Smuggler Archive
Thread: Finaly I know why we are hated
Page 4 of 4
ValiantHalibut
Fri Feb 25, 2005 5:56 pm
#40
"As you said yourself, that implication from the ticket was that if you don't know anything about the professions, you can parse their meaning from the title. This doesn't mean asinine over-literal, and grammatically incorrect potential interpretation..."
The thing is, he was banking on that as the crux of his argument. That was why he phrased it as he did.
Musicians can play music.
Dancers can dance.
Brawlers can brawl.
Fencers can fence.
etc etc etc
Using that form to present his argument makes it implicit that he wants it to be parsed on a basic level without any underlying understanding. If he had used the following examples instead:
Musicians can play music.
Dancers can dance.
Commandos canuse big weapons and blow stuff up.
Jedi can use lightsabers and the force.
But smugglers CANNOT smuggle.
Then it wouldn't have had nearly as much impact, however it would have been true. In order for it to fit the style he would have hadto say:
Musicians can play music.
Dancers can dance.
Commandos can command.
Jedi can jed.
But smugglers CANNOT smuggle.
That, however, is stupid and nonsensical. He chose his style and use of repetition in order to have a certain effect. However, his argument - which was based upon that choice - was inherently flawed. The CSR pointed that out.
And that post wasn't a post to a CSR about customer service issues. He wasn't saying "I have a problem with X and need help." It's as though someone called you at your customer service job and said, "Hey, you all suck!" and then hung up.
Message Edited by ValiantHalibut on 02-26-2005 02:58 AM
Kamileon
Fri Feb 25, 2005 6:26 pm
#41
ValiantHalibut wrote:"As you said yourself, that implication from the ticket was that if you don't know anything about the professions, you can parse their meaning from the title. This doesn't mean asinine over-literal, and grammatically incorrect potential interpretation..."The thing is, he was banking on that as the crux of his argument. That was why he phrased it as he did.Musicians can play music.Dancers can dance.Brawlers can brawl.Fencers can fence.etc etc etcUsing that form to present his argument makes it implicit that he wants it to be parsed on a basic level without any underlying understanding. If he had used the following examples instead:Musicians can play music.Dancers can dance.Commandos can use big weapons and blow stuff up.Jedi can use lightsabers and the force.But smugglers CANNOT smuggle.Then it wouldn't have had nearly as much impact, however it would have been true. In order for it to fit the style he would have had to say:Musicians can play music.Dancers can dance.Commandos can command.Jedi can jed.But smugglers CANNOT smuggle.That, however, is stupid and nonsensical. He chose his style and use of repetition in order to have a certain effect. However, his argument - which was based upon that choice - was inherently flawed. The CSR pointed that out.And that post wasn't a post to a CSR about customer service issues. He wasn't saying "I have a problem with X and need help." It's as though someone called you at your customer service job and said, "Hey, you all suck!" and then hung up.Message Edited by ValiantHalibut on 02-26-2005 02:58 AM
If you wanna be a grammar nazi, then consider this:
-ian and -er are actual english suffixes, modifiying a base word.
Commando, Artisan, Jedi are not suffixed words like Musician, Dancer, Brawler, Crafter, Smuggler, etc.
-o, -isan, -i mean NOTHING and do not modify the words "Command" "art" and "jed", which isn't EVEN a word.
And before you trot frikkin "Ranger" out, it doesn't contain a suffix either. Ranger is a word on its own merit, just like Commando, Jedi, Artisan, Merchant, Architect...
The POINT being, and the point of the ticket is that title != ability in the case of the Smuggler, and in no other profession. The CSR chose to ignore that, and blow him off because of "semantics" and provide an incorrect argument as to why it was just semantics anyway.
Aelik Orrigo: Smuggler, Pilot, and Ranger. Kettemoor
SpinningCloud
Fri Feb 25, 2005 7:07 pm
#42
Valiant; "He was pointing out the flaws in the argument presented to him..."
No, because the argument presented to him was that the definition of the profession title matched the skills for all but Smuggler, NOT that some suffix was added that didn't match the root. He didn't respond to the argument in the least, he responded with a liguistically flawed counter. As was pointed out the -isan in 'artisan' is NOT a suffix indicating someone that does art. Commando is a word in and of itself and it so happens that Commandos have skills that match the profession tittle.
I find it interesting that you think flippant remarks to customers are appropriate in certain circumstances. Do you really think you could get a job at any large company if you went into the interview and TOLD them outright that in certain situations it is appropriate to give flippant and even rude responses to customers? I'd bet you'd never hear from them again. I suppose you could find some small company run by a few hackers more interested in their own entertainment than the bottom line at the end of the fiscal year. THEY might think it cute to give such comments to customers and hire you anyway. But let's admit that Sony is NOT such a company.
ValiantHalibut
Sat Feb 26, 2005 12:36 am
#43
*sigh*
How can you be seem so intelligent and yet be so incredibly far from getting the point? Suffixes don't even come into the equation. He was stressing a pattern and implying that the pattern fit across the board, but it doesn't. He was also being a jerk about it, and the CSR is in no way required to pander to an immature jerk even if he is a paying customer. Sure, it's usually in their best interest to be good natured but they certainly don't have to be.
I'm glad I just got my game computer up and running again. Visiting these forums makes me think the game actually is as bad as everyone seems to want it to be.
Kamileon
Sat Feb 26, 2005 1:30 am
#44
It was an unprofession way to answer the issue, I think.
