Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Facebook May Ban Bad Businesses From Advertising (theverge.com)

Posted by BeauHD on from the bad-hombres dept.

Facebook will now let you file a complaint about businesses you've had a problem with if you bought something after clicking on one of their ads. If enough people complain about a business, it could lead to Facebook banning the company from running ads. The Verge reports: The new policy is rolling out globally starting today, and it's meant to help Facebook fight back against another type of advertising abuse on its platform. Facebook says it's trying to combat "bad shopping experiences," which can cost customers and make them frustrated with Facebook, too. Facebook is particularly interested in a few problem areas: shipping times, product quality, and customer service. This isn't just a matter of misleading advertising: if a company regularly provides bad service, products that don't meet buyers' expectations, or just frustrates consumers, they risk getting in trouble with the platform.

It appears that Facebook will send notifications to users to ask about their experience if it detects that they've purchased something after clicking on an ad. You'll also be able to find those companies and leave feedback on the Ads Activity page. Facebook says it will inform businesses about negative feedback and try to pinpoint problems that a large number of customers are having. If customer feedback doesn't improve after a warning, Facebook will eventually start to limit how many ads a company can run. If it continues long enough, they can be banned.

111 comments

  1. What could possibly go wrong? by nonBORG · · Score: 1, Insightful

    A new level to a DDOS attack.

    --
    You can't handle the truth! - Because I don't post left all my comments get modded down, bye bye Karma.
    1. Re: What could possibly go wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Facebook bans themselves

    2. Re:What could possibly go wrong? by sycodon · · Score: 0

      Yep...SJWs will organize and start slamming un-PC businesses en mass.

      No different than the tactics used on Youtube videos and other social media platforms.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    3. Re: What could possibly go wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "May" which means, not even news and just more crap.

      I 'may' have won 1,000,000,000 dollars according to every other letter I get in the mailbox.

    4. Re:What could possibly go wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Protip: Non PC businesses should avoid advertising to SJW.

      A) The money is wasted, they arent buying any.
      B) You draw attention to yourself and You don't want to draw SJW attention
      C) You don't really want their business anyway. Yeah I bought a fridge from you guys and its not keeping my tofu burgers and kale salad cold enough. Kale has to be kept just above freezing you know!!

    5. Re:What could possibly go wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      good, fuck their shit

    6. Re:What could possibly go wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bit of a difference, actually. Their hilarious boycotts of actual businesses and organizations tend to backfire spectacularly.

      Just ask Chick-Fil-A or the NRA.

    7. Re:What could possibly go wrong? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pro-tip to you. Don't purposefully misconstrue what is written just to make a snarky political comment. The SJWs won't complain about companies advertising to *them*, they'll purposefully go looking for unPC companies and submit fake complaints with the express purpose of shutting down their access to the advertising platform. Like was written: just like they do now.

    8. Re:What could possibly go wrong? by desdinova+216 · · Score: 1

      my only issue with Chick Fil A is they tend to be closed on the one day of the week I would want to purchase from them. and the NRA seems to be obstructing any efforts to reduce the amount of gun violence.

    9. Re:What could possibly go wrong? by sycodon · · Score: 1

      1. Carl's Junior
      2. Enforce the laws we have.

      Fixed.

      --
      When Fascism comes to America, it will call itself Anti-Fascism, and tell you to give up your guns.
    10. Re:What could possibly go wrong? by desdinova+216 · · Score: 1

      there are no Carl's Jr or Hardees within 50 miles of where I live, you insensitive clod!

    11. Re: What could possibly go wrong? by thoughtlover · · Score: 1

      I was thinking this policy could be used in an activist-like manner to boycott certain, unfavorable companies, but that's funny about Facebook, for sure.

      --
      No sig for you! Come back one year!
  2. Yes, I would like to file a complaint . . . by PolygamousRanchKid+ · · Score: 4, Insightful

    . . . against Facebook, and their business practices about collecting and selling data about folks who are not associated with their business.

    Maybe if enough people file complaints against Facebook, they will take some action against themselves.

    --
    Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
    1. Re:Yes, I would like to file a complaint . . . by alvinrod · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I take it this is mostly in jest (not that what you say isn't true) but I think it does raise the point of something like this happening where some business (not necessarily Facebook) receives a lot of reports from an angry mob. That kind of action is right up the alley of the average "Kony 2012" internet slacktivist on Facebook.

      Facebook isn't completely stupid, but there's no way they're in a good enough position to evaluate these kinds of reports accurately or fairly. I suspect that some bad companies will get passes because they're well connected and know how to grease palms and some other legitimate companies that get broadsided by this won't be large enough for Facebook to care.

