Slashdot Mirror
Forbes Lists Top Corporate Hate Web Sites
windowpain writes "You've seen them. Maybe you've made one, like Walmart-blows.com or Paypalsucks.com. Now Forbes.com has a 'Special Report' devoted to what it considers the best of them. 'The following nine sites--there were ten, but one went unexpectedly dark during the editing of this story--are the crème de la crème of online rage. Note that we substantially cleaned up some of the posts, editing out odd capitulation schemes, iffy grammar and plain incoherence. Apparently blinding anger does not go hand in hand with dotting your i's and crossing your t's.' Maybe this will become an annual thing like the Forbes 400 and the Fortune 500." (I wonder what a capitulation scheme is.)
I wonder what a capitulation scheme is.
They probably meant "odd capitalization scheme." YoU THiNk, hUh?
Actually, at first I read it as "odd copulation schemes," which makes a lot more sense, doesn't it? * fp
A programmer is a machine for converting coffee into code.
It's really a multi purpose hate site, hating so many things/companies. This list was more directed to sites that hated a single thing/company.
how come there's not a 'forbes-sucks.com'?
To honor these quixotic champions, we spent hours trawling the Web looking for the very best corporate hate sites.
A number of years ago I wrote an opinion in Epinions regarding a brand new Dodge truck I had purchased (the new ones in 1994 just after the redesign). The opinion was written after about four years of ownership. One week after writing the opinion I had a lawyer (presumably from Chrysler) call me and threaten libel. I replied all I wrote down were the facts. Nothing more and that I had all documentation to back up my claims. If he would like, I could create a website with all of the documentation. I never heard back, but it was that kind of treatment that unfortunately convinced me to never purchase another product from them again. it's too bad, because they do have some of the most exciting products out there, but they simply cannot build them reliably and their customer service (even at the supposed 5 star dealerships was atrocious).
Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
There's this great anti-Microsoft website that I visit, now and then.
I like the way this was PR handled from UPS for the website UnitedPackageSmashers.com:
Company Says:
"We do know of the site. Because we live in a free society, people have the right to their opinion, and we recognize that people will use the Internet to voice their opinion. We believe that customers can get much more valuable and accurate information from our site."
Thats much better than a legal notice claiming a violation of some act, and gives them a leg up in my book. On a side note I wonder how forbes has/would handle something like forbessucks.com.
Depends on the product, I guess. Saying that a vacuum sucks would be a compliment. So it blows. For a similar reason, a badly broken hairdryer sucks...
If Microsoft ever made a product that wouldn't suck, it would be a vacuum cleaner!
Although, to be fair, a bunch of these companies have recurring issues.
Paypal, with its "we can suspend your account and you can't do fuckal about it, hooray, we get to keep your money". Allstate, with it's "musical chair claims adjusters".
Don't even get me started about UAL.
It isn't like people don't know about the shady shit these companies do, it happens pretty often, and if the company is a bunch of shits, contacting the BBB won't get you anywhere. State attorney generals haven't stepped in either in the cases of most of these companies.
I interviewed at UPS and we did a tour, a monitor fell off a conveyor belt. Everyone heard the tube pop, and the crash of glass, but one of the employees just tossed it back as if nothing had happened. As we were walking away, we heard another one drop and the sound of smashing glass.
Un-fucking-believable.
1q2w3e4r5t6y7u8i9o0pqawsedrftgthyjukilo;p'azsxdcf
I'm kind of disappointed that they didn't list Radio Shack Sucks. RSS was instrumental in organizing a class action against RadioShack, and in response RadioShack tried to lawyer them to death.
I didn't see electrolux sucks either.
...we were expected to be suprised, but it's not suprising.
Just an example from the Paypal part of the report:
Company Says: "We believe that people have a right to express their opinion. PayPal welcomes constructive criticism from members to help us continue to improve our service through our community discussion boards, chat rooms and Voices program. The problem with complaint sites is that the issues reported are sometimes out-of-date and have long since been resolved. Other times, customers may write complaints on the sites without trying to get their issues resolved through our customer service channels first. As a result, we can't confirm the accuracy of the information on these third-party sites. And we've found that they are not interested in providing a balanced view." (emphasis added)
Why can't they confirm the accuracy of the information?
Sure, they might not know if Customer Service Person A really hung up on a customer, but certainly they can look into some of these issues. Unless they're the one company in the world that doesn't monitor customer service calls. They have access to this information.
Why do they expect the site to be fair and balanced? When I complain to a company, I'm not being fair and balanced. I'm advocating for myself against the company. Yes, I want to reach an equitable solution, but these sites have a lot of people who weren't able to reach that equitable solution.
That's a problem for any company and you'd think they'd actually listen. (Yeah, I know.)
I realize there's a lot of bull on those websites. But at the same time, there are also patterns of problems. No company is perfect, and here is a chance for those problems to get past the customer service filter (who are the problem a certain percentage of the time).
What I don't get is why in the world any company wouldn't say something like "Yes, we're aware of those websites and in fact take their concerns into consideration", even if they don't really mean it. They just write those people off as "Never gonna be customers so skrew it: those people are stupid", but apparently don't realize that those people used to be customers, and other current customers will eventually leave them as well.
Am I part of the core demographic for Swedish Fish?
"Agreed. I'm surprised that their "forced illegal door search" policy hasn't resulted in a shooting, or at least a firearm being drawn."
Fry's electronics has the same policy, in both cases I just hold up my hand and say "no thank you" as I walk out the door when they try to look in my bags.
If they want to stop me they can, but then i can sue for false imprisonment.
I refuse to be treated like a criminal for shopping at someone's store (even though they do just by trying to stop me at the door).
The other side of the story (which isn't to say companies don't suck):
http://www.customerssuck.com/
So, frustrated (and tired after switching everything over to our other DSL line), I posted a blog entry with the title "I hate CenturyTel" and a big explanation as to what went wrong. Monday morning, our DSL line was fixed. The engineers on the other end were VERY apologetic, but I just assumed that they were trying to make amends - when the next day we got a call in the office from an executive at CenturyTel who had Googled for "I hate CenturyTel", found my blog, and yelled at some people to get things fixed. He then called us to personally apologize, gave us a bunch of freebies to make amends, and chatted with my boss for over half an hour about how to avoid this problem ever recurring. I came in from a client, my boss said "we just got a call about your blog" - and I assumed I'd libelled someone, was in trouble, etc. He then said "make sure you politely insult everyone who screws us over, it did wonders this time!"
Lead developer, http://wisptools.net