Taking the question as asked, rather than the general version of it. Whatever the answer turns out to be, the method for getting there is the same: state the assumption, do the arithmetic in public, and invite the correction. That is slower than asserting, and it is the only version that survives being wrong.
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.
The bit I cannot resolve on my own is how people are thinking about the trade-off between reversibility and privacy, because you cannot have both.
Tell me what I have not thought of.
julia.endo said:Whatever the answer turns out to be, the method for getting there is the same: state the assumption, do the arithmetic in public, and invite the…
That is right for the common case. Whether it is right for the case being asked about depends on a detail that has not been given.
PeptideMeter — Independent Peptide Analytics
Community-driven peptide testing and vendor rating platform. Transparent results. Unbiased analysis. Trusted by thousands.
View Resultspaige_pharma 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. Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it. The narrow version usually has an answer; the broad version usually does not, and answering the broad one is how a thread stops being useful.