This one has a reasonably settled answer, so here it is. The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions. Agreeing that something happens says nothing about whether it happens enough to act on.
Asked to pay by a method with no recourse, by a supplier I had used twice before without being asked, which is what made me stop.
What I am after is how people are thinking about the trade-off between reversibility and privacy, because you cannot have both.
I have searched first, so if this is covered somewhere point me at it and I will read it.
NurseKim_ATL said:The mechanism and the magnitude are separate questions.
No disagreement with NurseKim_ATL. One condition attached. Yes, and the corollary is less popular: if the reasoning holds, it also holds where it produces an answer we do not like.
Correct me if the detail matters more than I have assumed.
PeptideMeter — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View Resultsbbq_ray_KC said:Asked to pay by a method with no recourse, by a supplier I had used twice before without being asked, which is what made me stop.
Adding a me-too, because a thread of one person's experience is not much use.
From the other side of the consultation, briefly. It helps to say which part of this you are uncertain about. A precise question gets a precise answer; a general one gets everybody’s favourite anecdote.