this post was submitted on 04 May 2026
165 points (99.4% liked)

Hardware

7173 readers
410 users here now

All things related to technology hardware, with a focus on computing hardware.


Some other hardware communities across Lemmy:


Rules (Click to Expand):

  1. Follow the Lemmy.world Rules - https://mastodon.world/about

  2. Be kind. No bullying, harassment, racism, sexism etc. against other users.

  3. No Spam, illegal content, or NSFW content.

  4. Please stay on topic, adjacent topics (e.g. software) are fine if they are strongly relevant to technology hardware. Another example would be business news for hardware-focused companies.

  5. Please try and post original sources when possible (as opposed to summaries).

  6. If posting an archived version of the article, please include a URL link to the original article in the body of the post.


Icon by "icon lauk" under CC BY 3.0

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] favoredponcho@lemmy.zip 5 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

I suspect they spent the money customers gave them on trying to deliver the phones and refunds were difficult to provide.

[–] Canuck@sh.itjust.works -1 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

People who go into a crowdfunding campaign expecting either a product or a refund with no risk for just one or neither, aren't the right audience for and shouldn't be participating in crowdfunding.

The delays and refund denials were not ideal, and perhaps they could have handled that better, but picking between complete insolvency delivering no product to anyone vs delivering the product to people who crowdfunded and pre-ordered, is the lesser of the two "evils" if people want to call it that, especially given the reality of the situation headed into COVID-19.

[–] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago

People who go into a crowdfunding campaign expecting either a product or a refund with no risk for just one or neither, aren't the right audience for and shouldn't be participating in crowdfunding.

Okay, even if you assume this caveat emptor bullshit excuse to be the case: these refunds were not nearly limited to crowdfunding campaign backers. These were people who saw Purism advertising a finished product that they could preorder/order. This is the same position as if I'd go to Fairphone's website, order a Fairphone 6, never receive it, request a refund, and either get denied repeatedly or ghosted indefinitely.

You can't "buyer beware" a legally established American company advertising a product. That's just called a scam. And that's already generously ignoring the crowdfunding backers they scammed by giving zero transparency to.