Because it’s easier to sign up than it is to cancel.

Button that doesn’t look like a button.

Unclear phrasing…

Now, am I saying it’s impossible to understand? No. Do I think it rises to the level of law-suit worthy? Barely.

Is it anticonsumer and intentionally designed so as to make it more difficult to unsubscribe and put up barriers to get people to stay? Absolutely.

What the other user here is documenting Discord doing with the cancel button that doesn’t look like a cancel button are called “Dark Patterns.”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_pattern

The point of a Dark Pattern is to make options unclear and how to do things just ever so slightly confusing. Why? Because unlike you and me, this will trip up a significant number of users. They wouldn’t be doing it if it wasn’t working.

Further, the US FTC considers Dark Patterns such a big deal that in 2021 they committed to ramping up enforcement of removing Dark Patterns that make it difficult to cancel subscriptions.

https://www.ftc.gov/news-events/news/press-releases/2021/10/ftc-ramp-enforcement-against-illegal-dark-patterns-trick-or-trap-consumers-subscriptions

It’s also important to note that Discord is being sued through a California law:

https://casetext.com/statute/california-codes/california-business-and-professions-code/division-7-general-business-regulations/part-3-representations-to-the-public/chapter-1-advertising/article-9-automatic-purchase-renewals/section-17602-unlawful-acts-by-business-making-automatic-renewal-or-continuous-service-offer-to-consumer#:~:text=2024 Legislative Session.-,Section 17602 - Unlawful acts by business making automatic renewal or,the automatic renewal offer terms

When you read through this, the Dark Patterns that Discord uses definitely fall under this law. One hopes that the FTC will do some follow-up with Discord as well.

But I mean, go ahead, keep denying that psychological tricks are being used to make it difficult for some people to cancel. Not everyone’s brain works the same ways, and things that are easy to see for you aren’t easy to see for everyone. When it comes to consumer protections, we protect everyone, we don’t just say “You must be dumb, sucks to be you! I guess that means it’s okay to exploit you!” I mean, I personally am not cool with tricking the mentally handicapped for a quick buck.

Intelligence is usually graded on a normal distribution.

I fail to see how it’s a strawman. Either you’re ok with companies taking advantage of people because they’re not very intelligent or you’re not.