    2. Re:Yes, I would like to file a complaint . . . by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      . . . against Facebook, and their business practices about collecting and selling data about folks who are not associated with their business.

      Maybe if enough people file complaints against Facebook, they will take some action against themselves.

      You would TRUST Fuckerberg to do that?

      Don't be a dumb fuck.

    3. Re:Yes, I would like to file a complaint . . . by rmdingler · · Score: 2

      Yes, let's ask the folks whose business model is predicated on advertising sales to police it up, instead of applying a bit of common sense.

      There are abuses on both sides of the transaction; with deceptive advertisers taking advantage of the gullible, and uninformed purchasers blaming the seller for their own ignorance.

      Why would you even purchase something from a one-shot advertiser on the Facebook? Research a product you're interested in on as many sites as possible, and understand in advance that the internet practice of purchasing something you cannot 1st hold in your hands is an inexact science.

      There are so many reputable ways to purchase goods from the internet that offer easy-peasy returns... if you are often unsatisfied with your purchases, remember that you are the common denominator.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    4. Re:Yes, I would like to file a complaint . . . by gnick · · Score: 1

      ...selling data about folks who are not associated with their business.

      Is there any evidence that they've sold data linked to names of non-users? That would be super-shady, but I haven't heard of them doing that.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    5. Re:Yes, I would like to file a complaint . . . by alvinrod · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Why would you even purchase something from a one-shot advertiser on the Facebook? Research a product you're interested in on as many sites as possible, and understand in advance that the internet practice of purchasing something you cannot 1st hold in your hands is an inexact science.

      While this makes perfect sense to you and me, I'm going to guess that neither of us use Facebook. We've already got people getting their news from Facebook, so I expect purchasing decisions are the least of our worries.

    6. Re:Yes, I would like to file a complaint . . . by HornWumpus · · Score: 2

      The words you are looking for are: 'Shadow profile'.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    7. Re:Yes, I would like to file a complaint . . . by gnick · · Score: 2

      I'm aware of shadow profiles. The question I'm asking is whether they've been caught associating shadow profiles with names and selling the data. I'm not aware of that happening.

      --
      He's getting rather old, but he's a good mouse.
    8. Re:Yes, I would like to file a complaint . . . by Type44Q · · Score: 1

      Cue future headline:

      "Facebook bans bad businesses from advertising... and promptly disappears in a puff of logic."

    9. Re:Yes, I would like to file a complaint . . . by lagi · · Score: 1

      Yeah, you know, this is exactly what I was thinking reading this... Like maybe Facebook should ban them selfs from advertising.

  3. Hmmm by dohzer · · Score: 1

    Does Facebook ever advertise their business on Facebook?

    1. Re:Hmmm by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 1

      No, they advertise it to Russian oligarchs.

    2. Re:Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, they advertise it to Russian oligarchs.

      So it's only to Hillary in the US, then?

      I think she's already aware of FB.

  4. That's recursive! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So let's see when we end up with Russel's paradox

  5. Shakedown. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Those are some nice ads you got there. Be a shame if *something* happend to them.

  6. Overall story: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Facebook "may" do something good.

    1. Re: Overall story: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lmao! No. This will be used as an excuse to remove any businesses that provide support to conservatives and donâ(TM)t provide support to socialists.

      You are so naive, I bet you think Tesla will stop killing people with their shitty fake auto pilot, too.

  7. Let the brigading begin! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    It's open season on businesses you disagree with. It worked for posts, comments and videos. Why not businesses? Report brigades, ho!

    1. Re:Let the brigading begin! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      All this is going to do is hide shady brick-and-morter businesses. The internet ones will just re-brand every 30 days (like the stores that sell counterfeit clothing, wedding dresses, and such do) and have a clean slate again.

      While I will applaud the idea behind this, the actual effort will require more than just "banning a business" but banning an entire marketing douchnozzle company from being able to place any ads for ANY of their clients.

    2. Re: Let the brigading begin! by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      The hard part is you actually have to buy before you complain.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re:Let the brigading begin! by ArhcAngel · · Score: 1

      The internet ones will just re-brand every 30 days (like the stores that sell counterfeit clothing, wedding dresses, and such do) and have a clean slate again.

      Don't forget Google changing its name to Alphabet.

      --
      "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it." - K
    4. Re: Let the brigading begin! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Buy something, then return and refund it. Double the damage to the business. That's how you review brigade on Valve's Steam for example.

