• ParkinT (cs)

    I bow in reverence to the guy who had the guts to do what many of us have 'thought' (or even coded and deleted) so many times!! This post reaffirms my belief that "There is balance in the Universe". Revenge of the Geek!!

  • CaRL (unregistered)

    Humpph. If a web site talked to me like this, I'd keep hitting Check Out to see just how far the messages would go. Then I'd modify the URL to say "checkout=Y" and get my damn discount anyway.

  • Someone You Know (cs)
    Jake Vinson:
    Nolan heard about one of his company's "problem customers" from a friend of his in the customer service department.

    FTFY.

  • Tom Woolf (unregistered)

    I can't tell you how many times I would have been called a ninny if every online store did this. :-)

  • TarquinWJ (cs)

    Humans generally respond better to a rude response than a polite one anyway, so this is not as bad (or shocking) as it seems. They tend to get irritated when an automated response tries to be too polite. Give me an honest reply instead any day.

  • notme (unregistered) in reply to TarquinWJ
    TarquinWJ:
    Humans generally respond better to a rude response than a polite one anyway, so this is not as bad (or shocking) as it seems. They tend to get irritated when an automated response tries to be too polite. Give me an honest reply instead any day.

    Abusive is not the same as honest. How about honest but still professional?

  • snoofle (cs) in reply to notme
    notme:
    TarquinWJ:
    Humans generally respond better to a rude response than a polite one anyway, so this is not as bad (or shocking) as it seems. They tend to get irritated when an automated response tries to be too polite. Give me an honest reply instead any day.

    Abusive is not the same as honest. How about honest but still professional?

    "You have clicked 'Submit' once too often in an invalid context! The software at this end does not know how to respond.<site no longer responds to the offending ip>"

  • Perfect coder (unregistered)

    A shame, then, that the code shown would throw a runtime error because of the mismatched quotation marks.

    It should read like this:

    """Check Out""!"
  • Bill (unregistered) in reply to TarquinWJ
    TarquinWJ:
    Humans generally respond better to a rude response than a polite one anyway
    Well that's the stupidest thing I've heard in years, you ignorant slut.
  • Addison (unregistered) in reply to CaRL
    CaRL:
    Humpph. If a web site talked to me like this, I'd keep hitting Check Out to see just how far the messages would go. Then I'd modify the URL to say "checkout=Y" and get my damn discount anyway.

    What? That doesn't even make sense. First of all it's unlikely they'd be using a query string for something like that, and beyond that they probably don't even need a variable at all. It likely just redirects to another page.

  • Anonymous (unregistered)

    Nice story but let's see it in action on the real website before assuming this code ever actually made it to production. It's not unheard of to write some "frustration code" every now and then but why are we making the assumption that the given sample was ever checked in?

  • reader (unregistered)

    "The hardware wasn't powerful enough for a custom discount."

  • MrBester (cs) in reply to CaRL
    CaRL:
    Humpph. If a web site talked to me like this, I'd keep hitting Check Out to see just how far the messages would go. Then I'd modify the URL to say "checkout=Y" and get my damn discount anyway.
    For that, you'd either have to have gone through the checkout process before and noted the QS value to get to the checkout page (if you do that you're weird) or had access to the code, in which case you'd probably go direct to checkout anyway.
  • HughJass (unregistered) in reply to CaRL
    CaRL:
    Humpph. If a web site talked to me like this, I'd keep hitting Check Out to see just how far the messages would go. Then I'd modify the URL to say "checkout=Y" and get my damn discount anyway.

    Quality. I remember same old games had a similar feature (i.e. you do something dumb and if kept doing it you'd get more annoyed error messages from the game - can't remember any off the top of my head though).

    In any case, why is the website giving a 'complicated' choice to the user? Wouldn't it have been simpler for the options the user could select only be those that are valid for the promotion? Crazy talk I know.

  • Code Dependent (cs)

    It's been nine years since I did anything with VB. I don't remember, but doesn't it require a Break after each Case statement, or else it falls through? In which case the message will always be, "For the love of god, stop clicking Check Out!"

  • Bernie (unregistered)

    Your stupid system didn't give me enough insults! I am your most valuable customer and I demand more insults!

  • jonnyq (cs) in reply to Code Dependent

    Heh... second such comment I've seen here.

    I only have about a year experience with both VB and VB.NET, but I do remember that being the one language where, no, you do NOT have to break between cases.

