Hacker News Reader

Comment by rspeer | Hacker News Reader

This title's grammar is mangled and confusing on HN. The $160000 was for the developer, not for anyone else. The "for those who use Facebook ads" was a separate clause saying who the post is for.

I know HN approves of original titles but also disapproves of sensationalism and exclamation points. I would suggest something like:

App developer says: "Facebook stole my $160000"

View on HN

I didn't get the title even after reading it three times.

And they didn't steal it either. They just didn't pay it out yet, it says pending. And even if it was canceled or whatever, "steal" is not the right word since they were never his money to begin with.

This is an interesting interpretation of (possible) theft.

What if Facebook has no intention of paying it out?

I'm pretty sure Facebook would be covered if they decided not to pay, I doubt the developer even read the ToS, let alone understood it.

But to the point, "steal" is to take something. If you didn't ever own it, I don't think it can be called stealing.

To me it seems that like with any contract, the money is his once he fulfilled his part of the deal (ad views/clicks). I agree that not payout out is not the same as stealing, but in this case it does seem awfully close since Facebook is acting as a middle man. If someone hires me to do a job for a 3rd party, gets paid for my work, but doesn't pass me my part - I'd call this stealing.

But if it was determined that the part you did was done fraudulently? That's essentially FB's position here. And their contract states that the remedy for that is account termination and forfeiture of the balance.

The OP is from the Ukraine. I think grammar nitpicking is not the best way to understand the issue.

Complaining about "Your angry" is nitpicking. Suggesting an improvement to an incomprehensible title isn't.

Remember, you are not your work!

The original title, with punctuation, is basically fine. It's HN that mangled it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com