  8. Facebook admits defeat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Rather odd for a company to boast powerful AI targed ads only to have users report "bad" ones no? Smells awfully fishy. Clicking on any kind of report would confirm you saw the ad. Rating your experience confirms you purchased either the product on the ad or some other product from the company, either way furthering what they know about you.

    1. Re:Facebook admits defeat? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      either way furthering what they know about you.

      I don't think that is very high on the list of Facebook users' concerns, or they would not be Facebook users to begin with.

  9. They'll end up banning Microsoft because... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Windows 10.

    1. Re: They'll end up banning Microsoft because... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Nah, they will pay their way out if need be. We will see 'troll factories' selling their services to anyone needing to ban a competitor. Employment even if you're too sleazy for telemarketing. For surely, facebook is not going to check that you actually bought the product?

  10. Prepare for more ideological abuse by ScentCone · · Score: 0, Troll

    Another vector for sponsored activists like Hogg to try to muster up reputation-trashing campaigns against businesses that insufficiently provide money and public support to the Chosen Virtue Signaling Marching Orders Issue Of The Day.

    --
    Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    1. Re:Prepare for more ideological abuse by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 0

      Another vector for sponsored activists like Hogg

      Ok but how did the sponsored activists know which schools to attend to be mass shot at? Are they psychic too? And if so, is that part of the conspiracy?

    2. Re:Prepare for more ideological abuse by ScentCone · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Hogg didn't get shot at, but he sure is happy to exploit the fact that other people were in order to collect $ and logistical support from people like Soros as he goes out to gin up partisan fund raising and votes. Hogg and his types couldn't be more thrilled when a crazy person murders people, because they love a good emotional lever to use when trying to strip away ever more civil liberties.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    3. Re:Prepare for more ideological abuse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They had their FEMA buddies doctor the official records, duh!

    4. Re:Prepare for more ideological abuse by h33t+l4x0r · · Score: 0

      Hogg didn't get shot at, but he sure is happy to exploit the fact that other people were

      So we should discourage active school shootings since it will prevent Hogg from exploiting casualties for political means?

      Yes! But how could we do that? Hmm... Oh I know!

      We can ban assault weapons! Or at least make it hard for crazy people to get their hands on them!

    5. Re:Prepare for more ideological abuse by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      [The NRA] didn't get shot at, but sure is happy to exploit the fact that other people were in order to collect $ and logistical support from people like [Dennis Veilleux] as it goes out to gin up partisan fund raising and votes. [McConnell] and his types couldn't be more thrilled when a crazy person murders people, because they love a good emotional lever to use when trying to strip away ever more [firearms regulations].

      You're right, someone should put a stop to that. *sarcasm*

    6. Re: Prepare for more ideological abuse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ban guns, snip the tips off our knives, blunt blades, block acid sales, license pressure cooker sales and keep the list rolling. A determined person is likely to succeed on some front, the effort should be in limiting the numbers of determined people through empathy, inclusion, and employment long before it gets to the point of someone acting. Violence is only the symptom, not the cause.

    7. Re:Prepare for more ideological abuse by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      Right, because the NRA's purpose is to PREVENT YOU FROM TAKING OTHER PEOPLE'S CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED RIGHTS AWAY. Just like the ACLU tends to focus on things like your rights as protected by the 1st, 4th, and 5th amendments (and, sometimes, the 2nd, too).

      And since there are some very well funded groups trying to take away your civil rights, the NRA needs to spend money to push back against that never ending attack. Hogg and company, on the other hand, are seeking money and political power in order to strip away your rights. See the difference? Don't pretend you don't.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    8. Re:Prepare for more ideological abuse by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      We can ban assault weapons! Or at least make it hard for crazy people to get their hands on them!

      Well, you're in luck! Assault weapons are already incredibly difficult to obtain unless you're willing to do so criminally. No assault weapon made after the 1980's can be sold in the US (unless it's to the government). And for those that are on the market, they cost many thousands of dollars if they're still functional, and buyers have to go through a lengthy and very expensive government tax/licensing process that includes a nearly proctological background check including multiple personal references and everything from banking info to employer interviews by BATFE feds. There's a reason that crimes committed by people using legally owned assault weapons are essentially non-existant.

      Or are you talking about assault "style" rifles, that share some of the same cosmetic similarities as actual assault weapons? If so, then what you mean are "semi-automatic rifles," which of course have been available over the counter in this country for more than a century, and are the most common rifles in use. Untold millions of them. And yet, when it comes to murders, the FBI tells us that the number of people killed using a long gun of any kind is hugely eclipsed by the number of people who are beaten to death with bare hands, baseball bats, and fence posts. And of the tiny percentage that ARE killed using long guns, the vast majority of those are shotguns or simple little .22 rimfire rifles. The rifles that share cosmetic similarities to assault weapons are used in only a tiny fraction of such cases, and most of those involve illegally owned weapons anyway.

