[jesterson]

> Not everything should be streamlined for a quick call solution

If you have a better solution to correct an error or solve a problem than having a call/meeting and openly discuss situation and possible resolutions - I would love to know about that.

[port11]

The response was condescending and very… American. The call ensures what, that you'll be more receiving to their grievances? That nothing is on the record? A lot of people don't want to jump in calls, ever. The initial response should've validated that the community feels slighted, that they should've brought them onboard for the decision making, etc.

Acknowledging the mistake immediately seems like a good start.

[latexr]

> The call ensures what, that you'll be more receiving to their grievances?

It ensures you truly understand what the crux of the grievance is and what they would like to happen to get it resolved, instead of being distracted by tangential points.

> That nothing is on the record?

If you’re already assuming malice before the resolution process even had a chance to begin, the conversation has little chance of being productive. Do you know this particular person? Have you interacted with them before?

> A lot of people don't want to jump in calls, ever.

Then say no! But being preemptively mad because someone asked is absurd and does nothing to fix the problem. The asker shouldn’t assume what the other person wants or doesn’t, they should ask. Which is what they did.

> Acknowledging the mistake immediately seems like a good start.

Yes, very much agreed. But you can’t take back what you did, only try to make amends. And that’s very difficult if the other party demands perfection while you’re still even trying to understand the situation.

[Almondsetat]

>the response was condescending

in your own opinion

>and very American

from an American company? that's what I'd expect. Should they have brought up some Japanese PR consultant just to reply to a community post?

>acknowledging the mistake immediately

Who says a mistake happened? You? Before apologizing maybe we should understand the problem?

[fragmede]

> Should they have brought up some Japanese PR consultant just to reply to a community post?

Yes! It wouldn't even have had to have been a good one to have done a better job. Shit, just find the closest weeb and run it past them.

A developer relations person needs to understand developers so why shouldn't we expect the community person to understand the community they're interacting with?

Mozilla doesn't have the community goodwill to burn, it's hanging on by a thread - so not hiring someone with an idea if how to actually do that job would be penny wise pound foolish.

[jesterson]

Ok, how the perfect reaction would be if you were at charge?

I understand people have sympathy inclination to victims, so everyone would assume the victim is good and other side is bad. I have worked long enough with japanese people knowing they can throw unpredictable tantrums.

As a manager, what would be your best course of action to deal with similar situation?

[port11]

Acknowledging the mistake immediately seems like a good start, as I've said.

Life doesn't always have to be from the perspective from “a manager”, these are community volunteers doing untold hours of unpaid work. Just be a person, whose acquaintance is upset you replaced their handmade postcard with an AI-generated one.

[jesterson]

Acknowledging a mistake, no matter genuinely or not, doesn't solve the situation. It just makes victim feel good a bit.

Agree on manager view, I was rather putting situation in a wrong perspective. It doesn't change the questions though - what would you do to resolve the situation (not to make the other side feel good)?

[port11]

> Acknowledging a mistake, no matter genuinely or not, doesn't solve the situation. It just makes victim feel good a bit.

This feels very wrong to me, I'm sorry, but I'd be very pissed if you told me such a thing in a personal context. Reminds of Stanley from The Office, who claims he never apologised to any of his wives.

[Jach]

Written communication is usually better and allows for more clarity, investigation, preparation, careful thought, and exploring of solutions. When it's not better it's usually because one party doesn't like to read or write and so avoids it as much as they can.

[watwut]

> If you have a better solution to correct an error or solve a problem than having a call/meeting and openly discuss situation and possible resolutions - I would love to know about that.

I do, actually. You first read what the other person wrote. Then your response will take whatever they wrote into account. If they did not expressed themselves clearly, you explain what it is that you do not understand. The "We want to make sure we truly understand what you're struggling with." is wholly inappropriate if the only reason you do not understand is that you did not read what they wrote.

Second, you dont suggest the other person is struggling with something, unless they are actually struggling with something. The original post does not show someone struggling at all.

Tl;dr if you want to "openly discuss situation and possible resolutions" you dont start by ignoring what the other person wrote. This response makes it very clear that manager does not intend to openly discuss the situation or possible resolutions, the manager is not taking the complaint seriously at all.

[skywhopper]

How is a private call about a community issue an “open” discussion?