• john (unregistered)

    This is one of the best articles in weeks. Still laughing. Maybe I'll print this out an stick to my wall.

  • Alex (unregistered)

    And I thought our helpdesk calls were bad... at least most people emailing our helpdesk manage (semi-)coherent English!

  • (cs)

    Instant classic. Good job submitter

  • Tech (unregistered) 
    ------------------------------------------------- 
ISSUE #88334
------------------------------------------------- 
Client Issue:
"frist" -- ff 

Problem Point:
Even though the poster 'ff' (aka captain obvious) is
clearly the first poster, to prevent his embarrassment
over a malformed, and misspelled post an automated
response should be implemented so that no human can
post the first comment.

Improvement Goal:
Code should be implemented to replace the first comment
with a large and colorful "First", to satisfy all the nit-
wits out there and prevent the shame of misspelling it
regardless that it might replace something meaningful.

    Grumble

  • Anonymous (unregistered)

    Idiot CTO versus smart helpdesk - score one for the helpdesk! Today's article was great, this is exactly the sort of retarded thing your average exec would think and exactly the sort of response necessary to show him what an idiot he is.

    Oh, but the SPAM, it's driving me MAD! Is it that hard to implement some rudimentary spam protection? I know you guys have day jobs but so do I and I'll happily do it if you want!

  • Ffrenzy (unregistered)

    Is there an "article of the year" award ? If so, i nominate this entry...it's one of the best, if not THE best, ever

  • Anonymous (unregistered)
    Jeff:
    TRWTF is in the comments: why are links permitted? What legitimate use could they have?

    Everyone who reads this site could copy/paste http://www.google.com into their new tab's url field...so the links (and the ensuing spam) aren't needed.

    Why are links permitted? I don't know, maybe because this is HTTP and hyperlinks are the recognised way of navigating between HTTP pages? Banning links is overkill, people are often posting links to interesting sites or maybe just to definitions on Wikipedia. The trick is surely to ban posts with any more than 3 links, or something similar. Then we can still cross reference from the comments but the spammers will be screwed (remember that there is a law of spamming that says you are not allowed to put any less than 12 links into a spam post, even if they are all the same link - it's crazy but then spammers are retards).

  • nerfherder (unregistered)

    Every time I make this thing idiot proof they go and make a better idiot!

  • Anonymous (unregistered)

    Despite the fact that this is the best article we've seen in a long time, I'd be willing to bet that some joker wil post a pithy remark like "CTO tells support to raise user issues with management, some issues are stupid, haw haw".

  • V P (unregistered)

    There's no way that this happened. Even though the tech would be right about customers being lazy, etc, they would have lost their job in a hearbeat for that kind of attitude just about anywhere.

  • bored (unregistered)

    I liked the story! I also like how wow gold came back to fix his/her horrible job at spamming message boards. Well done wow gold, I will now click all your links so you can profit!

    captcha: letatio - I haven't had it in awhile, my girlfriend says it hurts her mouth.

  • Ben4jammin (unregistered)

    Was this the CTOs first day in IT or what?

    And as a side note, a snippet from one of our helpdesk tickets. As background, we are a college and support software in the classrooms. I have removed the names to protect the innocent.

    "just a quick note to say thanks, we have finally figured out that we use the MS Office Outlook to do the Outlook class – apparently this was not clear until now. Appreciate your help"

    This was from the Director of Education at that campus...I am not making this up.

  • (cs) in reply to Tech
    Tech:
    Even though the poster 'ff' (aka captain obvious) is ...

    "ff" is not me. Please stop spreading such rumors. Thank you.

  • Bob (unregistered) in reply to V P
    V P:
    There's no way that this happened. Even though the tech would be right about customers being lazy, etc, they would have lost their job in a hearbeat for that kind of attitude just about anywhere.

    Man! Where do you work? Note to self: never work for V P's company, avoid the country if at all possible.

  • Admiral Obvious (unregistered) in reply to Capt. Obvious
    Capt. Obvious:
    Tech:
    Even though the poster 'ff' (aka captain obvious) is ...

    "ff" is not me. Please stop spreading such rumors. Thank you.

    I remember back when I was just a Captain Obvious... Good times!

