Random Rants LXXII - What is wrong with us?

[Dachs]

Technically, merchants are supposed to ask for your ID when you use a credit card to verify you are an authorized user of the card, but none of them ever do.

Yes, but the Visa and Mastercard merchant agreements say that merchants are not allowed to refuse service if you don't provide identification, and their websites include problem-report forms for merchants who refuse service because you don't have ID.

Since the merchant isn't allowed to refuse service upon failure to produce ID, most of them don't even have the employees ask - not due to laziness, but due to there being basically no upside to doing it.

 

[The_J]

I perfectly timed my travel at Schiphol, but I completely messed it up at Stansted .

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Yes, but the Visa and Mastercard merchant agreements say that merchants are not allowed to refuse service if you don't provide identification, and their websites include problem-report forms for merchants who refuse service because you don't have ID.

Since the merchant isn't allowed to refuse service upon failure to produce ID, most of them don't even have the employees ask - not due to laziness, but due to there being basically no upside to doing it.

Is this true in Canada, as well?

My mother used to work in a convenience store, and from time to time she was evaluated by a "secret shopper" who would note in a report whether my mom had followed the rules of customer courtesy, if she was in compliance with age-restriction rules (ie. carding anyone appearing under 25 if they were buying tobacco products or lottery tickets - the actual age is 18 but this was to make sure), and of course correct procedure with debit and credit cards would have been part of this. Failure to ask for ID for a credit card would have meant failing the secret shopper test.

My mother always passed with flying colors, and this resulted in a nice bonus on her next paycheque. So clerks here do have an incentive to follow the rules. Anybody they deal with could be a secret shopper.

 

[Dachs]

Is this true in Canada, as well?

My mother used to work in a convenience store, and from time to time she was evaluated by a "secret shopper" who would note in a report whether my mom had followed the rules of customer courtesy, if she was in compliance with age-restriction rules (ie. carding anyone appearing under 25 if they were buying tobacco products or lottery tickets - the actual age is 18 but this was to make sure), and of course correct procedure with debit and credit cards would have been part of this. Failure to ask for ID for a credit card would have meant failing the secret shopper test.

My mother always passed with flying colors, and this resulted in a nice bonus on her next paycheque. So clerks here do have an incentive to follow the rules. Anybody they deal with could be a secret shopper.

I don't know about whether the merchant agreements are different in Canada, actually. It seems unlikely that they would be, but I've never worked retail in Canada.

Secret shoppers, or mystery shoppers (depending on how the company wants to brand it) are a thing with many US merchants, too.

 

[Synobun]

When I worked in a convenience store 8 years ago in Ontario, the only carding policy was for tobacco products and lottos and that was for age, not ownership of the card being used. No carding for regular use.

Likewise when I worked with Greyhound here in BC 4 years ago. Only sold tickets, and the only carding done was for tickets going across the border (and the carding was a passport). Never anything about cardholder identity.

My bank even advertises with its credit cards that you can get a bunch of extra cards and dole them out to others. As far as I can tell, everybody's fairly comfortable with the idea of the PIN being king and not identity confirmation.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

The idea behind a PIN is that only the real card owner would know it.

Of course that's not the case with many people who do share PINs, but then if the card is lost or stolen and it's used by someone else, the bank has zero sympathy for people who have shared PINs.

Awhile ago when I had issues with Netflix and the ISP, the first thing the companies wanted to know was if anyone in my family could have gotten my password or used my phone to deal with the ISP.

The answer to both is no. I explained that the only family I have is living in a nursing home and never visits. My cat does not know how to use either my computer or my phone. And the only other person who ever comes here is the housekeeper and she has her own phone.

I don't share passwords or PINs. I can't fathom people who do. They may implicitly trust the person they give them to, but it's not something that the bank or company will be happy about when something goes wrong.

 

[Ferocitus]

When I worked in a convenience store 8 years ago in Ontario, the only carding policy was for tobacco products and lottos and that was for age, not ownership of the card being used. No carding for regular use.

Likewise when I worked with Greyhound here in BC 4 years ago. Only sold tickets, and the only carding done was for tickets going across the border (and the carding was a passport). Never anything about cardholder identity.

My bank even advertises with its credit cards that you can get a bunch of extra cards and dole them out to others. As far as I can tell, everybody's fairly comfortable with the idea of the PIN being king and not identity confirmation.

They have a good idea of the risks for PIN misuse, and for people not being able
to service or repay credit card debts.
I set myself up with goods that could not be repossessed, didn't get a job,
hahaha, and went bankrupt. One year after the banruptcy expired, I was sent
application forms for cards by the very same bank.

 

[Synobun]

Decided to test out the ignore feature for the first time on here. It doesn't do anything. Defeats the point.

 

[Snerk]

Stop ignoring me, synsensa!

 

[Synobun]

Is someone speaking to me?

 

[BenitoChavez]

Decided to test out the ignore feature for the first time on here. It doesn't do anything. Defeats the point.

How so? When I did it it hides all posts/threads by that person and no longer gives alerts.

 

[Synobun]

How so? When I did it it hides all posts/threads by that person and no longer gives alerts.

I mean, not really though. All it actually does is just put what they say in a spoiler.

 

[Ferocitus]

Decided to test out the ignore feature...

I heartily endorse this product and/or service.
I have many people on my list, and I'm on many.
It definitely does work and makes for a much more enjoyable forum experience.

 

[BenitoChavez]

I mean, not really though. All it actually does is just put what they say in a spoiler.

Interesting. When I ignored you, all posts of yours disappeared except the one where you quoted me, which gave the spoiler.

When I ignored Ferocitus all his posts disappeared.

(You're both unignored now btw )

 

[Synobun]

Interesting indeed. May need to revisit the feature if that's the case, although I don't really see the merit behind showing you their existence if they try to engage you since ultimately you're blocking them because of their engaging you...

 

[Lexicus]

I don't know what you're talking about, people I have on ignore quote me all the time and there's no spoiler, you just can't see their posts unless you hit "Show Ignored Content" at the bottom of the thread. You can no longer see their threads either.

 

[Synobun]

I don't know what you're talking about, people I have on ignore quote me all the time and there's no spoiler, you just can't see their posts unless you hit "Show Ignored Content" at the bottom of the thread. You can no longer see their threads either.

Spoiler :

Right, and you can't see this post unless you hit 'Show'.

 

[BenitoChavez]

This is what it looks like when I ignored Synsensa. It's not a spoiler per se but it functions the same way.

 

[Lexicus]

Spoiler :

Right, and you can't see this post unless you hit 'Show'.

That's not the same at all, though. I can still see that you've made a post, I just can't see the text you've put inside a spoiler. With Ignore you can't even see the person's posts unless you hit Show Ignored Content, and that's all the way down at the bottom of the page.

The ignore system worked closer to the way you're describing before the new forum software move- it would still show you that the person posted, but it hid the actual content behind a banner saying "you are ignoring this user" or something like that.

You can't even see an ignored poster's stuff quoted in other people's posts whom you're not ignoring (which occasionally leads to "WTH" moments when people reply to stuff you can't see).

This is what it looks like when I ignored Synsensa. It's not a spoiler per se but it functions the same way.

View attachment 499542

That is not the behavior I get, I must have changed a setting.

 

[Synobun]

I was gonna take a screenshot but Benito beat me to it. That's how it looks for me as well. One click away, just like with a spoiler.