I STILL don't get it. All these lists and tips (which I've given myself and employ) on HOW to protect ourselves are great BUT isn't the very first line of defense NOT shopping at risky places or, at the very least, checking out the safety of a place you want to purchase from? And yet, that very first line of defense is repeatedly disagreed with by those offering protection advice. And to state one's factual experience is spun as "bashing." Go to other forums like "As seen on TV" for instance. There companies are openly discussed. Why? Customer protection. The discussions on any forum where purchasing is done, over the net especially, always cover the vendor's practices and not just the product they sell. Even Amazon shows reviews on the business itself as well as the product. There's a whole sub forum here for Negative Vendor reviews. Why? Same thing... customer protection. So we can talk about shipping times, missing items in the order but not the fact that our CC was hit after shopping there (given we don't use the card for purchases other than ecig supplies.) Again, the first step in one's protection is vendor choice. And you know what, I would lay money down betting that the vendors that DO pay the higher cost of secure software and processing centers are pleased when they see those who don't being named. And not because they enjoy seeing any vendor "bashed" but because they know their business has a better chance of growing then and their efforts and higher expenses pay off. The territory is highly competitive and their efforts become evident when the lack of effort by others becomes evident. Maybe its become ideological. I'm in the "transparency matters" school. I will reward a vendor's good business practices and want them known so I can find them. They're the ones that will win my business first even though I will still employ my own good sense protecting myself even then... my trust is never going to be blind.
