Author: KarinsDad
Date: 12:51:58 03/17/99
Go up one level in this thread
On March 17, 1999 at 14:49:07, Bruce Moreland wrote: [snip] >> >>Robert, >> >>In normal circumstances, I would agree with you on this 100% and not have stated >>what I did. However, this is not a case of several individuals knowing a >>password and the administrators do not know that more than one individual knows >>the password. This is a case of one person giving his password out publicly >>(within view of the administrators) so that many others could determine the >>veracity of his statements. Knowing the reasons that he did this and knowing >>that hundreds of people could then use that account to log in, the administrator >>can shut down playing capability on that account, give Mark a new account (if he >>wanted one), and can also shut down the account within a week or two, once the >>controversy dies out. Due to extenuating circumstances here, the administrator >>could have been reasonable and ignored the letter of the law in this case. > >Why? Because it is more reasonable. For example, years ago, we had this real idiot in our organization who said stupid things. I once got into an argument with him and realized in the middle of it that I was looking like a fool in front of others just disagreeing with the guy. So, from then on, I just let him rant and rave and he looked more silly not getting a rise out of me than he did if I tried to dispute what he was saying. In this case, chess4you would have looked more responsible if they would have just let Mark go on with his accusations without overreacting by banning him (he didn't want to go back to that server anyway). > The guy is trying to kill his business There is no evidence of this. Mark has stated that he had a bad experience and explained his reasoning (granted, he has done this repeatedly). As you yourself have stated, this may have actually benefited them. I myself had never heard of them before. I'm sure that others here have also heard of them for the first time due to Mark. I do not make snap judgment based on the accusations of one disgruntled customer and I am sure that there are others that also do not do that. > as well as breaking his rules. I >can easily understand the attitude, "Eesh, let's just get rid of this guy." Yes, I can understand this attitude. But, this is the type of lose-lose attitude that doesn't work in business as opposed to the win-win attitude of being seen as the side that is trying to be reasonable and is bending over backwards to help out the disgruntled customer. I was much more impressed with Mr. Boehm's first posting where he appeared reasonable than with his second posting where he banned Mark. KarinsDad :) > >bruce
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.