• cooopsspace@infosec.pub
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    arrow-down
    4
    ·
    1 year ago

    That’s exactly what happened.

    It was “keep it for further testing” before it got reamed with poor review, and then it was “ok send it back then”.

    • cerement@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 year ago

      didn’t qualify as a review much less a “poor review” – lose the provided graphics card, proceed to munge the cooler onto an unrelated card, complain when it doesn’t fit, blast it as a garbage product that no one should ever buy

      • cooopsspace@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah and if they’re going to mess it up that much the company might just take it back and send it to GamersNexus for a real review.

    • Th4tGuyII@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      “Poor review” is putting it lightly after how dirty they did that card. They probably wanted it back to give to someone to do an actual, fair review of.

      Also, they were told they could keep it for further testing, but not that they could keep it forever or as a gift. That LTT auctioned the prototype that definitely still belonged to Billet Labs was plain irresponsible.