Executive Services now Blocked

"Nomen Nescio" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> > It is nonsense to criticise those who play agame Sprint organized.
>
> >This is a rather childish argument. "He started it, so it's ok for me to
> >do it too"?
>
> I agree that he could have worded it better, but I think his point was
that you should not
> criticize people for playing the game to their own advantage. This is
what businesses do. This is
> the way capitalism and the free market works. Negotiating terms to your
own advantage.

I don't know who made the comment about "he started it," but it IS a valid
reason for many things. I'm not sure what the poster was referring to, but
it's Sprint's choice to start playing the negotiation game with their own
service. Their territory, they set the rules, and now people are playing.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.509 / Virus Database: 306 - Release Date: 8/12/2003

---

› See More: Executive Services now Blocked

>Lying in order to further negotiations is childish and dishonest, and that
>apparently is what a lot of people do.

Uh, that's far from a customer-only issue.

People being sold Vision connection kits and being told they can use Vision with a laptop. Being
told WLNP is a government mandated fee, being told they cannot place calls because the network is
being "upgraded". Being told over and over that that same billing error that occurs every month is
"the computer's fault".

I can write a book on some of the whoppers I have heard from Sprint (and indeed, other companies).

What do you think the company-to-customer lie ratio is with Sprint PCS.

I'd estimate 500:1, 500 company lies for each customer lie.

Of course, that's just a guess. But framing this as primarily a customer transgression borders on
the absurd.

"Nomen Nescio" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> >Of course it's going to be blocked. Every time someone posts a direct
number
> >in this newsgroup, that number gets inundated with phones calls which
really
> >shouldn't be going there and the number is usually disconnected within a
> >week or so.
>
> Wait, Bob. I'm confused on your position.
>
> Just yesterday in a different thread you claimed that the number of
"pissed" Sprint users in this
> newsgroup was so low that it didn't have any effect on the company
overall.
>
> In specific you said, and I quote:
>
> "And I think you and the others are really blowing this out of proportion,
> that everyone is pissed off. Hell fire, there's not even a real big
problem
> in this newsgroup, which consists mostly of a very very small percentage
of
> customers."
>
> Now, you are stating that if a number (a number which would probably only
be used by "pissed off"
> customers) is posted in this newsgroup, it gets "inundated with phones
calls".
>
> Is this not a pretty blatant contradiction?
>
Not at all foul mouthed one ... What I'm saying is that when a phone number
is posted here, people call it for every imaginable service call, not just
for complaints about WLNP, but for everything else as well, running from
cancellation for non-pay, getting credits for dropped calls, retention, plan
changes, whatever ...

> You don't really seem to have a consistent position on much of anything,
Bob.

I've always had a consistent position here.

Bob

"Nomen Nescio" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> >No. He said the executive services, retention, whatever people are
pissed
> >off because of the calls going there that shouldn't.
>
> Ah, you don't get it. I'll dumb it down a little.

I don't think you could possibly bring it to a lower level than it already
was, but give it a shot.

>
> Bob say yesterday people on this NG have little effect on Sprint.

That's not what he said. Pissed off people on the news group are not the
same as droves of random customers calling an unlisted number that they
found here. Did you forget about lurkers. word of mouth, etc? Leaking
information has an affect. Sprint wouldn't have changed the number without
having had a problem with inappropriate calls.

Many more people ended up with access to that number than the total of
people that actually post a gripe on the news group. They probably got
direct calls asking for better plans, free phones, etc, out of nowhere when
that department is intended as a problem-solver, not a salad bar.

>
> Bob say today that people on this NG have big enough effect on Sprint to
make Sprint to change
> number.

No he didn't, he said that the leaking of information here caused the
problem. The number is seen by everyone; not everyone that reads the group
is posting gripes. That alone makes them different populations, one being a
smaller subset of the other. The number is passed along too.

THEN you have to address the fact that Bob was talking about people posting
here not affecting Sprint. That's different from getting floods of phone
calls from people just calling up to ask for stuff for no reason. It was a
whole different topic. It would have helped if you quoted his whole post,
but then I guess you don't understand context.

FURTHERMORE anyone with half a brain would realize that Sprint could in
theory NEVER read this news group, but still be affected by inappropriate
calls.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.509 / Virus Database: 306 - Release Date: 8/12/2003