      But sure, let's keep crazy people from getting those. The NRA completely agrees with you, and has been calling for 30 years for stricter compliance with the sort of reporting processes and record keeping that would actually help with that. The murderer in Florida who killed 17 had a long history of crazy behavior and violent assault. So why did he pass the background check? Because an Obama-era program aimed at protecting minority teenagers from the legal consequences for violent behavior kept him off the books despite dozens of acts that would immediately prevent you or I from ever being able to legally possess any kind of firearm, ever. The NRA has encouraged, and congressional Republicans have passed a bill that tightens up exactly such sort of slop, and would have also prevented the recent Texas killer from passing a background check despite his previous employer (the Air Force) knowing he was a violent nutjob. So, it's good to know that you're with the NRA on this topic. It's an important one, and they've been preaching about it for decades. The push-back on it is coming from Democrats, so you might want to take it up with them.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    9. Re:Prepare for more ideological abuse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      lol fag

    10. Re:Prepare for more ideological abuse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I quite like the size of my penis so I don't need a gun

    11. Re:Prepare for more ideological abuse by desdinova+216 · · Score: 1

      then why is the NRA opposed to a waiting period so that a sufficient background check can be done?

    12. Re:Prepare for more ideological abuse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why the hell is this off-topic shit modded up?

    13. Re:Prepare for more ideological abuse by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      then why is the NRA opposed to a waiting period so that a sufficient background check can be done?

      Who said they are? They fully support a rich, deep background check through the NICS system, and want it to be even more thorough than it already is. A customer looking to make a purchase has to wait while that background check is completed. In most cases, that's only a matter of minutes ... because, you know, we now have things like high-speed, integrated databases and banks of federal agents with access taking calls (a RECORD number of them, every month) as purchases are queued up. What the NRA is saying is that we need reporting agencies, shrinks, and other parties who may know prohibitive things about a prospective gun owner to GET ON THE RECORD in the NICS system so that the very well-oiled NICS check can show red flags that are currently slipping through the cracks. Waiting longer for data that isn't present in the system achieves nothing. Only holding lazy, non-cooperative, or under-funded agencies responsible for stepping up and getting that data into the system will further tighten things down. Something Republicans have passed bills to do, and which Democrats have blocked, as recently as this year.

      And, of course, Obama-era policies like the one (still in place) that prevented the crazy, violent murderer in Florida from even having a local record in the first place are going to always be a problem. No background check - instant, or week-long, is going to prevent him from buying a rifle if his school, victims, and sheriff's office won't even go on the record to put him into the red-flag-reporting NICS system in the first place.

      The question isn't "why is the NRA against waiting for a background check," but "why are so many liberal politicians against providing the data that would instantly flag a prohibited person?" Background checks against hundreds of databases aggregated into NICS take only moments. It's very comprehensive, but it breaks down (as would any background check - five minutes or five weeks) if a sheriff won't charge or report someone who's committed dozens of assaults. That instant background check won't work if the Air Force can't be bothered to report (as required by law) that a person who was recently discharged from the military was done so because of committing violent assault. NICS works well, and instantly - but it's GIGO. A slower process wouldn't prohibit someone if the needed data isn't there.

      In the meantime, hundreds of thousands of people criminally attempting to purchase firearms while being prohibited from doing so are blocked by NICS checks. Guess how many times people attempting those purchases (all of which, by definition, involve lying on federal paperwork while in the process of attempting the purchase - a gimme federal felony conviction) have been prosecuted for those criminal attempts? Less than a dozen, in years. How many of those people who just tried to lie their way through a background check but were denied a firearm purchase then went on to acquire a weapon illegally by other means, instead of going to jail for that just-committed, demonstrable crime? Tens of thousands, at the very least. Again, this is an area where the NRA has been - year in, year out - begging federal officials to act. They have caught-red-handed evidence of criminals attempting to acquire weapons, and those guys just leave the dealer without consequence, and the NRA's lawyers and lobbyists have been pointing out those missed prosecution opportunities for years.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    14. Re:Prepare for more ideological abuse by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      See the difference? Don't pretend you don't.

      So you have no problem with sponsored acitvists, reputation-trashing campaigns against businesses, exploiting shootings in order to collect $ and logistical support, partisan fund raising and voting, and emotional leverage in general...

      you only have a problem with them when they're used by opponents of things that you support.

      Well that's certainly principled.

