PayPal Denies Twitch Troll $50,000 Worth In Refunds (ubergizmo.com)

An anonymous reader writes: Trolling is commonplace on the internet. On Twitch, one of the many ways people troll Twitch streamers is by making donations, only to get a refund from PayPal at the very last minute, thus tricking streamers into thinking they've been given large sums of money. A troll by the name of iNexus_Ninja has been doing exactly this. However, when he tried to go to PayPal to refund the charges, PayPal decided to deny his request which ultimately left the troll $50,000 in debt. Twitch streamers apparently fought against his request for a refund and won. Meanwhile, Russia is paying state-sponsored trolls, elevating the troll to the level of professional propagandists.

Comments

Well known fact;

[no-body]

PayPal sucks and the list is long, just try to get all the information they store about you out of them - good luck!

Re:Well known fact;

[Anonymous Coward]

PayPal may suck, but they redeemed themselves with this action.

LOL @ iNexus_Ninja.

Re:Well known fact;

[Anonymous Coward]

"I pretended to give someone some money, but then I didn't"

WTF? How the fuck is this even a troll. It's just stupid. I hate PayPal as much as anyone, but in this case I'm glad they fucked this guy for pulling this stupid stunt.

Re: Well known fact;

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe he was just teasing the tittie-streamers. The same way they tease their audience - put it out there, make it seem soooo close, but never give it up.

Re:Well known fact;

[Xtifr]

I think "they redeemed themselves" is a bit strong, but I do agree that this sounds like something that should be counted on the positive side of the ledger.

Re:Well known fact;

[Aighearach]

If they did it consistently, it would redeem them... on this one issue out of dozens of persistent problems they have.

Re: Well known fact;

[Barny]

Click the link, there is a video. He was doing this to game streamers, not cam-whores.

Re:Well known fact;

[Guspaz]

> WTF? How the fuck is this even a troll.

Because he didn't do it right away, he'd wait until the streamers had spent the money, and then try to issue the refund with PayPal, which would then cause PayPal to charge the streamer back for the money. In essence, he was putting the streamers in debt.

Really, he ought to go to jail for that, but at least in this case he got stiffed.

Re: Well known fact;

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah "girl gamer" streamer with huge cleavage and the game in 1/8 in the corner. e.g.: camewhores

Peoples are always very against sexual exploitation until it is teenage boys that are exploited.

Re:Well known fact;

[Anonymous Coward]

So what? Are you so deluded that fixing one of X problems means the fix should have been ignored? What a wonderful world you must live in where everything is so binary. Presumably you're an Apple zealot and cannot see beyond the reality distortion field?

Re:Well known fact;

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder if he's got a coin attached to a string that he uses for vending machines. Or maybe he pretends to give to blind beggars by tossing some change into their cup while at the same time taking some bills out.

Or maybe he's laughing now because his goal all along was to fuck over his parents by maxing out their credit cards.

Re: Well known fact;

[gsslay]

That's a strange definition of exploitation. Poor teenage boys. Exploited by free streams. Forced into hours of watching. Robbed of the time they could be gaming.

Re:Well known fact;

[mindwhip]

This... and if they went after the guy for making false clams, or convinced the authorities to go after him for Fraud then they would be redeemed. All they really did was block what should be classed as a criminal act of Fraud and reading the info online, paypal rejecting his refund request wasn't that big of a deal for him. For a $50k attempted fraud he should be going to jail. If he had tried something similar at an actual bank he would be.

Payment reversals are a big deal for Twitch streamers, not only do they lose the money involved, after its likely been spent, they usually still incur paypal fees for both the initial payment and for the reversal, and are left, sometimes significantly, out of pocket.

(not a streamer but frequent Twitch watcher)

Re: Well known fact;

[Anonymous Coward]

Fucking clams. Hard to tell the real from the false these days. Fuck you clam! Fuck you all!

Re: Well known fact;

[fightinfilipino]

this is the sort of asinine logic that permits Stanford men's swim team members to rape women without worrying about jail. how about you blame the victim less anonymously, anon?

Re: Well known fact;

[Anonymous Coward]

The victim are the one that are getting money or the one losing money? IMO there is no victims, only exploiters and exploited. To know which is which, look at the direction the money goes.

For example, in a strip club women will exploit the sexual nature of men on order to easily robe them of their money. The strippers are sexually exploiting these dumb men. If in that scenario you see the women as the victim of sexual exploitation then i am afraid you are suffering from a severe case of feminism and there is no hope for you. Go kill yourself.

Re: Well known fact;

[Anonymous Coward]

Poor prostitutes. Exploited by paying customers. Choosing to work in the sex industry. Robbed of the lavish life of been taken care of by a submissive husband.

This is what feminist will tell you about sexual exploitation...

The farmer grow and sell good, he is exploiting a farm. The prostitude gain money for rubing men, she exploit men. The camwhore get donation for showing her boob to the horny teenage boys, she exploit teenage boys.

The only reason you don't see it this way, the logical way, it is because you are brainwashed by a feminist education that taught you that women are always victim. Women are not always victim, in fact women are rarely victim. They are the protected class of every human society and enjoy the most benefits. Civilisation was invented, built and is maintained by men for the only purpose of making women feel safe and be comfortable. Many victims are men, and those victim are ignored most of the time.

Re: Well known fact;

[Anonymous Coward]

LOL Implying that a camwhore getting all the attention she crave, fame, gifts and money is anything like a rape victim. You are a disgusting mangina. How about you stop getting high on feminism can start treating women as equal to men? That mean equal responsibility too.

Women can be violent. Women can rape. Women can abuse. Women can exploit. They are just as capable as men.

Re: Well known fact;

[Anonymous Coward]

"Women are rarely victim. They choose to have sex with many ugly stranger with bad teeth because it make them hapy. They like risk of being beaten up and maybe kill because it thrill them." And more yadda yadda. People that make these absurd claims usualy speak in broken enghlish like that because they come from a third world country where women are treated like shit. That they LIKE it. Just like cooking up live aninmals "theyre too dumb to feel pain" his might surprise you frikken neanderthals but most women DON'T like all sorts of smelly fat toothless brute sticking their filthy tools into them for a day (or night job). And it takes a crack or heroin habit before they agree to do it regularly, and keep using to block the emotional pain from having to do it. I know.. I knew many many street workers in my past as platonic friends, and because they could triust me told me things they would NEVER tell a john..
  Cultures that treat people like shit in general , like India, Puerto Rico, and the Phillipines, and other places like that tend to have the worst record, but America is catching up fast as a cesspool of abuse as well.. now that "treating people like dung" is becoming the norm in the good 'ol U S of A.
Women are people too, not receptacles for male you know what...

Re: Well known fact;

[Anonymous Coward]

The penis. You can say it. It's safe. Penis. See?

Re: Well known fact;

[Anonymous Coward]

Whats this got to so with Scientology?

Re:Well known fact;

[DiEx-15]

PayPal may suck, but they redeemed themselves with this action.

LOL @ iNexus_Ninja.

Oh... It gets better!

This genius (Read: Prince of Idiots) had his personal pic revealed. He looks somewhere between 16 to 19.

So, if he used his parent's info to do this... I'd hate to be in his shoes.

Re:Well known fact;

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought that was known.

He is 18 years old, he doesn't have a job and he does use his parents' credit card for "trolling".

Re:Well known fact;

[cthulhu11]

My question is WTF is Twitch and WTF is a streamer?

Re: Well known fact;

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you also ask "WTF is Google"?

Takes less time than posting your ignorance/laziness.