"Carl." <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Nomen Nescio" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > >No. He said the executive services, retention, whatever people are
> pissed
> > >off because of the calls going there that shouldn't.
> >
> > Ah, you don't get it. I'll dumb it down a little.
>
> I don't think you could possibly bring it to a lower level than it already
> was, but give it a shot.
>
> >
> > Bob say yesterday people on this NG have little effect on Sprint.
>
> That's not what he said. Pissed off people on the news group are not the
> same as droves of random customers calling an unlisted number that they
> found here. Did you forget about lurkers. word of mouth, etc? Leaking
> information has an affect. Sprint wouldn't have changed the number
without
> having had a problem with inappropriate calls.
>
> Many more people ended up with access to that number than the total of
> people that actually post a gripe on the news group. They probably got
> direct calls asking for better plans, free phones, etc, out of nowhere
when
> that department is intended as a problem-solver, not a salad bar.
>
> >
> > Bob say today that people on this NG have big enough effect on Sprint to
> make Sprint to change
> > number.
>
> No he didn't, he said that the leaking of information here caused the
> problem. The number is seen by everyone; not everyone that reads the
group
> is posting gripes. That alone makes them different populations, one being
a
> smaller subset of the other. The number is passed along too.
>
> THEN you have to address the fact that Bob was talking about people
posting
> here not affecting Sprint. That's different from getting floods of phone
> calls from people just calling up to ask for stuff for no reason. It was
a
> whole different topic. It would have helped if you quoted his whole post,
> but then I guess you don't understand context.
>
> FURTHERMORE anyone with half a brain would realize that Sprint could in
> theory NEVER read this news group, but still be affected by inappropriate
> calls.

Well said and exactly the point I was making initially Carl. I have no clue
how long Nomen has been on this newsgroup, but I've been on it since 98, and
I've personally noticed at least 4 inside & non published SPCS CS telephone
numbers posted here, that have been disconnected within a week or two from
the time it was posted here.

Bob

Bob

>Context means nothing to you, eh?

No.

>... SPCS .... should be changed.

I agree.

>I don't think you could possibly bring it to a lower level than it already
>was, but give it a shot.

Will do.

>That's not what he said.

Yes it is.

>Pissed off people on the news group are not the
>same as droves of random customers calling an unlisted number that they
>found here.

If this NG is irrelevant, where do the "droves" come from?

>Did you forget about lurkers. word of mouth, etc?

No, I think the NG is relevant. Even .01% of subs who read this group is relevant when you are
talking about millions of subs.

Some of those lurkers may have been "pissed" about WLNP also.

>Sprint wouldn't have changed the number without
>having had a problem with inappropriate calls.

Then they should monitor this group closely since it affects their business operations.

>Many more people ended up with access to that number than the total of
>people that actually post a gripe on the news group.

Beats waiting on hold for an hour. People deserved that number.

>They probably got
>direct calls asking for better plans, free phones, etc, out of nowhere when
>that department is intended as a problem-solver, not a salad bar.

Every customer problem should be handled promptly and competently.

>No he didn't, he said that the leaking of information here caused the
>problem.

No, he implied that the group was not representative of contentment with Sprint.


>The number is seen by everyone; not everyone that reads the group
>is posting gripes. That alone makes them different populations, one being a
>smaller subset of the other. The number is passed along too.

Good! Maybe they'll staff the "peon" lines with more competent people, then. If people were
satisfied with the current state of Customer Service, they wouldn't be seeking out a different
number. Would they?

The fact that so many people are looking for a "back door" number means that they are not
satisfied with the "front door" offering.

Sprint should make it so that people don't feel they need to go this route.


>It was a
>whole different topic. It would have helped if you quoted his whole post,
>but then I guess you don't understand context.

I like blue bicycles.

>FURTHERMORE anyone with half a brain would realize that Sprint could in
>theory NEVER read this news group, but still be affected by inappropriate
>calls.

Anyone with half a brain would realize that so many people clamoring for a decent customer
service line are desperately unhappy with the customer service lines they are currently being
offered.

>Not at all foul mouthed one ...

**** you, **** licker.

>What I'm saying is that when a phone number
>is posted here, people call it for every imaginable service call, not just
>for complaints about WLNP, but for everything else as well, running from
>cancellation for non-pay, getting credits for dropped calls, retention, plan
>changes, whatever ...


Wow. For an irrelevant newsgroup, many people get these special phone number from here.

According to your previous posts, few people would ever see the number.


>I've always had a consistent position here.

I agree.

I've never seen you on here without being on your knees with Sprint's collective dick in your mouth.

You have always assumed the position.

I stand corrected.

>Well said and exactly the point I was making initially Carl.

Translation: "I'm on my knees Carl, now unzip your fly. Trust me, i'm good at this."


>I have no clue
>how long Nomen has been on this newsgroup, but I've been on it since 98,


Oooooh, put that on your resume'. Maybe someone other than you will be impressed.

(hey, it could happen)


>and
>I've personally noticed at least 4 inside & non published SPCS CS telephone
>numbers posted here, that have been disconnected within a week or two from
>the time it was posted here.


Because Sprint just couldn't have the "real" customer service people talking to the peasants.

Sprint will disconnect any customer service line where the hold time drops to less than 30 minutes.

"Nomen Nescio" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> >That's not what he said.
>
> Yes it is.

You quoted his words, then paraphrased incorrectly.

>
> >Pissed off people on the news group are not the
> >same as droves of random customers calling an unlisted number that they
> >found here.
>
> If this NG is irrelevant, where do the "droves" come from?

People don't have to post gripes to the news group to call a phone number
they saw.


> >Sprint wouldn't have changed the number without
> >having had a problem with inappropriate calls.
>
> Then they should monitor this group closely since it affects their
business operations.