  • Captain Obvious (unregistered) in reply to Tech
    Tech:
    ------------------------------------------------- 
ISSUE #88334
------------------------------------------------- 
Client Issue:
"frist" -- ff 

    Problem Point:
Even though the poster 'ff' (aka captain obvious) is
clearly the first poster, to prevent his embarrassment
over a malformed, and misspelled post an automated
response should be implemented so that no human can
post the first comment.
    

    Improvement Goal:
Code should be implemented to replace the first comment
with a large and colorful "First", to satisfy all the nit-
wits out there and prevent the shame of misspelling it
regardless that it might replace something meaningful.

    Grumble

    Actually... No, I'm going to let someone else explain.

  • No (unregistered)

    No

  • O'Boy (unregistered)

    Although the samples amply demonstrate the flaw in the CTO's logic, he did have a point. Any legitimate help desk ticket does represent a flaw somewhere in the product/service, and it may be worth trying to figure out if there's a way to fix it.

    Sometimes (quite often, probably) there may not be enough information in the ticket to determine how the confusion arose, but you should be able to at least identify the most common points of failure.

  • RBoy (unregistered) in reply to O'Boy
    O'Boy:
    Although the samples amply demonstrate the flaw in the CTO's logic, he did have a point. Any legitimate help desk ticket does represent a flaw somewhere in the product/service, and it may be worth trying to figure out if there's a way to fix it.

    Sometimes (quite often, probably) there may not be enough information in the ticket to determine how the confusion arose, but you should be able to at least identify the most common points of failure.

    In some cases, true, but when "Replace User" becomes the solution for 75% of the problems, it seems to lose its helpfulness.

    Let me guess, you've never worked in tech support before?

  • Emperor Obvious (unregistered) in reply to Admiral Obvious
    Admiral Obvious:
    Capt. Obvious:
    Tech:
    Even though the poster 'ff' (aka captain obvious) is ...

    "ff" is not me. Please stop spreading such rumors. Thank you.

    I remember back when I was just a Captain Obvious... Good times!

    lightweights ...

  • Mike (unregistered)

    Let me guess, the CTO was a recent MBA graduate?? Welcome to the real world, buddy - time to take off the rose-colored glasses.

  • Joe (unregistered)

    I've been reading TDWTF for a few weeks now, but this is the first article that actually made me laugh out loud. Thanks :)

  • Deity Obvious (unregistered) in reply to Emperor Obvious
    Emperor Obvious:
    Admiral Obvious:
    Capt. Obvious:
    Tech:
    Even though the poster 'ff' (aka captain obvious) is ...

    "ff" is not me. Please stop spreading such rumors. Thank you.

    I remember back when I was just a Captain Obvious... Good times!

    lightweights ...

    Bring it on...

  • Mike (unregistered)

    That was amazing. Hopefully it's real so I can root for these people.

  • Anonymous (unregistered) in reply to V P
    V P:
    There's no way that this happened. Even though the tech would be right about customers being lazy, etc, they would have lost their job in a hearbeat for that kind of attitude just about anywhere.
    Rubbish! They probably would have lost their jobs if they replied to customers in that manner but these are all tickets that are going up to the CTO for review. I'm far ruder than that to my CTO on a daily basis because he's a useless gimp. But I still have a job and he couldn't even fire me if he wanted to.
  • General Protection Fault (unregistered) in reply to Emperor Obvious

    Watch your back, Emperor

  • BEFore (unregistered)

    Or we could block BBCode (or more then X links or etc) from unregistered voters....

  • Anon (unregistered) in reply to Anonymous
    Anonymous:
    V P:
    There's no way that this happened. Even though the tech would be right about customers being lazy, etc, they would have lost their job in a hearbeat for that kind of attitude just about anywhere.
    Rubbish! They probably would have lost their jobs if they replied to customers in that manner but these are all tickets that are going up to the CTO for review. I'm far ruder than that to my CTO on a daily basis because he's a useless gimp. But I still have a job and he couldn't even fire me if he wanted to.

    Yet you post anonymously. Interesting...

  • BEFore (unregistered)

    (Previous attempt seems to have disappeared -- but I called posters voters anyway. So count this as a correction and not a repost.)

    TRWTF is in the comments: why are links permitted? What legitimate use could they have?

    Why not simply remove BBCode ability from unregistered posters? (Or block more than X links, or etc.)

  • Bob (unregistered)

    I don't know about you guys, but I'm going to be working damn hard on my getting ability.

    /GET!

