I feel like that's a rather generic stand-in complaint for (what frequently ends up being) something entirely different.
If both of the actually important parties - tasker & purchaser - were happy beforehand, the problem is TaskRabbit, not them.
Maybe the lesson here is "don't accept $37 million in funding for an odd-jobs coordinator"?
It's not a tasker's fault that some website needs to squeeze an unreasonable amount of profit out of running groceries & fixing desks.
Context is key in any discussion. Let the voting system sort it out :)
I feel like that's a rather generic stand-in complaint for (what frequently ends up being) something entirely different.
If both of the actually important parties - tasker & purchaser - were happy beforehand, the problem is TaskRabbit, not them.
Maybe the lesson here is "don't accept $37 million in funding for an odd-jobs coordinator"?
It's not a tasker's fault that some website needs to squeeze an unreasonable amount of profit out of running groceries & fixing desks.