Hacker News Reader

Comment by MichaelZuo | Hacker News Reader

It seems like your linked example is of a 'high-risk' business similar in risk to pornhub, casino websites, etc.

It doesn't seem like the OP's business falls into that category.

In terms of "proof", I can't imagine what you'd accept as proof that I'd want to post here. In terms of risk, benign is a pretty good word for it, and we've been using another processor for years and years without any issues on that front.

I think Stripe is well within their rights to do all the due diligence they feel they need to do; I just wish they had done it before we signed a contract and started taking payments, and it does feel like we dodged a bullet by not agreeing to the Minimum Fee Commitment.

Linking to a real identity at least will make it easier to accept. Using a pseudonym simply adds an extra layer of doubt.

would you share that other payment processor?

We’re currently using Cybersource, owned by Visa. I argued for moving us over to Stripe because Stripe offered a better rate, and their UI, APIs, reporting, and documentation are much nicer than Cybersource’s. I had also argued for and worked with Stripe at my previous job in a much riskier sector — event ticketing — for years, and never had a problem, so it felt like a no-brainer.

Maybe I'm missing something, but that doesn't seem to be the case. When the OP was asked what why the post didn't mention the business' category, he/she said that

> This is more a function of the fact that I don't want my business to be identifiable from this post than that it's a sketchy business. You'll have to take my word for it, but it's exceedingly benign.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com