questionsdoes this bother you in our community?


Sounds reasonable. The deal should be removed or edited.


That is definitely annoying to have a deal with incorrect information but I assure you this is not the first time and will not be the last.

I have rarely been successful in having a tattle work so I don't even use that "feature" now. I would click through a deal and discover it's expired and then tattle only to find the deal still active a week later.

My expectations for the deals are so low now that I rarely even vote on a deal. It's been 3 months since I've voted or added a deal. I'm trying to see how long I can go until I turn purple.


I'm not sure if the problem is with the community. If I see a tech product at a great price (that's my area of expertise), I will upvote it. I will not click through to the site and go through checkout just to confirm whether the free shipping is true or not.

However, D.W is suffering from its popularity. Now that vendors are pretending to be a part of this community, they are often being disingenuous in more than one way. False upvotes with multiple accounts and misleading comments are really hard to find out from the visitor side. Even having a similar username to the business name isn't enough to make them trustworthy.

Maybe the algorithm needs another tweak. If there is more than one upvote by an account that was created at the time the deal-poster's first deal was posted (and all have exactly one Woot, perhaps), then raise a flag or lower its rank. Maybe this happens more than I know.


I'm a little confused about your description of the transaction. If you approved a Paypal transaction for $X, then -- to be redundant and obvious -- that's the only amount you approved. The seller cannot add another charge on top of the approved Paypal amount.

If that is indeed what happened, you can (1) attempt to cancel the transaction within Paypal, and (2) immediately institute a dispute claim through Paypal to cancel the transaction. If that doesn't work, you can institute a claim directly through your credit card issuer.

I reviewed every deal they've posted since their advent here in Sept. 2011 and found a total of five complaints similar to yours. I strongly suspect there are more instances of the same problem that have not shown up as unhappy comments. Five complaints indicates (to me, anyway) an intentional pattern of bad-faith conduct by the merchant.




This merchant also frequently advertises almost-free items with a per-item shipping charge; it's clear that their profit often comes from shipping, not sales. Not illegal, of course, but also not especially ethical.

Perhaps @jumbowoot can look into the situation and the merchant's "good fit" for this site.

As to the voting issue, no one is "sucked" into up-voting for any deal. If you don't know if you have good info on the company, make your decision to vote or not accordingly. I personally have a built-in bias against newly registered merchants (especially those who dump several "deals" at once) and won't vote for them until I explore their website and their merchandise.


I will give an example of something that bothers me more in the community. I posted a great deal on earphones yesterday. Really, a great price. And it got nothing but downvotes because it sold out not long after I posted it.

Why can't people just tattle it instead of stomping all over my reputation :-(


I post deals everyday and i have never or will never post something that is inaccurate like free shipping when there is a charge for shipping.


@omnichad: I agree that vendor-sleaze is a growing problem. However, to my mind, a greater problem is a significant increase in vendor postings that lack any deal aspect: no discount for wootizens, no genuine sale price, no free-shipping offer that's not already standard for the vendor, etc. In other words, the posting is just spammish advertising.

One merchant (I think it's safe to assume he's the merchant, although his ID doesn't indicate a connection, since he posts items only for a single vendor) has posted 23 items in the last month or so. Not one of them has been an actual deal, yet he continues to post.

I wish we could get some guidance from @jumbowoot regarding whether there are actually guidelines for deal-ness when vendors post items.


@omnichad: I totally sympathize. And the thing that's annoying me right now is that I will post something and it might get a lot of upvotes, but it doesn't reach the top Popular page until the next day, about the same time it expires. What's up with that? And it's not just my posts, whatever they've done to the popularity formula, it's a mess!

Regarding the original post, I'm beginning to wonder if Woot has cut back on staff monitoring tattles, spam, etc. Tattling seems to do little good, and spam comments have been rampant lately!


@omnichad: That's very annoying, but it might behoove you to check throughout the day to make sure your deals are still live.