Re:Well known fact;

[Aighearach]

not only do they lose the money involved, after its likely been spent

This part I have no sympathy for. "Don't count your chickens before they hatch." When you get a payment from a stranger, be it check or money order or electronic transfer, don't rush out and spend an equal amount before it has irreversibly cleared. In addition to this particular scam, there are lots of other scams that involve the reversal of payments. All you have to do to avoid being bitten is: never return over-payment in the same billing cycle, never count your chickens before they've finished clearing the bank, and always cash checks at the issuing bank, never deposit them..

PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[guruevi]

One of the many reasons I'm not using PayPal is because they thrive of these refunds and using any excuse possible to lock large sums of money in their system. Obviously they continue claiming they're "not a bank" and therefore don't have to follow any of the rules that any other merchant account needs to. With a little bit of looking around you can find cheaper options to PayPal, even solid merchant accounts for credit card processing.

Re:PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[luther349]

yep if you run any sort of business a merchant account threw a bank offers way more protection. but the problem is everyone uses paypal.

Re:PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[Anonymous Coward]

I know ..I cannot troll in Amazon this days either..
what an honest troll got to do to survive this days? I have 5 babies to feed
Mind giving some links to those other places?, I ll appreciate any fresh one that has not been abused much yet, I have 4 babies to feed

Re:PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[Anonymous Coward]

One of the many reasons I'm not using PayPal is because they thrive of these refunds and using any excuse possible to lock large sums of money in their system. Obviously they continue claiming they're "not a bank" and therefore don't have to follow any of the rules that any other merchant account needs to. With a little bit of looking around you can find cheaper options to PayPal, even solid merchant accounts for credit card processing.

In Europe paypal is regulated like a real bank. So they can't do their usual shenanigans.
They still suck, but they suck less than if I were using them from the US of A.

Re:PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[Anonymous Coward]

yep if you run any sort of business a merchant account threw a bank offers way more protection. but the problem is everyone uses paypal.

If you really want to fix this entire nation that's easy. Send all the niggers back to Africa with a Baby Boomer under each arm. That will immediately cause an era of prosperity and technological advancement that will absolutely dwarf the 1950s.

Re:PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[myowntrueself]

yep if you run any sort of business a merchant account threw a bank offers way more protection. but the problem is everyone uses paypal.

If you really want to fix this entire nation that's easy. Send all the niggers back to Africa with a Baby Boomer under each arm. That will immediately cause an era of prosperity and technological advancement that will absolutely dwarf the 1950s.

And leave millennials in charge, 'Murica fuck yeah!

DO IT!

I'll grab a large bucket of popcorn.

Re:PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[Anonymous Coward]

The amount of money they make from locking these accounts is not even peanuts. They lock accounts because, although they are not a bank, they have to comply with an insane number of laws from all the country they do business in, and that is hard.
Not that I don't blame them, their fees are too high, just like credit cards. But for simple use, paypal works great.

Re:PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[hackwrench]

I buy games through bundles and one says unequivocally that PayPal has the lowest fees, but they use a separate processor for credit cards. eBay still uses only PayPal, despite them being split up into two separate companies again. I used to have a Google Wallet account to use a credit card, but they've discontinued the credit card feature, and recommended Simple.com. I've taken to having PayPal pulling money from my Simple.com account, the first time I've been having things work that way. I was sick in the hospital and PayPal effectively floated me about a $16 0% perpetual loan because of Netflix and Hulu. By the way, if you are in the hospital and automatic withdrawals make you go into overdraft, many banks/credit unions will refund you overdraft fees if you tell them you were in the hospital. PayPal has what I consider a stupid withdraw from bank account but don't withdraw until certain terms are met but the money apparently appears in the seller's account on time feature. There was an invalid withdrawal made from my account and I reported it at http://www.ic3.gov/complaint/d... and PayPal put the money back. Once they've made a decision you can actually appeal it, though they don't make that clear. I'm just not seeing most of the things that people are making complaints about PayPal.

Re:PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[Anonymous Coward]

Some trolls shouldn't be fed.

Re: PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't use PayPal -- why should I when I have a real bank, that is FDIC insured, and properly regulated.

Hasn't stopped me one iota from preferring stuff vis the Internet.

Re:PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[Anonymous Coward]

Thing is that that era of prosperity and technological advancement will be happening in Africa

Re: PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[Anonymous Coward]

The alternative is to give out your credit card number to merchants with unknown security policies. I'd rather just give it to PayPal.

Re:PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[Anonymous Coward]

Ebays use of paypal is fine with me. The paranoid nature of paypal has saved my ass a couple of times when dealing with fraudulent sellers. One case involved a guy selling SSDs and after a month disapeared with everyones money leaving hundreds of customers without their drives. Paypal just straight up refunded and said not to worry about it, they'll go after him themselves. That works for me. My bank and Visas usual approach is to shrug and say "Not my problem". Paypal is pro-active, and when dealing with uncertainty thats a *good* thing,

Re:PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm extremely skeptical. More likely, it's because they can make interest on the money they have on hand. Banks had done this at ATMs, withholding withdraws for just a few tiny moments before being punished for the illegal activity.

Re: PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[dunkelfalke]

In the EU Paypal is, in fact, a bank and has been a bank for years. They have acquired a banking licence in Luxembourg after EU decided that they either have to be a bank or to stop providing their services.

Re:PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[Anonymous Coward]

Whether PayPal is a bank or not depends on where you are using it:

PayPal Europe was granted a Luxembourg banking license, which, under European Union law, allows it to conduct banking business throughout the EU. It is therefore regulated as a bank by Luxembourg's banking supervisory authority, the Commission de Surveillance du Secteur Financier (CSSF).

Re: PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hahaha what, in between the gang rapes?

You fucking moron.

Re:PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[houghi]

I do not use PayPal BECAUSE they are not a bank. I dislike banks just as much as anybody, but at least they have some rules and I do not have enough money for them to make stealing it worthwhile.

So for payment I use either my credit card or, well, nothing. If I were to somehow need to pay an individual, I will transfer the money to him via my bank. That is free for me in Europe. Only people I have done that to is to friends when I did not have enough cash with me in a restaurant.

I do not like companies who say 'we are not a .." and I do not use them. The rules are there for a reason.

Uber : We are not a taxi company
PayPal : We are not a bank.

Apparently if you have enough money you can be NOT anything. See what happens if I open a place where I serve food and claim not to be a restaurant. I should be able to sell food for a much lower price, because the meat is green. (Human or just rotten? Doesn't matter, I am not a restaurant.)

Re:PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[Anonymous Coward]

I hate PayPal and how they make up their own rules as they go. I sold a laptop on eBay, 5 months later the guy asks for refund on PayPal because it broke. I deny due to it being 5 months, but apparently they have a 6 month return policy and don't care about my return policy that was stated on eBay. The buyer returned a different laptop than I sent, but that didn't stop them from taking what they could and refunding his money. Lucky for me, I didn't trust them from the start and had a separate account for eBay/PayPal and they only got $200. Unfortunately, I will have a bad debt on my credit till I can settle it for pennies on the dollar.

Re:PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[Lord Bitman]

Yeah, PayPal doesn't offer any of the protections of a bank. That's why everyone should use Bitcoin!

Re: PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[Anonymous Coward]

If your card is comprimised, you're not liable for fradulent charges and they get removed from your card. A new card is issued. Go about your merry way. Done.

I would much rather deal with a system that has to follow rules / guidelines than one that does not. ( PayPal )

Re:PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[Cytotoxic]

See what happens if I open a place where I serve food and claim not to be a restaurant. I should be able to sell food for a much lower price,

This actually exists, hopefully minus the green meat. They are called food trucks, and it is a big issue in the same circles that Uber is a big issue. Brick and mortar restaurants don't like them because they steal their lucrative lunch crowds and don't have the fixed overhead of a restaurant. So cities try to regulate them out of business .... and eventually they figure out a way to make sure the government wets their beak enough and suddenly they find a way to allow food trucks.

