SBI has had a number of refund frameworks since our inception, and our intent has always been the complete satisfaction of our subscribers. Currently our most comprehensive refund policy yet, which is available to read in full, refunds units through an accelerated upvote schedule. The refund process is final.
While it doesn't give a short summary about the refund policy this answer is so well written and I don't mind this is the one put on the final version.
In my humblest of opinions, all links should be relative, like the one in my answer above, and should not point to any specific front end such as steemit, busy or steempeak.
It should be within the technical capability of each condenser to scrub leading characters for any Steem permlink and replace with their own while rendering the page (e.g. Steempeak can replace all Steemit links with Steempeak links). My understanding is that Steemit does not do this (and does not render permlinks without the leading domain as valid links) so we try to use steemit links for our readers to have a better overall user experience.
That said, we usually post our updates through busy.
For eligible accounts, the new refund framework will keep enrolled units at a 2 STEEM potential value but will grant a 0.50 STEEM potential to all sponsored units. In effect, the total potential ROI under this framework is 250% for each 1 STEEM enrollment. Refunds would be delivered through an accelerated upvote schedule:
Since our system tracks pending upvote values using rshares, we will deliver the accelerated upvotes through our normal delivery system, by manually removing your units from record and increasing your rshares_balance with any surplus value you are due.
For more info please read the full post on our refunds
Accurate. We know it's sort of complicated (like everything else SBI, lol!) We try to strike a balance between sustainable, fair, and generous, while preventing excessive abuse. It results in inherent complexity... Our own little three body problem.
Response accepted as a qualifying submission.
Don't forget you can also earn points by scoring the clarity and helpfulness of other qualifying responses.
Summarizing with our own words is better than just putting a link to sendusers to. While I agree that it's hard to summarize it well. Saying it's hard to summarize refund policy of all things on FAQ answer doesn't sound encouraging for potential user, does it?
the new refund framework will keep enrolled units at a 2 STEEM potential value, but will grant a 0.50 STEEM potential to all sponsored units. In effect the total potential ROI under this framework is 250% for each 1 STEEM enrolllment. Refunds would be delivered through an accelerated upvote schedule
Accurate. It's okay to be confused by the second question. The answer is no, because units represent a subscription level. Would you call a magazine and ask them to by back your subscription? It would be a ridiculous question.
The question comes from some members getting confused and thinking our shares are an unregistered security instead of a subscription (which would be something you could own and sell back). This is why we are moving toward saying 'units' or 'SBI levels' instead of 'shares', but every term is awkward in it's own unique way.
Response accepted as a qualifying submission.
Don't forget you can also earn points by scoring the clarity and helpfulness of other qualifying responses.
Check this link out for yourself. It will go over, extensively a full blown SBI Refund policy. They still are in the old phase, but are dialectically getting to the new phase as we speak.
Funny that, the new phase goes as followed: "the new refund framework will keep enrolled units at a 2 STEEM potential value, but will grant a 0.50 STEEM potential to all sponsored units. In effect the total potential ROI under this framework is 250% for each 1 STEEM enrolllment. Refunds would be delivered through an accelerated upvote schedule"
By a technicality, you do not "sell your units" nor can you. @steembasicincome holds a grasp on that, and you can only get it back through a refund. So everything's centralized in @steembasicincome's hands and operations.
Accurate. Response accepted as a qualifying submission. Hopefully people will still see to score it, since it is nested under another response instead of directly below the category comment.
Don't forget you can also earn points by scoring the clarity and helpfulness of other qualifying responses.
Accurate. We have had only one refund request since bringing everyone's attention to the available options. Response accepted as a qualifying submission.
Don't forget you can also earn points by scoring the clarity and helpfulness of other qualifying responses.
Rating 5 - contains more detail than other answers, wording is difficult to follow. Focusing only on 250% potential ROI is oversimplifying the policy, as it could appear from this that you could send 1 steem and then get a refund of 2.5. the policy is much more complex than that.
SBI has had a number of refund frameworks since our inception, and our intent has always been the complete satisfaction of our subscribers. Currently our most comprehensive refund policy yet, which is available to read in full, refunds units through an accelerated upvote schedule. The refund process is final.
Rating 7
While it doesn't give a short summary about the refund policy this answer is so well written and I don't mind this is the one put on the final version.
Accurate. Response accepted as a qualifying submission.
Don't forgot you can also earn points by scoring the clarity and helpfulness of other qualifying responses.
In my humblest of opinions, all links should be relative, like the one in my answer above, and should not point to any specific front end such as steemit, busy or steempeak.
It should be within the technical capability of each condenser to scrub leading characters for any Steem permlink and replace with their own while rendering the page (e.g. Steempeak can replace all Steemit links with Steempeak links). My understanding is that Steemit does not do this (and does not render permlinks without the leading domain as valid links) so we try to use steemit links for our readers to have a better overall user experience.
That said, we usually post our updates through busy.
This is a really interesting answer!
Rating 6 - Happy with this answer and a link in the FAQ, the policy is complex and too much for a simple answer. This does the job.
I rate this a 6 - I would probably be happier if I didn't have to click a link to read more.
Posted using Partiko Android
6 clarity point
The user needs to go to the link to know about the refund policy but this answer reads so nicely and it's good.
