Jump to content

Lunar Core

Resident
  • Content Count

    85
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About Lunar Core

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  1. Really now? That is not what you stated nor what you implied. "My point is that whoever wrote the support ticket, with a 30 day deadline to respond to the ticket, was not aware that the ticket would be automatically closed in 3 days." The above are your exact words Ms. Galli. So no, your point is as stated in the above quote, not what I stated should have been done. A point that has been pointed out to be a wrongful assumption on your part. Kindly do not attempt to rewrite your own post history next time.
  2. There was no misreading done. You yourself stated that you had been given a case number. I am sorry that you lack basic reasoning and reading comprehension skills. I will now spell it out for you: The thirty day limit cited within the e-mail is a legal requirement. The three day limit for the automated system is applied no matter the case. You should have at least given a query response asking for clarification before that automated response was triggered. "They" did not close the case. The automated system did when you failed to even so much as attach a question. Own your mistake, contact support, get the ticket reopened and next time do not ask for clarification on a support ticket using an e-mail. In closing: Yes, the system should have had a longer time frame or been suspended for such a ticket. It was not and you should never have assumed it would be. Especially if you have actually used the support ticket system before.
  3. The thirty day deadline is a legal requirement. The automated response is part of the support ticket system. The assumption on the part of the employee opening the ticket is that no one would go for three days without making some sort of response. You did not respond in any manner, not even to ask for clarification. Not using the support system. Reading your comment there I can only say this: Yes, you were supposed to provide the documentation or at least respond to the ticket when you found it. You were not supposed to contact the employee directly through e-mail. If the support line knew nothing about the ticket it is far more likely that you failed to give them the ticket number so they could look it up. Apparently, you did need instructions as you made assumptions that were quite unsound. Your "point" is nothing more than your personal feelings on the matter. I have filed a variety of support tickets with various services and found that the automated system (which is employed by many, using a slightly longer timeframe) is often assumed to not be an issue. Anecdotal and personal experience? Yes, it is. It does show however that service providers expect you to at least use their support system for inquiries about a support ticket. If we were discussing the government instead of a service provider, I'd agree with you.
  4. Not really. Unless you responded to the ticket with the requested information, the automated response would have been sent out. It's a machine Ms. Galli, programmed to respond under specific circumstances and applied to all Support Tickets equally. If you intend to respond to them, contact support and notify them.
  5. Pray tell why you do not use VTOL aircraft? Simply put, using tricks of any kind to fore someone else to move is underhanded and immature. They will not listen to reason, so find a way to work with what you have.
  6. Or move on and ignore her. You know, the mature way out of this.
  7. That is an automated response, sent out when no actions are taken by an end user.
  8. Maelstrom Janus wrote: Hey Ive got a forum stalker once again getting his facts completely wrong too.... Hmm, having lurked here long enough to have read that particular thread I can safely say that Perrie is one hundred percent correct where data usage is concerned.
  9. Maelstrom Janus wrote: Considering I spend most of my sl time 'at altitude ' and flying vehicles myself ..... and havent seen any other airborne vehicle for a good year or so.... By th way your facts on the ostrich are erroneous assuming you are using that old fallacy about em burying their head in the sand... so basically your facys were 100% wrong.... Considering the both of you are using anecdotal evidence (personal experience) to support your opinions, neither of you are making factual statements regarding Second Life air travel. You are relating your personal experiences. Treating these experiences as if they define the rest of the world damages your credibility.
  10. Maelstrom Janus wrote: Ah ban lines and security orbs - legalised griefing implements .... one of the many reasons we never see aircraft flying in sl any more..... Sorry, your opinion on existing security systems and access restriction methods does not rquate out to hard facts Mr. Janus. The correct phrasing is as follows: "Ah ban lines and security orbs .... one of the many reasons - in my opinion - we never see aircraft flying in sl any more....."
  11. Welcome. To. Reality. When all other service providers and entertainment providers (including Blizzard) manage to block Spammers from sending their messages through Instant message in an effective manner that reduces such events to negligible, let us know.
  12. Thank you for confirming that all you are capable of is projecting your own nonsense onto anyone who dares to give you common sense advice. If you honestly expect each and every service provider to do everything for you, you will live in eternal disappointment. That is your choice.
  13. There are also ways of reading a post without inventing rudeness or hypocrisy. Learn them. Or go through life with the belief that everyone that is blunt with you is rude.
  14. Nope - it's reality. Running to Linden Lab, without making even one realistic suggestion, is "one-step thinking" of a sort that no other service is expected to listen to. Follow the advice you've been given or put forth a reasonable suggestion (no, charging for an account is not realistic or reasonable). Continually responding to common sense methods for spam control with your "one-step thinking" projectionist crap does nothing more than show the type of person you really are: One that expects everyone else to do everything for them. But hey - at least your sort keeps those lovely Identity Theft "protection" services in business! One born every minute! Edited to add: Oh and so you are aware: Even Blizzard cannot stop spammers of this nature. They've tried. Their response? Report and block the spammer. In the case of Blizzard, these spammers even go so far now as to try and hack/hijack existing accounts. Be very thankful that all you're getting is a minor annoyance (an IM or offline directed to your e-mail) as it could very well be far worse.
  15. Learn the difference between whining and stating facts before laughing next time. Maybe then you will not be laughing at a hypocrisy that does not exist.
×
×
  • Create New...