Re:PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[Anonymous Coward]

A food truck serving meals is a restaurant without the expenses of a building. Around here, anyone selling food has to cope with rules about cleanliness, food quality and so on.

Re:PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[GTRacer]

I'm glad PayPal was proactive in your case of SSD fraud. They weren't so nice to me when I bought a "Clean IMEI Cellphone" which wound up on a fraud list less than 2 months after purchase, and within PayPal's purchase security/warranty window. Had to fork over good money after bad to get a new IMEI. Phone was otherwise perfect though!

Re: PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[mindwhip]

Not in all cases. For instance if your credit card company/bank determine that you were at fault (ie. you willingly gave your card and details to the fraudsters and you could have determined that they were fraudulent with some checks) or fail to notify them soon enough of you being aware and if they can't recover the money for whatever reason they can still hold you liable for it. Also small transaction amounts are often not covered depending on the situation.

While the credit card companies do have more rules than paypal themselves they still have a lot of leeway to take your money.

Re:PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[TsuruchiBrian]

If I told my wife we were going to a restaurant, and I took her to a food truck, she would divorce me.

Re:PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[Cederic]

Nah. Maybe a cafe if it's a fixed location truck.

But the issue is around competition between catering outlets. Restaurants offer different benefits to the local burger van, pub grub competes with bistro snack bars, they're all in the same market and as you say, they all have to adhere to the same food hygiene laws.

PayPal built their company by ignoring the financial regulations and fucking over their customers. I wont eat at a rat infested restaurant with abusive waiting staff, and I don't use PayPal.

Whether they call themselves a bank isn't really relevant.

Re:PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[Trogre]

That's funny.

But I don't think that disqualifies a food truck from being a restaurant. Just not a fancy restaurant.

Presumably your wife also would not appreciate being taken to the local McDonalds or Subway. Do you also consider them not restaurants?

Re:PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[TsuruchiBrian]

Obviously any institution or person that serves food should be subject to appropriate food safety regulations, etc. I don't think "restaurant" is the official term for an institution that serves food. Or at the very least it probably varies by state.

I would say that a food truck is a type of restaurant, like how a truck is a type of car. I think a good logical argument could be made for this type of classification, but I don't think anyone I know would actually call a food truck a restaurant (myself included). I think of mcdonalds and subway as fast food restaurants, which makes them types of restaurants semantically. But I think colloquially, at least where I am from, a "restaurant" without any qualifications means a "sit down restaurant" which means you are seated by wait staff and served food at your table.

Re:PayPal does something for their 'vendors'?

[Anonymous Coward]

If I told my girlfriend were were going to a restaurant and I took for to a food truck, she would laugh.

Maybe you shouldn't have married a shallow gold digger with no sense of humour.

What the hell is Twitch?

[Anonymous Coward]

Am I missing something here? I've never heard of Twitch.

Re:What the hell is Twitch?

[hawguy]

Am I missing something here? I've never heard of Twitch.

Yes, you're apparently missing the ability to do a simple Google search.

This may help you:

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=what+is+t...

(hint: click any of the 10 results on the first page)

Re:What the hell is Twitch?

[hcs_$reboot]

But when you see a commercial on TV about product XX you've never heard of, you don't wonder "why are they talking about XX", right?

Re:What the hell is Twitch?

[guruevi]

It's Youtube for channels with a focus on live streaming.

Re:What the hell is Twitch?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a live porncam platform for gamers.

reference: legendarylea

captcha: depress

Re:What the hell is Twitch?

[luther349]

youtube steaming isnt switch.

Re:What the hell is Twitch?

[OzPeter]

Am I missing something here? I've never heard of Twitch.

Don't you people have *any* social awareness?

tWitch is a popular dancer who made his name on season 4 of So You Think You Can Dance.

Re: What the hell is Twitch?

[Anonymous Coward]

I greatly prefer Lindsay Arnold and Brittany Cherry, both of whom have since been on DWTS.

Re: What the hell is Twitch?

[OzPeter]

I greatly prefer Lindsay Arnold and Brittany Cherry, both of whom have since been on DWTS.

So has tWitch

Re:What the hell is Twitch?

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought it was an early album by Ministry

Re:What the hell is Twitch?

[Anonymous Coward]

Streaming people being switched is on the internet, but on tubes that aren't youtube.

Re:What the hell is Twitch?

[FatdogHaiku]

But when you see a commercial on TV about product XX you've never heard of, you don't wonder "why are they talking about XX", right?

Because they can't do XXX on TV?

Re:What the hell is Twitch?

[hcs_$reboot]

Hmm no. Twitch is one of the two twitches.

Re:What the hell is Twitch?

[Anonymous Coward]

But then how would everybody know that he hasn't heard of Twitch because he's so above it all?

Re: What the hell is Twitch?

[Anonymous Coward]

Live streaming of tits!

Re:What the hell is Twitch?

[Aighearach]

The easiest way to stay above it all is to not ask, and still not know what it is, and not even tell anybody. I'm so hip, nobody knows how hip I am. I don't even know, because I don't have time to worry about if I'm the only one who doesn't know the new fad.

Re:What the hell is Twitch?

[Aighearach]

I would wonder, "how the hell did I end up stuck in a room with screens I don't control, that are showing commercial propaganda, and where the bleep is the exit?

Re:What the hell is Twitch?

[Aighearach]

Wow, you're in pretty deep if you think that a company is society. And indeed, only companies that spend a lot of money on propaganda.

I'll give you a hint: that isn't what social awareness means.

Re: What the hell is Twitch?

[Opportunist]

Where? WHERE?

I only get to see live streams of dicks and assholes.

Re:What the hell is Twitch?

[Anonymous Coward]

It would have been more ecological if you had just answered the guy. Do you know how much energy burns when half the /. google for 'twitch'?
You insensitive eco-terrorist!

Re:What the hell is Twitch?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, you are missing something. Not in the sense that Twitch is a great service or innovative, but in the sense that you should watch a couple of Twitch streams to see how young people spend money. I'm not going to explain it, just watch and learn.

Re: What the hell is Twitch?

[karlandtanya]

Then you're not hip. You're square.

You're welcome.

Re:What the hell is Twitch?

[Anonymous Coward]

All that's left for the troll to do is to ponder: "Where you at now, my possession?"

Re:What the hell is Twitch?

[Drethon]

Pay per view would disagree.

Re:What the hell is Twitch?

[Ogive17]

dos equis is good but I prefer negra modelo when I'm in Mexico.

Re:What the hell is Twitch?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually it is what people in Newcastle in England call their mother-in-law t'witch.

Re:What the hell is Twitch?

[Anonymous Coward]

i dont have to watch stupid kids to know I'll be glad to be dead before they ever come into any kind of political power. i dont envy you younger people having to live in their world hahahaha

Re:What the hell is Twitch?

[mindwhip]

In the UK PPV advertise XXX but the best you get is xxx

Re:What the hell is Twitch?

[Quirkz]

No kidding. My daughters have grown up in a house with only streaming TV. When we're at a hotel and have the TV on, they complain loudly when commercials come on, because their show went away and they don't want to watch whatever this other junk is. I don't blame them one bit. At least they're getting old enough to understand it when it happens.

Re: What the hell is Twitch?

[hawguy]

Then you're not hip. You're square.

You're welcome.

Don't tell me that I'm crazy
Don't tell me I'm nowhere
Take it from me
It's hip to be square

Re:What the hell is Twitch?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's a live porncam platform for gamers.

This is the best and most accurate description of Twitch I've ever seen.

good

[luther349]

the main troll they do isnt large amounts its normally small amounts like 1$ so the refund after fees cost more then they donated. third party's have stepped in to help prevent it they act as a escrow and blacklist known donation trolls.

Re:good

[Actually, I do RTFA]

Any recommended third parties? Someone I know was working on a political site, and was looking for a way to collect donations that wasn't susceptible to that kind of trolling.