  • (cs) in reply to O'Boy
    O'Boy:
    Although the samples amply demonstrate the flaw in the CTO's logic, he did have a point. Any legitimate help desk ticket does represent a flaw somewhere in the product/service, and it may be worth trying to figure out if there's a way to fix it.

    Sometimes (quite often, probably) there may not be enough information in the ticket to determine how the confusion arose, but you should be able to at least identify the most common points of failure.

    Yeah, I have to agree. The first point was that the manual is too confusing. The user's way of saying that was utterly retarded, but the point is still valid. If your users can't understand the manual, you need to improve it. (And hey, your users can't be that stupid since they're actually reading the frickin' manual! Most users won't even crack it open!)

    In the 2nd case, it sounds like the user is upset about how he was treated on the phone, or via email tech support. No, you shouldn't have to make him laugh, but you should make sure your tech support people are polite. I know it's not always easy. I've had to deal with users before. But if you can't handle the heat, get out of the kitchen.

    The other points, I mostly agree with. You can't fix other companies' software, the user didn't read that the problem was fixed 2 years ago, etc. But it may still be an opportunity to improve your software. What if the user didn't have to go to hotmail to send you a problem report (or whatever the issue was)? Maybe it would be useful to just have a button in your interface that they can click to email whatever they need to the appropriate person?

    Despite the fact that these users did act very stupidly, they may still be giving you valuable information that could make you money. Don't just throw it on the floor because you don't get it!

  • dew|frost (unregistered)

    Directly from the top of page: Comment On Support Should Never Be Necessary That's pretty much it.

  • ih8u (unregistered) in reply to Tech
    Tech:
    ------------------------------------------------- 
ISSUE #88334
------------------------------------------------- 
Client Issue:
"frist" -- ff 

    Problem Point:
Even though the poster 'ff' (aka captain obvious) is
clearly the first poster, to prevent his embarrassment
over a malformed, and misspelled post an automated
response should be implemented so that no human can
post the first comment.
    

    Improvement Goal:
Code should be implemented to replace the first comment
with a large and colorful "First", to satisfy all the nit-
wits out there and prevent the shame of misspelling it
regardless that it might replace something meaningful.

    Grumble

    ISSUE #278033

    Client Issue: "whining posts are cluttering up the interwebs (see ISSUE #88334)"

    Problem Point: While some posters (for some unknown reason) enjoy short, stupid posts like 'frist', other posters seem to feel that we all want our screens to be filled up by their long-winded, whining and moaning about, in this case, ONE WHOLE WORD.

    Improvement Goal: Make sure to append to the beginning of every short post (< 25 chars?) the following message. -- ALERT! You do NOT have to read this post. It may be silly. If that bothers you greatly, you may need a social life, a hobby separate from the internet, or psychological help. --

  • (cs)

    When I was a CS rep for DirecTV several years ago, they told us during training that people would be stupid about following directions, and that the only thing to do was be patient and do whatever possible to get them to follow our directions.

    That often resulted in conversations like this:

    Me: "Ok, we need to reset your receiver. Unplug it, wait 20 seconds, then plug it back in." Customer: "Ok." (20 seconds go by) "Nothing happened." Me: "Did the lights on the receiver turn off?" Customer: "No." Me: "Did you unplug it?" Customer: "No." Me: headdesk

  • Anonymous (unregistered)

    As others have said, best story in a while! Great stuff!

  • Anonymous (unregistered) in reply to Anon
    Anon:
    Anonymous:
    V P:
    There's no way that this happened. Even though the tech would be right about customers being lazy, etc, they would have lost their job in a hearbeat for that kind of attitude just about anywhere.
    Rubbish! They probably would have lost their jobs if they replied to customers in that manner but these are all tickets that are going up to the CTO for review. I'm far ruder than that to my CTO on a daily basis because he's a useless gimp. But I still have a job and he couldn't even fire me if he wanted to.
    Yet you post anonymously. Interesting...
    Well yes, I always post anonymously. We all do. Just because some people use silly made up names doesn't make them any less anonymous, unless they actually use their screen names around the office. Let's hope nobody is sad enough to do that.
  • (cs) in reply to ih8u
    ih8u:
    ------------------------------------------------- ISSUE #278033 ------------------------------------------------- Client Issue: "whining posts are cluttering up the interwebs (see ISSUE #88334)"

    Problem Point: While some posters (for some unknown reason) enjoy short, stupid posts like 'frist', other posters seem to feel that we all want our screens to be filled up by their long-winded, whining and moaning about, in this case, ONE WHOLE WORD.

