zenafu
join:2007-06-12
Brooklyn, NY
1 edit | I'm as mad as hell...I'll be back....yippy ki yay, mutha..!
I think a lot of these threats are the result of people feeling as if they have no recourse; no way to have their grievances heard and satisfactorily dealt with. Add a sense of entitlement and stir. |
|
Jodokast96
R.I.P Bassman442
Premium
join:2005-11-23
Erial, NJ
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| said by zenafu  :I think a lot of these threats are the result of people feeling as if they have no recourse; no way to have their grievances heard and satisfactorily dealt with. Add a sense of entitlement and stir. Yeah, you're right. Just like trying to deal with the government. It's a wonder we haven't had more attacks on the government than we've had given the general thoughts of some people out there. |
|
kaila
join:2000-10-11
Lincolnshire, IL
clubs: 
| reply to zenafu
Yup... I'm not saying it's ok to act out like that, but in many cases your problem is dealt with just that way.... it's your problem.
TOS agreements are typically airtight. They might seem to border on being anti-consumer, but since each customer is a potential plaintiff (enemy), ISP's feel they have no choice but to protect themselves from their own customers. There's a reason it takes a whole lot of legal departments time to craft TOS agreements. |
|
Koil
Premium
join:2002-09-10
West Columbia, SC
clubs:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
| said by kaila :Yup... I'm not saying it's ok to act out like that, but in many cases your problem is dealt with just that way.... it's your problem. TOS agreements are typically airtight. They might seem to border on being anti-consumer, but since each customer is a potential plaintiff (enemy), ISP's feel they have no choice but to protect themselves from their own customers. There's a reason it takes a whole lot of legal departments time to craft TOS agreements. You're right, companies do need to shield themselves, as their are always going to be people out there trying to take advanatage of the "man" or get over in some fashion. I have no problem with them protecting themselves legally.
However...
When companies set themselves apart, and make no seeming effort into really caring about their customers, or making real efforts to resolve issues, this is where customer's get unhappy, pissed and irate.
Is it right to make threats and use violoence towards ones end of getting their problem resolved. The right answer is "no", but once you have exhausted all other avenues, and still haven't received satisfaction regarding your issue, what else are you to do? You followed all the "right ways" of doing things, and the person on the other end of the phone could obviously give a crap, as their making 7 bucks an hour to listen to you gripe. "Put it with the rest of 'em, pal".
No one wants to PAY for that kind of service. When you're actually paying someone for a service, and then they screw ya over time and again...it gets absolutely frustrating.
At this point, someone is going to make mention of the fact that you can "speak with your wallet" and cancel that service. Well, you're right, to an extent. But what of people who live in an area where there is only one cable provider/ISP/whatever? Whats your recourse then? Rabbit ears? Tin can and string? Smoke signals?
It would be so refreshing, and I think the company would go VERY far, if they actually SERIOUSLY made customer satisfaction there goal. They went OUT of their way to actually make customers happy. Make a very obvious mission statement something along the lines of real customer service, handled in real time and actually MEAN it. make the people who answer the phones empowered enough to be able to take action on something. They don't have to make network changes, but they send a call somewhere and that call has to be acted on in 4 hours or something. Thats how it is where I work, and I see no reason it can't anywhere else.
Until the companies start realizing this, and stop trying to screw their customers over....these type of incidents, well...in the words of Chris Rock, "I ain't saying he did it....but I understand"
--
I want to die in my sleep, like my grandfather. Not kicking and screaming like the people in his car. |
|
jgkolt
Premium
join:2004-02-21
Lakewood, OH
clubs: | reply to Jodokast96
yeah but if it is a recourse against the government as apposed a cable company the media and government labels it terrorism.
--
3 free for you/3 free for me: Free Stock Trades : PM Me |
|
Jodokast96
R.I.P Bassman442
Premium
join:2005-11-23
Erial, NJ | As they should. |
|
fiberguy
My views are my own.
Premium
join:2005-05-20
1 edit | Why? The people have the right to over-throw the government... I don't agree that doing it is the right thing to do, good, or has ever shown to work in the history of man kind, but... the people still retain that right. |
|
C0deZer0
Oc'D To Rhythm And Police
Premium
join:2001-10-03
Davenport, FL
 ·Verizon FIOS
| reply to Jodokast96
Did you forget something called the Constitution?
One of the rights granted by therein is the ability for citizens to demand change, action, or even rebel if the status quo in place cannot adequately meet the needs of the people the government is supposed to serve. |
|
Jodokast96
R.I.P Bassman442
Premium
join:2005-11-23
Erial, NJ | No, not at all. But it doesn't give someone free reign to threaten and attempt to harm members of the government just because they're pissed off. I suppose you think McVeigh was right in his actions? That's what you allude to. |
|
C0deZer0
Oc'D To Rhythm And Police
Premium
join:2001-10-03
Davenport, FL
·Verizon FIOS
| I'm all for due process and allowing things to be remedied with procedure and order.
However, when it's clear that the set order of things is not going to be conducive to solving the problem, there must be a way to enact more direct action.
I've several situations where the "status quo" process of trying to solve technical problems with products I've purchased were never going to work. And when supervisors themselves decide to get uppity, arrogant, and/or flat out hang up on me, that is when I appeal to file with the BBB.
As for this guy's situation, it's hard not to understand how he feels. the place was giving him the run-around and otherwise doing everything except solving the problem in the first place. Thus, without any viable alternative or recourse for action, he resorted to the only (base) avenue that was available to him.
I'm not exactly saying he's in the right, but neither is the company here. Do you get what I'm saying here? |
|
Jodokast96
R.I.P Bassman442
Premium
join:2005-11-23
Erial, NJ | Yeah, I understand that and have agreed with it all along. It was the comments by some that the same actions against the government are allowed under the Constitution and that labeling it as terrorism was wrong. |
|