Also, it kinda amazes me that the major candidates haven't been blasted with tons of chargebacks from such trolls.

Re:good

[Anonymous Coward]

looking for a way to collect donations that wasn't susceptible to that kind of trolling.

Increase the minimum donation amount to above what would create a negative refund. Problem solved. Or don't offer refunds. Why should you be able to undo a donation?

Re:good

[stephanruby]

Also, it kinda amazes me that the major candidates haven't been blasted with tons of chargebacks from such trolls.

May be, they have, but they don't want to feed the troll by telling the world what happened.

Also, candidates don't have a real-time update of campaign contributions they're getting, which defeats the main purpose of a troll.

Most trolls want attention and publicity. You deny them that possibility and they move on to easier targets.

Re:good

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't have a choice, they file a chargeback with the credit card company and the credit card company just reverses the charge. They have to give you a chance to defend yourself, but if the guy claims "my card number was stolen and someone else used it" you've got an uphill battle, especially over the internet where you don't even have a signature.

Re:good

[Aighearach]

If you attempt a chargeback without cause, they'll dispute it and win, your card will get canceled, and you'll potentially be unable to get a credit card for a few years because of credit abuse. Fake chargebacks are no joke, because they deal with banks.

The reason the trolls can do this with paypal is only because paypal isn't a bank, and so isn't held to the industry standards.

Re: good

[Anonymous Coward]

"Unable to get a credit card"

Oh the horror!

Re:good

[Gavagai80]

Refunds through paypal are free to the merchant though -- they refund the fee. I don't see how the donor can cause expenses to the victim unless they do a chargeback with their credit card company, which will cost the merchant ~$25.

Re:good

[Actually, I do RTFA]

Umm... that sounds like a good thing. But while fake chargebacks (and this kind of trolling) are evil and illegal, I'm not sure what recourse someone would have. For a couple of reasons - first, it seems that it'd be hard to get the chargeback upheld. I mean, someone with their CC and CSV (and maybe zip) typed info in. All they have to do is claim it wasn't them. And the counter-argument is?

Secondly, I'm quite surprised a list of stolen CC's wasn't used to troll one of the candidates. So the chargebacks bankrupt a campaign

Re:good

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey Kids! Let's learn about Credit Card Fraud:
1) It is fraud to buy, pay or donate for something you have intention of honoring.
2) A Bank is under no obligation to do business with people engaging in fraud.
3) A credit card company will not honor a chargeback if there is proof of fraud on the part of the credit card client. If they've been doing this for months or years, they will just cancel the card.
4) Paypal is not a bank and is under no obligation to process or refund anything. Paypal keeps thousands of pieces of personal information on you, so screw up once and you won't be able to use Paypal again

Re: good

[St.Creed]

Or unable to obtain a mortgage. Or a job with a financial institution. Or a new bank account. Or any job at all.

The way it works when I was working with a credit card fraud dept. was that you were checked in the register and if your name came up as a hit, the company that put you in the register was called and asked for more information. The client was then asked for their side of the story. Depending on the answers the loan or credit or account was denied - or sometimes granted. For instance, some people were placed in the register for being abusive to employees. The company I worked for didn't have offices so they really didn't care about that and the creditcard was granted in that case. But if you had been registered for being a moneymule for criminals, you were basically going to have to live on cash for the next decade, and employers wouldn't be able to send you any money either. Since wages (where I live) are never done in cash but always through bank transfers - even for a paper boy - having this restriction placed upon you means you have to answer a lot of embarrassing questions from your employer.

In the USA I can imagine that, given the way creditcards and credit scores work, being denied a creditcard is going to be a real issue.

Re: good

[Cederic]

My current debt is what's left of the mortgage and the £62 I spent online earlier today.

That £62 went on a credit card. I pay no fee, I pay no interest, I have protection against fraudulent activities, and as a result of purchasing online I get big discounts on high street prices, I get a wider choice of goods and I get a metric fuckload of convenience.

Not having a credit card would be seriously bloody annoying.

Re:good

[Cederic]

1) It is fraud to buy, pay or donate for something you have intention of honoring.

So close.

4) Paypal is not a bank and is under no obligation to process or refund anything.

Very wrong in a number of different jurisdictions.

Paypal keeps thousands of pieces of personal information on you, so screw up once and you won't be able to use Paypal again

You say this like it's a bad thing.

Companies that only offer payment through PayPal don't get my business. Life really is that simple.

Re:good

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm with Chase. I've initiated many chargebacks when I have a dispute. They do an investigation, which is mostly found in my favor, but if it isn't, there is no penalty like you describe.

Forget Russia, Hillary spent $1 mil on trolls

[Anonymous Coward]

But this won't get any press from /. editors... it's much easier to bash Russia.

Correct the Record, a pro-Hillary Clinton political action committee (PAC), is spending over $1 million on online trolls in order to âcorrectâ(TM) Bernie Sanders supporters on social media sites.

The PAC this week launched an initiative called âoeBarrier Breakers 2016,â which is composed of a âoetask forceâ that will debate âBernie Bros,â(TM) presumably supporters of the Senator Sandersâ(TM)s campaign, as referred to by their official press release.

According to Correct the Record, the task force will âoecombat online political harassment,â boasting that it has already âoeaddressed more than 5,000 individuals who have personally attacked Secretary Clinton on Twitter.â

http://www.breitbart.com/tech/...

Re:Forget Russia, Hillary spent $1 mil on trolls

[cheater512]

Hi Bernie Troll.

Re:Forget Russia, Hillary spent $1 mil on trolls

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope, now the GOP trolls pretend to be Bernie trolls so that they can make a semi-credible attack on Hillary

Re: Forget Russia, Hillary spent $1 mil on trolls

[Anonymous Coward]

Why does everyone think political views they disagree with are trolling? Let's focus on jobs and how to stop people's jobs from being outsourced to cut costs. If we build a wall on the border, jobs won't be able to leave the country. We'll keep more jobs in the US and the American people will prosper as a result. That is why you should abandon both Democrats and vote for Trump.

Re:Forget Russia, Hillary spent $1 mil on trolls

[Anonymous Coward]

Nope, the GOP trolls pretending to be Bernie trolls are actually Hillary trolls pretending to be Bernie trolls so that they can make a semi-credible attack on Hillary. That's right, Hillary supporters hate their own candidate, but they're trying to make it look like the attack is coming Bernie bros.

Re:Forget Russia, Hillary spent $1 mil on trolls

[Anonymous Coward]

Hello Cuck.

Re:Forget Russia, Hillary spent $1 mil on trolls

[Anonymous Coward]

Translation: "Ignore this factual article clearly detailing evidence of Hillary SuperPACs paying millions for astroturfers and instead enjoy my baseless wild accusations against the people -I- don't like!!!"

Re:Forget Russia, Hillary spent $1 mil on trolls

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't see why AC's comment should be rated Troll. After all, the fucking superfluous bit about Russian trolls added to the end of the summary is just an invite to shitpost. It's submitter or BeauHD fault that nobody is going to discuss the actual topic seriously

Re:Forget Russia, Hillary spent $1 mil on trolls

[Anonymous Coward]

wut? Are you responding to moi, AC? I'm pretty sure my post doesn't translate into what you just wrote, lol.

Or maybe it does. I dunno, trolling is hard work nowdays since trolls have gone pro.

Re:Forget Russia, Hillary spent $1 mil on trolls

[Anonymous Coward]

And Bernie spent $23,000,000 on Revolution Messaging which has been spamming Reddit and other major sites for months. All the candidates are doing this now since it worked out amazingly for Obama.

