News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

king_of_goats

It's both, but mostly the latter. Purely from a time-management standpoint, doing the menial clerical work of compiling all the information requiring to properly respond to a dispute -- like some kind of courtroom lawyer assistant preparing for a boring case -- is just alien to how I want to spend my time as an entrepreneur. I'd rather just click "Accept", move past it, and focus my efforts on GROWING the business -- not engaging in these trivial disputes.

FYI -- I directly asked Stripe support, is there any downside to having a default policy of "Accepting" all disputes? Does my "accept-to-challenge" ratio have any impact on my account standing, risk profile, likelihood of getting banned, etc? They said, nope! Just focus your efforts on keeping your dispute rate ITSELF low. The resolution rate is irrelevant.

I see literally no benefit to challenging the disputes, assuming you don't care about getting the money back and would rather not waste the time/energy on the challenge process.

The ONLY thing I might be getting wrong in my case is this: Perhaps Stripe has some kind of "internal monitoring" metrics that tracks how users respond to disputes, and maybe there's some kind of "accept vs. challenge" ratio they use to assess account standing and risk likelihood. If that is the case, my assumptions may be wrong here and this may be the wrong strategy. Would love to hear input from somebody at Stripe on this question. Wasn't the Stripe cofounder crawling around on this site last week answering some questions? Where's he at now? lol

Is trying to overturn chargebacks a COMPLETE waste of time for entrepreneurs?

This will probably be a controversial take, but I've concluded that simply "accepting" all chargebacks may actually be the best course of action for entrepreneurs. Here's why:1) According to Stripe, it doesn't matter if you win or lose the dispute -- the mere fact that a dispute was filed counts against your account standing in either outcome:"Accepting disputes: You can accept a dispute,...

( Read More... | 5 comments | on HN )
I'm not saying "yeah let's rebel and keep doing it!" or anything like that; now that I'm aware of this I'll be ultra-careful going forward.

My point is -- it seems absurd that people WOULD get their account banned for a couple of trivial test payments. And since this practice seems so widespread in the software developer / entrepreneur community, I think these doomsday soothsayers telling us that your account WILL get banned if you do this are clearly overstating how serious this is and how aggressively it's policed and cracked down on by PPs like Stripe.

Absolutely makes sense to have something like that, for genuine scammers, mass offenders, etc. But being but on that list for a few measly test payments to make sure your software is working properly? That to me sounds LUDICROUS.

Making a live-mode test payment to yourself = a payment processor ToS violation?

To me it seemed like common sense that before you push the thing into the real world, no matter how much testing you do, you'd fire a couple test payments on the live version.Apparently, after reading more into it, if you make a payment to yourself, or to a business where your name is associated with it, this is a violation of the Stripe (and other payment processor) ToS, and you can get your...

( Read More... | 40 comments | 16 points | on HN )