    15. Re:Prepare for more ideological abuse by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      No, I only have a problem with totalitarian-minded types who know that shutting people up and stripping away their rights is the only way to forward their agenda. That you can't tell the difference between people who want to destroy rights and people who want to preserve them suggests that you really, REALLY should do anything dangerous to other people, like, say, voting.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    16. Re:Prepare for more ideological abuse by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      I quite like the size of my penis so I don't need a gun

      Wow, that's a powerful penis! When was the last time you had a bunch of MS-13 guys with machetes in your back yard? Is your giant penis armored, or what? It must be remarkable if you know it's capable of preserving your life when someone's willing to kill you with actual weapons. Truly, amazing. Have you considered starring in a reality show of some sort? You'd make a fortune.

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    17. Re:Prepare for more ideological abuse by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      That you can't tell the difference between people who want to destroy rights and people who want to preserve them suggests that you really, REALLY should do anything dangerous to other people, like, say, voting.

      I vote to preserve my right to live, thank you. Magazine size limits - a.o.k. Requiring someone to be 21 to purchase a semiautomatic weapon - a.o.k. Requiring trigger locks - a.o.k.

      I'm damn dangerous. And there's nothing that you can do about that.

    18. Re:Prepare for more ideological abuse by ScentCone · · Score: 1

      I vote to preserve my right to live, thank you.

      You already have that right. If a criminal seeks to deny you of that right, we already have substantial mechanisms in place to punish them. That same criminal could, with a twitch of the wrist while driving, run you down with a car, too. Or beat you to death, as happens wildly more often than any murder committed using a rifle of any kind, let alone ones that share cosmetic features with assault weapons.

      Magazine limits? I suppose you're thinking that the murderer in Florida would have been less deadly while he casually took his time killing people for quite some time before eventually abandoning his gun and walking out of the school. Right? Right. Except he chose to use low-capacity magazines because they were easier to conceal than standard capacity mags. If you really think that forcing a law-abiding person who's suddenly gone crazy (you know, someone who was limited to only buying low-capacity magazines) will be significantly safer if they have to pause their shooting for literally 2 or 3 seconds while they pop in another magazine, then you have no idea what you're talking about. Meanwhile, the actual criminals who don't care in the least about your limits, will think that's hilarious anyway.

      And, 21 to purchase a semi-auto? People have been buying them for over a century. Of course it used to be much easier - anybody could walk into a hardware store and buy them like they would an axe or a screwdriver. Then we had a serious increase in the murder rate (not counting the big spike during prohibition) that topped out in the 1980's. Since then, roughly a hundred million guns have been purchased by American owners (most of those are semi-automatic), but the murder rate has dropped to roughly half of what it was 30 years ago. Far more guns purchased, far fewer murders.

      I'm damn dangerous. And there's nothing that you can do about that.

      I'm not sure what you're saying, here. Why should I care if you're "dangerous?" Are you threatening me, or somebody else? If you're not, then - so what? EVERYBODY is dangerous, and have at their disposal virtually unlimited ways to kill lots of people, without even getting around to using firearms. Are you boasting about martial arts skills or something?

      --
      Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
    19. Re:Prepare for more ideological abuse by DRJlaw · · Score: 1

      That you can't tell the difference between people who want to destroy rights and people who want to preserve them suggests that you really, REALLY should do anything dangerous to other people, like, say, voting.

      I vote to preserve my right to live, thank you....

      I'm damn dangerous. And there's nothing that you can do about that.

      ....

      I'm not sure what you're saying, here. Why should I care if you're "dangerous?" Are you threatening me, or somebody else? If you're not, then - so what? EVERYBODY is dangerous, and have at their disposal virtually unlimited ways to kill lots of people, without even getting around to using firearms. Are you boasting about martial arts skills or something?

      Clip out the part of the conversation where you claim that I "really, REALLY should[n't] do anything dangerous to other people, like, say, voting," then innocently act confused about what I mean and ask if I'm threatening you... classy.

      EVERYBODY is dangerous, and have at their disposal virtually unlimited ways to kill lots of people, without even getting around to using firearms. Are you boasting about martial arts skills or something?

      Killer ninja voting. Tool...

  11. It's a trap! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    What a wonderful way to trick users, errr, suckers into giving FB feedback on ads!

  12. My prediction by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Money talks, nobody walks.... advertisers will be more welcome than complainers.....

  13. Many bad products are from stupid customers. by jellomizer · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I am not saying there are bad companies that produce crap. But if you look at Amazon bad reviews on products most of them are from people who got a product to solve a problem that there was no advertising to say it was even remotely going to solve.
    This $400 dell laptop runs the most modern games kinda choppy. It is utter crap compared to my $3000 desktop system I made last year.

