the work we do, which are also under contracts.

Re: PayPal Freezes Mailpile Campaign Funds

#324

Post by danbmil99 »

patio11 wrote: post #118

Indulge me in a flight of fancy in which we pretend, for the sake of argument, that a) Paypal is run not by Snidely Whiplash clones but b) by smart geeks working with thin margins in a highly regulated industry where c) customers are at risk essentially never, d) merchants eat 100% of the risk if they stay in business, and e) Paypal eats 100% of the risk if the merchant doesn't. Why is Paypal very skeptical of pre-sa…

These are good points all, I basically agree. However, if one understood the culture of Open Source and crowdfunding, it would be relatively easy to see that Mailpile is a pretty low risk for outright disappearance and chargebacks. Also, a project like MP has serious PR risk for Paypal being such dicks.

I suspect someone in-the-know at Paypal made this argument, and to their credit they backed down quickly in the face of potential Twitter disaster.

Re: PayPal Freezes Mailpile Campaign Funds

#325

Post by danielweber »

freejack wrote: post #184
patio11 wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think we're in substantial agreement as to Paypal desiring to shift losses due to fraud or non-performance onto the merchants. Since they desire to do this, they will not accede to Mailpile's desired world, where Mailpile gets 100% of the money on day 1 and then Paypal can seek recovery on day 120 or 365 if a chargeback comes in. Many HNers wish we lived in Mailpile's desired world 100% of the time regardless of me…

yeah, I totally agree. My only nit was your claim that Paypal bears risk. Its true that their model comes with risk and they've built their business model in a way that they shift it to third parties as extensively and quickly as possible. Its a sore point with me in how Paypa, Visa, etc. operate. The merchant is rarely right.

I have been gob-smacked by how, as a buyer, Ebay[1] took my side so readily in a dispute. It seemed they were ready to believe anything I said. I would hate to be on the other side of that.

[1] I know Ebay isn't exactly the same as PayPal, but one owns the other.

Re: PayPal Freezes Mailpile Campaign Funds

#326

Post by [deleted] »

tptacek wrote: post #323
_pius wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our risk tolerance and cost structure would very much matter to those negotiations. Sure, those negotiations would happen before significant money or services are exchanged. And, presumably, we wouldn't enter into an agreement unless we were mutually satisfied. But arbitrarily deciding to withhold payment for your services after the fact, pending an audit of your workplace practices, for instance, would probably land…

I don't understand what the difference is between Paypal's handling of payments and remittance of funds, which are governed by its contracts, and the terms and conditions of the work we do, which are also under contracts.

[deleted]

Re: PayPal Freezes Mailpile Campaign Funds

#327

Post by _pius »

tptacek wrote: post #323
_pius wrote: post #321

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Our risk tolerance and cost structure would very much matter to those negotiations. Sure, those negotiations would happen before significant money or services are exchanged. And, presumably, we wouldn't enter into an agreement unless we were mutually satisfied. But arbitrarily deciding to withhold payment for your services after the fact, pending an audit of your workplace practices, for instance, would probably land…

I don't understand what the difference is between Paypal's handling of payments and remittance of funds, which are governed by its contracts, and the terms and conditions of the work we do, which are also under contracts.

You're describing negotiations that happen before significant money and services have been exchanged; this PayPal "negotiation" occurs after. This turns out to be a rather large difference. Indeed, it's the difference between a contract negotiation and a hostage negotiation.

Re: PayPal Freezes Mailpile Campaign Funds

#328

Post by dpweb »

It's a complex question. Easy for Mailpile if they want to go to war about it. Start a new direct campaign somewhere else and tell their previous givers to request a charge-back.

PP acting in its role in indemnifying buyers here, which is understandable, but it really isn't appropriate for them to pass judgement on MP business plans.

Free market will sort this out anyway. IGG or givers will go to another platform if PP is seen as unreasonable. Few are going to go thru the trouble of a campaign if PP is constantly holding back the funds.

Re: PayPal Freezes Mailpile Campaign Funds

#329

Post by tptacek »

_pius wrote: post #327
tptacek wrote: post #323

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't understand what the difference is between Paypal's handling of payments and remittance of funds, which are governed by its contracts, and the terms and conditions of the work we do, which are also under contracts.

You're describing negotiations that happen before significant money and services have been exchanged; this PayPal "negotiation" occurs after. This turns out to be a rather large difference. Indeed, it's the difference between a contract negotiation and a hostage negotiation.

No, Patrick just got finished explaining how people who do pre-order business with Paypal could have reasonably been expected to know what Paypal was going to do.

Re: PayPal Freezes Mailpile Campaign Funds

#330

Post by jedunnigan »

rmc wrote: post #206
MacsHeadroom wrote: post #116

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What were you buying? Out of the dozens of times I've purchased with Bitcoins I have never been ripped off. Buy from reputable companies or use an escrow service. A homeless guy asked me for my car keys the other day. He said he'd clean the inside of my car and bring me the keys. I didn't give him my keys. Something tells me you would have.

use an escrow service. Something like PayPal for Bitcoins? Sounds like we're back to square one. What's the point of bitcoin again?

Not exactly. Bitcoin enables multi signature transactions, so power rests not only with the escrow service, but also with the parties involved. There can also be more than one dispute mediator involved, as to maintain a balance.

For the delivery of real world goods you can write small scripts in the tx that monitor tracking numbers, have time locks, and the like as to maintain more control over the flow of money. Bitcoin is trustless, but only to an extent. Just like anything there will be point of failures, but Bitcoin minimizes them to a large extent and brings with it the opportunity to distribute power among many third parties, not just one.

I won't even bother answering you last question though, because I'm sure you realize how ridiculous that sounds in the context of this thread. Namely, if MailPile only accepted Bitcoin this would have never happened.

Post reply on HN