@magic cave: I think that tattling a deal by that ID might get some action. If they're only posting for one store, and they have a non-related name, they're going to get the big talk about a new username or have their account closed.


This deal has been edited and expired.
Thanks for the heads up.

All told.


The vendors are just inventory dumping shit all over deals.woot. I've reporting a circle of websites posting the same deals over and over again (for example, one is that crappy windup cell phone charger) and no one does anything about it or cares enough to get rid of all the junk. This place is probably less than 50% user-posted deals now.


@magic cave: It does not always work as you describe. The site can connect with PayPal, your password input, then go back to the site. This is how this one is set up. At that time it gives a drop down shipping choice to complete the transaction. The problem being that there was only one choice in the drop down menu. I see this setup occasionally. I did contact the vendor through their website, of course, because you cannot set up a Paypal dispute immediately.


@90mcg112: Yeah, it's pretty obvious that the powers that be are okay with all the vendor postings. I guess it's good for the bottom line, so I don't expect any changes. That's why I just scan the deals and only pay attention to ones that are posted by names I recognize as regular users. Not super efficient, but it works.

As for the original question, yes it bothers me because it is inaccurate info about a deal. It shouldn't be allowed, should be tattled, and should be edited/removed. And since jumbo responded accordingly, the system does still work in this respect.


The vendor just answered on the original post. Kudos where they are due.


@morriea: Thank you for the clarification. I've used Paypal for perhaps 1000 purchases and have never seen that particular payment format, but now that I know it exists I'll be on the lookout for it. To me, that's an instant indicator of bad faith on the part of the merchant, and I'll back right out of the deal.


@pitamuffin: The system only worked because this question was posted and became popular and was finally noticed by Jumbowoot.

The system is still not working. When you tattle on a deal, that tattle is obviously being disregarded or put into a large pile of other work so it's not being looked at in a timely manner.


@magic cave: The reason for that format is so that the "shopping cart" portion is entirely on the merchant site. For example, if the merchant wants to calculate shipping themselves, but base it on the zip code provided by Paypal (without having to type your address twice). It's not entirely used for scammy purposes.

But I'd rather have the option to type at least my zip code before going to checkout at all. That's all up to whomever coded the merchant's web site.


@cengland0: I have found it successful to tattle two or three times to have something do anything. While I do not have access to any of the "behind the scenes" action, I would imagine that the system is designed to get two or three tattles before taking action, to ensure the first tattle is legit.

I comment on another site and their policy is that three people need to complete the action so there is not one person out there with a vendetta, however though, there seems to be a flaw and doing the action three times yourself will get the desired results.


@cengland0: I guess we've had different experiences with the tattle function. I usually tattle for duplicate deals, and the dupes seem to disappear pretty quickly after tattling.


@90mcg112: I have noticed those chargers, but hadn't followed up to notice it's the same poster. I suppose I should start doing that and hitting "tattle" a bit more.


I'm glad this one got fixed. If it only got fixed b/c of this tread, maybe there needs to be more threads about bad deals/vendors.
I'd love to list those who post the same "deals" every day.
And the vendors that post items that are not deals. i am amazed when I see them up-voted and suspicious of how they got that way.
Or would the woot powers that be frown on that ?

PS and what about those vendors/voters who take a name w/ woot in it so that those who wander in here might mistake them for some official affiliation . For some reason they really annoy me.


Even though the seller posted on the original deal with a promise of credit, I have yet to hear a thing. There has been no contact through the website (I used the "contact us" link) or any other means. So far it is an empty promise.


worse yet is when an item with free shipping arrives postage-due. (GEARXS)


@kamikazeken: That seriously happened? I would be unable to stop myself from throwing a good, old temper tantrum.

Did you get it resolved with them?


Who vote for the deal ? community??


@homelava: I would assume that many voted for the deal based on the information provided by its poster. I don't imagine that anyone clicks on each deal and goes through the entire checkout process before deciding how to vote. To some extent, one just trusts the text.


FULL shipping was credited.