The CSR simply should have not commented on the argument made, and referred him to the boards to suggest ways to enhance the smuggling aspect of the profession. Even though we, who hav done so, know how much of an ineffective joke that can be, it's still the correct avenue to address the issue in the bug report.
Customer service or technical support do not exist to pass judgement on people's comments, but instead of address or correct an issue.
The CSR simply should have not commented on the argument made, and referred him to the boards to suggest ways to enhance the smuggling aspect of the profession. Even though we, who hav done so, know how much of an ineffective joke that can be, it's still the correct avenue to address the issue in the bug report.
Customer service or technical support do not exist to pass judgement on people's comments, but instead of address or correct an issue.
SpinningCloud
Sat Feb 26, 2005 8:40 am
#45
Valiant,
I'm surprised YOU don't get the point. The pattern DOES fit across the board that it was written as. The CSR tried to continue the pattern incorrectly...which only made him look silly in most of our eyes.
What the CSR basically implied by continuing the pattern with 'artisan' and 'commando' was that since artisans don't make art and commandos don't command then there is no inherent reason why smugglers should smuggle. And, for your edification, the reason I used 'crafter' and 'craft' in the original bug report I sent was JUST for the reason of continuing the pattern correctly. If I had made the series longer and included pistoleer, swordsman, caribiner and TK I would have used a class that fit them all,'fighter' and 'fight', to correctly extend the series.
Problem withthe CSRslogic is that the pattern was clearly a serious words with suffixes added to produce nouncounterparts that perform an action expressed by the root word. The two he added did clearly NOT fit that patternand hence appeared nonsensical and did not in anyway make a valid or even amusing point...at least not amusing to people that understood the pattern presented in the first place.
And, while you may think it's a good idea for customer service personel to make snide comments to customers, you'd never land a job stating that in an interview would you?
MISTagent01
Sat Feb 26, 2005 11:14 am
#46
SpinningCloud wrote:
Valiant,
I'm surprised YOU don't get the point. The pattern DOES fit across the board that it was written as. The CSR tried to continue the pattern incorrectly...which only made him look silly in most of our eyes.
What the CSR basically implied by continuing the pattern with 'artisan' and 'commando' was that since artisans don't make art and commandos don't command then there is no inherent reason why smugglers should smuggle. And, for your edification, the reason I used 'crafter' and 'craft' in the original bug report I sent was JUST for the reason of continuing the pattern correctly. If I had made the series longer and included pistoleer, swordsman, caribiner and TK I would have used a class that fit them all,'fighter' and 'fight', to correctly extend the series.
Problem withthe CSRslogic is that the pattern was clearly a serious words with suffixes added to produce nouncounterparts that perform an action expressed by the root word. The two he added did clearly NOT fit that patternand hence appeared nonsensical and did not in anyway make a valid or even amusing point...at least not amusing to people that understood the pattern presented in the first place.
And, while you may think it's a good idea for customer service personel to make snide comments to customers, you'd never land a job stating that in an interview would you?
All I can say to this is....
1. Perhaps India has different personnel rules/regulations? Consider that for once.
2. The CSRs logic seems silly to everyone because he's a foreigner, most likely. So everyone get off the CSR's back for trying to make sense out of something. What's really funny is that the CSR in question might have taken the ticket seriously, and responded in kind. The more I read it, the more it feels like he took it out of context (being from a different culture) and responded in a way he felt was approprate.
3. Who cares if no one gets the point? Jeez, the ticket should never have been sent in (because it's a waste of time,) and the result is Smugglers arguing at eachother. I don't know about anyone else in this thread, but I'm tired of reading it.
Good day.
SpinningCloud
Sat Feb 26, 2005 12:26 pm
#47
Mist,
Perhaps the CSR is Indian with English as a second language...I have no idea actually, how do you?
While I respect you, if you are tired of reading this thread then don't click on it. How hard is that?
As for the legitimacy of sending in tickets like this I would have to agree that a ticket isn't perhaps the right avenue...I sent in a bug report which doesn't generate a request for an answer from a CSR. THAT I think is appropriate. If you want something fixed you have to keep bringing it to their attention...over and over. If it stops coming up in front of their face I guarantee you it will drop to the end of the priority list. I've personally been there and moved items to the bottom of the priority list when customers stopped asking for them or complaining about them.
TomoRainer
Sat Feb 26, 2005 1:34 pm
#48
Who was he being a jerk toward? The CSR? There was nothing personal in that ticket. If he was being a jerk toward "them"--the devs, the higherups at SOE--the CSR should feel no compunction to respond in kind or in any manner that isn't cool and professional. (Not that he should even if the ticket were a personal attack, but let's pretend.) This could include a reprimand for inappropriate use of the CSR ticket system for the purposes of making a "political" statement, but I see no possible reason a CSR would feel entitled to defend the corporation for which he works with sarcasm or a passive-aggressive counter, doubly so if the offender has never violated the rules in this way before.
Besides, while I found this guy funny as a stylist, his argument misses the point entirely.
Anyway, I don't think the CSRs really have any place in this mess between us and the devs, but if someone's so frustrated at being ignored that they turn to this avenue, I can certainly understand it.
Besides, while I found this guy funny as a stylist, his argument misses the point entirely.
Anyway, I don't think the CSRs really have any place in this mess between us and the devs, but if someone's so frustrated at being ignored that they turn to this avenue, I can certainly understand it.
Page 4 of 4