Re:Forget Russia, Hillary spent $1 mil on trolls

[rtb61]

The silliness of the Russian troll claims. The Russian government seems incapable of doing their trolling internally via their security staff or military and must resort to cheap PR contractors. So does the Russian government do it, probably, do they use cheap unreliable contractors, probably not. Anyone can search upon this planet and find literally tens of millions of people who will say anything and make any claim you want them to, if you pay them enough and that enough is quite often not very much at all. The days of US government dredging up people to say all sorts of things and have thinking people believe any of it are long gone, can't prove it in a court of law, STFU America.

Re:Forget Russia, Hillary spent $1 mil on trolls

[Anonymous Coward]

Shit, how do I get in on this action?

Re: Forget Russia, Hillary spent $1 mil on trolls

[hackwrench]

Poe's law? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/P...

Re:Forget Russia, Hillary spent $1 mil on trolls

[Anonymous Coward]

Wait until the Russians wise up and start outsourcing the trolling from India

Re:Forget Russia, Hillary spent $1 mil on trolls

[AK Marc]

Hi Republican Troll.

Re: Forget Russia, Hillary spent $1 mil on trolls

[Anonymous Coward]

"Jobs can't go through walls, stupid! They're not a ghost!"

Re:Forget Russia, Hillary spent $1 mil on trolls

[wildstoo]

From such a reliable and impartial source as Breitbart.com, how could I possibly doubt the veracity of this report?

Oh, wait...

Re:Forget Russia, Hillary spent $1 mil on trolls

[Anonymous Coward]

so it's trolls all the way down?

Russians are opposed to man+girl(female child) and

[Anonymous Coward]

Speaking of russians.
Russians are opposed to man+girl(female child) and should be killed

>>6246534
>
>You're twisting it! Some parts, anyways (I know about that Mathew verse dumb Brit and Ruskie Christians think they love so much.)
>
>Still, it was stupid to anchor your thread.

>>6251200
EVERY relevant form of Christianity is against it and "twists" that quote.

EVERY SINGLE ONE.

USA, Russia, Europe.

This is one reason why Deuteronomy is superior by far.

Why is it that the Russki christians are against man+girl btw?

How is it that the Russians can be done away with for this?

Should Russia be nuked?

I thought they were ok with men+girls before (90s, 2000s). I thought they were "conservative". Now I read of them torturing and killing men who like young girls.
(police crusing the testicals of man who was accused of liking a girl)

I think the Russians, since they are opposed to man+girl, should be slaughterd en mass.

Any pro-women's rights, anti-man-marrying-girl-children culture or CUNTtry should be destroyed completely to the last stone.

Are you suprised /pol/ anchored the thread? All of /pol/ are cuntnationalists.
They support women's interests and they should be butchered cruely.

If I ruled, I would give Russia an ultimatium:
You either follow Deuteronomy on man+girl, or I follow Deuteronomy.

They would decine and I would nuke every little town they have.
If they retaliate, who cares.

Re: Russians are opposed to man+girl(female child)

[Anonymous Coward]

There is something seriously wrong with you. Nuclear weapons shouldn't be used ever again. And Deuteronomy has no place deciding modern law. Even Jesus declared it obsolete.

wtf russia

[Anonymous Coward]

WTF does this story have to do with Russia? Who added this aside, anonymous submitter or BeauHD? It fucking retarded to believe that other governments, law firms, ngo's, lobbyists, and other entities involved with "messaging" don't engage in the same type of activities. The current interest about Russian trolls is due to some batshit looney neocon paranoid conspiracy that Putin is trying to get Trump in the White House because he's scared of Hillary(!).

Re:wtf russia

[Anonymous Coward]

WTF does this story have to do with Russia? Who added this aside, anonymous submitter or BeauHD? It fucking retarded to believe that other governments, law firms, ngo's, lobbyists, and other entities involved with "messaging" don't engage in the same type of activities. The current interest about Russian trolls is due to some batshit looney neocon paranoid conspiracy that Putin is trying to get Trump in the White House because he's scared of Hillary(!).

Hillary is genuinely scary - if Putin doesn't do what she demands, she will disrobe in front of him. The sight of that harpy naked would drive even the bravest man to commit suicide. Why do you think Bill screwed around with other women so much?

Re:wtf russia

[Anonymous Coward]

Putin loves Donald Trump

Western sources who monitor Russian politics told the Washington Examiner that Rykov is a propagandist arm of the Putin government machine. "Rykov is considered to be one of the leading pro-Kremlin bloggers in Russia," said Michael McFaul, the former U.S. ambassador to Russia under President Obama who is now a senior fellow at the conservative Hoover Institution think tank. "As you can see from his Twitter feed, he is very active. And he loves Trump."

The Kremlin is trolling for Trump
[this is special one since it has anti-Kremlin, anti-fascist, anti-racist, anti-anti-semitic threads running though it, all tied to Trump!]

Is Trump a Sleeper Agent for Moscow?

Trump has spoken highly of Russian President Vladimir Putin, describing him as a strong leader who defends Russian interests and who could be an ally of the United States, especially in the Middle East. Duke believes much the same thing, and has a personal relationship with a long-time adviser to Putin who has devised an anti-American “Eurasian” alliance that includes Iran in the Middle East

just look at what n e o c o n David Frum (@davidfrum) said:
"Russia’s “troll army” now an active presence in US social media too"
https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/737385995906076674

"Trolling for Trump may be one of those jobs that Americans just won't do. Requires imported talent"
https://twitter.com/davidfrum/status/728752525357256704

Lots more craziness from looney n e o c o n s about Trump is out there.

Re:wtf russia

[hackwrench]

The so-called "Russian trolls" bit is real, but it's also a really old story and belongs nowhere in this piece. It took me some time to find the magic search terms, but https://www.bing.com/search?q=... returns the relevant results.

Re:wtf russia

[Anonymous Coward]

good link. I especially like this story from the results:

Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal

As the Russians gradually assumed control of Uranium One in three separate transactions from 2009 to 2013, Canadian records show, a flow of cash made its way to the Clinton Foundation. Uranium One’s chairman used his family foundation to make four donations totaling $2.35 million. Those contributions were not publicly disclosed by the Clintons, despite an agreement Mrs. Clinton had struck with the Obama White House to publicly identify all donors. Other people with ties to the company made donations as well.

...
Whether the donations played any role in the approval of the uranium deal is unknown. But the episode underscores the special ethical challenges presented by the Clinton Foundation, headed by a former president who relied heavily on foreign cash to accumulate $250 million in assets even as his wife helped steer American foreign policy as secretary of state, presiding over decisions with the potential to benefit the foundation’s donors.

Re:wtf russia

[Anonymous Coward]

... he's scared of Hillary(!)

Putin knows how to buy votes and Hillary knows how to sell votes. What's scary about that?

Re:wtf russia

[gustygolf]

The submission is here: https://news.slashdot.org/subm...

So yes, it was added by BeauHD.

(The submissions link is in the 'Related Links' section right below the article summary, but for some reason, the Submission link doesn't show up unless you have JavaScript and even then you can't right-click and 'copy link location' on it. Come on, does nobody know basic HTML any more?)

Re:wtf russia

[Anonymous Coward]

WTF does this story have to do with Russia?

It has the word "pay" and the word "troll" in it so it must be related!!!11!oneoneon1!

Who added this aside, anonymous submitter or BeauHD?

Either an extremely lazy and incompetent, even for recent /. standards, editor or someone finally noticed these standards and replaced editors with very unsophisticated automated link system.
"On a semi-related note, [here's the most recent link which shares one keyword with this one]."
"Meanwhile, [here's the most recent link which shares two keywords with this one]."

Re:wtf russia

[Anonymous Coward]

"Democrats HATE this one simple trick that your comrades found. Click here to learn it!"

Re:wtf russia

[Anonymous Coward]

WTF does this story have to do with Russia?

