Lycos Deletes Emails and Says 'Too Bad!'

Billosaur writes "The Consumerist brings us a tale of woe which is apparently generating outrage in some quarters, along with death threats. Lycos email customer Whitney did not access her account for 30 days. This resulted in Lycos deleting over two years worth of email. It isn't so much Lycos' policy that's the problem (though that requires some scrutiny), but the response of the 'manager of all of Customer Service,' Mike Jandreau. Apparently he's not too service oriented, as his exchange with Whitney shows. And since this story was posted to The Consumerist, apparently Mr. Jandreau has become the focus of some unwanted attention. Of course, his final response to her might have something to with it: 'I'm sorry, no one here has any intentions of helping you with anything. I am the manager of all of Customer Service. There is no one higher than me that you will speak with. You violated our policy, which is, despite what you say, completely clear. No one is holding anything hostage. Your e-mails have been completely deleted, and no amount of money can now restore them.'"

Comments

The Mail Nazi!

[Anonymous Coward]

No mail for you!!

Re:The Mail Nazi!

[operagost]

No. That law was passed to keep companies CURRENTLY UNDER INVESTIGATION from deleting email, not EVERY COMPANY AT ALL TIMES.

Thanks for keeping the dubya-bashing level high on Slashdot, though. I was afraid all the leftist freaks were on vacation simultaneously.

Re:The Mail Nazi!

[EvanED]

Yeah, only us leftist freaks care about the murder of 2/3 of a million human beings. Whereas you normal folks don't see anything wrong with it.


Let me introduce you to my friend, Mr. Strawman.

Who said anything about the war? We're talking about making up laws about data retention.

Re:The Mail Nazi!

[meme_police]

A funny first post. Will wonders never cease!!!

Re:The Mail Nazi!

[mrmeval]

They can only screw so many people before they have to have some real relaxation.

Slashdot for all your non-sexual harrassment needs!

Re:The Mail Nazi!

[Anonymous Coward]

> I was afraid all the leftist freaks were on vacation simultaneously.

Obviously you're blinded to the recent trend that even CENTRIST freaks are noticing what a disaster this administration has been!

Re:The Mail Nazi!

[Anonymous Coward]

strange... cimawxhqflrvybn@cs.arizona.edu

Re:The Mail Nazi!

[fredrated]

One is only a freak when one is out of the mainstream, which now applys to you. Get used to it freak. You will probably be a freak for a long time since your friends fucked up so bad.

Re:The Mail Nazi!

[mightyQuin]

leftist freaks!

gad...I hope I'm not the only banjo playing hater.

Re:The Mail Nazi!

[LordVader717]

Same thing happened to me with hotmail. Guess which email service I won't be using anymore.

Re:The Mail Nazi!

[saviorsloth]

(sigh) i know i shouldn't feed the trolls, but people throw this number around all the time, and while the number may be accurate, i don't think that the study that created that number justifies the tone that many people attach to it (U.S. murdering people). go ahead and mod me OT if you want, but i take charges of murder against my country very seriously, and i don't think that this charge is accurate. i will grant that the US has murdered people in Iraq, not only through the actions of rogue soldiers, but also through inexcusable high-level decision-making, specifically the use of heavy ordnance against targets in populated areas and intolerably aggressive interrogation policies that often did not merely border on, but went fully into the realm of torture.
With that said, let's move on to the number. i guess you didn't say specifically, but i assume that you're talking about iraq, and implying that the US has murdered roughly 600,000 people, the deathtoll from the johns hopkins statistical survey of iraqi deaths, right? i assume that if you didn't think america murdered them you wouldn't accuse people of not caring about their deaths, since everyone in america is uniformly revolted by Iraq's horrifying inter-necine violence, which is probably why support for the war has dropped precipitously lately. i'm not trying to be catty, i just want to establish firmly what we're talking about here. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lancet_surveys_of_mor tality_before_and_after_the_2003_invasion_of_Iraq
all right, so that study (and the similar one done by Johns Hopkins two years earlier) compared the official death count in Iraq during the pre-war period with the current deathcount, the latter of which they arrived at through a household cluster survey of all of Iraq. It subtracts the pre-war death rate from the current one and says that roughly 600,000 more Iraqis have died since the war who would not have died under the conditions existing before the war. I know a little bit about statistics and i have some concerns about the methodology of the study, but i've only taken a college statistics class, and the people who made the study are fucking professionals, so i will go ahead and grant them that their number is probably accurate.
My point is that 600,000 is an aggregate number of all people who have died in iraq of all sorts of probably war-related deaths. this includes people who have been killed in Iraq's vicious sectarian bloodletting, including not only the Sunni insurgency, who have been slaughtering scores of Shias for several years now, but since the study ran through June 2006, it also includes the wave of Shia death squad reprisals following the bombing of the Golden Mosque almost a year ago. It also includes people who have died because of the Sunni insurgents' targeting of critical water and electricity infrastructure. it also includes deaths caused more indirectly by the war, especially the general instability, lack of services and security, created by 4 years of urban, guerrilla warfare. (i know i said "it also includes" three times, but this is /. not comp class, and i've already spent too much time feeding this troll.)
While i'll admit that blame for all of these deaths, particularly the last of those, could ultimately be laid upon America's doorstep, since we started the war that has unleashed these terrible forces, i don't believe that America has murdered 600,000 people. perhaps that's just a matter of semantics, but i don't think so.

Re:The Mail Nazi!

[deprecated7]

all your email are belong to lycos (sorry if it's already been posted, found it humorous)

Re:The Mail Nazi!

[Master of Transhuman]

"I know a little bit about statistics and i have some concerns about the methodology of the study, but i've only taken a college statistics class, and the people who made the study are fucking professionals, so i will go ahead and grant them that their number is probably accurate."

Gee, I'm sure they appreciate your condescending acceptance that their methodology - which is standard and used in all such studies - was "probably" accurate.

The point of the "US murdering Iraqis" is that the US STARTED THE FUCKING WAR FOR NO GOOD REASON!

Can you grasp that, Bush shill? You tried to in your LAST SENTENCE, but apparently it didn't sink in.

And if that isn't enough, the US supported the UN sanctions policy in the 1990's which killed another half million or so - not to mention supporting Saddam in the '80's in the Iran-Iraq war.

Not to mention trying to start ANOTHER war with Iran NOW which will kill ten times the numbers involved so far.

Get a clue.

And if you'll examine that study more closely, you'll see that the stats - at least in the earlier study that did not include the last year or so when the civil war heated up - indicate that much, if not MOST, of the death toll is DIRECTLY the result of US airstrikes, US civilian annihilation campaigns like Fallujah, and random murders by US troops on the streets.

If you haven't bothered to read up on the numerous reports from Iraq over the last three years of US troops simply machinegunning entire cars and busses full of people and randomly shooting teenage kids in the head, you haven't been paying attention. And these come directly from quotes from actual US soldiers who DID this shit.

Yes, US troops are murdering Iraqi civilians. And your quibble is whether it's 600,000 or 400,000 or 200,000.

Asshole.

Re:The Mail Nazi!

[wordsnyc]

Deaths during war are not murders. They are casualties. Stop being a baby. People die all the time.

Especially when you invade their country and turn it into a free-fire zone for no damn reason.

And deaths in a war can legally be adjudged murder. Ask the guy who was just convicted of murdering three Iraqi civilians.

Re:The Mail Nazi!

[saviorsloth]

well, it's still offtopic, but since you decided to call me an asshole i figured i may as well respond, not that there will probably be any point.
first of all, i was trying to say that compared to the people doing the survey, i know jack shit about statistics. that's what i meant by saying that i'd taken one class, not that my grain of experience counted significantly against their vast mound of it. i shouldn't have used the word probably. for the record, my only real problem is with the accuracy of the previous regime's death toll records that they use as the baseline. i accept the validity of their cluster sampling method.
i was also at pains to mention that i do admit that americans are murdering iraqis, and i think that it's absolutely horrible. i'm not denying it. i'm not quibbling over numbers. i am granting that US actions have caused 600,000 deaths. it's absolutely fucking horrible. i don't know what you want me to say. i will admit that i am quibbling, but it's over terminology. i'm only saying that this survey includes many various and sundry causes of death, not all of which are what i would define as murder by US soldiers. I was at pains to include what many people call "collateral damage" as actual fucking murders. i agree that the tactics employed in the fallujah campaign were disgraceful. There have also been utterly horrific acts of individual violence like the ones you cite, caused by the vietnam-like stress of an unending war against an almost invisible enemy, with cities replacing jungles. it's all incredibly fucking terribly. If a US soldier shoots a weapon or orders a bombardment which kills civilians, it's murder. it's atrocious.
if a sunni insurgent blows up a car bomb in a market full of shias, i don't think that this qualifies as US troops murdering people.
We have killed far, far too many people. whatever the number of people murdered is, it's far too fucking many.
feel free to flame me back. i guess that's what slashdot's really all about.

Re:The Mail Nazi!

[Master of Transhuman]

You are correct that deaths not caused by US troops actions do not count as MURDERS BY US troops.

My point is that that fact is fundamentally irrelevant. It's semantics. The mere PRESENCE of US troops contributes to the problem, and the fact that the war was started at all by the US is the direct proximate cause of every death in Iraq that was not likely to happen had the war not occurred.

It's that simple. The semantics of whether "US troops personally killed each and every one of 600,000 people" are quite irrelevant, except purely for precision's sake. And I have nothing against precision, in general. But there comes a point where it does become quibbling.

And further, in EVERY war, almost EVERY soldier becomes a murderer by definition. War IS murder, simply because war is an action of the state. It's one thing to defend yourself against a direct attack by another person. It's quite another to take up arms, go to another country, and shoot people - even people in another uniform - that you do not know personally and who have not threatened you personally.

