[issybird]

Originally Posted by ZodWallop

But they are treated equally according to the return policy.

And yet I suspect the lion’s share of returns are self-pubs. They may be treated equally, but the self-pub aficionado relies on it more. Self-pubbed truly is a special category; the qc just isn’t the same overall.

Nonsense. Caveat emptor.

There is more than enough information out there to make a good judgement before buying a book. And if there is not, then maybe you shouldn't put yourself up as the guinea pig.

Nobody deserves to be insulated from the risk of paying for entertainment that they didn't enjoy in the way they thought they would.

And yet in this particular instance, Amazon seemingly has no issue with it. So why are you imposing a personal moral constraint on someone doing something entirely legit? Pronouncements from on high on moral issues are always suspect, frankly.

That it is legit is the whole point of the story I linked to. The purpose of this thread.

Let's say Amazon's return limit is two books (I know two books is okay, because I have returned two books). Using your logic, a person could read a trilogy and only pay for one book. If the limit is two in a month, that could happen every month.

That example wouldn't violate the letter of the return policy, but would violate the spirit of it.

Let’s look at the big picture. Amazon sells more books with a liberal return policy than with a restrictive one. Amazon prefers to sell more books. Duh. That some are making out by pushing the policy to its limits does not override the first and primary consideration. You refuse to acknowledge this. Right behavior by certain bad apples is more important to you than maximizing sales and that’s silly, frankly. And then there are the constraints that would be put on the good apples if the policy became more restrictive, but hey! Fewer people would be getting away with something. Gee, that feels good - but your priorities are screwed up.

And again, you define your situations so narrowly as to be absurd. I have every faith that Amazon’s algorithms are much more flexible than that. I’m sure returns are looked at in the context of sales/profits from an account overall. The person who’s returning two books of three each month is going to be flagged much sooner than the person who’s returning two of thirty - I suspect Amazon loves that latter customer, in fact. Nuance matters.

Look, I’m not saying that each person doesn’t have an obligation to act morally. They do and yet some don’t. But sometimes all you can do is look after your own behavior and let the chips fall where they may. And in this case, where the victims, i.e. Amazon and the authors, are doing better by tolerating returns, I truly don’t get your beef.