On Wed, 11 Jul 2007 22:17:40 +0100, geni <geniice(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> >> And we /might/ have averted a
> >> lawsuit.
> >Prove it.
> If that's your attitude then we are wasting our time.
You would rather have it phrased as citation needed?
One of the basic
parts of logical debate is that you can provide evidence to support
your assertions.
No, I am saying that either one accepts that there is a risk that some
complaints may result in litigation if not taken seriously, or one
does not. If one does accept the possibility, then the judgemental
has to be that of the person who handles the ticket, and if they make
a mistake then we have to handle it tactfully and pleasantly as a
learning experience.
You or I would undoubtedly have rejected this particular complaint as
baseless straight away, but we have to accept that humans answer the
queues and humans will sometimes make mistakes; where we err it is
undoubtedly better we err on the side of safety.
The Register is missing that point. I think you are as well.
Even if the volunteer's judgment was so far out that we kick them from
OTRS as a result, which I don't believe is so here, we still have to
accept that OTRS is the system we have, and approach problems in a
constructive way.
Guy (JzG)
--
http://www.chapmancentral.co.uk
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:JzG