Not much other than the world troll. Speaking of trolls... I hear all bears in Russia mutated around the time of Chernobyl incident (not sure events are related) and now there is one (or more, depending on how you count heads) troll lives under every bridge. Could you verify?

Re:wtf russia

[Anonymous Coward]

Agreed. It's completely unrelated, and seeing politicized stories on Slashdot just reminded me why I don't read Slashdot anymore.

Re:wtf russia

[Anonymous Coward]

It took me some time to find the magic search terms, [bing.com]

Took me about 10 seconds using Google...

Too much time

[Anonymous Coward]

Trolling is commonplace on the internet. On Twitch, one of the many ways people troll Twitch streamers is by making donations, only to get a refund from PayPal at the very last minute, thus tricking streamers into thinking they've been given large sums of money.

Wow... Some people have way too much time on their hands. I thought merely watching Twitch was lame enough, but this takes the cake.

Re:Too much time

[rudy_wayne]

I totally tricked you into thinking you were getting money from me. GOTCHA!! :facepalm:

Number 23

[Greyfox]

Giving PayPal access to $50,000 of your funds: Priceless.

Re:Number 23

[Anonymous Coward]

Later this month, people stupid enough to give money to a crowd-funded project, and do it via PayPal, will be shit out of luck,

http://www.ubergizmo.com/2016/...''

PayPal offers customers Purchase Protection for things they buy, including payments to crowd-funded projects. PayPal has announced that effective June 25 they be changing their TOS and will no longer offer Purchase Protection for crowdfunding. If you donate to a project via PayPal and it fails or turns out to be a scam, PayPal will no longer guarantee you that you will get your money back.

Re:Number 23

[Anonymous Coward]

PayPal has announced that effective June 25 they be changing their TOS and will no longer offer Purchase Protection for crowdfunding.

That will teach them not to buy a cat in a bag.
A pig in a poke, for those who prefer that version of the idiom.

Re:Number 23

[Anonymous Coward]

That will teach them not to buy a cat in a bag. A pig in a poke, for those who prefer that version of the idiom.

I don't know if those are really "versions" of the idiom. The second one is more like the punchline of the joke that the first version sets up. In the past, of course, no one would ever intentionally buy a cat. They just sort of showed up when your barn built up enough rats.

Re:Number 23

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it definitely has a price. You had the price in your own statement. How can you not see this?

Re:Russians are opposed to man+girl(female child)

[Anonymous Coward]

timecube is that u

There are no refunds with Bitcoin

[Anonymous Coward]

And that's a good thing.

This is what probably did it

[slashmydots]

If only they had some sort of video evidence of his actual donation live and in realtime...and full HD 60FPS. OH WAIT.

Re:This is what probably did it

[Barny]

This. Damn it I have no mod points :/

I despise PayPal, but .....

[King_TJ]

It doesn't sound to me like the service was in the wrong, denying a refund in this situation? If you're just using the service to troll people, requesting transfers of funds you know up-front you don't *really* want to transfer, it seems like it's YOUR problem if the payment processor grows tired of participating in your game and declares your funds transfer final.

As someone who was forced to deal with PayPal's antics as part of the "package deal" selling on eBay when the two of them formed a cartel, I can think of SO many more legitimate situations to complain about PayPal over than this one.

Re:I despise PayPal, but .....

[Anonymous Coward]

This. By the time you send $1 to anybody via PayPal, you have already explicitly agreed that you will use the service for its intended purpose, and there are multiple steps in performing a transaction requiring you to explicitly affirm you are authorized to send the money, you want to send the money, etc. Webpage fine print and click-through agreements have legal force; they are contractual terms which you essentially accept by using the service. Not only is PayPal entitled to rely on your representations of the legitimacy of the transactions you're using it for, but If PayPal allowed these trolling practices to continue, they would eventually be sued by, e.g., somebody who went out and placed a non-refundable deposit on XYZ thinking that they had received a genuine windfall in the form of a cash-in-hand gift from a stranger. It's not PayPal's job to sort out whose legal claim is more of a threat; they can simply retreat behind counsel and dare the troll to file the ridiculous lawsuit seeking return of the funds that he deliberately but insincerely caused to be transfered. And of course by filing suit he is simultaneously revealing his troll identity to the entire world. At your service, Legal.Troll (dodging -1 Karma as anon coward).

Re:I despise PayPal, but .....

[jb_nizet]

I disagree. If someone is abusing your service, you ban him from the service. If someone harms the service by abusing it, you file a complaint, and ask for a compensation. The justice decides if you deserve a compensation, and how much it should be. But just changing the rules of the game unilaterally and rejecting to give back the 50K$ doesn't look right to me. If the receiver started spending these 50K$ even before they were actually on their bank account, they are plain stupid.

Re:I despise PayPal, but .....

[Kkloe]

They probably didnt change any game or rule, paypal probably has a statment in the agreement that probably says, if you do something fucky expect to be fucked.
Everyone has them, just because it doesnt state to the letter every single thing you should not do to break the rules it doesnt mean it doesnt apply.

Re:I despise PayPal, but .....

[thegarbz]

I disagree. If someone is abusing your service, you ban him from the service.

They did. They banned him from using the refunds due to abuse. This is entirely consistent with what you want.

Refunds in my opinion should only be possible from the sellers end or from a legal warranty point of view. In that regard donations should NEVER be refundable unless you can explicitly prove the transaction was fraudulent in the first place. I distrust paypal as much as the next person but I fully support them in this point, and I only ever use it from the buyer's side (i.e. the side that would benefit the least from this action).

Re:I despise PayPal, but .....

[houghi]

Was it possible to retract payment at the last moment after saying you were going to pay? If so, they should honour that, no matter how much of a dick move it is.
If they do not like their own policy, they should change it.

So to me they were very much in the wrong, no matter that I despise the people who were trolling. I also know you are not paid, until you have the money. People tell me where I work 'I have paid' and even send me proof all the time. I only believe them when we get the monies.

Re:I despise PayPal, but .....

[Anonymous Coward]

I disagree. If someone is abusing your service, you ban him from the service. If someone harms the service by abusing it, you file a complaint, and ask for a compensation. The justice decides if you deserve a compensation, and how much it should be. But just changing the rules of the game unilaterally and rejecting to give back the 50K$ doesn't look right to me. If the receiver started spending these 50K$ even before they were actually on their bank account, they are plain stupid.

No rules were changed. He gave away his money. He has a right to ask for it back in the case of fraud, etc. He never had a right to ask for it back because he gave it in bad faith. That was never allowed.

Re:I despise PayPal, but .....

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe I'm reading it differently than others, but I didn't take the summary or article as complaining that PayPal refused.

Re:I despise PayPal, but .....

[Trogre]

Troll gets served. What's the problem?

Perhaps I have missed some of the facts and please correct me if I am mistaken, but here is my understanding of it:

• He paid $50,000 to one or more Twitch users via PayPal.
• He then falsely claimed to PayPal that he had not intended to make those payments, expecting a refund.
• One or more Twitch users make PayPal aware that this troll has behaved this way before.
• The refund request was denied by PayPal.

Is that the way of it and, if so, what is the problem?

LOL "NEW" Professional Trolls?

[Anonymous Coward]

Israel has been doing this for FIFTEEN YEARS!!!!

FACT.

Re:LOL "NEW" Professional Trolls?

[Anonymous Coward]

Lol, no, they haven't and THAT's a fact :)

Tomorrow when you sign into your junior high class remember to put the big KKK sign next to your name so everybody knows what a racist a-hole you are.

M

Re:LOL "NEW" Professional Trolls?

[konohitowa]

OMG! Israel donated $50k to Twitch accounts via PayPal... and then they asked for a refund!!! And they've been doing that for 15 years!

Sigh.

Good Defence

[Anonymous Coward]

"I'm not a troll, I'm a professional propagandists." Now I'm wondering, what is the reaction of the Chinese fleet on this story? What about Lebanese goat herders? Or that of a Syrian apocalyptist?