    Or the people don’t understand the difference between a professional product vs a home product. Your linksys home router vs a Cisco switch for a data center. The home router is orders of magnitude cheaper and it has more features.
    Or people getting an expensive camera with lenses that do not autofocus. For most average picture taker your phone will get better pictures. But for the professional photographer they can get real art from this complex phone.

    People often will get the cheapest crap they can find expecting it to work like the premium version, or pay top dollar for an item that is meant for professionals that require sill and training to use.

    --
    If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    1. Re:Many bad products are from stupid customers. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you're thinking about this the wrong way. you can now get back at your old employer who fired you. just wage a campaign to get them booted from facebook ads. power back to the people..

      if it detects that they've purchased something after clicking on an ad.

      What i want to know is how they detect this.

    2. Re:Many bad products are from stupid customers. by captbollocks · · Score: 2

      you're thinking about this the wrong way. you can now get back at your old employer who fired you. just wage a campaign to get them booted from facebook ads. power back to the people..

      if it detects that they've purchased something after clicking on an ad.

      What i want to know is how they detect this.

      Conversion tracking using js, pixels, etc... Nearly everyone does this using Facebook's tools so the best performing ads can run.

    3. Re:Many bad products are from stupid customers. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On the other hand, a great many manufacturers seem to think that just because something is sold cheaply, it doesn't have to satisfy basic requirements. Router/phone/laptop crashes once a week or has unfixed security holes? Why are you complaining? It was cheap, wasn't it? 2000mAh battery really only holds 800mAh? It was cheap, goddammit! Light bulb not as bright as advertised or off color? What did you expect for that price?

      Selling something for less does not absolve you from playing by the rules.

    4. Re:Many bad products are from stupid customers. by Kokuyo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think there are much worse examples. One of them would be people leaving a 1 star review because shipping was bad. I have yet to figure out in what way that is the fault of the product.

    5. Re:Many bad products are from stupid customers. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The product was obviously hard to ship, with some torus-shaped package instead of a box.

    6. Re:Many bad products are from stupid customers. by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      The first sentence in my argument "I am not saying there are bad companies that produce crap." If they are overselling (lying about) their product and services and giving misleading information then yes they should be responsible for customer backlash, because they are scamming people.

      But if that Cheap Battery held 2000mAh but worked within reason for 2 years. While the one that costs twice as much held the 2000mAh for 4 years. And both were guaranteed for 2 years. You shouldn't fault the Cheap maker because you got what they were selling and promising, while the more expensive brand undersold it quality.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    7. Re:Many bad products are from stupid customers. by jellomizer · · Score: 1

      It will depend. If the company that makes the product is also the ones that ship it, then they are responsible for not properly caring for their product in transit.

      I could make a top quality wooden sculpture. But if I decided to ship it in a box of nails and the customer gets it, they will be rightfully annoyed at my product.

      --
      If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
    8. Re:Many bad products are from stupid customers. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What if you make a top quality wooden statue, package it in more bubble wrap than is imaginable, you choose a shipping company that is reputable and you've used 100s of times before without issue, and this one time they run it over with a truck or lose it?

      There are people who will still give you a 1 star review, and that's what the GP was talking about.

    9. Re:Many bad products are from stupid customers. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because they're reviewing the item for Amazon. If there are routine shipping problems that may be Amazon's fault that is still useful for people thinking of buying. It hurts the utility of Amazon as a review service for everyone else, but that's not what they're providing.

  14. Finally I get to complain by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Finally I get to complain that my mail order Ukrainian bride was really a fat ugly bloke that doesn't look anything like her pictures!!! Certainly knows how to suck a c0(k like a daemon, so I'm not all that unhappy...

  15. so create an account sell crap until shutdown, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1) just do enough to get an account
    2) sell crap
    3) Profit
    4) get shutdown
    5) goto 1

    Bonus) setup a ring and endorse each other products

    NB: This is all already common place.

    1. Re:so create an account sell crap until shutdown, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2) sell crap

      Nah, pretend to be selling but don't ship the products when clients made an order and paid. Plenty of this kind of scam on FB.

  16. Here we go,.... by AbRASiON · · Score: 2

    Look at the business which recently had people coming through the door late in the evening, AFTER closing time, they let people through but eventually had to cut new customers off at a certain point in time.

    Unfortunately, the next customer to try was a black woman,....

    Do I need to explain the rest? Suffice to say, total social media mess, people fired, was any of this deliberate? Who knows? Based on the original posted story, Occam's razor says no.

