How We Handle Feedback We Disagree With

We receive a lot of feedback. Much of it is incredibly helpful, but sometimes readers ask us to build things or change policies in ways that fundamentally conflict with our principles. Here is how we handle those moments.

Bugs vs. Philosophy

There is a clear line between feedback about a mistake and feedback about a design choice. If a user points out that a tool is broken, rendering incorrectly, or providing inaccurate output, we fix it immediately. We are grateful for bug reports.

However, when feedback targets a deliberate restriction—like our refusal to bypass privacy settings or our lack of a bulk-download feature—we respond differently. In these cases, the "issue" is actually the product working exactly as intended.

When We Say No

The phrase "the customer is always right" doesn't apply when the "customer" is asking for something harmful or unethical. For example, we regularly receive requests to allow viewing private accounts. The answer is always no. We respect the privacy boundaries users set on platforms.

We also get asked to build automated tracking tools to monitor when a specific user posts. Again, the answer is no. That crosses the line from a utility into surveillance.

Respectful Disagreement

When we disagree with feedback, we try to respond respectfully but firmly. We don't just ignore the request; we explain our reasoning. This is why we publish articles like this one. Accountability goes both ways—if we are going to enforce strict limits on our tools, we owe our users an explanation of why those limits exist.

We won't build what you want just because you asked for it, but we will always tell you exactly why we won't.