  • ChrisB (unregistered) in reply to Code Dependent
    Code Dependent:
    It's been nine years since I did anything with VB. I don't remember, but doesn't it require a Break after each Case statement, or else it falls through?

    Nope

  • Code Dependent (cs)

    Given that qsB is the error (see comment on first line), it appears that if there is no error number it runs the function checkVirtualBundle to see if the quantities are correct. Since any nonzero return value is acceptable, I guess they're using an integer for a boolean, and not to indicate the quantity.

    So if the user has entered an acceptable quantity and hit a submit button, why the hell are they telling him he's entered a correct value and can now proceed to checkout? I HATE THAT SHIT! I ALREADY HIT SUBMIT! JUST TAKE ME TO CHECKOUT, DUMBASS!

    'Get correct text based on error Select Case qsB Case "" If checkVirtualBundle = 0 Then strMsg = "

    Please choose the correct amounts of the products below to " & _ "continue.

    " Else strMsg = "

    You have entered valid quantities. " & _ "<a href=""cart.asp?checkout=Y"">You may now proceed to " & _ "checkout.

    " End If

  • blah (unregistered)

    TRWTF:

    strCpnID is probably not HTML escaped.

  • ObiWayneKenobi (cs)

    The Real WTF is not "firing" such an idiot customer. Seriously, rewarding idiotic behaviour just sends a message that it's okay to be a moron.

  • silent d (unregistered) in reply to Code Dependent
    Code Dependent:
    So if the user has entered an acceptable quantity and hit a submit button, why the hell are they telling him he's entered a correct value and can now proceed to checkout? I HATE THAT SHIT! I ALREADY HIT SUBMIT! JUST TAKE ME TO CHECKOUT, DUMBASS!

    Your comment is acceptable. You may now proceed to submit your comment.

  • Anonymous (unregistered) in reply to ObiWayneKenobi
    ObiWayneKenobi:
    The Real WTF is not "firing" such an idiot customer. Seriously, rewarding idiotic behaviour just sends a message that it's okay to be a moron.
    I fully agree. "The customer is always right"? Bullshit!
  • mauve (unregistered) in reply to HughJass
    HughJass:
    In any case, why is the website giving a 'complicated' choice to the user? Wouldn't it have been simpler for the options the user could select only be those that are valid for the promotion? Crazy talk I know.

    We don't know how complicated the choice is. I would agree, if it's asking you to work out exactly what quantities you need to satisfy the coupon validation and type them in, but it could be providing a simple choice which any idiot should be able to complete successfully.

  • DangerMouse9 (cs) in reply to Code Dependent
    Code Dependent:
    So if the user has entered an acceptable quantity and hit a submit button, why the hell are they telling him he's entered a correct value and can now proceed to checkout? I HATE THAT SHIT! I ALREADY HIT SUBMIT! JUST TAKE ME TO CHECKOUT, DUMBASS!

    Tell us how you really feel. ;)

  • blah (unregistered) in reply to Anonymous
    Anonymous:
    ObiWayneKenobi:
    The Real WTF is not "firing" such an idiot customer. Seriously, rewarding idiotic behaviour just sends a message that it's okay to be a moron.
    I fully agree. "The customer is always right"? Bullshit!
    Indeed. Have they even thought about how much $$$ this buffoon actually costs them?
  • timias (cs)

    Seems to me that the customer isn't an idiot, just cheap and not afraid to complain until he gets an extra discount. The real idiot is customer service who caves in to his demands thereby telling him all he needs to do is complain a bit and he will get additional money back. It is exactly the same mentality every intelligent parent identifies in any 2 year old. Heck it is even a cliche "Give em an inch and they will take a mile."

  • Andy Goth (cs)
  • Wyrd (unregistered) in reply to ChrisB
    ChrisB:
    Code Dependent:
    It's been nine years since I did anything with VB. I don't remember, but doesn't it require a Break after each Case statement, or else it falls through?

    Nope

    The language you are looking for is called C. (or C++... I'm not sure about some of the other languages that have a C-style syntax. You'll have to test those yourself. :-P)

    -- Furry cows moo and decompress.

  • clickey McClicker (unregistered)

    Customers like this do business with you because you are soft compared to your competitors, you cave too easy.

    It could also be said that it has nothing to do with them being lazy, whining brats of course.

