I Didn't Mean to Churn, Yet it Happened

[Anonymous]

---

@Kenny wrote:

I agree, LTL. I don't think there is much that can/or should be done to curtail any "churning". Highly individualistic.. where does it start? Where does it end? I think it's going to end up being like the MS -- no advocation/how to guides.. lol To be clear, no talk at all of churning has ever been said previously. I think it was just a misunderstanding or meaning well kind of thing.

I will say to everyone that admin is talking about this issue and we'll have a verdict soon. In the mean time, let's just treat the conversation like that of MS and just not get too heated, too detailed, and encourage whatever "it" is. lol

My personal opinion is different (of course) than that of myFico. Have to enforce whatever the rule is. I think bonuses are there to be used, period. Your risk is entirely up to you. I don't get into your business, you don't get into mine -- unless I want to involve you. Oh well, life isn't like that, though is it, sometimes?!

Edit: I hate when I'm reading the forum and then I make a post and it's COMPLETELY out of the time in which the post I was referring to was. Oh well. That's my brain. What can I do? 

---

If churning talk is eventually disallowed can we also disallow advocacy of getting 50 store cards and pushing CLI button/phone 50 times daily to get silly limits on even sillier cards.

[yfan]

Well, since a moderator is taking the discussion back to personal opinions about churning, I guess it's not so off-topic here.

---

@Kenny wrote:

My personal opinion is different (of course) than that of myFico. Have to enforce whatever the rule is. I think bonuses are there to be used, period. Your risk is entirely up to you. I don't get into your business, you don't get into mine -- unless I want to involve you. Oh well, life isn't like that, though is it, sometimes?!

---

The entire business of credit is about you inviting others to be in your business. And these others - namely the lenders, do business with lots of others, who may believe that they are impacted by what they consider to be abuses of the system. If credit weren't about involving others in your business, there would be no discussion about credit and you would just pay for everything in cash. Participating and sharing personal experiences and opinions on a public forum is even more about inviting people to be in your business - or at least to opine about it.

[Anonymous]

---

@yfan wrote:

Well, since a moderator is taking the discussion back to personal opinions about churning, I guess it's not so off-topic here.

---

@Kenny wrote:

My personal opinion is different (of course) than that of myFico. Have to enforce whatever the rule is. I think bonuses are there to be used, period. Your risk is entirely up to you. I don't get into your business, you don't get into mine -- unless I want to involve you. Oh well, life isn't like that, though is it, sometimes?!

---

The entire business of credit is about you inviting others to be in your business. And these others - namely the lenders, do business with lots of others, who may believe that they are impacted by what they consider to be abuses of the system. If that weren't the case, there would be no discussion about credit and you would just pay for everything in cash. Participating and sharing personal experiences and opinions on a public forum is even more about inviting people to be in your business - or at least to opine about it.

---

"Abuse" is subjective and widely open to interpretation. As long as you play within the confines of the sandbox it isn't truly abuse. If they change the size of the sandbox or only let you play once then that is within those confines. Until they change it/did change, then it is/was open season.

[yfan]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

If churning talk is eventually disallowed can we also disallow advocacy of getting 50 store cards and pushing CLI button/phone 50 times daily to get silly limits on even sillier cards.

---

Sure, as soon as someone points to an actual thread where someone advocated for or supported getting 50 store cards and/or hitting CLI 50 times daily - the numbers being rather important here. My expereince in reading these boards have been that store cards are not generally seen in great light, nor given a lot of airtime. The Amazon one is probably a slight exception, but not by much.

[Anonymous]

---

@yfan wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

If churning talk is eventually disallowed can we also disallow advocacy of getting 50 store cards and pushing CLI button/phone 50 times daily to get silly limits on even sillier cards.

---

Sure, as soon as someone points to an actual thread where someone advocated for or supported getting 50 store cards and/or hitting CLI 50 times daily - the numbers being rather important here. My expereince in reading these boards have been that store cards are not generally seen in great light, nor given a lot of airtime. The Amazon one is probably a slight exception, but not by much.

---

The number was an example, but actually isn't too far off "I kept saying CLI on the phone and it gave me 20 $500 increases, internet credz 4 me" In any case, It will be a sad day when you can't discuss the more intricate sides of the credit world, particularly using it to your advantage for more than just, oh, a mortgage and an auto loan or two.

[yfan]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@yfan wrote:

The entire business of credit is about you inviting others to be in your business. And these others - namely the lenders, do business with lots of others, who may believe that they are impacted by what they consider to be abuses of the system. If that weren't the case, there would be no discussion about credit and you would just pay for everything in cash. Participating and sharing personal experiences and opinions on a public forum is even more about inviting people to be in your business - or at least to opine about it.

---

"Abuse" is subjective and widely open to interpretation. As long as you play within the confines of the sandbox it isn't truly abuse. If they change the size of the sandbox or only let you play once then that is within those confines. Until they change it/did change, then it is/was open season.

---

"Abuse" is subjective... mhm, which is why I worded my post the way I did - now bolded. But I do not think as long as you are technically within the rules then it cannot possibly be abuse. In fact, abuse of the rules as a concept exists precisely because those are behaviors that pass a technicality test but are still not intended use.

