https://x.com/Kchan1571777/status/1961283945175400917
lmao
>>104023993Does it only work with VND?
>>104024014Jesus christ. Youtube fucking sucks at getting back at small creators, too. I hope this gets traction.
>>104024076Not sure, but I've never heard of this before this post, so it might be a niche subject that happens to be gaining more traction in the viet community, like how Vietnamese people enslave immigrants in Japan.
>>104024014>Refund exploitHow does this work? is the person just charging back
that's unfortunate
>>104023993just ask mousey for help
>>104023993Maybe start by following YouTube's rules instead of exploiting the platform?
>>104024247They did, and haven't exploited the platform
>>104024201OP is obviously lying. YouTube doesn’t do chargebacks.
>You violated our policy. We're upholding our original decision"so shit lmao
>>104023993The important question is is it possible to do this to other channels, not just the Viet Cong?
>>104024297No. Super Chats aren't refundable.
imagine getting paid in vietnamese dongs
>>104023993Has anyone who isn't famous ever won a review?I'm not trying to victim blame but putting all your eggs in one basket with these companies that have zero support is a bad idea.
>>104024284explain this
>>104025292There are only a couple of reasons why her revenue would be deducted, and none of them involve chargebacks, because Youtube doesn't operate that way. My guess is that she ran an Adsense campaign but didn’t pay her bill, so her revenue was deducted. In any case, her story doesn’t make much sense.
>>104023993The third world in first world places is a problem, I see no issue with this.
>>104024284>>104024201>>104024076>>104024297After taking a quick look through >>104024014 (My wife is Viet and I'm pretty fluent in Vietnamese so I believe I got everything there), the other guy didn't really "abuse a loophole" per se. He just did a chargeback from the bank side - likely told the bank that he lost his credit or debit card and asked them to roll back all recent transactions very shortly after he dropped those SC. Given that every banks allow you to do that, theoretically, it shouldn't be limited to just VND or Viet channels. Banks aren't dumb, though, so whoever pulls this trick isn't going to be able to do it often before his bank(s) starts noticing a pattern and tells hm or her to suck it up.The VTuber in OP probably was just unlucky (being a literal who didn't help either)
>>104026433Why the fuck is the streamer punished for chargebacks? It's still nonsense.
>>104026483Google/Youtube don't give a shit about the streamer. They just want their money and it's easier to go after the streamer than the anonymous paypal guy
>>104026483Someone's gotta be punished in the situation. Can't punish the buyer, in the off chance the card was actually stolen. Can't punish the bank and youtube won't punish itself.
>>104026529>>104026543I guess I'm still in the "it couldn't possibly be that bad it's worse" stage, but I just don't see how it legally holds up. That's like if somebody robs a bank and spends the money at walmart, and the cashier at walmart goes to jail.
>>104026483Someone could exploit that by working together with the receiver to fraud YouTube
>>104026640The thing is it falls under the "Yeah it's fucked up and we're wrong but you can't afford to go to court over this because even if you win you'll get nothing" tier of fuckery.
>>104026483Because that's how it works. See picrel for a quick summary from chatGPT, or you can just look the whole process up.Technically, it's YT who took the loss. Their system then deducted that amount from the streamer's revenue balance which made it fell into negative (from the pic, he got that SC in May but the chargeback proceed only went through in July) and flagged it. The streamer either fucked up or got unlucky with YT CS / Support team afterwards, but he failed to prove that getting chargeback'd wasn't his fault.This isn't really new either (maybe Viets are just catching up on committing frauds). Decades ago, people used to lose Paypal accounts due to these kinds of chargebacks with similar processes (banks issued chargeback -> Paypal lost money and flagged the poor seller's account -> it was up to the seller to convince Paypal that he was innocent next and some failed to).
>>104026640Youtube can fight the chargeback. They probably didn't care because it's not worth it
>>104023993>>104024014This is fucked up if true but I don't see why you would lie about this if it's easy to verify. I have been watching youtubers for more than a decade and youtube support is notorious for being shit if you are a small channel. Most of the times that small channels get any justice is when they publicize what happened and a larger channel reports on it so their larger fanbase starts harrasing youtube. It's one of the things that clued me in on the fact that only the rich and famous get what they want.I would recommend they tell this to a large drama channel to get a "public outrage" cycle going. You know, get a bigger drama channel to report this which then gets its content stolen by a larger drama channel. Then a larger one steals it and then the ball keeps rolling. It would probabaly work because the topic at hand would be easy to farm views from.
>>104023993Interesting charge back abuse. I'm not sure how their account ended up in the negative though. Shoulda been 5M in/5M out, relatively quickly, no? Or is Youtube charging percentage fees for chargebacks? Or maybe it wasn't so quick and they already cashed out, and didn't think of donating to themselves to fix it.Also, Twitter should really start charging Youtube for operating as their customer support center.
>>104027417One sinister addition is that lately Youtube seems to have let some chatbot have access to their X account judging by the increased reply rate, yet no proof of actual customer service. Cruel false hope for all tubers facing issues.
>>104027417>only the rich and famous get what they want.If the punishment for doing crime is a fee, it's free at a certain income level.
