Naming those who do a poor job.

I just read a thread about lousy customer service in which the writer related his unhappy experience with a vendor, another guy then added another example; neither named who treated them like this. Which makes me ask why not tell others who they are so they can be avoided. What's the use of going to the trouble to post if the most important part of your message is not included? What do you think?

Reputations -- whether good or bad -- should never be based on a single incident.

By the way -- this should not have been posted in "Equipment."

Cheers.
-Dan

Eric,

I know what you mean, but I would rather have it the way it was said. The point of the posting seemed to be that "there's good customer service, and then there is bad. Here is a story that illustrates what I like." I much prefer that class and style to one that says "XYZ is bad and ABC is good. Avoid XYZ at all costs...." The style of the original poster is positive, the other way is somewhat negative.

And the fact that Scott Losmandy is singled out is not bad. After all, isn't that how we all want our lives run. We recognize the good, and give them kudos. ANd we mention what was not good, but don't necessarily name them outright. (Think of the last staff meeting, or sales meeting you were at.)

And besides, from what I have read, any organization has its good and bad. (I've seen complaints about Losmandy--and good comments about everybody else I can think of.)

It takes twenty "attaboys" to make up for one "Awe Shoot." (or something like that).

In short, I'm hardly a sunshiney Pollyanna, but I prefer positive.

Alex
Alex