I was in Vietnam from 1967-1968. I never had the occasion to shoot anybody. However, at Vung Ro Bay in June, 1968, my facility came under attack. I was armed and prepared to respond to anybody attacking me. But I had no interest in fighting the war per se (even though I enlisted, I did so to avoid the draft, since being drafted at that time meant you would be infantry - and I wasn't that stupid even then.) And most of the other guys there were in the same boat.

Nonetheless, they didn't particularly like the Vietnamese. They disliked them based mostly on racial and ethnic prejudice. The majority of people in the Army are there because they are lower or middle class and don't have other opportunities. This is as true for the "new" Army as it was for the old. The only exceptions are officers. So you end up with people who are prone to racial and ethnic hatred being soldiers. And I'm sure had any of them been infantry, they would not have hesitated to take out their frustration with being there ON the Vietnamese. And that would have made them murderers, regardless of their basic feelings about murder. I may be wrong in my estimation of myself, but I feel that I would NOT have reacted in that way. In fact, I hated my comrades and the military in general far more than I cared one way or the other for the Vietnamese. I would have been more likely to frag a US NCO or officer or shoot a fellow soldier being an asshole (and there were plenty of those around, as usual) than I would have been interested in shooting Vietnamese.

If you read the accounts of US soldiers in Iraq, it all sounds exactly the same. Every Iraqi is a "raghead", a "haji" (the equivalent of the Vietnamese "gook"). And numerous US soldiers there have admitted to atrocities. Anybody starting a war KNOWS this is how their soldiers will react. And the soldiers do, too.

Which makes them all murderers by definition.

Sure, there are exceptions among the troops. But those exceptions are irrelevant to the overall situation. So it's not wrong to ignore the exceptions in making broad statements such as the one that triggered this discussion. Precision may be sacrificed, but as they say, "a difference that makes no difference is no difference." In science, this is not the case. In reality, it is.

Right now, Iraq is no longer the issue. Iran is. Bush intends to use nuclear bunker-buster bombs on Iran. Estimates are that this action ALONE will kill tens of thousands of civilians near the Iranian nuclear sites, not even counting the thousands of technicians at the sites. Depending on how poorly the bunker busters penetrate the earth and the increased incidence of radiation-caused health problems, the resulting fallout has been estimated to be capable of killing up to THREE MILLION people across Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan and India.

The resulting war with Iran will undoubtedly kill ten times the number killed in Iraq so far.

It's on. And it's g

Re:The Mail Nazi!

[operagost]

They're not my "friends." You're assuming quite a bit, you mental midget.

Re:The Mail Nazi!

[operagost]

It doesn't justify mindless hyperbole.

Outrageous

[Intron]

I would demand a full refund for this free service.

Re:Outrageous

[Anonymous Coward]

We are talking HUMAN RIGHTS here people.

Re:Outrageous

[arth1]

I would demand a full refund for this free service.

Somehow, I doubt they will pay you back the amount the advertisers paid them on behalf of you.

Re:Outrageous

[WhoBeDaPlaya]

Sounds like eBay's customer service ;)

Re:Outrageous

[mrcdeckard]

i agree the parent is +5 funny, however, it seems that some people actually believe that she hasn't a right to complain because the service was free. let's follow that logic for a moment:

i have a computer shop that offers a back up service for free (as an incentive to get people in the store to buy computers, eg). a customer uses it, say 6 months in the past. every 2 months i archive stuff off to a cheap medium, say dvd-r. customer comes back, says, hey, my hdd crashed, could you restore my old info to a new hdd. i tell him, "sure, oh by the way, you'll need to upgrade to a premium service for $19.99."

the customer gets irate, and no one can figure out why. even after i show him the original fine print, he feels cheated. why?

because he was under the impression it was a FREE service with no "catches". he entered the agreement with a trust -- a trust that i will venture to say was exploited. if i saw that he didn't read the agreement when he signed, did i point out to him that it would cost him $20 if he were to ever *use* the service?

of course not. he probably would've just bought a backup drive or something instead. by the same token, i bet the 30day provision was buried in the eula, which lycos bets no one reads (and they figure they don't both people that do as customers).

i think, as a business owner, i should be able to stand my ground, however underhanded it is. he did sign afterall. it's not my fault he had a general trust in people.

however, to respond how lycos did in this case is plain unethical -- i doubt there was language in the EULA that stated, "if user complains about any portion of agreement, lycos reserves the right to delete any and all of user's data."

mr c

Re:Outrageous

[Anonymous Coward]

The point of a backup service is to restore data. The point of an email account is to receive email that will be read by someone. If you don't login to your email account for more than a month, you're not using the account like it's meant to be used. Many free email services have login-or-it-gets-deleted rules in their terms of service. That is not surprising at all, because it's the only way abandoned accounts and throw-away accounts can be deleted. If you don't bother to read the terms of service which guard years of your personal history and trust that someone keeps your data for free while you don't even use the account normally, you're a very trusting person (I'd put it another way, but apparently the people defending this woman are easily offended by to-the-point language.) If your email isn't worth $20, don't make such a fuss about it, ok?

Re:Outrageous

[jimktrains]

I know that this is OT, my apologies...

Your sig is wrong. Introns are used during alternative splicing to make more possible gene products than genes. Also, introns are suspected in regulation of genes. There is a reason for them, or they wouldn't exists, that's how a lot of bio works (vestigial organs are old things going away, introns are "new" evolutionarily, so they must be useful, in theory).

At the very least, you cannot say they do nothing, because they are known to do some things...

Re:Outrageous

[HomelessInLaJolla]

> every 2 months i archive stuff off to a cheap medium, say dvd-r.

And don't forget that, should you decide to tell the customer,"You've bothered me so much that I won't even accept your application for premium service even if you pay cash" ...

You still have the cheap backup media! You cannot possibly, honestly, tell the customer that their data is irrevocably deleted.

That is the point of the outrage.

Re:Outrageous

[rhombic]

The sig is completely correct:

Intron: the portion of DNA which expresses nothing useful.

Introns may do lots of things, but they do not express anything. Expression by definition is only done by exon sequences. If a sequence is translated, by defintion it's in an exon.

Pedantic & O-T, I know. Cheers

Re:Outrageous

[jimktrains]

Did you read the part on alternative splicing...? The do express things, just not all the time. Hell, not all exons are expressed all the time, the line between them is thin at times.

Re:Outrageous

[rhombic]

Certainly not every exon is used in various splice variants, but they're still exons. For a given gene, a particular transcript may only use exons 1, 3, 4, 5, and 7, while another may use 1, 2, 3, 6, and 7, but all seven are still referred to as exons when discussing the gene. In normal usage, at least among the people I work with, anything that ends up in any mature mRNA outside the nucleus is an exon. Everything else within a particular gene's transcript is an intron. Everything outside the transcript is neither. If I referred to, say, exon 1 of AKAP9 as an intron because it's not present in transcripts coding for isoform 2 or 3 of that gene, people would think I was silly (Admittedly, only a few people in the world would give a flying crap about exon 1 of AKAP9, but still).

I do have to admit, my pedantic response was technically incorrect-- I wasn't accounting for interleaved genes, where an intron of one gene may be a coding sequence for another gene.

Re:Outrageous

[jimktrains]

I wasn't even considering those, but alternative splicing could use an exon to code for a gene product here, and leave it out to code for a related, but different product later.

Re:Outrageous

[dan828]

Really? I've had a yahoo account since '98 or so, and have gone, at times, over a year without logging in to it. I just checked it to see if I could still log on, and low and behold, it's all still there, including some spam from March of 2000 that I never got around to deleting. Maybe I'm just special or something.

Re:Outrageous

[rhombic]

Gawd, this is spiralling too deep ;). Sure, exons get left out of alternate splices all the time, that's how they work. But the language used in the field, by everybody I know, is if it's used in a mature mRNA it's an exon. If it gets left out to code for a related but different product of the same gene (a.k.a. an isoform) it's still an exon, just not used in that transcript's splice variant. If it gets left out of 99.99% of the transcripts for a particular gene, but one out of ten thousand edited, capped, and exported mRNAs has it there, then it's still an exon (or you screwed up your cDNA generation). If it gets transcribed, but then edited out of every mature mRNA for a particular gene, then it's an intron. If it's an exon for a different gene (say, interleaved or opposite strand), it's still an intron when referring to the original gene. And I'm not even going to get into antibody splicing, which takes all of this to the next level. But still, at the end of the day, if it ends up in a mature mRNA, either 5' non trans, ORF, 3' non trans, then it's an exon.

Re:Outrageous

[gsn]

This is why I love /.

Nerds :-)

That was entertaining and educational guys, thanks.

Re:Outrageous

[meme_police]

I didn't log into my Yahoo account for a year or so and lost everything. Not that it mattered because it was 99.9% spam and .1% legitimate marketing materials. Nothing important.

Re:Outrageous

[Jinjuku]

No ones fault but the end user if they dont read the EULA. Gawd knows I read them before agreeing.

Re:Outrageous

[ArielMT]

Nah, eBay stick to canned responses and merely pretend to not understand even the basic nature of your problem. They're Captain Oblivious rude, not Soup Nazi rude.

"eBay, you billed me a fee that I already paid and a final value fee for an iten that didn't get any bids."

"Customer, have you tried clearing your cache and cookies, emptying your recycle bin, deleting all the contents of your 'My Documents' folder, and reinstalling Windows?"

Re:Outrageous

[StrongAxe]

Do you use Yahoo Messenger, or any other services (like Yahoo Groups)? It might consider accessing those with the same account name as the same as logging in.

Re:Outrageous

[fermion]

The two are not identical situations. A firm like Lycos is basically an advertising agent. It provides a service to attract eyeballs to it ads. If an account is not using a service, then the account is not generating revenue, and said account is merely occupying disk space that could be used by a more productive account. This situation is pretty clear to anyone objective party. What is also clear is the fact that Lycos has no duty to provide a backup for anyones email. Not only is it a free system best suited for casual use, but I doubt seriously that they guarantee that a backup will be available if some system fails. Even on paid services backup is the ultimately the users responsibility, unless the contract specifically has provision for such a thing.