    Regardless. Customers can be idiots and cause unwarranted complaints and rating bombing to occur.

    1. Re:Here we go,.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This shit is only going to get worse, unfortunately. I've thinking about moving to a red state. While I am not a white supremacist myself, I'm starting to believe they may have been right all along. There is a concerted push to demonize the white majority, especially the men, and bring in replacements more favorable to totalitarian socialism. I recently told my sister (*mostly* joking), "Looks like I'm going to end up a Klansman."

    2. Re:Here we go,.... by liquid_schwartz · · Score: 1

      This shit is only going to get worse, unfortunately. I've thinking about moving to a red state. While I am not a white supremacist myself, I'm starting to believe they may have been right all along. There is a concerted push to demonize the white majority, especially the men, and bring in replacements more favorable to totalitarian socialism. I recently told my sister (*mostly* joking), "Looks like I'm going to end up a Klansman."

      Red states have as many Klansmen as dreamers have totally productive straight A students who just want a better life. There's a few in both cases but both also get *far* more attention than their numbers warrant.

    3. Re:Here we go,.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      While I am not a white supremacist myself

      Neither are they, jackass.

    4. Re:Here we go,.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The Klan? Maybe you're right. If that's the case, I have misunderstood. I don't think whites are better than anyone. I simply think that we need to wake up to the concerted Zionist push to dilute and eradicate white ethnicities. We have a right to our culture and future. I used to laugh at groups like the KKK that said shit like this, but I was wrong. They are proving to have been correct. I can't wait until we're a minority in our own land to ally myself with white patriots, even actual racists ones I may disagree with.

    5. Re:Here we go,.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And they fired the employee because "someone has to be accountable." Hahahahahahaha. Wait. Hahahahahahahahahahaha. "Accountable." We've reach peak left. They don't even know the definition of the word "accountability." Explains a lot.

    6. Re:Here we go,.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And this is why we say, "Link or it didn't happen".

      Without knowing where and when, at the very least, this is meaningless. To draw any rational conclusion from it you would also want to know what the business was, and why they were in the habit of letting people in "AFTER closing time".

    7. Re:Here we go,.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ooouuuhh a black! woman! let's cower in fear!

    8. Re:Here we go,.... by AbRASiON · · Score: 1

      Dickhead, this article is less than 2 weeks old, heck it might even be a week. Some kind of coffee shop.

      They weren't in the fucking habit of letting people in after closing time, they were in the habit of serving customers, busily and no one had time to walk to the door and flip the "closed, fuck off" sign - once they attempted to instigate said "closed, fuck off" rule a black woman got uppity about it and all hell ensued on social media.

  17. Internet Death Penalty by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We're heading for a world of no second chances. Once you've been banned by Amazon, Facebook or Google, all of which have strict no-reinstatement policies (unless you're prominent enough to publicly shame them), you're basically cut off from the biggest place of commerce, communication and mobile OS. There's no hope for help from the USA, because they themselves swing the ban-hammer.

  18. ISPs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    All the worst rated isps should be block right?

  19. Nothing could go wrong... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    1) Click an ad for McDonalds.
    2) Complain about the food.
    3) Everyone else do the same.
    4) No more McDonalds ads!

  20. Or... by mandark1967 · · Score: 1

    They may not.

    --
    Sig Follows: "Suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself." -- Mark Twain
  21. when the walled garden violates net neutrality by goombah99 · · Score: 1

    if facebook becomes the internet, such as it's facebook essentials in India, then doesn't it also violate net neutrality when it picks winners and losers?

    --
    Some drink at the fountain of knowledge. Others just gargle.
  22. I'm not on facebook by johnsie · · Score: 1

    Not after Cambridge Analytica and the fact that Facebook moved their servers out of Europe just to avoid privacy rules.

  23. banning it self? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How can facebook ban it self, on facebook?

  24. Stop ads infecting/slowing/tracking you... apk by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    See subject & via APK Hosts File Engine 2.0++ 64-bit for Linux h t t p : / / a p k . i t - m a t e . c o . u k / A P K H o s t s F i l e E n g i n e F o r L i n u x . z i p (remove spaces between characters & download).

    Yields more security/speed/reliability/anonymity vs. any SINGLE solution (99% of threats = hostnames vs. IP address (that most firewalls use)) more efficiently/FASTER + NATIVELY 4 less!

    (... Vs. "Bolt on 'MoAr' illogic-logic" competitors slowing you, hosts speed you up 2 ways (adblocks + hardcodes u spend most time @) vs. competition loaded w/ bugs (DNS/AntiVir) + their overheads (messagepass ('souled-out' to advertiser addons) + filtering drivers) & their complexity leads to exploitation).

