> AIs and other opaque processes making decisions are incredibly frustrating.
Simply better messaging would fix most of this.
One approach is to be upfront and say:
Our automated AI systems have decided that it probably isn't in our best interests to do business with you. We can't elaborate on why, because that would give clues to spammers to help evade our detection of them. However, if you are willing to pay us $15, we will have a human look at your case and make the decision instead. You will be able to send evidence to the human (for example evidence of legitimate sales, a registered company, etc.). The human will be able to ask for further information, but will not be able to tell you the reason for any rejection. Your $15 will not be refunded if your case is rejected. Before you do, double check that your use isn't borderline on our rules and T&C's - human review isn't an opportunity to push the boundaries of what is allowed.
Simply better messaging would fix most of this.
One approach is to be upfront and say:
Our automated AI systems have decided that it probably isn't in our best interests to do business with you. We can't elaborate on why, because that would give clues to spammers to help evade our detection of them. However, if you are willing to pay us $15, we will have a human look at your case and make the decision instead. You will be able to send evidence to the human (for example evidence of legitimate sales, a registered company, etc.). The human will be able to ask for further information, but will not be able to tell you the reason for any rejection. Your $15 will not be refunded if your case is rejected. Before you do, double check that your use isn't borderline on our rules and T&C's - human review isn't an opportunity to push the boundaries of what is allowed.