So let's make a more realistic comparison between your firm and lycos. Let's say that after a year or so, a customer wants to restore data. In particular the customer is looking for a certain file. You try to restore, and it works, but has a read error on the file. The customer states you promised a backup, and the customer is going to hold you to it. So, you run some data recovery software, and even though you would really like to charge for it, you don't. As a result you accrue a hour of non billable time. At this point you have provided good customer service, done the best you could, and expect the customer just to acknoledge that service was free, and to go away. However, the customer really wants the file, and asks what else can be done. Still trying to provide good customer service, you say there are some data recovery people that can do the job. The customer asks how much, and you say a few hundred dollars. The customer then asks you to pay the any fees for recovery since you promised a backup. Under the assumption that Lycos was responsible for the email, you are responsible for those charges. Otherwise the customer has every right to trash your company for not keeping promises, even though you did everything you could.

The world is full of mostly reasonable agents, all understanding the limits of the process. But some people are just unreasonable. They want to set fire to a product and then expect warranty to repair it. They don;'t understand that a free service is worth exactly that, even it the payment is indirect, which of course any reasonable person knows it is. These are the people who fall for the Nigerian scams, and even after huge sums of money, still believe it is a legitimate offer. These are the people that ruin the world for the rest of us.

Re:Outrageous

[CaptainTux]

And I do not see anything wrong with the reply by Lycos

How can you not see anything wrong with the reply by Lycos? While I'm sure we don't know the entire story, a customer service agent should never tell someone "no one here is going to help you". That's just bad customer service. Whether the guy liked it or not that customer is part of the reason he has a job. She might not be paying anything for the account but she is one of the reasons advertisers pay Lycos big bucks to advertise on their site. Like it or not, the company is beholden to people just like her and telling her that no one was going to help her is akin to saying "you know what? Fuck you!"

Personally, I hope this man is reprimanded for this. I don't think he deserves to be fired but he needs a stern lesson on customer service. People like him are the very reason why customer service has become so horrible. Nobody actually cares about the customer anymore.

Re:Outrageous

[Anonymous Coward]

The point of a backup service is to restore data.

That's where you're wrong! The point of a backup service is to... back-up your data. If you want your data (free encryption, too!) restored, well, that's a different service. And it's going to cost you.

Re:Outrageous

[WhoBeDaPlaya]

That's true. You forgot the standard "Now you are booted off eBay and are banned for life without parole" deal. Has happened to lots of powersellers simply because their competitors reported fake copyright/rule violations and eBay takes the "safer" approach of assuming you're guilty until confirmed :|

Re:Outrageous

[Anonymous Coward]

Lets say I was speeding and didn't know it. What would you expect the response from the police officer to be?

I'll give you a clue, the response would *NOT* be:

I'm sorry you didn't know what the speed limit was, because you were *ignorant* of the law I will just let you off without even reminding you that it is in everyones best interest to obey the posted speed signs. I'm sorry to have pulled you over, have a nice day.

There was no reason Mike should have escalated the matter. Proclaiming a holier than thou manager status might have seemed as if he was being an ass but its nicer than just saying no.

From that point there really was no need for Mike to respond any further. Regardless of whos side you identify with Mikes final response was **hilarious**

I don't know about you but in some situations pissing up a storm and or demanding to speak to a manager gets you noowhere fast although there are cases where this is not true in general as a consumer you only screw yourself by loosing your cool. Especially if you happen to be sitting in a restraunt and have not been served or ever intend on going back. Its not something that is unique to Lycos. People need to grow up and live within the context of their time.

Now those people who use a free service or free software *and* then go bitching up a storm have every right to be angry and should be entitled to a 100% refund and an emphatic apology from anyone in the audience who cares.

Re:Outrageous

[NCraig]

...i bet the 30day provision was buried in the eula, which lycos bets no one reads...

Great story, but don't you think you should have gone to the Lycos website and checked out the claim that you based the whole scenario on?

From the Lycos Mail New Account page:

Note: The content of a Lycos Mail Basic account will be deleted if the owner does not login and check the account at least once every 30 days.

The above is highlighted right under the account type selection area. Oh, and one of the mail plans is called PRESERVATION.

I think I'm getting a raging clue.

Re:Outrageous

[Intron]

Pass the popcorn.

Only Losers Use Free Webmail

[Anonymous Coward]

What do you want for free? You think you have the right to escalate the matter to the CEO of the entire company over your FREE email account? Gawd quit whining and move on.

Re:Only Losers Use Free Webmail

[Kozar_The_Malignant]

Of course, no company like Lycos ever makes money on said free email accounts. They don't get any revenue from advertisements or anything, so driving customers aways like they're bubonic rats won't have any effect on corporate revenue. Aggressive reduction of your customer base is always a good business model.

That said, Lycos is pretty currently pretty out front about the need to check mail every 30 days. I don't know if that was true when the subject of this signed up.

Re:Only Losers Use Free Webmail

[Azarael]

The profit largest source of profit that Lycos will get then is customer good will. A company has to make money somewhere in order to exist and they will have a hard time doing so by treating people poorly. At the end of the day, a minimal level of courtasy is cheaper to provide than outwrite malice.

Re:Only Losers Use Free Webmail

[drinkypoo]

That said, Lycos is pretty currently pretty out front about the need to check mail every 30 days. I don't know if that was true when the subject of this signed up.

Provided they had in their terms of service the right to change terms whenever they wanted, it really doesn't matter if it was true when this induhvidual signed up for the service. you pays your money, you takes your chances, and your chances are a lot worse when the money involved is $0.00.

Sure, the guy's response is infantile. He should be taken out back and slapped around for how bad he made Lycos look. But the simple fact is that if you care about your email, you should be making backups, and if you care about your email and you are not making backups, you are stupid. Sure there's stuff in my gmail that I would be bummed to lose, but nothing critical is in there, so I haven't bothered to back it up. Everything critical is saved to my local machine, and gets backed up to a disc or a removable disk at some point.

Re:Only Losers Use Free Webmail

[qwijibo]

Look at all the free advertising that they're getting out of a hostile response to one freeloader. Notice, this isn't a freeloader-turned-customer, this is a freeloader. I'm with a lot of other people here who said "Lycos is still around?"

This is a tremendous amount of free advertising that cost them NOTHING. Good will is touchy feely crap that the suits don't care about, but free advertising is like hitting the lottery. This guy will get a promotion for stirring up the pot. Yeah, it would be nice if the world weren't that callous, but it is.

Re:Only Losers Use Free Webmail

[Azarael]

Yes, but if that were the case it would be hard to assume that the positive response would out-weigh the negative. The one thing I know for sure is, that I something like this happened in the small, little known start-up that I work for, the perpetrator would not touch the ground on the way out.

Re:Only Losers Use Free Webmail

[Azarael]

The profit largest source of profit that Lycos will get then is customer good will Cripes, that mess should read:
If that is the case, then the largest souce of profit that Lycos will get is through customer good will

Re:Only Losers Use Free Webmail

[eldepeche]

Yeah, great advertizing for them. "Lycos still exists? Man, good thing I have a gmail account." OR, "Better get a real e-mail account instead."

Re:Only Losers Use Free Webmail

[Zemran]

I do not use Hotmail because they killed my account after Billy Boy took over because of the 30 day rule. I still have my Yahoo account which I have had since then because they do not enforce the 30 day rule. That said I have now switched to using Gmail because Yahoo no longer supports pop3 and I prefer to keep hold of my own mail so I do not have to worry about 30 day nazis like this girl had. I never bitched about Hotmail I just moved... I would not bitch if Gmail shafted me because I have a copy of everything and I can just move again...

I do support her arguement because Lycos appear to have been rude to her and provided a bad service which they had been paid for (by advertisers) and I think that she should shout about it so that said advertisers know that they are not getting what they paid for. But I also think that anyone that leaves anything that matters on a free account (and I have a lot on free accounts but with back ups at home) is a fool.

Killed Server

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, we made short work of that server.

Re:Killed Server

[atezun]

I sure hope there wasn't any e-mail on it.

Re:Killed Server

[AudioEfex]

It had nothing to do with /., if you are referring to Mike Jandreau's personal websites. They went down early today.

If you'd like more real info about this situation (as opposed to people reading one short paragraph and then commenting to all hell like they know what they are talking about) check out www.theconsumerist.com

What makes this situation amusing is the continued responses of Jandreau and Lycos (which is back from the dead for many of us - haven't thought of that name in many years). Jandreau put his own picture up on a website (www.moviesnobs.com) and when The Consumerist put it up, he wrote this asinine silly letter talking about Federal rights and at the end said, "Under federal law you must comply," like he's the friggin' Borg Queen or something. Then the lawyer makes the same silly requests - um, Mike Jandreau's photo is available from Google Images and other sites - it's fair use, baby.

I would have felt bad for Jandreau, or at least wished this would have all gone away, if he had dealt with it properly. I'm sure it was tough for him to wake up and see that 1/2 the internet is cussing his name. However, instead of dealing with it in a decent way, he just got even more ridiculous and obviously shows by his lack of tact in writing that he does not belong in customer service. I hope Lycos doesn't get sued for anything anytime soon, as the lawyer that sent the letter to The Consumerist doesn't seem to have anything more than a grade-school level of knowledge about the law.

Yes, the customer was not right either, but telling people "I am the head of all of customer service and there is no one higher you will speak with" is just a jerk on a power trip. Although I believe his statement was inaccurate - if he was high he probably wouldn't have been such a dink. ;)

AE

Re:Killed Server

[moresheth]

um, Mike Jandreau's photo is available from Google Images and other sites - it's fair use, baby.