    Improvement Goal: Make sure to append to the beginning of every short post (< 25 chars?) the following message. -- ALERT! You do NOT have to read this post. It may be silly. If that bothers you greatly, you may need a social life, a hobby separate from the internet, or psychological help. --

    While the first post was quite humorous, I like this one much better :) Some people just have to speak, even when they know that nobody cares. Kind of like right now...

  • (cs) in reply to Anonymous
    Anonymous:
    Well yes, I always post anonymously. We all do. Just because some people use silly made up names doesn't make them any less anonymous, unless they actually use their screen names around the office. Let's hope nobody is sad enough to do that.

    I have been known to answer to my screen name offline. (If I'm playing a game that involves voice chat, and you need my offline attention, yelling "Heron" at me is probably the best way to get it...)

    Of course, that's not an issue at the office.

  • AdT (unregistered) in reply to Heron
    Heron:
    Me: "Ok, we need to reset your receiver. Unplug it, wait 20 seconds, then plug it back in." Customer: "Ok." (20 seconds go by) "Nothing happened." Me: "Did the lights on the receiver turn off?" Customer: "No." Me: "Did you unplug it?" Customer: "No." Me: *headdesk*

    Next time, ask the customer whether the contacts inside the socket are golden or silver colored. Works wonders they say...

  • LKM (unregistered)

    While not every support call is the result of a problem with the software, a lot of them are (depending on what you're actually selling). It's often possible to fix the software and avoid the support issue, and it's almost always cheaper to fix it once in software, rather than answer the same call a hundred times.

    So the CTO had the right idea, even if the actual implementation went overboard. Support calls should very often result in changes in the software.

  • Worf (unregistered)

    What? No one's made a comment about the old Air Force jokes?

    http://www.begent.org/squawks.htm

    Was the first thing I thought when I read this story!

  • Justin (unregistered)

    Since there was some confusion about the definition...

    http://tinyurl.com/mugw2j

    bonus, captcha: http://tinyurl.com/ng6bu3

  • heretic (unregistered) in reply to Heron
    Heron:
    When I was a CS rep for DirecTV several years ago, they told us during training that people would be stupid about following directions, and that the only thing to do was be patient and do whatever possible to get them to follow our directions.

    That often resulted in conversations like this:

    Me: "Ok, we need to reset your receiver. Unplug it, wait 20 seconds, then plug it back in." Customer: "Ok." (20 seconds go by) "Nothing happened." Me: "Did the lights on the receiver turn off?" Customer: "No." Me: "Did you unplug it?" Customer: "No." Me: headdesk

    Did it ever occur to you that the people on the other end of your conversation had already deduced that a receiver reset would not solve the problem because they had already done that five times over the past two days? And that why they waited two days was because they were trying to avoid the pain and suffering inflicted by Customer Service reps who could be replaced by trained zombie monkeys without losing functionality?

  • M (unregistered) in reply to O'Boy
    O'Boy:
    Although the samples amply demonstrate the flaw in the CTO's logic, he did have a point. Any legitimate help desk ticket does represent a flaw somewhere in the product/service, and it may be worth trying to figure out if there's a way to fix it.

    Sometimes (quite often, probably) there may not be enough information in the ticket to determine how the confusion arose, but you should be able to at least identify the most common points of failure.

    This.

    If more CTO's cared enough about the quality of their company's products to use customer feedback to improve product quality, the software landscape today might be different.

    Of course, there WILL always be stupid/lazy/stupidandlazy users. But seek first to improve the product, THEN you can blame the customer.

  • @Deprecated (unregistered) in reply to Heron
    Heron:
    When I was a CS rep for DirecTV several years ago, they told us during training that people would be stupid about following directions, and that the only thing to do was be patient and do whatever possible to get them to follow our directions.

    That often resulted in conversations like this:

    Me: "Ok, we need to reset your receiver. Unplug it, wait 20 seconds, then plug it back in." Customer: "Ok." (20 seconds go by) "Nothing happened." Me: "Did the lights on the receiver turn off?" Customer: "No." Me: "Did you unplug it?" Customer: "No." Me: headdesk

    That makes me want to apply for a support job at a VoIP company: Customer: I am suffering from low QoS. Me: We need to reset your VoIP gateway Customer: Okay, I am resetting it n BYE sip:[email protected];transport=udp SIP/2.0^M CSeq: 2 BYE^M

  • (cs) in reply to heretic
    heretic:
    Heron:
    When I was a CS rep for DirecTV several years ago, they told us during training that people would be stupid about following directions, and that the only thing to do was be patient and do whatever possible to get them to follow our directions.