  • notme (unregistered) in reply to Wyrd
    Wyrd:
    ChrisB:
    Code Dependent:
    It's been nine years since I did anything with VB. I don't remember, but doesn't it require a Break after each Case statement, or else it falls through?

    Nope

    The language you are looking for is called C. (or C++... I'm not sure about some of the other languages that have a C-style syntax. You'll have to test those yourself. :-P)

    Both of those, and most others. If I remember correctly, even bash-programming works that way.

    I have come across cases now and then where the ability to just omit the break, and thus have the program execute the commands in the following case statements as well comes in really handy.

  • Washii (unregistered) in reply to HughJass
    HughJass:
    CaRL:
    Humpph. If a web site talked to me like this, I'd keep hitting Check Out to see just how far the messages would go. Then I'd modify the URL to say "checkout=Y" and get my damn discount anyway.

    Quality. I remember same old games had a similar feature (i.e. you do something dumb and if kept doing it you'd get more annoyed error messages from the game - can't remember any off the top of my head though).

    In any case, why is the website giving a 'complicated' choice to the user? Wouldn't it have been simpler for the options the user could select only be those that are valid for the promotion? Crazy talk I know.

    Dwarf Fortress somewhat does this if you keep hitting '?' on the in-game help. Pretty amusing. It is by no means old, though.

  • Maurits (cs)

    TRWTF is the use of

      /
    • as a line-breaker.

  • vt_mruhlin (cs) in reply to Code Dependent
    Code Dependent:
    I HATE THAT SHIT! I ALREADY HIT SUBMIT! JUST TAKE ME TO CHECKOUT, DUMBASS!

    I thought the same thing at first, but guessed that would only get hit in the event that there was an error, but the error got fixed. In that case, and only that case, it would make sense.

  • Grank (unregistered) in reply to Perfect coder
    Perfect coder:
    A shame, then, that the code shown would throw a runtime error because of the mismatched quotation marks.

    It should read like this:

    """Check Out""!
    "

    Yeah, I was going to say the same thing... makes me call B.S. on this story, since the class and href quotes ARE escaped. Maybe that's because the person who stuck that in just copied and pasted the first case and then forgot to escape the new quotes, but I think it's more likely that someone wrote and submitted this "code" because they thought it would be funny. Fail :(

  • DaveyDaveDave (cs) in reply to blah
    blah:
    Anonymous:
    ObiWayneKenobi:
    The Real WTF is not "firing" such an idiot customer. Seriously, rewarding idiotic behaviour just sends a message that it's okay to be a moron.
    I fully agree. "The customer is always right"? Bullshit!
    Indeed. Have they even thought about how much $$$ this buffoon actually costs them?

    Well, given that he's clearly bought enough from them to even become known to the developers, I'd suggest that he probably costs them less than he spends. If you ask me, this is a shining example of good customer service leading to a loyal customer, even though (in his eyes) the company is making frequent mistakes.

  • blah (unregistered) in reply to DaveyDaveDave
    DaveyDaveDave:
    Well, given that he's clearly bought enough from them to even become known to the developers, I'd suggest that he probably costs them less than he spends. If you ask me, this is a shining example of good customer service leading to a loyal customer, even though (in his eyes) the company is making frequent mistakes.
    Ha. Bought enough or suckered enough out of them? All his unfair discounts on top of the time wasted on the phone with him when they could be servicing a customer with a legit problem? I don't know. But he's certainly more grief than he's worth.
  • D. Travis North (unregistered) in reply to Anonymous
    Anonymous:
    Nice story but let's see it in action on the real website before assuming this code ever actually made it to production. It's not unheard of to write some "frustration code" every now and then but why are we making the assumption that the given sample was ever checked in?

    Even if it wasn't checked in, it's still funny. Yes, we've all written frustration code, but it's always fun to see other people's frustration code. The story makes me feel better about some of the evil thoughts I've had on projects in the past.

    When reading articles on TDWTF, keep in mind that Alex (and company) regularly flex their "artistic license" muscles. Grains of salt are essential for enjoying the site (unless, of course, you enjoy pointing out flaws).

  • BEF (unregistered) in reply to Code Dependent
    Code Dependent:
    So if the user has entered an acceptable quantity and hit a submit button, why the hell are they telling him he's entered a correct value and can now proceed to checkout? I HATE THAT SHIT! I ALREADY HIT SUBMIT! JUST TAKE ME TO CHECKOUT, DUMBASS!