This is untrue.

Google Images normally is allowed fair use for showing the images. It's mostly educational and informative in nature. There is one example where they were not allowed the fair use of certain images.

But, that does not mean if an image shows up in Google Images that it can be used anywhere, for any reason. Many of the images that Google shows are copyrighted. This means that for you to use the image in a way that does not fall under fair use, it is copyright infringement. So it would be illegal, for instance, if you stole a photo for your book cover.

So, in summary, just because you can see it, doesn't mean you can use it.

Re:Killed Server

[AudioEfex]

So, in summary, just because you can see it, doesn't mean you can use it.

Oh, you can't do ANYTHING you want, but again, if you go to theconsumerist.com and read what is actually going on, you'll see that's not the claim. The Consumerist, a news website, posted a story and since Mike Jandreau put his image up on his website for publicity purposes, they used the image under "fair use".

Mike Jandreau then sends them an email this morning (which yet again, you can read at the site) which demanded they take it down as it was a "violation of (his) privacy" and "Under federal law you must comply," like he was the Borg Queen, as I said above. It was the silliest thing I ever read. He *may* have had 1/2 a point if he had mentioned copyright, but again, fair use is pretty obvious in this case.

Then, to make it even worse, the supposed lawyer emails The Consumerist (yet again, posted at the site) with other erratic, psudo-legal claims that were just silly. Every reaction out of Mike Jandreau and Lycos lawyers has been a pissing contest like I've never seen. I guess these guys didn't realize that the Consumerist, Gawker, etc. was not the site to be making bullshit legal claims to, and now they are the laughing stock of the Internet even more.

Again, it's not what happened with the damned email, it's how Lycos "all your bases belong to us", the "highest guy in customer service" said. A business can send you a "fuck you, we aren't helping you" email with nice words like "Unfortunately", "policy dictates", "We value you as a customer, but we regret...", just a "pay us or your email is gone" and a cocky little bastard getting his wood off on being a douche to someone.

AE

Re:Killed Server

[AudioEfex]

Aw fuck, that's what I get for posting in the middle of the night and not hitting preview, LOL. What I meant was :

So, in summary, just because you can see it, doesn't mean you can use it.

Oh, you can't do ANYTHING you want, but again, if you go to theconsumerist.com and read what is actually going on, you'll see that's not the claim. The Consumerist, a news website, posted a story and since Mike Jandreau put his image up on his website for publicity purposes, they used the image under "fair use".

Mike Jandreau then sends them an email this morning (which yet again, you can read at the site) which demanded they take it down as it was a "violation of (his) privacy" and "Under federal law you must comply," like he was the Borg Queen, as I said above. It was the silliest thing I ever read. He *may* have had 1/2 a point if he had mentioned copyright, but again, fair use is pretty obvious in this case and all he could come up with is "violation of privacy" and "you must comply".

Then, to make it even worse, the supposed lawyer emails The Consumerist (yet again, posted at the site) with other erratic, psudo-legal claims that were just as silly. Every reaction out of Mike Jandreau and Lycos lawyers has been a pissing contest like I've never seen. I guess these guys didn't realize that the Consumerist, Gawker, etc. was not the site to be making bullshit legal claims to, and now they are the laughing stock of the Internet even more.

Again, it's not what happened with the damned email, it's how Lycos "all your bases belong to us", the "highest guy in customer service" said. A business can send you a "fuck you, we aren't helping you" email with nice words like "Unfortunately", "policy dictates", "We value you as a customer, but we regret...", instead the person got just a "pay us or your email is gone" and a cocky little bastard getting his wood off on being a douche to someone.

AE

Re:Killed Server

[moresheth]

You're right, it is silly for him to get worked up over it.

There are a lot of people, though, that do believe that you can use any image you find on the internet, any way you want to. I just figured I'd make sure people know that they still have to follow copyright law, even though it's on Google Images.

Sorry, I wasn't contesting anything other than that.

corporatespeak

[udderly]

Of course, his final response to her might have something to with it: 'I'm sorry, no one here has any intentions of helping you with anything. I am the manager of all of Customer Service. There is no one higher than me that you will speak with. You violated our policy, which is, despite what you say, completely clear. No one is holding anything hostage. Your e-mails have been completely deleted, and no amount of money can now restore them.'" Sounds like someone needs to brush up on their corporatespeak.

Re:corporatespeak

[mandelbr0t]

Yeah, not the best possible response, even if she was being exceptionally difficult. Let me give it a try:

"I am responsible for all decisions regarding Customer Service. At this time, we have followed our normal policy for free accounts. We offered you the opportunity to upgrade your account, which would have paid for one of our staff to restore your e-mails for you. However, since we didn't hear from you in 48 hours, the automated process has run normally and completely deleted your e-mail. It is absolutely unrecoverable. I'm sorry for your inconvenience, but we've provided the service that you signed up for. Please provide comments that will help us improve our service in the future if you wish. However, as the Manager of Customer Service for all of Lycos, I have decided that this particular case is closed and will provide no further reply to your questions and concerns."

Hmmm. Same thing, but not quite as confrontational. It still states the important bits: it was policy, we warned you, you ignored us, I'm the manager and I've decided to close this issue without further correspondence. "10/10 for effort, but minus a few points for style, ya?"

Re:corporatespeak

[risk one]

I don't blame the guy for talking this way. He's honest. Their service deletes email permanently if someone doesn't log in for a time, and when something like that happens they can offer nothing further. He's just being honest about the service. Of course, with a service like that, brutal honesty isn't a good tactic, but whenever honesty becomes bad policy, you need to review your service, not the way you talk.

Re:corporatespeak

[MrMarket]

Your re-write is not nearly as vague and nonsensical as it should be to be considered corporate speak. Sprinkle in some synergies and stakeholders, and consult "A Mediator's Toolchest" for win, win, win solution.

Re:corporatespeak

[udderly]

You're kidding right? Nobody cares that Lycos's ToS spelled it out. Nobody cares that this woman should have known the policy. Nobody cares that she should have backed up her email.

We're only hearing about this situation due to this guy's behavior. And now Lycos has probably lost business and he's going to get broken off first thing Monday morning. And why? Because he's "honest?" No, because he's a pompous ass who used his position to be unnecessarily rude to a prospective customer.

Re:corporatespeak

[Anonymous Coward]

He's not being honest. He had first said she could get back her email if she upgraded her account for $20. Now that she's complaining publicly, he seems to be retracting this offer. Either he's trying to fend off the charges of business extortion, or he's trying to punish this user for what she said publicly. Either way, he's not being honest.

Re:corporatespeak

[Myopic]

Although I don't know for sure, I imagine he did say that, four or five times, and it didn't sink in to the customer. Eventually, he decided to dumb down his language to what he perceived as her level. Good thing she understood him then, or else he might have resorted to "Look, bitch, yer emails are completely fucking gone. F.O.A.D."

Re:corporatespeak

[giminy]

I'm sorry for your inconvenience, but we've provided the service that you signed up for.

The word 'you' is used too much, as in the above sentence. I would recommend the following edit:

"Dear so-and-so, I am Such-and-such and am responsible for all decisions regarding Customer Service. At this time, we have followed our normal policy for free accounts. I would like to point out that we offered the opportunity to upgrade the account, which would have added the account to our backups and would have permitted a restoration. Unfortunately, we received no response in the 48 hours alloted per terms of the free account service agreement. As such, an automated process made room for other accounts by expuging the data. The process used makes the data unrecoverable. I am sorry for the inconvenience. Please provide comments that will help us improve our service for not only yourself, but also for our other valued customers. Sincerely, Such-and-such"

'You' is a very confrontational word. When in doubt, refer to the item at hand (e.g. 'the data' not 'your data', 'the account' not 'your account'). I especially like the sentence "The process used makes the data unrecoverable." You really have to unravel it to place meaning to it. "The process" oh, that was run by you guys, okay. 'the data'. oh, that was my account. Crap.

This sort of passivation makes eyes glaze over and also tricks our brains into not parsing the whole thing at a time. It's hard to associate bad guy A with doing bad thing B if both A and B are obscured behind intermediaries.

I add the last 'yourself' in there on the off-chance that the customer will come back. It doesn't hurt to leave the door open.

You can trust me, I work for the government (no, really, I do).
Reid

Re:corporatespeak

[Anonymous Coward]

Let me try a re-write:

"Dear so-and-so, I am Such-and-such and am responsible for all decisions regarding Customer Service. At this time, we have followed our normal policy for free accounts. In this case, we have decided to go beyond our normal procedure and restore your data free of charge. I am sorry for your inconvenience. Please provide comments that will help us improve our service for not only yourself, but also for our other valued customers. Sincerely, Such-and-such"

There, much better!

Re:corporatespeak

[Skreems]

His statement wasn't rude. He wasn't bending over like the customer wanted him to, but he wasn't insulting. He was just stating the facts without sugar coating them.

Re:corporatespeak

[mblase]

Sounds like someone needs to brush up on their corporatespeak.

Sounds more like a conversation with Strong Bad to me.

Re:corporatespeak

[udderly]

One does not have to be insulting to be rude and simply stating facts is not always appropriate.

For instance, what if someone walked up to you and your wife and introduced himself as a guy that used to have sex with your wife, and proceeded to tell you the various positions they used and the sounds that she made? It's not an insult and he's just "stating the facts without sugar coating them."

The fact is that if you're in customer service, your job *is* to bend over. If you can't handle that, then look for another career. Unfortunately for this clown, he's going to have that decision made for him. What's more, he deserves it for puffing up ("manager of all customer service"), pointing out that the prospective customer was wrong ("which is, despite what you say, completely clear") and being a snotty little prick.

