Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

I agree with the principle presented here... but before we all hail Newegg, I'll explain why I have not conducted business with this company since 2009...

Here is a letter I wrote Amex then, disputing a nasty transaction with this company.  https://www.dropbox.com/s/8b8dg9diowqz48y/Amex%20Dispute%20R...

This is real, and I won.




Trust me, I am doing you a favor: Your redaction technique is very poor. Almost every redaction you used allows us to see the tops and bottoms of the letters which is enough to recreate all the hidden characters.

Partial redaction is no redaction.


Was there anything beyond that which would enable reconstruction of the data? Just curious. I was only trying to share, and on a level which would enable the audience to know it was real. Thanks.


Understood, and totally redacted now.

Look, I was just trying to present some truth, at least my truth.

I tried to anonymize, but I understand the audience here is pretty sophisticated..

If anyone wants to advise on how to share this better please advise. I'm not trying to hate, just share some facts. I was surprised the seemingly fanboy level reaction to Newegg here. I did a fair amount of business with them previously and their behavior in this case was truly objectionable. This isn't exactly a Snowden level revelation... I was just saying this company isn't exactly a bunch of angels...

I now use Amazon for what I used to buy from Newegg. They cost a bit more for some things but are a stand up company and have always stood behind their sales. If something doesn't work they accept a return (which is commendable), and if something is delivered broken (which is what happened in this case) they don't give you a rash of sh*t.


> "I was just trying to present some truth"

Here on HN, we don't want mere truth. We also optimize for interesting and directly relevant comments. "Newegg egregiously screwed up a return for me" may be true, but how exactly is it interesting or relevant in a discussion about their response to patent trolls?


The response here has been a surge of "I'd do more business with Newegg because of this." I stated my point. I agree with this point of the article, but I wouldn't do business with these guys.

For the record, the letter previously published outlined exactly what happened. They shipped me an item that came out of the box broken. When I wrote to them they responded acknowledging, and issued an RMA. When they received the item they denied the return. I wrote back this was unacceptable. After a further week of no response I disputed the charge. At that point Newegg updated the status to "Repair". They shipped me back the "Replacement Item", and I put these things in quote because it references their language, when in fact it was the same broken item that I received. I reopened the dispute, demonstrating with photography exactly what happened. I wrote that I intended to re-open the dispute, at which point I received a refund from Amex.

I am surprised I am losing karma for this. For what? An opposing view? I've been nothing but genuine here. If you want to know who I am you don't need to analyze the parts of the small % of the letters that weren't redacted. Google my e-mail address. It's in my public profile.

Also, if you want to fight patent trolls, support EFF. They don't have t-shirts, but they do have hoodies: https://supporters.eff.org/shop/nsa-spying-hooded-sweatshirt


IMO you're getting downvoted [sidenote: I wouldn't worry about karma so much] because your complaint is sort of analogous to complaining about higher prices at the Mom-and-Pop store across the street from the Walmart Supercenter.

Newegg's "strict" RMA policies are often compared to the much-larger Amazon, who practically allows you to set a purchased item ablaze and return it for a full refund, no questions asked. Amazon will even pay for the return shipping in most cases.

Sure, you can get better customer service from Amazon, just like you can get the same brand-name products from Walmart for cheaper than the Mom-and-Pop, but "supporting" a business typically implies sacrificing some sort of convenience (or money) because you believe in a business's philosophy. Since you were eventually reimbursed for the defective merchandise, you actually fared pretty well.


I think you're missing the point. off topic ranting about why you don't like newegg is why you're being voted down. it has no relevance to the topic no matter how important it feels to you.

I say this having no particular allegiance to newegg. I'm simply pointing out something you don't seem to understand.


> "I am surprised I am losing karma for this. For what? An opposing view?"

As I said above, here on HN, mere truth is not enough to make us consider a comment to be a positive contribution. We select for interesting and directly relevant comments. Your comment is honest, but doesn't particularly add value to the discussion; you might consider it relevant, but I find it tangential and uninteresting.

Downvotes are the HN community's way of signaling that this is not the sort of comment we'd like you to make on this story.


> Downvotes are the HN community's way of signaling that this is not the sort of comment we'd like you to make on this story.

"should be the HN community's way" would be more accurate. It's not hard to find interesting comments downvoted because people disagree with them.


>"As I said above, here on HN, mere truth is not enough to make us consider a comment to be a positive contribution."

It sounds like you'd like to think your community-of-choice is unique, but get over it. There is no "we" here, nor is there some amazing comment quality optimization going on. This place goes hive-mind like any other forum on the internet. "We're" not special.


> "you'd like to think your community-of-choice is unique"

All communities are unique. This is the only community I know of that obsesses over a guy who makes bingo cards for a living. That doesn't mean we're necessarily better than other communities, just that we have our own specific approach to downvotes that people coming from other communities might be surprised by. (In particular, we usually downvote tangential/uninteresting comments, memes, and humor -- edw519 is an exception because his humor is typically both topical and side-splittingly entertaining.)

The person in question posted one of those types of comments, and then asked why it was being poorly received. He has now been educated as to what "we", in aggregate, are looking for.


> ...but how exactly is it interesting or relevant in a discussion about their response to patent trolls?

Another comment on this thread simply states "Newegg is my hero!". How come you're not lecturing that commentator?

I found joshjdr's comment relevant. From my years on Hacker News, I've never had the impression that every comment was directly relevant to the posted link.

Most of the time someone leaves a comments that off-topic like joshjdr. Many people respond and sometimes a giant thread emerges. Those uninterested simply move on.


> "How come you're not lecturing that commentator?"

joshjdr indicated that he wanted to understand the negative response his comment was generating. I provided him with an explanation; this is a service many HN commenters have expressed appreciation for in the past. The other guy made no such indication, so I gave him a downvote without explanation.

> "I've never had the impression that every comment was directly relevant to the posted link."

Perhaps my explanation was less clear than I hoped.

The HN community has certain expectations for comment quality. Generally speaking, the less directly relevant a comment is, the more of some other positive quality it needs to have in order to be well-received. "Newegg really screwed up something unrelated to patent trolling" is both tangential and unenlightening.


It's in the context of what the original link is about.

In your example:

Another comment on this thread simply states "Newegg is my hero!". How come you're not lecturing that commentator?

"Newegg is my hero" is a comment stating that the user likes Newegg because of what is being described in the link. While not extremely useful, the comment is directly related to the subject being discussed.

Whereas, "I don't like Newegg because they screwed up a return." is both not useful and also has nothing to do with the topic being discussed. It has as much to do with the story as "I don't like Newegg because an employee once cut me off on the highway."

Not to mention that with sites like HN, it gets old fast when people use every mention of certain subjects/people/companies as a catalyst to air any unrelated grievances they have just because. Imagine (this is a fictitious scenario) that joshjdr reposted his original comment in every thread mentioning Newegg, regardless of context. That sort of stuff can be frustrating to wade through regularly so people tend to react poorly to comments that appear similar in nature.


What's the point of redaction if you keep enough of the data intact to trivially reconstruct it?


I guess none. The information redacted was not really critical, I tried to remove personally identifying information while making the point... but I understand your point and appreciate the feedback. Thank you.




Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: