|
|
|
|
|
by wwweston
2567 days ago
|
|
I agree it's a generally good response. There are a few more things I'd like to see more clearly addressed: * While the removal of the account termination template is good, in conjunction with additional hiring to support more attention to any individual ticket, I can't tell by whose standards the "reasoned response" is gauged, or if the response is reviewable at all. I did note that they now want two human reviewers, but that's distinct from specifying a process in which a reasoned response is articulated and reviewed. * More importantly, if the reasoned response doesn't pass muster with the customer, what's their resort? Still Twitter-shaming? I suppose that's legit if they'd rather their mistakes were public like this. * The question of whether an account-wide lockout w/ no data retrieval is a necessary/proper consequence for those flagged for CPU abuse needs addressing -- ideally they should have a different policy that allows for data egress (with bandwidth fees, if necessary), but if not, a rationale and clear policy
might be acceptable. |
|