Re:corporatespeak

[Anonymous Coward]

Lycos customer service doesn't exist to give freeloaders the most for their money. The customer service people are meant to help customers, i.e. people who use their accounts regularly or pay for them. The question isn't how you please someone who keeps the account around "just in case", it's how to tell them as politely and undamaging as possible to fuck off.

Re:corporatespeak

[udderly]

Like this? http://www.homestarrunner.com/sbemail152.html

Can I have your account number or identity theft please?

Re:corporatespeak

[Anonymous Coward]

So when their system decided to take out the email it had something or someone reload 2 years worth of tapes so it could nuke all the backups just to make sure (and save space which, as a few megabytes on a single tape, would never be reassigned anyway)? They may have lost the last month or so but there's no way that NONE of that data exists anymore. Saying "No amount of money will get it back now" is the kind of childish 'nananananah, I can't hear you' nonsense that should get this manager sent back to kindergarden until he grows up a bit. Now all she has to do it WRITE to the CEO and include a copy of the email and it'll actually happen.

Re:corporatespeak

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, if you're a pussy.

Re:corporatespeak

[Aladrin]

I tried to determine if you are serious or joking, and I think you are actually serious.

I have never heard of this, and I can find nothing on Google about it. Can you back this up with evidence? (The 'you' is confrontational bit, I mean.)

Re:corporatespeak

[nuzak]

I've worked customer service before, and though it's a little more complicated than that, the gist is correct: Except when you're summarizing what the customer is saying, you shouldn't use "you" to make statements of fact, because they sound like accusations. Obviously it's not an ironclad rule.

What drives me absofuckinglutely nuts with disgust however are the number of articles in Wikipedia written in the second person. But that's for an entirely different reason.

Re:corporatespeak

[jlarocco]

'You' is a very confrontational word. When in doubt, refer to the item at hand (e.g. 'the data' not 'your data', 'the account' not 'your account').

To quote Fight Club:

Nine time out of ten, it's an electric razor. But, every once in a while... it's a dildo. It's airline policy not to imply ownership in the event of a dildo. We use the indefinite aricle: "A dildo." Never "Your dildo."

Re:corporatespeak

[Aladrin]

Oh, I don't mean to say that there's never a time that 'you' is more rude, or less considering, or more forceful... I just don't think that completely removing it from the language is a good idea. You start to sound like an automaton and that you don't care about the person at all.

'The account' is much less personal than 'your account', and not a bit more confrontational.

'You failed to respond' is quite a bit more confrontational than 'there was no response to our notice.'

I guess I'm trying to say that the problem is not the word 'you', but rather how the customer is being spoken to.

It's like that '5 forbidden phrases' movie that has been shown at every customer service job I've ever worked at. 'You'll need to' is okay, but 'you'll have to' is rude. WTF? Maybe in 1 particularly area, but that's not a blanket statement no matter what they want to think. Even worse, the sentence can be completely reconstructed and remove the rude elements of both of those phrases, and they don't even attempt to talk about that. The statement is something like 'You'll have to send $5 to this address to buy that back-issue.' 'If you send $5 to this address, we'll send you that back-issue.' is MUCH MUCH less rude.

I hate that movie, btw... It's just so wrong in so many ways.

Re:corporatespeak

[StrongAxe]

He said "you have to sign up for the $19.95 service to get your data back".

He didn't say "We have your data, and you can get it back for $19.95, but you had better act quick or in 48 hours it's all going into the shredder".

He gave her no indication that there was a short time limit during which she could recover her data. And a simple two-message email exchange can easily take two days if the two people are not sitting at their computers at exactly the same moment.

Re:corporatespeak

[giminy]

Sadly, I'm being serious. I definitely don't like corporatespeak...it always feels so artificial and stifling. We're all human beings, and corporatespeak attempts to remove our humanness. It takes all of the personality out of what should be fundamentally interpersonal relationships, which is sad.

Equally sadly, corporatespeak works. I get the feeling it works mostly because of the points above (confusing the brain). I'm sure my idea has been influenced by something somewhere, but I'd like to think that it's my own idea. It makes people lose their focus when they have a genuine complaint. It provides layers of abstraction and places ideological walls in the relationship. It makes consumers instead of customers. There isn't as much money in a customer as there is in a mind-numbed consumer, but I think that dealing with a customer is a whole lot more fun. It's hard to find companies that think the same way, if ever they could be found.

Reid

Re:corporatespeak

[Chacham]

Another point would be not to associate the actor unless required. It comes off as pedantic. And, reasons should not be given because they seem like excuses. So:

"Dear so-and-so, I am Such-and-such and am responsible for all decisions regarding Customer Service. The standard policy for free accounts is to delete ..... This policy has been followed, and the opportunity to upgrade the account--which backs up accounts to make a restoration possible--was offered. No response was received within the alloted 48 hours, per terms of the free account service agreement. As such, an automated process deleted the data. The process used makes the data unrecoverable.

I am sorry for the inconvenience. Please provide comments that will help us improve our service for not only yourself, but also for our other valued customers. Sincerely, Such-and-such"

This sort of passivation makes eyes glaze over and also tricks our brains into not parsing the whole thing at a time. It's hard to associate bad guy A with doing bad thing B if both A and B are obscured behind intermediaries.

Obscured is not what is happening. It is all about the subjectivity inherent in referring to a subect as "i", "we", or "you". That subjectivity triggers subjectivity in the subject, which will enforce what the subject already feels. If this were a joyous letter, subjectivity would be used to heighten the pleasure.

Re:corporatespeak

[Skreems]

Bull. There's a ton of customers out there who can't get it through their heads that they just aren't going to get their way, so they keep yelling and demanding to speak to someone higher up who will give them their way. Letting her know that this was as high as she was going to get, and her request was not going to be filled, is in no way like your overblown example.

tupiche

[HomelessInLaJolla]

>Your e-mails have been completely deleted, and no amount of money can now
>restore them.

I doubt this is true. There are probably more than a hundred different archives, tarballs, and tape backups from which they could salvage most, if not all, of the poor woman's e-mail.

If his sister/wife/daughter would "lose" her e-mail would he be so dismissive?

His statement is especially suspect when the original tech support answer
was

Should you want to restore the previous contents of your account, you
will need to upgrade to the Lycos Mail Plus service...Restoration is not
available to members who do not upgrade, and our policy will be strictly
enforced. To have your account restored, you must upgrade, and pay the
$19.95 upgrade fee I guess the corporate mantra is: If extortion won't work then resort to extermination.

Sounds like my last three
employers.

Re:tupiche

[rice_web]

I think it's entirely possible that free accounts, of which there could be millions, offer no form of protection. Think logically the amount of storage that that would require for a small company like Lycos, and the likely small staff they have. I just can't imagine them having a massive backup system.

If they do, of course, then shame on them. But why be so quick to accuse them of being lazy or inept?

Re:tupiche

[HomelessInLaJolla]

> I think it's entirely possible that free accounts, of which there could be millions, offer no form of protection

Possible. I doubt it, though. The recent article about under the table influence applies. Hard disk and network backup storage technology has been an enormous money funnel. If Hotmail and Yahoo! can upgrade from 25 MB accounts (default) to 1 gig accounts (default) then, in all realms of real probability, all e-mail is archived someplace for a long time.

Re:tupiche

[Ray Radlein]

I doubt this is true. There are probably more than a hundred different archives, tarballs, and tape backups from which they could salvage most, if not all, of the poor woman's e-mail.

Especially if they do business in any of the many countries with stricter-than-nonexistent data retention laws (yeah, I know, lycos.co.uk is undoubtedly a completely distinct corporate entity, yada yada yada).

Re:tupiche

[Threni]

> But why be so quick to accuse them of being lazy or inept?

Because this is Slashdot, where companies - even those that provide a service for free - are necessarily evil, and consumers are never wrong. How dare they try to hide behind the terms of the contract? To read the headline you'd think the company just deleted someone's emails for no reason.

Re:tupiche

[HomelessInLaJolla]

> To read the headline you'd think the company just deleted someone's emails for no reason

Okay. You win a point. There was a reason: to be cruel for personal amusement.

Re:tupiche

[I_am_the_man]

If his sister/wife/daughter would "lose" her e-mail would he be so dismissive?

Does the fact that the customer is a woman have anything to do with it?

Re:tupiche

[Anonymous Coward]

If his sister/wife/daughter would "lose" her e-mail would he be so dismissive?

lol.. How about making the FBI think he is a terrorist and then having the government force them to find the missing emails or that will get a vacation at club gitmo.

Could you imagine, the telepjone rings, the voice askes for Mike Jandreau and he say's yes i'm here, at that moment, a group of FBI and CIA officers dressed in full tactical run through the door surounding the phone's extention and anyone near it. the conversation goes something like this,

FBI: you know this whitney person, (shows a copy of hiss drivers license and several photos from gradeschool to present.)

Mike: Um, thats that bitch who never logged in so we deleted his email.

FBI: I need copies of everything you deleted

Mike: I told the prick we cannot find them, they are deleted, gone, end of story

(The CIA jumps into the conversation,)

CIA: your last name? are you a citizen? Well, it doesn't matter

FBI: the emails,

MIke: Don't have them

CIA: your not a citizen

Mike: I am..

CIA: your taking a ride with me

Mike: I need to let my boss know i'm leaving

CIA: you will inform no one of anything

FBI: Call it good cop bad cop or whatever, I need those emails

Mike: no way to retrive them, your shit out of luck.

CIA: come on, You going to club gitmo for coluding and concealing evidence of a terrorist.

Mike: what? who?.. Now hold on, you cannot do that; I have rights

CIA: not in america pall,

Mike: you can't do this, I'll get out as soon as the courts hear my side

CIA: I'm doing it- (starting to laugh) Who said anything about going to court?

FBI: He can hold you untill your too old to work in this field again. Give us the email.

Mike: there should be a tape back up over there. It has everything but the last two weeks she had service.