What exactly ...

[PPH]

... is Twitch? And why are people 'contributing' to it's members?

I understood that it was some sort of video streaming/chat service, purportedly used by gamers. But if 'contributions' are really a big thing, I suspect that there might be something other than gaming going on, for which people expect 'contributions'.

Dare I suggest: Cam whores?

Re:What exactly ...

[Fire_Wraith]

Actually, no. Twitch has been very quick to crack down on anything remotely sexual. At most you'll find attractive female streamers wearing low cut tops while playing games, but not much beyond that. The donations bit tends to come more from the fact that the best streamers are entertaining, because not only are they good at the game, but they're good at narrating what they're doing, and making it more interesting to watch.

To try and explain it better, imagine if instead of just watching Aaron Rodgers play football (or any other pro athlete in their sport), but instead of maybe having a couple of outside commentators, you're watching him play, from his point of view, while he tells you what he's doing and why, chatting and interacting with you, and giving you tips on how to do better in your own games. How cool would that be? Nevermind that you can also chat with everyone else watching, too. And while most of the gamers on Twitch aren't on quite that level, even some of those with a smaller following can do alright, with people chipping in to buy pizza for them. Some of them will also run promotions, give away codes for free games, etc. It's probably not for everyone, but it can be very entertaining.

Re:What exactly ...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's kind of the same thing, but it really is just people playing / talking about video games on the other side. A lot of people enjoy watching that type of thing enough to chip in tips.

Re:What exactly ...

[PPH]

So, if the whole 'contribution' thing is purely a gratuity, not some sort of pay for service, then what's the point in reversing the charges? Why don't the cheap bastards just not pay up front to watch?

Re:What exactly ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Generally it's free to watch with occasional ads (if Adblock+ isn't installed). Many of those who offer gratuity also will subscribe to the channel, if the streamer is partnered with Twitch, for $5 a month. The money is split between twitch and the streamer and helps give them a more steady income. Subscribing often comes with other perks like being able to join the streamer in multiplayer games, elevated chat privileges, and individual stream specific emotes to use in chat.

Re:What exactly ...

[Anonymous Coward]

They reverse the charges because they think it's funny.

Normally when you make a donation you also get to send a short text message. Sometimes this message will get read out loud. So you donate a couple of dollars, have your troll message read and then reclaim your money and think that it's funny that you both tricked the streamer into thinking (s)he got money and also you tricked the system into giving you a "free" billboard message out (which is often mean or silly).

Re:What exactly ...

[Anonymous Coward]

You are extremely close to the very definition of trolling. That's the reason.

Re:What exactly ...

[Buchenskjoll]

What exactly is Aaron Rodgers?

Re:What exactly ...

[Anonymous Coward]

What part of *troll* do you not get?

Re:What exactly ...

[Anonymous Coward]

There is no point to reversing the charges. Think of the contributions as a 'Donation' button on your website. People can access your website, see what you post, etc. Maybe you have a member's login but it's all free for the normal user.

But, if you have enough traffic and you do an announcement once in a while that says something like "The servers are paid for out of my own pocket and the donations of users. Anything helps!". You do that, and you'll get some donations. It might not be a lot, or it might be a ton of money. I know several clan/guild masters who just stashed away hundreds or thousands of dollars in donations because the amount they received eclipsed the amount required for their servers.

Twitch is pretty much like that. You provide your stream without charging anything, and sometimes people will donate something out of the goodness of their heart. Like the guy above said, though, the streamers getting the most are usually some combination of professional gamer (esports) and entertaining. The people donating compare it to paying for cable or other forms of entertainment. Eg you might spend $20 going to the movie theater, and that might take up 1-3 hours of your time. But if you watch a streamer nearly every day for a few hours, surely you could donate $1? $5? $10? Get thousands of people to donate $1 and it starts to add up.

Of course, some portion of the donation goes to Twitch, but it gives viewers a very direct way to support the gamers/streamers they like the most. Whereas with cable, Hulu, etc you pay one lump sum and it's shared to everything - even the stuff you hate. Some streamers actually make a living based on their streams.

Re:What exactly ...

[PPH]

OK, this makes sense in a perverse sort of way.

Re:What exactly ...

[Quirkz]

I assume he's jolly, and is thus some kind of pirate.

Re:What exactly ...

[Fire_Wraith]

He's the quarterback of the Green Bay Packers, in U.S. professional football. I tried to pick someone that was both "good", and also not known for being a jerk/disliked by various people.

Maybe I should have gone with a car analogy, and cited a Nascar driver, but I'm not as familiar to make a choice there. :)

Re:What exactly ...

[OfMiceAndMenus]

I suddenly have an urge to create a Sports-Oriented version of Twitch. I should call it JockItch...

Re: Russians are opposed to man+girl(female child)

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm going to partially disagree on several counts. I'm not the original ranting AC, so please don't misconstrue this as any sort of support for whatever points might have been buried somewhere in there. I'll agree with your first statement that there was something seriously wrong with him, even if I'm generous and pretend the rant was intentional trolling.

Nuclear weapons shouldn't be used ever again.

Nuclear bombs were used in an attempt to stop a war; the consequences were carefully weighed by people knowing full well the horror they were unleashing. If you're attacked by a teen with a knife who genuinely poses a threat to your life and the only way you have to stop the kid is to use a gun, then you're justified using the gun. Nobody should pretend that killing a city with infants, grandmothers and innocent people is ever a good choice, but it is, and only should be, a last resort. As such, careful deliberation should be used to apply the minimum force necessary to achieve the goal, thus the term "tactical nuke."

I'm sorely tempted to talk about the type of person who should be trusted with such a horrible and awesome potential. The idea of the people we've already trusted, and the person we're probably going to trust after the next election; well that idea scares me. It scares me a lot. I don't like where the world stands now and I don't like where it looks to be headed. As a registered voter in the US, I feel like I have a duty to vote the best way I can and to help persuade those I can to vote the same way. Right now, I can't see any way I can do my duty in a way that makes me confident I am making, or even can make, a good decision.

And Deuteronomy has no place deciding modern law.

Actually, I'd nearly agree with you on that. Nearly. Deuteronomy was a list of laws enacted and changing according to both the time and direct direction of God himself. It is an example of a snapshot of a theocracy, dependent on the existence and intervention of (a) God. As such it can be looked at as a historical discussion of how laws could work and how they could affect a society, but without the direct intervention of (a) God shouldn't be applied directly unless you are sure God is directing you and correcting any misconceptions you might have about the reasons for the rules. (If you're going to make those extraordinary claims, then I for one will take the role of [doubting] Thomas and expect extraordinary evidence.)

Even Jesus declared it obsolete.

I'd say that Jesus declared it complete. Obsolete carries a slightly different connotation for me, so while I might agree with the sentiment, I disagree ever so slightly on vocabulary. I believe that Jesus was the completion of the old law and so He had the authority and did the things that made the old law complete. It wasn't invalidated like the term "obsolete" would usually imply, but rather finished. According to my beliefs, he completed the theocracy and he alone had the right to determine what, if anything, would complete it. He said that there were things that people should do and he defined how people should behave but he expected a direct relationship with God and didn't expect politics to be a part of that.

Ain't just russia

[Anonymous Coward]

A superpac supporting Clinton got caught paying trolls as well.

Meanwhile, the US is paying state-sponsored trolls

[Rujiel]

There, fixed that fpr you with something much more relevant to slashdot. Hi, cold fjord!

Re:Meanwhile, the US is paying state-sponsored tro

[hyades1]

Well said.

Haaaaaaaa haaaaaaaaaa!

[Anonymous Coward]

Fuuuuuuhaaaaaaaakin looooooooooozer!

Troll?