For eligible accounts, the new refund framework will keep enrolled units at a 2 STEEM potential value but will grant a 0.50 STEEM potential to all sponsored units. In effect, the total potential ROI under this framework is 250% for each 1 STEEM enrollment. Refunds would be delivered through an accelerated upvote schedule:
Since our system tracks pending upvote values using rshares, we will deliver the accelerated upvotes through our normal delivery system, by manually removing your units from record and increasing your rshares_balance with any surplus value you are due.
For more info please read the full post on our refunds
Rating 7
Good job on the summary, this isn't an easy one!
Accurate. We know it's sort of complicated (like everything else SBI, lol!) We try to strike a balance between sustainable, fair, and generous, while preventing excessive abuse. It results in inherent complexity... Our own little three body problem.
Response accepted as a qualifying submission.
Don't forget you can also earn points by scoring the clarity and helpfulness of other qualifying responses.
Rating 7 - for a very complex topic, possibly the best summary I have seen. Provides the link for more information.
I will score it 6
Very well explained and useful information. Great job on providing links for more details
Posted using Partiko Android
Rating 7, good summary + link to more information
Rated 7. I could understand and is probably the best response I've read.
7 clarity point
Great summary overall for this relatively complex topic (This is still new stuff for us all). Good job!
Rated 7, very well worded and clear
Posted using Partiko Android
The refund policy is pretty difficult to summarize in a few words but you can read the lastest version of it on this post; https://steemit.com/busy/@steembasicincome/sbi-refund-policy-redux
NB: I have my reservations about embedding links for public purposes. Some noobs would not click on embedded links with the fear of it being phishing.
Posted using Partiko Android
Rating 4
Summarizing with our own words is better than just putting a link to sendusers to. While I agree that it's hard to summarize it well. Saying it's hard to summarize refund policy of all things on FAQ answer doesn't sound encouraging for potential user, does it?
Lol I thought as much 😄
Posted using Partiko Android
Accurate. Response accepted as a qualifying submission.
Don't forget you can also earn points by scoring the clarity and helpfulness of other qualifying responses.
I would score this around a 4 it works but is simple. Putting the link in a better format would also be nice.
Rating 5 - Giving the link is the easiest solution, the policy is complex to explain accurately
Rating 6, imho mentioning the security impact of embedded links is very good. But a summery for the FAQ would be nice
Rating 6 - no more information needed!
Posted using Partiko iOS
Read more about SBI refund policy here
https://busy.org/@steembasicincome/sbi-refund-policy-redux
Rating 3
It's better to also summarize the content of the link posted rather than just putting it there for this question.
Accurate. Response accepted as a qualifying submission.
Don't forget you can also earn points by scoring the clarity and helpfulness of other qualifying responses.
I will give this a 3 due to the very short intro and using the link without making it look better.
Rating 5 - the link could be formated with markdown, but the policy is very hard to simplify in an FAQ so a link is probably best.
Rating 4, at least a summary should be included
I rate this answer as 5, a little inside of the post was necessary.
3 clarity point
Just giving link isn't a satisfying answer
In summary, the new refund framework states:
You can find more about the refund policy here.
You mean sell your units back to @steembasicincome? I guess I am not clear with this second question.
Rating 6
A great attempt to summarize this stuff. This category isn't the easiest of the bunch.
Accurate. It's okay to be confused by the second question. The answer is no, because units represent a subscription level. Would you call a magazine and ask them to by back your subscription? It would be a ridiculous question.
The question comes from some members getting confused and thinking our shares are an unregistered security instead of a subscription (which would be something you could own and sell back). This is why we are moving toward saying 'units' or 'SBI levels' instead of 'shares', but every term is awkward in it's own unique way.
Response accepted as a qualifying submission.
Don't forget you can also earn points by scoring the clarity and helpfulness of other qualifying responses.
I rate this response as 6. The refund policy is tricky to understand but the citation was necessary.
Rating 6 - provides both a summary and the link to a very complex question.
Rating 6, small summery and link to more information
You can read about the new refund policy here
Rating 5
Providing a little summary on the FAQ page would be useful instead of just a link
Accurate. Response accepted as a qualifying submission. Hopefully people will still see to score it, since it is nested under another response instead of directly below the category comment.
Don't forget you can also earn points by scoring the clarity and helpfulness of other qualifying responses.
Rating 6 - formatting with the link in markdown is neater than other similar responses.
Rated as 5. Could have provided a summary of the post.
5 clarity point
Summary on the answer instead of just a link would be better
Rating 4, just a link is not enough
Accurate. We have had only one refund request since bringing everyone's attention to the available options. Response accepted as a qualifying submission.
Don't forget you can also earn points by scoring the clarity and helpfulness of other qualifying responses.
Rating 5 - contains more detail than other answers, wording is difficult to follow. Focusing only on 250% potential ROI is oversimplifying the policy, as it could appear from this that you could send 1 steem and then get a refund of 2.5. the policy is much more complex than that.
I give you a 6. Simply explains the policy but in a complex way.
5 clarity point
Good attempt to summarize the post! I thinks it's funny there are 3 points of answer when there's only 2 questions...
I rate this a 7 - Plenty of info without clicking on the link.
Posted using Partiko Android