FBI: if you tell anyone we were here, or what we discused, you will be aiding the enemy and you will go on vacation with me!

CIA tells the FBI agent: "See, I told you we didn't need no stinkin judge." The FBI agen't replies in a laughing tone, "Habeas who". They hi five each other as they are walking out the door.

The down side is, The Whitney dude might have recovered the email but still cannot access them from the secrete prison he's being held in. His requests to talk to a judge results in giving him quality time with some hlbilly named jud who has a slur in his speech.

Re:tupiche

[JackHoffman]

She got exactly what she was promised. One login during the grace period could have saved her account. Lycos removed the account because she didn't use it as agreed upon. She can whine and cry extortion all she wants, it's still her own fault, for not getting a real email account with her own domain, and for not using the free account as she agreed to do. She should learn from that, pay the upgrade/restore fee and be more responsible with her oh-so-important mail next time.

Re:tupiche

[Hoi Polloi]

Judging from the spam I get I wish hotmail would destroy more accounts.

Re:tupiche

[OnlineAlias]

I think that is highly unlikely, in fact almost unthinkable. After all, a major portion of their business rides on the fact that people store mail there. If they were to lose that service entirely, Lycos would be hosed.

They do a lot of business with Netapp for their storage, so I'm guessing they not only keep backups in multiple locations simultaneously (via MPLS or something), but they also keep a bunch of versions of it spinning on on disk too. So not only do they have it, they have whatever version she might want of it.

Storage technology has become just as sophisticated and mind blowing as everything else in the technology world, so storing and backing up all that data is really no big deal...

Re:tupiche

[Sponge Bath]

... to be cruel for personal amusement

Celebrity Deathmatch Referee: "I'll allow it!"

Re:tupiche

[UnrefinedLayman]

I doubt this is true. There are probably more than a hundred different archives, tarballs, and tape backups from which they could salvage most, if not all, of the poor woman's e-mail.

I would argue that that is untrue. It's also not necessarily economically feasible to do so. For example (which has no bearing on how anyone else does things; this is only an example):

We run an Exchange system for about 19,000 people over eight backend Exchange 2003 servers. To restore a mailbox from one of those servers without affecting the production system (which requires coordination from three financially separate groups), we must:

• Put up a new domain controller in a three domain forest
• Make a backup of the DC
• Move it to a private network without a connection to the domain
• Put up a new Exchange back end server on the private network
• Restore the information store
• Export the mail to a PST file
• Restore the backup of the DC and put it in DS restore mode
• Return the DC to the network, allow replication to overwrite its db
• Demote and decommission the DC

Total time: estimated at 60 hours of work (20 hours, 3 people).

No one, and I mean NO ONE at any level of the organization gets mailboxes restored. Backups are for disaster recovery only and are recycled after two weeks. If someone loses all their mail then waits thirty days to tell us, it's no longer possible to do the work, even if it's ordered by the organization head.

Now imagine Lycos, providing a free email service for many thousands more users. How long do you think their retention time for backups is, when they provide no positive affirmation that they can restore the data? How much time and hardware (servers, backup devices, backup media) do you think they'd be willing to put into restoring free email? How many FTEs would they have to dedicate only to that task? How likely would you be to go through 60 hours of work to restore a peon's mailbox in your own organization after you specifically told them what to do to prevent it from being deleted in the first place?

I feel bad for the person that lost her email and think the customer service guy's a douche, but I also don't doubt that Lycos is not in a position to restore the mail even if they wanted to and wouldn't fault them for saying No even if they could. That's reality.

Re:tupiche

[HomelessInLaJolla]

That's one messed up system you've described.

What happened to:

Physically walk or SSH/remote desktop to the system controlling the data storage device on which the backup is stored,

Export the mail to a PST file and then walk or SSH/remote desktop to the production system and, if necessary, recreate the account in the manner of a new account generation. While I don't work with MS-Exchange this very simple method, requiring less than thirty minutes, works to restore entire *NIX accounts including Mozilla, pine, mail, Gnome/KDE/Enlightenment settings, etc.. Anything beyond that is corporate cruft.

Re:tupiche

[UnrefinedLayman]

Well, you've hit the nail on the head. Exchange isn't UNIX. It's a proprietary SQL database. It isn't plaintext on a tape, and to get data from it you need to have the database running in Exchange.

Yes, it's a lot of cruft, but you also get necessary corporate features out of Exchange with Outlook that are impossible to get out of Pine, mail, Thunderbird, you name it. Welcome to the reality of systems and email administration: little tricks and setups that work for individual users or small business almost never work the enterprise.

Re:tupiche

[Anonymous Coward]

That is still much more than what I would be willing to do for FREE. She refused to pay $20 to upgrade her account, which very possibly would have been merely enough to signal that she means business and isn't just a leech who will ask for another free restore next year.

The representative could have handled the situation more politely, but I doubt that anyone at Lycos, including the highest ranks, is sorry for that "customer". No matter what the customer service representatives at other mail providers will tell you: Everybody wants users like her to go to the competition.

Re:tupiche

[Random Data]

What you need is a couple of old PCs and a compatible tape drive. My previous job involved backup administration, and we just kept a few old boxes to use as our testbeds. About once a month we'd refresh the DC backup, so that we could test patches and changes. We'd use the same test environment for that kind of recovery operation. The only real cost was a single unit tape drive and a backup software license, both easily accounted for as required for disaster recovery to be tested.

Re:tupiche

[uglyduckling]

We run an Exchange system for about 19,000 people over eight backend Exchange 2003 servers. To restore a mailbox from one of those servers without affecting the production system (which requires coordination from three financially separate groups), we must: * Put up a new domain controller in a three domain forest * Make a backup of the DC * Move it to a private network without a connection to the domain * Put up a new Exchange back end server on the private network * Restore the information store * Export the mail to a PST file * Restore the backup of the DC and put it in DS restore mode * Return the DC to the network, allow replication to overwrite its db * Demote and decommission the DC Total time: estimated at 60 hours of work (20 hours, 3 people).

Which pretty much sums up why Exchange is totally unsuitable for use as a production mail server. I mean, come on - that's absolutely crazy. If it wasn't for the middle management obsession with shared calendars Exchange could be tossed out and something sane used.

Re:tupiche

[Colin Smith]

Yes, it's a lot of cruft, but you also get necessary corporate features out of Exchange with Outlook that are impossible to get out of Pine, mail, Thunderbird, you name it Specifically?

Just wondering... (having worked as a systems, mail and even database administrator in a corporate environment for 15 years).

Re:tupiche

[Anonymous Coward]

I doubt you know shit about Exchange them. Ever heard of Recovery Private Stores? No?

2 hours max to recover a mail box. 1 person. Go look them up.

Re:tupiche

[squiggleslash]

Seeing as some mods appear to believe this is flamebait, I'd just like to back you up on this.

"Mike" first of all offered to restore the mail, but for a $20 fee, which as the original writer pointed out, came across as extortion:

Should you want to restore the previous contents of your account, you will need to upgrade to the Lycos Mail Plus service...Restoration is not available to members who do not upgrade, and our policy will be strictly enforced. To have your account restored, you must upgrade, and pay the $19.95 upgrade fee. This is non-negotiable.

Customer complained, pointing out how this felt and also making it clear that the "30 day login requirement" was not that clear, so it was an easy mistake to make. After a few exchanges on this subject, none of which amounted to an outright rejection of the above, this comes from Lycos:

I am the manager at Lycos. Your e-mail will not be restored, as it's been more than 48 hours since you were notified as to what you had to do. Our policy is clear, and clearly stated on the homepage, whether or not you choose to look at it. Nothing will be done for you.

So in the middle of discussions, Lycos decided to delete the mail anyway. Just in case there was any doubt, Mike took this one step further and wrote the following snide response:

I am the manager of all of Customer Service. There is no one higher than me that you will speak with. You violated our policy, which is, despite what you say, completely clear. No one is holding anything hostage. Your e-mails have been completely deleted, and no amount of money can now restore them.

So, yes, Lycos deleted the mail for no apparent reason beyond being cruel for personal amusement. Clearly the account holder did want to hold on to them. Clearly there was no necessity to delete the mail. Mike felt that he should punish the account holder for daring to question the legitimacy of his $20 "offer". Did he need to? Nope.

Did Lycos have a legal right to? DOES IT FUCKING MATTER? The issue here is are Lycos being assholes (answer: YES!) and does Mike deserve some criticism for his personal, rude, unhelpful and unsympathetic response? Answer: Hell yes. The fact someone has a legal right to be an asshole is not reason to believe the person is beyond criticism, that the organization is not behaving attrociously, that complaining about it is somehow "wrong", or even that the victim has not been poorly treated.

Re:tupiche

[Anonymous Coward]

Dude, that's totally whack. Nobody in their right mind would have a 19,000 mailbox mail system in production without an enterprise level backup system like Veritas that is able to restore at the individual mailbox level. $5000 and you're done.
60 hours..pshaw. What are you backing up your Exchange stores with now, NT backup??
At worst, every local computer could copy it's .ost file to somewhere else daily as a backup, even the same computer.

Re:tupiche

[kimvette]

Huh?

Exchange 2003 allows single mailboxes to be restored, either tied to the original user account or to an alternate independent account.

With Exchange 2000 and prior what you outlined is absolutely true, but not so with 2003.

Re:tupiche

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, it's a lot of cruft, but you also get necessary corporate features out of Exchange with Outlook that are impossible to get out of Pine, mail, Thunderbird, you name it

Specifically?

Well, inability to properly quote email is a biggie. See, corporate users can't be allowed to quote email in a sane and rational manner, so Outlook horribly breaks simple quoting of messages. Users who value their sanity ignore all trimming and editing and simply top-post, resulting in email exchanges many megabytes in size, including multiple duplicates of flashing animated gif files in 25 line signature blocks.