    I'm assuming this happens immediately after you enter a discount code. This message is to let you know that your discount has been successfully applied. Not really that bad an idea--especially since some people might miss it if you just return them to the cart with a message somewhere on the page that their discount has been applied.

  • darkmage0707077 (unregistered) in reply to Bill
    Bill:
    TarquinWJ:
    Humans generally respond better to a rude response than a polite one anyway
    Well that's the stupidest thing I've heard in years, you ignorant slut.

    That's unknowledgable lover, you insensitive clod!!

    Captcha: suscripit (a suspicious script written by a toad)

  • SteveJobs (unregistered) in reply to ParkinT

    Oh, "coded and deleted"? IT morons are so cute when riled.

    The only WTF here is in the sheer lack of any kind of professionalism.

  • CynicalTyler (unregistered) in reply to Andy Goth
    Comment held for moderation.
  • Mister (unregistered) in reply to Grank
    Grank:
    Perfect coder:
    A shame, then, that the code shown would throw a runtime error because of the mismatched quotation marks.

    It should read like this:

    """Check Out""!
    "

    Yeah, I was going to say the same thing... makes me call B.S. on this story, since the class and href quotes ARE escaped. Maybe that's because the person who stuck that in just copied and pasted the first case and then forgot to escape the new quotes, but I think it's more likely that someone wrote and submitted this "code" because they thought it would be funny. Fail :(

    The Error Codes don't quite ring true either (for mine, anyway). Not only are they magic numbers, but (for some reason) I've rarely come accross people who would use the positive integers beginning with 1. I have encountered people who would do the negative integers from -1, but (and I really am not sure why), people seem to like to start error codes higher quite often (and even use multiples of some magic number, say 100,200,300...etc). There seems to be an implication (maybe I'm reading too much into it - or making too big an assumption) that qsB increments with each press of submit - in this case, even if the person corrected their problem, they would still get error messages, despite having corrected the issue.

    The point I was trying to make is - I agree, something doesn't ring true on this one at all.

    Nice Story, but. ("I like Stories" - Homer S)

  • eros? more like errors (unregistered)

    I'm sure once you click "check out" and it fails the checkout button gets rewritten as

    <input type="button" disabled="disabled" value="Checkout" />

  • Mr.'; Drop Database -- (unregistered) in reply to Washii
    Washii:
    Dwarf Fortress somewhat does this if you keep hitting '?' on the in-game help. Pretty amusing. It is by no means old, though.
    Older versions of DF would give you a rude message if you started to type "electrum" on certain screens and if you haven't unlocked electrum yet.
  • Michael Rutherfurd (unregistered)

    The old text based adventure game "The hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy" had a section where you needed to go into the engineroom of the Heart of Gold. The first time you tried it responded that you can't go there. The responses got progressively assertive until after 3-4 tries it said ok and you finally got in. Lots of amusement in that game :-)

  • chrismcb (cs) in reply to Michael Rutherfurd

    Get Donut Hole

    Edit: TRWTF is I can't delete this comment

  • chrismcb (cs) in reply to Michael Rutherfurd
    Michael Rutherfurd:
    The old text based adventure game "The hitchhiker's guide to the galaxy" had a section where you needed to go into the engineroom of the Heart of Gold. The first time you tried it responded that you can't go there. The responses got progressively assertive until after 3-4 tries it said ok and you finally got in. Lots of amusement in that game :-)
    Get Donut Hole
  • chrismcb (cs) in reply to Mister
    Mister:
    There seems to be an implication (maybe I'm reading too much into it - or making too big an assumption) that qsB increments with each press of submit - in this case, even if the person corrected their problem, they would still get error messages, despite having corrected the issue.

    The point I was trying to make is - I agree, something doesn't ring true on this one at all.

    Nice Story, but. ("I like Stories" - Homer S)

    First line is: 'Get correct text based on error

    So yeah, if the user keeps hitting the button AND keeps getting an error then they will get an error message. I'm going to buttume that if the user CORRECTED their problem, they won't get an error, and they won't fall into this code.

    I also don't see anything wrong with starting errors at 1 and incrementing. I just did that in a program I am working on.

  • El_oscuro (unregistered) in reply to Michael Rutherfurd
    Comment held for moderation.

Leave a comment on “Your E-tailer Hates You”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

« Return to Article