Honey browser plugin controversy: Difference between revisions
RAARGHHH I FORGOT TO PREVIEW AHHHHH |
*sighs* |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{Incomplete|Issue 1=References improperly formatted|Issue 2=Lacks in-text citations|Issue 3=Structure does not follow incident articles}}{{ToneWarning}} | {{Incomplete|Issue 1=References improperly formatted|Issue 2=Lacks in-text citations|Issue 3=Structure does not follow incident articles}}{{ToneWarning}} | ||
{{Delete|See talk page. | {{Delete|See talk page.}} | ||
<!-- Capital One faces a nearly identical lawsuit for the same practices. It appears as though this may be an “industry standard” predatory tactic that is more pervasive across coupon extensions en masse which may merit its own page. It may be the case that most coupon-searching browser extensions behave identically in this regard. --> | <!-- Capital One faces a nearly identical lawsuit for the same practices. It appears as though this may be an “industry standard” predatory tactic that is more pervasive across coupon extensions en masse which may merit its own page. It may be the case that most coupon-searching browser extensions behave identically in this regard. --> | ||