Microsoft lock-in is also a big one. You can only get this with Exchange Sever with Outlook (there are other flavors of course, like IBM lock-in with Lotus Notes, but this is clearly inferior to Microsoft lock-in).

Re:tupiche

[Anonymous Coward]

that's because MS Exchange is stupid. try using a unix-based mail system with a proper backup and you'll see that restoring email is simple. you don't even have to restore all the e-mail to the mailbox - just give the user the raw format file of his/her previous mailbox and let him/her deal with extracting the information from it. it's usually not tough with a hex editor or notepad if all you're trying to do is pull some important contact information.

Re:tupiche

[Anonymous Coward]

I think this says more about Exchange sucking, and your company being stupid for using it, than it does anything regarding Lycos.

Re:tupiche

[Anonymous Coward]

I've got to kind of question this. I work at a company with 43,000 users, about 20,000 mailbox enabled in Exchange. In total there are probably about 80 DCs and 200 mail servers scattered across the globe. I don't personally handle mail (we have a dedicated team for this) but when I request a restore it usually happens in a couple of hours. I know we use CommVault for the majority of our backup systems -- I don't know if that has something to do with it.

Regardless, it seems pretty flawed that you need to go to those lengths to restore a single mailbox. What if just the CEO's mailbox needed to be restored? Are you going to tell him "wait several days"? Seems totally off.

Re:tupiche

[49152]

I seriously doubt lycos is using MS-Exchange to provide free email services, they would have to be insane.

In almost any other email system it is rather trivial to restore just one mailbox.

Exchange may have many features that make it popular in the corporate world but easy maintenance seems to be NOT one of them.

Re:tupiche

[doc_u]

Or just create a Recovery Storage Group, restore the needed store to that group, and ExMerge the data to a PST (or PST's), then delete the RSG.
Total time approx 15 Minutes.

Don't know why you'd do it the old way if you were running Exchange 2003. (that is pretty much the only way to do it in 2000, without taking the Production systems down).

The only caveat to this is that you need enough (local) diskspace to restore the store to the RSG, but that usually isn't a problem on a well-run system.

  - Doc

Re:tupiche

[Tracy Reed]

This sounds like a VERY good reason not to use Exchange. It results in extremely poorly designed systems that are completely unmaintainable. Being able to restore individual files from backups is a normal part of maintenance which can be performed on most any sanely designed system. The system in the parent post is clearly in sane.

Re:tupiche

[lukas84]

Hmm, i'm having a hard time understanding this.

I administrate small exchange systems (up to 50-100 users). I've set message retention to 360 days, so users can restore single mails on their own.

For older, full mailbox restores, i just use recovery storage groups and a dummy account. Works fine.

Why doesn't that work in your environment (as said, i have no clue about enterprise it)?

Re:tupiche

[UnrefinedLayman]

RSGs are all well and good but have a lot of limitations (see http://support.microsoft.com/kb/824126). The biggest one:

The original mailbox must still be present in the original database and must still be connected to an Active Directory user account.

If the same woman in this story had come to us, she'd be completely screwed because it wasn't the messages that were deleted, it was the mailbox. The retention time for deleted mailboxes has to be determined based upon available disk space.

The second biggest is the one you mentioned: you need at least as much free space as the mail store used at the time of the backup. That's as large as 600 GB. The total time required to restore 600 GB of data from tape to a production Exchange server with over 1500 concurrent users is not 15 minutes. The required time increases as the transaction logs have to be replayed for differential backups. We don't generally have the luxury of keeping that much free disk space across the org either.

RSGs also require touching the production systems. That's not always an acceptable option.

Other people have harped on using "enterprise" backup solutions like Veritas (as though we don't) to get at individual mailboxes, but Exchange does not have per-mailbox backups. The "brick level" backups provided by Exchange are normal MAPI connections that read each message and record one by one. It's the equivalent of opening Outlook and exporting to a PST, and it runs at tens of MB per minute, not GB per minute.

Re:tupiche

[Ken D]

Well for one thing, you get the feature of not being able to do restores... thus not needing to do backups either! This saves an incredible amount of work and responsibility/pressure. Someone wants something... you say "Sorry! No Can Do! Have a Nice Day!"

The ability to restore seems to me to be a mission critical enterprise feature. Apparently a feature that Exchange completely fails to deliver. Perhaps you should upgrade to a system that works. Because I can just see the CEO appreciating needing to ask your most important customer to resend an important email because he accidently deleted it and it can't be restored. Really inspires confidence and a sense of pride in a job well done.

Re:tupiche

[swillden]

Yes, it's a lot of cruft, but you also get necessary corporate features out of Exchange with Outlook that are impossible to get out of Pine, mail, Thunderbird, you name it.

The *only* feature you get out of Exchange that you can't get with open solutions is that it works nicely with Outlook. All of the rest can be done with no problem -- and with the advantage that backup and restore is easy.

Re:Only ONE sure way to prevent this...

[revlayle]

anyone with teeth would destroy you.... you do realize this?

Wrong response

[Anonymous Coward]

He should have said "the dog ate them".

He's an amateur

[UbuntuDupe]

You want to see bitterness? Watch me when an Ubuntu install fails.

Re:He's an amateur

[Anonymous Coward]

You want to see bitterness? Watch me when an Ubuntu install fails.

Well, it's exactly as surprising as Lycos deleting accounts after 30 days...

Exchange Link

[TranscendentalAnarch]

The link for the exchange has already been /.ed, anyone got a mirror?

Re:Exchange Link

[fyoder]

google cache

Re:Exchange Link

[atezun]

The link for the exchange has already been /.ed, anyone got a mirror?

Yeah, but I'm not promising you're gonna like what you see.

What do you expect?

[RandoX]

Sounds like the Lycos servers wolfed them down.

Re:What do you expect?

[instantkamera]

Funniest thing I have read on slashdot.

ever.

Re:What do you expect?

[Anonymous Coward]

hint: lycanthropy

Re:What do you expect?

[Anonymous Coward]

"Sounds like the Lycos servers wolfed them down."

Oh, you sly dog.

Re:What do you expect?

[dreddnott]

All this biting sarcasm sounds so cynical.

This reminds me of my ex-wife...

[xx01dk]

I had this exact thing happen to my hotmail account of over 4 years. Thing is, all I had in it were rants between me and my now ex-wife, so no big loss. I don't know what I was trying to prove by saving those anyhow...

Lycos is right, obviously

[JackHoffman]

If you get an email address from them, you agree to their policy, which is to delete email accounts that haven't been accessed in a while. The grace period is longer at other providers, but it is still a very common type of rule, simply because users never bother to remove old accounts. They would just pile up if there was no rule in place to delete accounts after some inactivity. In fact, I find it comforting that Lycos actually deletes email and doesn't keep it around forever. If I were offered the choice of two types of accounts, one which can not ever be deleted and one which expires after a month, I'd take the latter.

Re:Lycos is right, obviously

[Anonymous Coward]

If I were offered the choice of two types of accounts, one which can not ever be deleted and one which expires after a month, I'd take the latter.

Get an account with Lycos. Just beware. Go on vacation, get busy or forget and 31 days later..poof...two years records down the tubes.

Now at some level this is the woman's fault for relying on Lycos' half-assed free service rather than either getting a paid account or at least dealing with a reputable provider like Yahoo, Google or even hotmail.

Re:Lycos is right, obviously

[jonesy16]

I completely agree with you. They start off by trying to make Lycos look like that bad guy. Now I didn't read the article / interactions between her and the company and it is possible that it wasn't handled with the best language. But in the end it's tough @!#$. They have a policy, one that you agree to when you sign up for FREE email. It's a policy that they need to keep in place to remove spammer accounts, junk accounts, etc, which is what a lot of people use these services for. I can only imagine, based on the amount of spam I get when I don't use my email address, that some of these accounts could be gathering thousands of emails per day. That's a lot of storage over a couple of months for thousands of users. So you put a policy in place. Sorry for her, but be more careful next time, or get a reputable (i.e., paying) email provider, at least then you'll have more leverage.

Alternatively, many email providers will let you access your email via POP so you can keep copies of all email on your own system, then you don't have to worry about what happens with the service ;-)

Re:Lycos is right, obviously

[Anonymous Coward]

How is that trolling?

Re:Lycos is right, obviously

[BrokenHalo]

users never bother to remove old accounts

Actually, to be fair, the majority do not offer any facility to close accounts which the user doesn't need any more. Or if they do, the link is buried somewhere so obscure it might as well not exist.

Years ago, I used to try to keep things tidy like this. Now I just maintain a much smaller number of email accounts, so it's easier not to let grace periods expire,

Re:Lycos is right, obviously

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Of course they're right. It's crappy PR, as this story demonstrates, but it's a free service and you get what you pay for.

While I would have some sympathy for the woman concerned if she hadn't understood this, there are several morals to this story:

1. Free services are worth what you pay for them, plus a little bit of convenience. They rarely, if ever, have any obligation to you.
2. Take regular back-ups of your important information.
3. It is foolish to trust an Internet service with whom you have no professional relationship to look after information that is valuable (or worth keeping secret, for that matter).

Every now and then, one of these e-mail or blogging or social networking sites actually invokes the clauses in their terms of service that basically say "we owe you nothing, and may drop or commercialise our service at any time". It's sad when people get caught out by that, and I think it's shitty of the companies concerned to take advantage of others' distress, but ultimately you can only reasonably come down on one side of the argument if the deal was advertised honestly up-front.

If that's his picture...

[sehlat]

was anybody in his right mind when he put that irresponsible child in charge of customer service?

Re:If that's his picture...

[geoskd]

was anybody in his right mind when he put that irresponsible child in charge of customer service?

Lycos probably only consists of about 2 dozen people, if that. A company like that does not require a lot of personell, so he probably is the customer service department. As for who hiured him, most likely he is one of the original founders and ended up doing customer support because no one else was willing to do it.

