FWIW, I don't mind if someone files a dispute; in fact, sending a refund as a response to a dispute (I believe even when the dispute is ignored and "lost") is actually cheaper than filing a refund out of the blue, for reasons I don't claim to understand: if you don't get a response from me regarding a refund (and I do often respond to those, although like, right now, picking apart those e-mails is fairly difficult), and if the developer won't give you a refund (which he now has the ability to do himself using the Cydia backend portal), there is no harm in filing a dispute: I don't argue with them on purpose (unless you act like a jerk in the message text and I notice, but you have to be pretty jerk-ish to make me bother ;P) so you get your money back.
That said, if you are filing a refund now and intend to re-purchase it later, that is kind of sketchy, and frankly if Cydia lets you repurchase it at that time, I consider it a low-priority bug (but one I would happily believe that Cydia currently has, as I keep making improvements to the way it detects things like refunds, and thereby may have made it "too good"; it certainly used to be the case that this was disallowed, though): if you get a refund on a product, you aren't supposed to be allowed to buy it again unless you manage to get someone to go out of their way to "clear the previous payment". You really should only be asking for a refund because you don't want the product: not because you temporarily want your $2 back, as described by this person here; the payment mechanism isn't some kind of fluid back/forth transfer system: it should only be used with serious intent.
Regardless, I agree: this product should not be on sale if it doesn't work. I think it is unacceptable that the developer is just all "yeah, it doesn't work, I'll be back in a week" without contacting myself or the repository to put a sales block on the non-functional product. We just tested it, and it in fact doesn't work. (We would have done this sooner, but surprisingly, despite over a thousand recent purchases, there have only been 3 complaints, and those would easily be explainable by local network issues.) That sucks.
So, I've blocked the product from further purchases (which also leaves a note on the depiction saying the product doesn't work, for anyone who already owns it wondering what is up), and this developer is going to be getting a very unhappy e-mail from me, and probably also from his repository (who will probably be even angrier than me, knowing them). I'm also going to be sending everyone who bought the product in the last few days an e-mail later today containing an automated way (a URL they can click) for them to receive a refund, if they want one. Trust me: I do not consider this at all a reasonable state of affairs, and you really shouldn't ever be in the situation where you are buying something that the developer knows doesn't work.
FWIW, I don't mind if someone files a dispute; in fact, sending a refund as a response to a dispute (I believe even when the dispute is ignored and "lost") is actually cheaper than filing a refund out of the blue, for reasons I don't claim to understand: if you don't get a response from me regarding a refund (and I do often respond to those, although like, right now, picking apart those e-mails is fairly difficult), and if the developer won't give you a refund (which he now has the ability to do himself using the Cydia backend portal), there is no harm in filing a dispute: I don't argue with them on purpose (unless you act like a jerk in the message text and I notice, but you have to be pretty jerk-ish to make me bother ;P) so you get your money back.
That said, if you are filing a refund now and intend to re-purchase it later, that is kind of sketchy, and frankly if Cydia lets you repurchase it at that time, I consider it a low-priority bug (but one I would happily believe that Cydia currently has, as I keep making improvements to the way it detects things like refunds, and thereby may have made it "too good"; it certainly used to be the case that this was disallowed, though): if you get a refund on a product, you aren't supposed to be allowed to buy it again unless you manage to get someone to go out of their way to "clear the previous payment". You really should only be asking for a refund because you don't want the product: not because you temporarily want your $2 back, as described by this person here; the payment mechanism isn't some kind of fluid back/forth transfer system: it should only be used with serious intent.
Regardless, I agree: this product should not be on sale if it doesn't work. I think it is unacceptable that the developer is just all "yeah, it doesn't work, I'll be back in a week" without contacting myself or the repository to put a sales block on the non-functional product. We just tested it, and it in fact doesn't work. (We would have done this sooner, but surprisingly, despite over a thousand recent purchases, there have only been 3 complaints, and those would easily be explainable by local network issues.) That sucks.
So, I've blocked the product from further purchases (which also leaves a note on the depiction saying the product doesn't work, for anyone who already owns it wondering what is up), and this developer is going to be getting a very unhappy e-mail from me, and probably also from his repository (who will probably be even angrier than me, knowing them). I'm also going to be sending everyone who bought the product in the last few days an e-mail later today containing an automated way (a URL they can click) for them to receive a refund, if they want one. Trust me: I do not consider this at all a reasonable state of affairs, and you really shouldn't ever be in the situation where you are buying something that the developer knows doesn't work.
