Jump to content

Phil Deakins

Resident
  • Content Count

    11,705
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Phil Deakins

  1. OH YEEESSSSS! That was a thread. It really was. It's the funniest thread ever in these SL forums. I wonder who eventually put her out of her misery by explaining to her what was happening 🙄
  2. That's what I've said many times, but apparently most people use Firestorm, and I think that Firestorm defaults to the legacy search. If it doesn't default to it, the way that Firestorm's search floater is arrange it's highly likely that a heck of a lot more people use the legacy search than I, and possibly we, imagined. Possibly most people who use Firestorm use the legacy search and, of course, that ranks places solely on traffic. ETA: Of course inworld traffic doesn't help marketplace listings, but I'm sure than there are many people who shop inworld.
  3. It's working out very well. Last month Phil Deakins was downgraded to basic, after being premium for over 11 years, and in March my other annual premium account will follow suit. Then I'll be gone. Thank you for asking.
  4. And some dish out penalties when, by the rules and guidelines, none are merited. If you haven't come across it, good for you, but it's absolutely true. That's what my post was about. It wasn't about when everything is working fine. ETA: Also, if you haven't been penalised, then you won't know from your own experience that they will not tell you what they say you've done wrong. They just won't. As I said, stupidity reigns.
  5. That's not surprising, as you have been a victim of what might well have been a bad hair day.
  6. The mods job is easy enough as it is. The problem is that they don't always do it properly, sometimes not even trying to do it properly, and that's the fault of those who don't do it properly. Some of them do it with personal bias/preference, regardless of any rules or guidelines. I'm sure that it sometimes has a lot to do with which side of the bed they got out of on the day. It's no wonder that different people have different ideas about what gets penalised. The mods don't need it made any easier. What they do need is to be instructed to only moderate according to actual forum rules and guidelines (and, probably in some cases, to actually learn the forum rules and guidelines). Of course, the mods get flack, whether written or thought, and confusion reigns, because they steadfastly refuse to tell a person why s/he has been penalised, and, when it's not obvious, as is often the case, the victim sometimes has no idea why they have been penalised, with the result that they cannot learn from history, and are, therefore, condemned to do it again. Stupidity reigns.
  7. Nope. That's against the rules, isn't it? lol
  8. Please try not to be so silly, Janet. You posted a post on page 3. I quoted it in its entirety. You said you didn't write what I quoted. I said you did, and that it's still there. What silly game are you playing? If you think it's ridiculous for someone to have a different opinion/view than you, that's alright. I think everyone knows exactly who is being ridiculous here
  9. What you consider top be facts are just your opinions. Don't confuse the two. Example: you wrote "48 hr turnaround is perfectly reasonable for an issue". That's your opinion. It's also a fact as far as you are concerned. But it's not some people's opinion, and it's not a fact as far as they are concerned. Another example: it's a fact that you wrote and posted what I quoted, in spite of the fact that you say you didn't You see, Janet, the very data that was presented fails to satisfy many people's criteria for good customer service. So you are mistaken about what pales in comparison to what.
  10. Exactly! It's company policy. Crap customer service init?
  11. @Nyll Bergbahn Yes, Nyll, I posted that I agree with what's been said about live chat. I'm really just grinding an axe that I have, but it's a 'correct' axe. In fact it's one that finally pushed me away from SL altogether. This month I downgraded this avatar to Basic after being Premium since the start of 2007. And in March I'll downgrade my alt to basic too, and then I'll be finished with SL. The company is bad for customers. So much so that for most of my time in SL I've said (posted) that I wouldn't lift a finger to help LL. Some, probably many, of the staff are excellent, though, but not all of them. Some are really bad.
  12. Janet. Different people have different views AND experiences. Some of the views and experiences don't agree with yours, so there is no reason for you to write what I've quoted. It may well be that LL's practises are just fine with you. I have no doubt that up to 48 hours and more is just peachy for some people. But it's not for others. So try to allow for people whose views and experiences are different to yours.
  13. Does that mean you have chosen to:- a. employ more people (new company employees)? b. bring more existing employees into the customer services section? c. move some existing customer services people from other customer services parts to the land operations part? If a, then well done! If b, then also well done, depending on where the people have been moved from, of course. If c, then sorry, but that's no good (for customers) at all as far as customer services is concerned.