    Created in FreePascal/Lazarus 1.8.2 using GTK3 on OpenGL 3.1 via KDE Plasma desktop on Kubuntu 18.04 plus patches.

    APK

    P.S.=> Enjoy - it's much better vs. the Windows model on many fronts (speed & efficiency, mostly (plus new "merge" feature))... apk

  25. Registered /.ers opinions of the Win64 model by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Your software is just fine - well written, functional... I'm going to continue using the Host File Engine by mmell February 17, 2017

    (APK's work), I've flat out said it's good by BronsCon February 11 2016

    his hosts program is actually pretty good by xenotransplant August 10 2015

    his hosts tool is actually useful for those cases in which one does indeed want to locally block stuff outright while consuming minimum system resources by alexgieg September 25 2015

    I like your host file system by Karmashock September 09 2015

    I do use APK's host file on all my systems at home by OrangeTide December 01 2017

    I personally use a HOSTS file blocker produced from a genius called APK by 110010001000 October 27 2017

    * See subject: Best part is this Linux 64-bit model is faster & more efficient (does 2x the work in 1/2 the time, literally)

    APK

    P.S.=> Enjoy a faster/safer/more reliable internet... apk

  26. Easily abusable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We're already in a world where companies and apps get one-star reviews as a form of protest about the company's policies, regardless of the quality of their actual product. Whether you think that's good or bad, it will definitely happen for this system too.

    While Facebook's goal might be to encourage specific areas like fast shipping and good customer service to real customers, what they're actually building is a "dislike" button for companies who engage in advertising on Facebook. This will not accomplish their stated goal, and their fools for thinking otherwise.

    1. Re:Easily abusable. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They know exactly what it will accomplish.

      Conform, or else!

  27. ooh this sounds good. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    il hire a smal army in a ch7nese click farms to file complaints about my competitors!
    how can this not be a good thing...

  28. Something tells me... by The+Angry+Mick · · Score: 1

    ...companies like Comcast and AT&T will be excluded from this policy. Can't have the keepers of the internet fast lanes getting tetchy with their subjects.

    --

    I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.

  29. Personalize that cake or else... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ... we'll hit you with this hammer, too!

  30. Does this include political parties? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I want my vote back.

  31. The new police by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Facebook. Judge jury and executioner.

    Nice??

  32. Will this include Political Parties, Candidates... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and even Governments gettting banned???!!! How that I would support, maybe even enough to signup for Facebook.

    My 'proof' word is GULIBLE how appropriate!

  33. I expect advertising providers to bett their custo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Any advertising provided should be doing this as job one. Stop crowd sourcing your civic responsibility onto the end users.

  34. Yo, dawg.. by Rick+Schumann · · Score: 1

    I heard you like to ban bad businesses, so I see you put a bad business in your business, so you can ban yourself while you ban everyone else.

    Kill Facebook.

  35. Wells Fargo by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This is the first one that comes to mind

  36. BBB Integration? by Etcetera · · Score: 1

    If this were tied to something independent of Facebook and broadly agreed on, maybe it would work. Minimum BBB score required, for example. But if Facebook (or any of the tech giants) try to do this itself it really just invites further regulation. Commercial advertising is the primary mechanism by which the tech giants exert economic control, as between Facebook, Google/AdWords/DoubleClick, and Twitter they control something like 90% of the online advertising market.

    I don't trust Silicon Valley with that kind of power and I don't really think anyone else should either. Outsource it - don't try to Change the World.

    --
    Hire a Linux system administrator, systems engineer,
  37. Purchase product of competitor, complain, removed. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    This will result in products being purchased, then bad reviews by competitor, which gets competitor pulled, and then an overall loss to consumers. Why not just have some type of rebuttal system in place. I thought that the BBB was the place for this sort of thing. Facebook is just looking to make more money and invite disruption for PR and other asymmetric business methods to drive profit.

  38. How? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    First company to be banned would be Facebook??

  39. Pecunia Non Olet by nospam007 · · Score: 1

    So I'll believe it when I see it.

  40. Wait! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You mean people actually CLICK on the ads they're presented? I avoid them like the plague. I have never bought, nor sought to buy, anything presented to me over some website. But I'm old. Get off my lawn.

    1. Re:Wait! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You mean people actually CLICK on the ads they're presented? I avoid them like the plague. I have never bought, nor sought to buy, anything presented to me over some website. But I'm old. Get off my lawn.

      And of course, I completely forgot the key element "..presented to me AS AN AD...".

      I need coffee.