• moody@lemmings.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    7 months ago

    If they don’t want you to ship it back, it’s pretty common for them to ask for some kind of proof of destruction. Back in the days of non-removable cords, they would have you cut the cord off your device or appliance before sending you a replacement.

      • moody@lemmings.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        Sort of. It kind of makes sense in that they don’t want you to lie about having a TV that doesn’t work to get a free second TV. If the issue is small enough that it can easily be ignored, it’s not worth replacing. And if it’s a big enough issue that it’s unusable, it shouldn’t bother you to destroy it.

        What sucks is that stuff ends up in the landfill most of the time instead of being recycled.

        • UNWILLING_PARTICIPANT@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          7 months ago

          What sucks is that stuff ends up in the landfill most of the time instead of being recycled.

          Yeah that’s the sad part. It’s such a colossal waste.

          it shouldn’t bother you to destroy it.

          I disagree. I think it should, and probably does, bother everyone involved. Why damage it further, when it could be sold or even just given to a refurb/repair outfit?

          I mean I know why, it’s because there’s no immediate profit motive there. Maybe even the opposite. Which again, is sad.