Let me add a little bit in WS defense here as well, from talking with guys that work in the company their is no CS department.   It believe its one guy that also does many other things besides CS for like every game they have.  Which is why the more details you can give in the first ticket the better chance you have of a quick(ish) answer.  If you wanna blame someone, blame fox sports for not giving them a budget to hire a CS staff

CS, or the one dude, often steps on his own dick by giving a wrong response and then recanting when pressed.  That, more than anything, is why CS has a bad rep. 

If he can step on his own dick, why is he working customer support? Seems like he could make more money elsewhere.

Calm down.  You're a tad too interested in that.

Too late.  You got him all worked up now.

Posted by doomey on 3/8/2011 2:28:00 AM (view original):
LOL. Too funny. Seriously man, the situation itself was convoluded, just leave it at that. The way it happened was as explained. When clarification was asked it was given and that information should have sufficed. While simplicity is important, it too can have it's own pitfalls if the issue is more complicated as was this issue. The ISSUE was the phantom signing, but that issue complicated the rest of my FA signings, so both needed to be explained. If there is something there that isn't accurate, then you have a point. .

Your post, however, was just a silly attempt to be unnecessarily condecending instead of simply saying the issue could have been more clearly defined. That, my friend, is how you communicate civilly. While what you posted is indeed true, it was barely appropos and bringing up spelling and minor grammatical defects in a forum atmosphere is just a call for attention and detracts from the heart of the conversation. That last comment just shows you need to do a little growing up, son.

You might want to check in on your own education, you are clearly missing some important punctuation in that last post. Just saying.

I wasn't being CONDESCENDING! lol 

Ok, I was right there because you tried to insult my punctuation and education background while not being able to spell that word correct.

You are dealing with CS, you didn't even want anything and they were just confused with why you even posted if you didn't want anything from them. I understand the reason behind your tickets but you're dealing with guys that get paid $10-$15/hr to know barely anything and **** people off. I haven't ran across a technical support for any company that knew what the hell to do but in this case I don't really blame them for being confused..

I'm on Doomey's side. (I know you all were dying to know)

"Ok, I was right there because you tried to insult my punctuation and education background while not being able to spell that word correct."

The final word should be "correctly."

As a rule, people shouldn't comment on another's grammar/spelling without properly addressing their own.

Anyway, I see both sides.  Doomey's post was confusing, but understandable.  CS was being its usual, dismissive self.

I'll have to disagree with the idea that CS was being dismissive.

The data that they had available clearly indicates that an offer was made.  Coupled with the fact that doomey was not asking that anything be "fixed" or "undone", there really wasn't anything else for CS to do other than respond, matter-of-factly, that there is no indication of a problem.

Posted by tecwrg on 3/9/2011 3:29:00 PM (view original):

I'll have to disagree with the idea that CS was being dismissive.

The data that they had available clearly indicates that an offer was made.  Coupled with the fact that doomey was not asking that anything be "fixed" or "undone", there really wasn't anything else for CS to do other than respond, matter-of-factly, that there is no indication of a problem.

Except that doomey specifically stated that he didn't.  So, impliedly, they didn't believe him, which means they were being dismissive of his claim that there was a problem.  The "indication of a problem" is that he said he didn't do it.  They chose not to believe him.  What if doomey's telling the truth?

I agree that not stating a purpose (or asking for a remedy) makes it more confusing, but they didn't seem particularly interested in entertaining the idea that something was wrong.

I don't think anybody really believes that an offer was not made from doomey's account.  Either unknowingly by doomey himself, or by somebody hacking into his account.  Either way, what would CS be expected to do, especially when he's not asking them to do anything?

If "phantom offers" were truly a problem, it would probably be more pervasive than "one owner, one incident".

Posted by isack24 on 3/9/2011 3:02:00 PM (view original):
"Ok, I was right there because you tried to insult my punctuation and education background while not being able to spell that word correct."

The final word should be "correctly."

As a rule, people shouldn't comment on another's grammar/spelling without properly addressing their own.

Anyway, I see both sides.  Doomey's post was confusing, but understandable.  CS was being its usual, dismissive self.

As a rule, people should not  comment on another person's post when it has nothing to do with them.

Doomey seems to think that.

Perhaps, although I thought doomey said someone else in his league said the same thing.

At the same time, CS could have just been less *******-y, and said, "we appreciate you bringing this to our attention.  Our data indicated that you made an offer, but we will certainly keep a lookout for similar situations."  I'm not a sensitive person, and I wouldn't really have cared what they said to me, but how hard is it to give a two-line answer that makes the customer think you care just a little?

Posted by tomhighway on 3/9/2011 4:27:00 PM (view original):

Posted by isack24 on 3/9/2011 3:02:00 PM (view original):
"Ok, I was right there because you tried to insult my punctuation and education background while not being able to spell that word correct."

The final word should be "correctly."

As a rule, people shouldn't comment on another's grammar/spelling without properly addressing their own.

Anyway, I see both sides.  Doomey's post was confusing, but understandable.  CS was being its usual, dismissive self.

As a rule, people should not  comment on another person's post when it has nothing to do with them.

You realize that would effectively end message boards, right?

Not to mention, you did the exact same thing with your first post.

At the end of the day, doomey wasn't requesting action.   CS was unsure what he wanted and kept asking for more clarification.   By the time they got the information they needed, doomey was frustrated and so were they.    They responded in the best way they knew how(He was offered a contract by you) and, since he wasn't requesting action, made it clear that they were closing the ticket.   Could they have been "nicer"?  Sure.