    That often resulted in conversations like this:

    Me: "Ok, we need to reset your receiver. Unplug it, wait 20 seconds, then plug it back in." Customer: "Ok." (20 seconds go by) "Nothing happened." Me: "Did the lights on the receiver turn off?" Customer: "No." Me: "Did you unplug it?" Customer: "No." Me: headdesk

    Did it ever occur to you that the people on the other end of your conversation had already deduced that a receiver reset would not solve the problem because they had already done that five times over the past two days? And that why they waited two days was because they were trying to avoid the pain and suffering inflicted by Customer Service reps who could be replaced by trained zombie monkeys without losing functionality?

    Yes, but I tell the person what happened the first five times, and ask if a sixth time is really necessary. If the answer is "yes," I do it. It's always possible that the helpdesk person has silently (secretly?) changed something in the meantime that will make this time work. And if it fails the sixth time, I get to adopt a more "see, I told you so" attitude.

  • joel8360 (unregistered) in reply to heretic

    Did it every occur to you that lying is a sure way to poison any kind of interaction? The correct response is not "OK...nothing happened" it's "Look, I've tried that five times already; do I really need to do that again?"

  • Dazed (unregistered) in reply to LKM
    LKM:
    While not every support call is the result of a problem with the software, a lot of them are (depending on what you're actually selling). It's often possible to fix the software and avoid the support issue, and it's almost always cheaper to fix it once in software, rather than answer the same call a hundred times.
    And often the fixes are very simple indeed: a few extra words in an error message, or placing a control in a different position.

    There is often an unfortunate tendency to focus only on the bigger issues in an application and never get around to fixing all the little things which, while not very significant to how the application works, can make a big difference to the users.

  • Franz Kafka (unregistered) in reply to heretic
    heretic:
    Heron:
    When I was a CS rep for DirecTV several years ago, they told us during training that people would be stupid about following directions, and that the only thing to do was be patient and do whatever possible to get them to follow our directions.

    That often resulted in conversations like this:

    Me: "Ok, we need to reset your receiver. Unplug it, wait 20 seconds, then plug it back in." Customer: "Ok." (20 seconds go by) "Nothing happened." Me: "Did the lights on the receiver turn off?" Customer: "No." Me: "Did you unplug it?" Customer: "No." Me: headdesk

    Did it ever occur to you that the people on the other end of your conversation had already deduced that a receiver reset would not solve the problem because they had already done that five times over the past two days? And that why they waited two days was because they were trying to avoid the pain and suffering inflicted by Customer Service reps who could be replaced by trained zombie monkeys without losing functionality?

    Not really. If I'm in that situation, I'll just lie about resetting the thing.

  • (cs) in reply to heretic
    heretic:
    Heron:
    When I was a CS rep for DirecTV several years ago, they told us during training that people would be stupid about following directions, and that the only thing to do was be patient and do whatever possible to get them to follow our directions.

    That often resulted in conversations like this:

    Me: "Ok, we need to reset your receiver. Unplug it, wait 20 seconds, then plug it back in." Customer: "Ok." (20 seconds go by) "Nothing happened." Me: "Did the lights on the receiver turn off?" Customer: "No." Me: "Did you unplug it?" Customer: "No." Me: headdesk

    Did it ever occur to you that the people on the other end of your conversation had already deduced that a receiver reset would not solve the problem because they had already done that five times over the past two days? And that why they waited two days was because they were trying to avoid the pain and suffering inflicted by Customer Service reps who could be replaced by trained zombie monkeys without losing functionality?

    Yes. Typically when I call tech support on an issue, the first suggestion is something I've already tried. I suspect that true for most people reading TDWTF.

    In which case, here's how the convesation could go:

    Tech: "Ok, we need to reset your receiver. Unplug it, wait 20 seconds, then plug it back in." Customer: "I did that twice already, it made no difference." Tech: "Ok. Could we try it just once more so that I know you've done it and that you've waited long enough. If that still doesn't work, I'll try my next solution."

    Sometime, the customer has to help you help them.

Leave a comment on “Support Should Never Be Necessary”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article