  14. @Pamela Galli The cost of a premium account is a miniscule amount to me, Pamela. That was a ridiculous thing to say. But it may be a lot to many premium members who live in different parts of the world. Either way, it's irrelevant to this discussion. The amount is comparable with other companies that take ongoing payments for their services, which was the point. I.e. a few quid a month. It's not just a few cents or a few pence each month. How much of an employee's time the payments are worth is totally irrelevant. If you pay for a service, and it doesn't work, or stops working, it really doesn't matter how much it costs the company to deal with it. You are paying for the service that they have stopped providing, so they need to deal with it however long it takes them to do it. Equating the employee's time to the monthly fee was a silly argument. I don't understand why you want to argue the toss about it. It's been common knowledge for many years that LL is very poor with their customers. You kept mentioning your SL business experience, but this thread was never about customer's SL businesses. It's only about LL's customer service. Poor customer service has been company policy for many years, so there's need to argue about it.
  15. Other companies that offer paid-for services, such as mobile/cell phone , TV, ISP, gym, etc., each charge a significant amount of money each month for their services. If there's a problem with the service, they can be contacted immediately on the phone. If they are big enough, they have dedicated staff for that purpose. If they aren't big enough, they have staff who can deal with the problems anyway. LL also charges a significant amount of money each month, but (judging by what's been said here) the company isn't readily available on the phone, except for billing. They are available for online chat during the company's local working hours, which isn't really good enough for a company with paying customers worldwide. They have a ticket system which is really bad. Up to 24 hours is a bad service. It doesn't mean that it's Patch's fault. He can only do the best he can with what LL provides, but LL does not provide enough dedicated people to manage the customer service systems. Comparing like for like - companies that sell services to people for an ongoing fee - LL's customer service leaves a LOT to be desired, to say the very least. The reason for it? The company doesn't care about its paying customers. Some employees do, but it's company policy NOT to provide good customer service - or they'd employ more dedicated staff.
  16. Sorry, Pam, but I was only refering to businesses that take real money from people - specifically LL. Play money (L$) isn't the same at all, even though it often costs real money. My gripe is against LL's attitude to its paying customers - those who pay them with real money - and not against L$ merchants.
  17. This is where we differ. What a paying customer believes is an urgent matter, IS an urgent matter. I agree with all that's been said about live chat. Nevertheless, the tickets of paying customers ought to be dealt with very quickly too. For many years, Linden Lab has demonstrated very clearly that they have no significant interest in treating paying customers as paying customers - except when it comes to taking their money, of course. They are never backward about that.
  18. In the early times, there was even live help available from a drop-down menu in the viewer. And a Linden, or a user-volunteer, would come right out and help. LL did good customer service back then, but it went right downhill not long afterwards.
  19. I remember those times, and it sorta makes the point I've made in both of my previous posts in this thread.
  20. There's a rather significant difference. LL is a for-profit business - ONLY for profit - and there are plenty of people who they could employ (if they cared enough) to do the work. The NHS is a free service that's provided to the people, and there aren't enough medical staff to fill the need. It's not that there are spare doctors (and nurses) around that can't get jobs. There just aren't enough of them in the country.
  21. I agree with the OP. Apart from (possibly) the very early times, LL, as a company, has had very poor customer support - or even any care at all about their paying customers. The only ones they may actually care about are those huge land barons, who pay them a lot of money each month, and there are only a handful of those, if that. About the rest of their paying customers, LL, as a company, doesn't give a damn.
  22. About the land:- you can't 'own' any Mainland without being a Premium account, which needs paying for, of course. You can 'own' land that's not mainland. In both cases you never really own the land. You rent it from the actual owner. With mainland, LL remains the actual owner and, with other land, the user remains the actual owner as far as you are concerned. Even though you may appear to own the land, that user can throw you out of it at any time and for any reason, regardless of any money that you've paid to him/her. That user doesn't own it either. He/she rents it from LL.
  23. Yes I'm in the UK. But my post was humour; i.e. the fact that I make own pastry must mean that I'm a pastry chef
×
×
  • Create New...