I think what they were trying to do does matter, because this is something that was (by their own account) the result of a "ham-fisted" attempt to implement a policy. Given the effect of the ham-fisted version, I don't think it's unreasonable to ask what the policy was, or what a less inept implementation of it is likely to entail. (This is quite apart from finding out about errors that led to the ham-fistedness, which I agree we may never know.)
Whether the affected writers will make back their losses isn't really relevant to the question of whether they (or Amazon's customers) deserve an apology from the people who caused them.
I've felt a bit queasy for a while about using this monopolistic and bullying operator for my book buying and selling, and to be honest this has just pushed me into a resolve that I might have come to anyway. On the other hand, their statement doesn't make me feel that they're trying very hard to woo me back. Maybe they'll turn over a leaf in the future? We'll have to wait and see.
Yay for War Dog, meanwhile! In parallel news, YD's present may take a few more days to arrive, as I've had to order it from a company that doesn't ship abroad. But then it's going to be late anyway...
(no subject)
Date: 2009-04-14 02:08 pm (UTC)Whether the affected writers will make back their losses isn't really relevant to the question of whether they (or Amazon's customers) deserve an apology from the people who caused them.
I've felt a bit queasy for a while about using this monopolistic and bullying operator for my book buying and selling, and to be honest this has just pushed me into a resolve that I might have come to anyway. On the other hand, their statement doesn't make me feel that they're trying very hard to woo me back. Maybe they'll turn over a leaf in the future? We'll have to wait and see.
Yay for War Dog, meanwhile! In parallel news, YD's present may take a few more days to arrive, as I've had to order it from a company that doesn't ship abroad. But then it's going to be late anyway...