[Anonymous Coward]

What is the definition du'jour for 'troll'?
Because this behaviour is not your granpa's trolling...

Re:Troll?

[Calydor]

"Person who uses the internet to cause other people emotional grief, frustration and anger for his own amusement."

See also "Douchebag"

Re:Russians are opposed to man+girl(female child)

[stealth_finger]

Is this a pro-pedo message?

Don't be an a**

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously, the only lesson from this story is: Don't be an a**hole, because sooner or later it will bite you.

Karma is a bitch, and this it sounds like this guy got exactly what he deserved.

The CIA editing Wikipwdia does not count

[Plumpaquatsch]

Because they only tell the truth, and can thus not be tolls.

https://slashdot.org/story/07/08/14/1453223/see-who-is-whitewashing-wikipedia

Re: Russians are opposed to man+girl(female child)

[jandersen]

There is something seriously wrong with you

I think you are probably right. The language and the structure of the GP's ranting reminds of schizophrenia: the introduction of bizarre word constructs (such as man+girl: what does it mean? Something perhaps with pedophile connotations?) and the cognition that seems to be jumping incoherently around without much logic; both are often found in schizophrenia, or it could be mania, I suppose.

It is probably not entirely appropriate to "diagnose" somebody like this, over a long, thin wire, but it fills me with great sadness when I see this kind of thing; we shouldn't bash him - it isn't a nice illness.

Brietbart?

[wiredog]

You're linking to a hard right "news" source that is known for lying in public?

BeauHD

[Anonymous Coward]

https://news.slashdot.org/story/16/06/07/2016214/paypal-denies-twitch-troll-50000-worth-in-refunds
https://news.slashdot.org/story/16/05/31/0057215/russian-online-trolls-resist-the-light

This story and the one BeauHD refers to are bullshit stories. Slashdot is a whore now. This is
nothing to do with news for nerds.

Know this. Google, Facebook, Twitter, Microsoft, Apple, US and foreign politicians, US and foreign
spy agencies (especially the CIA spooks), and myriad large corporations are aware of the wrecked
global economy and debt imbalances. They are aware of the repercussions of permitting the mass
flooding of foreigners across borders. Why is it like this? They are doing this on purpose.

Saying Russia resists the light and tying it to "trolling"... this story reaks of CIA propaganda and
it is the CIA who are 100% for sure damned.

Every CIA who dies goes to Hell. Period. George Bush Sr's plan (9/11) is not forgiven. Light that.

Little kid???

[DogDude]

WHY does this little kid have access to so much money? WTF? Are his parents mentally challenged?

Re: Russians are opposed to man+girl(female child)

[myowntrueself]

I'd say that Jesus declared it complete. Obsolete carries a slightly different connotation for me, so while I might agree with the sentiment, I disagree ever so slightly on vocabulary. I believe that Jesus was the completion of the old law and so He had the authority and did the things that made the old law complete. It wasn't invalidated like the term "obsolete" would usually imply, but rather finished. According to my beliefs, he completed the theocracy and he alone had the right to determine what, if anything, would complete it. He said that there were things that people should do and he defined how people should behave but he expected a direct relationship with God and didn't expect politics to be a part of that.

It can either be complete or consistent. If Jesus declared it complete then it must be inconsistent. Would you rather your life be run by incomplete laws or inconsistent laws?

Also "Not one jot or iota shall pass from the Law until the end of days." so why aren't Christians required to be circumcised and follow other aspects of the LAW such as dietary restrictions? Huh, in reality Christians are a bunch of atheists who don't even follow the Law that their prophet/God laid down.

Re:Meanwhile, the US is paying state-sponsored tro

[cyborg_monkey]

moron.

You don't know what a "chargeback" is... (in U.S.)

[IBitOBear]

A dispute is a request to get a charge "investigated". A "chargeback" is an instruction to the bank/credit company take the money back and make it my problem.

Most people don't know that (in the United States) these are completely different things.

If I dispute a charge then the credit card company may contact the vendor and ask them what happened and generally do a resolution where I may, or may not, get a refund. A dispute takes days, weeks, or even months to run its course.

A chargeback tells the credit card company to suck the money back out of the payee's account right now and debit it back to me unconditionally. There is no investigation. There is no delay. Once a chargeback has been issued the credit card issuer is no longer involved in the transaction. They payee may sue the payor or otherwise deal with the financial dispute by legal means. A chargeback is the "nuclear option" for dealing with a credit card transaction that's gone bad.

But understand that a chargeback isn't magic. If you buy something through an intermediary, the credit card bank is taking money from that next step in the chain, from that intermediary. That intermediary may then choose sue you or never do business with you again. So issuing a charge-back to ebay might get you a lifetime ban from ebay or a lawsuit from ebay and leave ebay holding the bag, unable to get the money back from the seller.

I've disputed several charges in my lifetime, but I've only ever once issued a chargeback. A local scaffolding company didn't properly log in the return of the scaffolding I'd rented. So they kept on billing me monthly rent for it. I tried to work it out with them, but they just kept saying they'd be charging me forever unless I showed up with the scaffolding. The individual pieces aren't serialized so it was impossible to coerce an audit to support my claim. I'm a home owner, not a business, so it's not like I could misplace that much stuff.

So I called the credit card company and issued a chargeback. The guy on the phone was all "what charges do you wish to dispute?" and I said "_NO_, I am issuing a chargeback for (amount) and blocking all further charges from (company)." I had to go several rounds and get a manager involved because the phone monkey didn't know what I was talking about. Finally I made it happen. Then I contacted the scaffolding company that I'd charged back everything they'd charged me since the date of the equipment return. With the money back in my hand and the door closed they became way more responsive and we agreed to go our separate ways.

They cold have sued me or whatever, but they would have lost since all of their records were messed up and their procedures were lax at best. So they decided (amount) and whatever equipment they thought I still had wasn't worth going to court.

A full chargeback is the last milestone before a resolution or a law suit, and if you issue (or receive as a business owner) more than a couple a decade you are likely to be dropped by the card company. It would _suck_ for a business to be banned by, say, all of Visa Corp. It wouldn't be fun for a consumer either.

But the full "chargeback" is a guaranteed protection to credit card holders as enshrined by law. The "dispute" is a contract term in your card and/or vendor agreement and subject to civil terms and other sections of law.

Chargebacks exist because the buyer and the seller are the actual involved parties, so either party can say to the payment processors "get out of this dispute completely" but to do that, to get out of the middle, the money must be put back into the hands of the original people.

It's twisty, and you shouldn't ever take legal or financial advice from the internet, but "disputing a charge" and "issuing a chargeback" are _totally_ different things.

ah ha

[Anonymous Coward]

Javascript must break the related links too then?

I see the same link to college shooting in Oct on every story...makes Slashdot look kinda stupid actually

Re:ah ha

[gustygolf]

Nah, they're broken with or without JS.

Re:You don't know what a "chargeback" is... (in U.

[Actually, I do RTFA]

A dispute is the beginning of the process. A chargeback is the result of a dispute.

If you ever won a dispute, your card company issued a chargeback.

The lack of the ability to roll over on any dispute without a chargeback fee seems like a huge flaw in the system.

It sounds like you kept getting bounced up the ladder until a manager decided that he would say yes to placate you.

Or, you can show me some documentation that I'm wrong, but I couldn't find any that supported your assertion. See a random source

AAAAH HA HA HA!

[iq145]

i love it. They nailed him! http://tech.slashdot.org/story... Down with trolls http://www.newser.com/story/21...

Here is the kids twitter, apparantly he's loaded

[nhat11]

https://twitter.com/archer21an...

Guess he have more money then he knows what to do with. Spoiled

The story looks fabricated.

[Anonymous Coward]

The journalist didn't reach out to the alleged troll for comment and the people who he donated to deny any refund request happened.