> Once upon a time patrick@value.net shaped the electrons to say...
> >I CC'ed SUPPORT. I KNOW SUPPORT WILL IGNORE THEM. THEY HAVE IGNORED
> >*EVERY* DAMN MESSAGE I HAVE *EVER* SENT IN THE PAST 1-1/2 years.
>
> Frankly I don't believe that. I know if you sent email while I was doing it
> (and it wasn't something open with someone else) it got a reply. We have
> the archives, I can check on it. In fact, I will:
>
> support.9510:To: patrick@value.net (Patrick Greenwell)
> support.9510:To: patrick@value.net (Patrick Greenwell)
> support.9510:To: patrick@value.net (Patrick Greenwell)
> support.9511:To: patrick@value.net (Patrick Greenwell)
> support.9511:To: Patrick Greenwell <patrick@value.net>
> support.9511:cc: Patrick Greenwell <patrick@value.net>
> support.9601:To: patrick@value.net (Patrick Greenwell)
> support.9601:To: patrick@value.net (Patrick Greenwell)
> support.9601:To: patrick@value.net (Patrick Greenwell)
>
> I 'grep -i patrick@value' and looked for anything outbound.
I do not, at anytime remember ever receiving a response from
support@livingston.com. If I am mistaken as it appears I am, I'm sorry.
> >And that is a PISS POOR way to handle it. How the hell am I supposed to
> >know YOUR support policies and that my mail to SUPPORT is subject to be
> >summarily ignored? Can't support take 30 seconds out of their day to email
> >me something to that effect?
>
> And bob, and tim, and... Do you realize how many people CC support on issues
> that someone else is working on? No, we're not going to do that. Isn't it
> logical that if you are working on a case and email that person, CC'ing
> support, that you should expect that person to deal with it. Why would
> any engineer doing support email be expected to jump into an issue that
> another engineer is already working on? That usually does nothing but cause
> trouble. And the new guy is going to have to start all over again, the
> person already working on it has the background info already.
That is not an excuse to silently delete mail. A simple response would be
more than adequate. An auto-responder saying "If you are already working
with an engineer, please direct messages to them," ANYTHING besides
outright ignoring mail.
>
> If you are already working with someone you shouldn't be sending the email
> to support in the first place. If you have someone working with you on it,
> why the hell do you want to have it go to someone else? We're not going
Because the person I was dealing with did not have the answer.
> >And I am supposed to know this....how?
>
> Technical support is all in this building, anyone in the field is a field
> service engineer. I always thought that was obvious just logical. I
> would never think someone in the field is working Technical Support when I
> deal with any company.
And I am supposed to know that....how? Guess?
>
> >"Yeah, when I get mail from customers to my personal account, I
> >just ignore them." Awesome way to handle it.
>
> Stop being so dense. Did I say that? No. But if you email him at home
> you have NO right to *expect* him to reply on a business related issue. If
I pulled his address from one of the MANY messages in which he responds to
the portmaster-users list about portmaster issues posted from that
address. Now, I am supposed to magically guess that even though he is
posting to portmaster-users from that account, that that isn't a valid
address for issues related to Livingston? Sorry, but that is just plain
wrong. If one wishes to maintain that seperation, they should not post
about work-related issues from a private or seperate account that they
don't wish to receive mail about work-related issues. That is just common
sense.
> you email me at megazone@world.std.com about a PM issue I might delete it
Yes, but I don't see you posting from there to the list.
>
> >> 3. He wiped out his email at one point during an upgrade. Since it isn't
> >> supposed to be used for things like this it wasn't a concern.
> >Gee, in the last message, it was "I never emailed him."
>
> Because we, logically, assumed anyone who thinks is going to email him
> at Livingston for a Livingston issue. And he never saw the email. We
> didn't know about it until you posted it here. The only thing he can
> think of is the email he trashed unseen. Which he wasn't concerned about
> since Livingston related email shouldn't have been there anyway.
See above.
> Like if I blast my world mailbox I'm not going to think "Gee, maybe someone
> sent me a PM question."
How bout: "Gee, I am sending mail about work from my personal account.
Maybe, just maybe, someone will actually use that address to send me mail
about work." What an odd concept, huh?
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
Patrick Greenwell (510) 943-5769 voice
Systems Administrator (510) 210-2000 modem
Value Net, Inc. (510) 943-1708 fax
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/