> On 2 Feb 97 ,Brad Knowles insightfully wrote:
> > The problem is that the Customer Service folks get the same kind
> > of cluelessness and vitriol for virtually *everything*, as
> > list-managers get when AOL users demand that they take time out of
> > their busy schedule to solve their problems, because that's what they
> > were put on this planet for. In fact, I suspect we see more of it,
> > and in general, worse cases of it, than list-managers typically do.
> Ahhh, but the difference is that your Customer Service folks are
> getting PAID for problems that AOL creates. List Managers are not
> getting paid. Is there some reason that you are *not* getting this
I'm not sure if I get your point, and I'm not Brad. AOL's customer
service people are trying to do their jobs. List Managers typically
volunteer to do this, and thus if they don't like the problems, they
can just quit. Both are dealing with clueless people, because both
are dealing with new users to the Internet.
How is AOL bad, because most List Managers aren't getting paid?
> > So, what? Turn off the entire Service and send everyone home?
> > Well, similar problems (perhaps not quite as bad, but certainly bad
> > enough) exist on the Internet already, so why not just turn off the
> > entire Internet and send everyone home -- that's just as valid a
> > solution.
> Not a bad solution.
Turning off the Internet is a good solution? Or turning off AOL?
> Brad, you keep wanting to misdirect the problem elsewhere. This is
> indicative of AOL's mindset. Instead, why not try to acknowledge the
> problem and then find a solution to it? Become part of the solution
> rather than deny their is a problem.
1. Brad's not "misdirecting" the problem elsewhere, he's explaining
why the problem exists. Your idea seems to be that "AOL is bad
bad bad" explains everything, and that's just not the case.
2. I think Brad, and others, _are_ working on solving the problem.
3. How are _you_ part of the solution? I know how Brad's part of
the solution, but it seems that you're just here to attack AOL
and attack Brad. I don't see that's any more helpful than
what you accuse him of.
PS: I just today dealt with a stupid user from AOL. But I don't
see that user's stupidity as a reflection on AOL, but rather
a reflection on stupid people in general. If AOL weren't the
biggest net company around, someone else would be, and _they_
would have the biggest concentration of stupid people.