What is true is that as long as someone is technically within the rules, others cannot stop them from what they are doing - unless these others happens to be the financial institution issuing the credit in this case who can take steps to crack down on what they see as abuse of their rules. As far as the sandbox, they write in their right to change the terms, and to issue or not issue credit at discretion, so it would stand to reason that the same logic that forbids a right to complain at others' churning behavior should also preclude a critic of banks exercising their prerogatives.

[Anonymous]

---

@yfan wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

---

@yfan wrote:

The entire business of credit is about you inviting others to be in your business. And these others - namely the lenders, do business with lots of others, who may believe that they are impacted by what they consider to be abuses of the system. If that weren't the case, there would be no discussion about credit and you would just pay for everything in cash. Participating and sharing personal experiences and opinions on a public forum is even more about inviting people to be in your business - or at least to opine about it.

---

"Abuse" is subjective and widely open to interpretation. As long as you play within the confines of the sandbox it isn't truly abuse. If they change the size of the sandbox or only let you play once then that is within those confines. Until they change it/did change, then it is/was open season.

---

"Abuse" is subjective... mhm, which is why I worded my post the way I did - now bolded. But I do not think as long as you are technically within the rules then it cannot possibly be abuse. In fact, abuse of the rules as a concept exists precisely because those are behaviors that pass a technicality test but are still not intended use.

What is true is that as long as someone is technically within the rules, others cannot stop them from what they are doing - unless these others happens to be the financial institution issuing the credit in this case who can take steps to crack down on what they see as abuse of their rules. As far as the sandbox, they write in their right to change the terms, and to issue or not issue credit at discretion, so it would stand to reason that the same logic that forbids a right to complain at others' churning behavior should also preclude a critic of banks exercising their prerogatives.

---

I don't blame them for taking countermeasures against those "evil freeloader good-for-nothing churners", But it doesn't mean that I cheer on the clamping down of bonuses either even if it is completely within their terms, which can change at will. I will be the first to admit I had fun while it lasted, to be rewarded heavily and seemingly limitlessly for spend I was already incurring. I saved many thousands on travel over the years and I don't regret a minute of it.

[yfan]

---

@Anonymous wrote:

I don't blame them for taking countermeasures against those "evil freeloader good-for-nothing churners", But it doesn't mean that I cheer on the clamping down of bonuses either even if it is completely within their terms, which can change at will. I will be the first to admit I had fun while it lasted, to be rewarded heavily and seemingly limitlessly for spend I was already incurring. I saved many thousands on travel over the years and I don't regret a minute of it.

---

That's just it. Just as you don't have to cheer on what the banks are doing, others need not cheer on what you are doing/have done. Just as you celebrate being able to take advantage of the system, so may others celebrate the trend towards shutting down that advantage-taking, especially if they believe they experience nerfing as at least partly a result of others churning.

[Anonymous]

---

@yfan wrote:

---

@Anonymous wrote:

I don't blame them for taking countermeasures against those "evil freeloader good-for-nothing churners", But it doesn't mean that I cheer on the clamping down of bonuses either even if it is completely within their terms, which can change at will. I will be the first to admit I had fun while it lasted, to be rewarded heavily and seemingly limitlessly for spend I was already incurring. I saved many thousands on travel over the years and I don't regret a minute of it.

---

especially if they believe they experience nerfing as at leastly partly a result of others churning.

---

This is key, Belief makes not the truth. Honestly it's probably more about keeping profits up as people with less (sometimes much less) than stellar credit start getting approved for these type of promotions. Go check out the Approvals forum sometime to see what I mean. Of course, That's just my belief.

[red259]

---

@Kenny wrote:

I agree, LTL. I don't think there is much that can/or should be done to curtail any "churning". Highly individualistic.. where does it start? Where does it end? I think it's going to end up being like the MS -- no advocation/how to guides.. lol To be clear, no talk at all of churning has ever been said previously. I think it was just a misunderstanding or meaning well kind of thing.

I will say to everyone that admin is talking about this issue and we'll have a verdict soon. In the mean time, let's just treat the conversation like that of MS and just not get too heated, too detailed, and encourage whatever "it" is. lol

My personal opinion is different (of course) than that of myFico. Have to enforce whatever the rule is. I think bonuses are there to be used, period. Your risk is entirely up to you. I don't get into your business, you don't get into mine -- unless I want to involve you. :D Oh well, life isn't like that, though is it, sometimes?!

Edit: I hate when I'm reading the forum and then I make a post and it's COMPLETELY out of the time in which the post I was referring to was. Oh well. That's my brain. What can I do? 

---

I'm not sure I have ever seen someone do a how-to guide for churning or actually advocate churning (in these forumns I mean). A few people have come out and stated that they churn, but that is not the same thing as advocating other people to do so and normally that is in response to posts of people complaining about churners or demanding to know if someone actually needs the card or is just trying to get the bonus. Seems like a slippery slope. Now a policy where people should not debate or put forth their position about the ethics of churning either pro or con wouldn't be bad at all. I strongly agree with the statement you made above of I don't get into your business and you don't get into mine.