Bring up should's in another thread.


> >No he didn't, he said that the leaking of information here caused the
> >problem.
>
> No, he implied that the group was not representative of contentment with
Sprint.

Exactly. The sentence above this one is what he said first. Then a day
later he said the sentence above that one (reworded). These concepts do not
exclude each other.

>
>
> >The number is seen by everyone; not everyone that reads the group
> >is posting gripes. That alone makes them different populations, one
being a
> >smaller subset of the other. The number is passed along too.
>
> Good! Maybe they'll staff the "peon" lines with more competent people,
then. If people were
> satisfied with the current state of Customer Service, they wouldn't be
seeking out a different
> number. Would they?

There's a lot more they need to do rather than just selecting "competent
people," but as I said above that's another topic.


>
> The fact that so many people are looking for a "back door" number means
that they are not
> satisfied with the "front door" offering.

The problem isn't looking for a back door, the problem is they find it. And
when they do, people will walk in through that back door for every little
thing, whether they were about to cancel or not.


> >FURTHERMORE anyone with half a brain would realize that Sprint could in
> >theory NEVER read this news group, but still be affected by inappropriate
> >calls.
>
> Anyone with half a brain would realize that so many people clamoring for a
decent customer
> service line are desperately unhappy with the customer service lines they
are currently being
> offered.

You keep responding with anti-sprint arguments. That isn't the issue at
hand, and I am not denying that Sprint sucks in more than one way.

If you want to talk about what SHOULD be, Sprint executives should be
randomly given one customer's email inquiry every day and be forced to call
customer service until somebody gives them the right answer (even if the
executive already knows it).


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.509 / Virus Database: 306 - Release Date: 8/12/2003

>>Context means nothing to you, eh?

In article <[email protected]>,
Nomen Nescio <[email protected]> says:

>No.

>>... SPCS .... should be changed.

>I agree.

Oh, OK- *that* one was cute.

-Kenny, presuming you got my point, regardless

--
Kenneth R. Crudup Sr. SW Engineer, Scott County Consulting, Los Angeles, CA
Home: 3801 E. Pacific Coast Hwy #9, Long Beach, CA 90804-2014 (562) 961-7300
Work: 2052 Alton Parkway, Irvine, CA 92606-4905 (949) 252-1111 X240

<sigh> With every reply like this Nomen, you lose more and more credibility
here ... Only losers need to revert to swearing to try to prove their
position ... What's more, you've tried to combine my comments from two
different posts I've made which don't apply to each other.

Bob

"Nomen Nescio" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> >Not at all foul mouthed one ...
>
> **** you, **** licker.
>
> >What I'm saying is that when a phone number
> >is posted here, people call it for every imaginable service call, not
just
> >for complaints about WLNP, but for everything else as well, running from
> >cancellation for non-pay, getting credits for dropped calls, retention,
plan
> >changes, whatever ...
>
>
> Wow. For an irrelevant newsgroup, many people get these special phone
number from here.
>
> According to your previous posts, few people would ever see the number.
>
>
> >I've always had a consistent position here.
>
> I agree.
>
> I've never seen you on here without being on your knees with Sprint's
collective dick in your mouth.
>
> You have always assumed the position.
>
> I stand corrected.
>

"Nomen Nescio" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> >Well said and exactly the point I was making initially Carl.
>
> Translation: "I'm on my knees Carl, now unzip your fly. Trust me, i'm
good at this."

And with that you have completed the transition from debate participant to
general usenet nerd. Goodbye.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.509 / Virus Database: 306 - Release Date: 8/12/2003

<sigh> With every reply like this Nomen, you lose more and more credibility
here ...

Oh, cut the Martyr crap, Bob.

When you start a post with "Not at all foul mouthed one ...", then unlike Sprint, I am going to
fulfull your expecations.

Ad-honimens don't work on me, because I care neither about credibility, or making freinds, or
even being right all the time. I just want Sprint to do the right thing. I'll discuss my
interpretations of the law based on experience and precidents.

If you wnat to fling feces at each other like a pair of rhesus monkeys, well, I can do that to.
Everyone blows off steam differently.

Don't want the attacks, don't initiate them. The person you attack may be better at it than you
are.


>Only losers need to revert to swearing to try to prove their
>position ...

"Losers", eh Bob?

I know people that make $500,000+ per year who curse like ****ing sailors.

Losers have to pompously declare other people as losers because they disagree with their
demeanor.

I think Losers constant support a company in the face of the indefensible, but that is the great
thing about freedom ... everyone has their differnt definitions.

So, being the loser that I am, I might as well not fight the urge to ask you to suck ****
through a straw.


>What's more, you've tried to combine my comments from two
>different posts I've made which don't apply to each other.

I don't think so. I think you obviously contradicted yourself. But interpret it as you like.

Asshole.


Love and kisses,
The un-credible Loser

>And with that you have completed the transition from debate participant to
>general usenet nerd. Goodbye.

You going somewhere, Carl?

Well, enjoy your vacation.