-=Geoskd

Re:If that's his picture...

[kfg]

All other issues in the situation aside, the answer to that particular question is, "No."

But then the idea that people assigned to customer service should themselves be in their right mind is a dying concept. We live in an age where the customer is viewed as some sort of work horse; and it is deemed more financially advantageous to work a horse to death in three years than keep him in service for 15, because the horse is a consumer.

Of course in that situation the horse does not have much in the way of options.

Yes, in this case she was getting a free service and might be viewed by some as being a pure drain on the system, but attempts to explain to her that data retention costs money and thus the account deletion policy might well be reasonable and that restoration is a labor intensive process that she might just have to legitimately compensate the company for might have been handled with a bit more delicacy, and efficatiously.

She might not have been right, but she was the one with the twenty bucks they failed to get from her. And now they have a wider PR problem instead of a quiet, little private one.

KFG

Before it starts...

[Apocalypse111]

Before too many people begin criticizing this woman for using a free email service and not following the terms of the account, let me just say that this is as much about them deleting her email as it is the responses she received from management. Go read the replies she got from the head of Customer Service. That kind of answer is totally unprofessional. There are words used to describe people who exhibit that kind of behavior, words akin to "douche bag" and "asshole". Personally, I was unaware that those were job titles used at Lycos...

Re:Before it starts...

[HomelessInLaJolla]

> them deleting her email

The e-mail isn't really completely deleted.

> Go read the replies

Exactly. This is a perfect example of social bullying.

Re:Before it starts...

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Go read the replies she got from the head of Customer Service. That kind of answer is totally unprofessional.

I can't. Not only was the original site slashdotted over its threshold and blocked by the service provider, but as I write this, services like Google Cache just show a "page not found" type of message from their caches, too. I haven't been able to find anything that looks like the original material since this story was posted earlier this evening, which makes me wonder whether this was an outright hoax, or at least whether the complainant wasn't being entirely honest in the report and the lawyers for Lycos rapidly squished her at the service provider or court level.

Re:Before it starts...

[subsoniq]

There are words used to describe people who exhibit that kind of behavior, words akin to "douche bag" and "asshole"

unemployed was the one I was thinking of. wouldn't be too surprised if this guy gets fired after the publicity that this is getting.

Re:Before it starts...

[thrillseeker]

There are words used to describe people who exhibit that kind of behavior

"soon-to-be employment-challenged"?

Re:Before it starts...

[cgreuter]

And while we're at it, I'd like to point out that her mistake wasn't so much using a free service as it was in using a service that doesn't let you back up your valuable information to your own physical media. It's not yours if you can't hold it in your hand.

The thing is, Lycos kept up their end of the agreement. If I'd been in her position, I'd have asked myself if the email was worth $20. If so, I'd have just coughed up the money, downloaded my email and told them to cancel the account, treating the money as a data recovery fee.

(That being said, I agree with you that the guy was completely unprofessional. Keep in mind, however, that we only have the blogger's side of the story and the three snippets of email that she selected. We have no idea how she behaved toward him. For all we know, the guy was being extremely polite under the circumstances.)

Re:Before it starts...

[Lord Balto]

Does anybody think that Lycos is running this service out of the goodness of their socialistic hearts and not because they get advertising revenue from it? Think of the GOOD publicity they could have gotten out of this, the increased ad revenue, if they had played it right. But no, they had to shoot themselves in the foot. These folks aren't assholes, they are morons. And that's why nobody even remembers they still exist.

Re:Before it starts...

[Anonymous Coward]

She used the free service, she abides by it's terms. Now she wants a freebie? Uh... no hon', you're not gonna get a freebie merely because you're too lazy to read the TOS or sign in every 30 days.

That she had the gall ask for a freebie, purely because she was both too lazy to sign in and too stingy to fork of $20 is incredible. I applaud this guy; for having the balls to say what every person should say to these morons, for having the balls to stick up for his time so that he could help people who actually bother to pay... or, god forbid, read the TOS.

Re:Before it starts...

[Apocalypse111]

Don't delude yourself into thinking that Lycos makes any money on subscriptions. All their revenue comes from advertisements. That wasn't "sticking up his time" - its his JOB to field these kinds of complaints, he's in Customer Service. That's CUSTOMER Service, not EMPLOYER Service. And yes, she's a customer as she is using the service, regardless of whether she's a PAYING customer or not. As a Customer Service rep, he has failed.

Re:Boo Hoo

[HomelessInLaJolla]

The point is that the original tech support response was that her mail could be retrieved for $19.95 and, when the consumer dared (dared, I say) to call the policy into question, the new response was that everything had been summarily, finally, and completely deleted.

Uh-huh. What's Lycos' archive, backup, restoration, and redundancy system like? How much money have they poured into their network stability?

Policy is one thing. Bull5hit is another.

Lycos is Stupid

[sesshomaru]

Hushmail's policy is better. You can have a free Email account, but you must log in every two weeks. Forget to log in, well, Hushmail will let you back in for a fee, of course.

I'm not saying "keep customers Email forever," I'm saying "Hang onto it for, say, a year and offer to sell it back to them."

Of course, this still doesn't change the fact that there are a million better free Email accounts than Lycos already available. Gmail is perfect enough that you need no other unless you want encrypted. (It's rapidly turning into my external memory a la Ghost in the Shell: Stand Alone Complex, "Oh, that obscure movie that I couldn't remember the name of but I remembered some facts about, I'll just search my Gmail. Oh, here's one I sent to Inu Yasha about it a few months ago."

Re:Lycos is Stupid

[sesshomaru]

Hmm... on further it seems that Lycos offers a similar deal, cheaper. So, my question is, did this guy just delete all her Email out of spite because he was annoyed. He is so fired if that's the case....

Re:Lycos is Stupid

[Anonymous Coward]

I somewhat agreed with it until this

"Oh, here's one I sent to Inu Yasha about it a few months ago."

I'm sorry, but we're going to be forced to sterilize you for the good of the republic now.

Re:Lycos is Stupid

[sesshomaru]

I know, it was meant as humor. I meant my brother, but since I'm not giving out real names on the Internet....

Re:Lycos is Stupid

[sumdumass]

I'm surprised no one has pointed out that storing email on someone elses server isn't the best practice if you need it to be safe.

Everyone has eluded to lycos having a bakup somewhere or not and the probability of it. But if it was that important, then why didn't the user make a backup himself? Storing important things in outlook or outlook express isn't a good idea without a back up either.

There should be a lesson for all in this. And that lesson isn't that some other company is bad or evil. If you place value on something, take steps to protect it. It is that simple. Even if you are attracted to the free online massive storage email offers, if it is important, don't trust it to automagicly be protected.

Re:Boo Hoo

[DogDude]

If it was SOOOOOOOO important, perhaps she should have made a local copy of it on her machine.

That, or pay a few bucks for the premium service.

What?

[Colin Smith]

You mean this isn't how customer support is supposed to act?

p.s. The customer isn't always right, all too often the customer is wrong, stupid and loud with it.

Re:What?

[arth1]

The customer isn't always right, all too often the customer is wrong, stupid and loud with it.

Customers being wrong or stupid doesn't mean it's sound business to have rude people staffing support, and I'm sure someone higher up in Lycos gets the hint.

Prediction: Michael Jandreau is out of a job by Monday, and hopefully a tad wiser.

Re:What?

[Anonymous Coward]

I hope not. It's about time people stopped pandering to whiners. People don't learn if they get their way every time they cry and scream about something. It's the reason we have all these stupid laws that allow people to sue over the meagerest of things.

Re:What?

[PlasticArmyMan]

Maybe not sound business sense but I think the representative realised that there was no business to come out of this person. We all have breaking points, I guess this was his.

Re:What?

[AK Marc]

I hope not. It's about time people stopped pandering to whiners. People don't learn if they get their way every time they cry and scream about something.

She shouldn't have gotten her way, but the "no" should have sounded a little more like, "sorry, but no" and a little less like "fuck off."

Re:What?

[kfg]

The customer isn't always right, all too often the customer is wrong, stupid and loud with it.

That is simply because people are all too often wrong, stupid and loud with it.

It is an axiom of customer service that they are. It is their job to deal effectively with that. The saying is not meant to imply that the customer is always correct, but that without customers you have no income; and the customer decides whether or not to give you his custom, on his terms.

It is in this sense that the customer is always right, even when an incorrect, idiotic loudmouth asking something totally ludicrous of you. There is a greater art in coverting one of those people into someone who has just given you money and is happy to have done so than there is in just telling him to fuck off.

KFG

KFG

Re:What?

[computational super]

the "no" should have sounded a little more like, "sorry, but no"

I must wonder, though, how many "sorry, but no" responses came before the "not so sorry, but no" response, but weren't represented in her blog. Remember, the customer service rep didn't get a chance to tell his side of the story.

Re:What?

[Anonymous Coward]

I had an employer who once told me "the customer is always right, if you're taking money from them."

Re:What?

[l3prador]

You mean this isn't how customer support is supposed to act?

p.s. The customer isn't always right, all too often the customer is wrong, stupid and loud with it.

Truly. It's really awful about our culture that we expect everyone to treat us with the utmost of respect and politeness, but then when things don't go our way we are unbelievably rude in turn.

What's more, even if the customer did have some sort of "right" to "get even", that certainly doesn't give anyone and everyone on the internet carte blanche to harass, intimidate and abuse this guy. Just because you heard about someone being a jerk doesn't give you free license to be as inhumane as you'd please.

Our society really needs to grow up, and maybe what we need is some customer service managers that will take the kiddie gloves off. Employees in the service industry are still people and you do not have the right to abuse and degrade them just because you happen to be consuming their employer's services.

Re:What?

[AK Marc]

I must wonder, though, how many "sorry, but no" responses came before the "not so sorry, but no" response,

There is never a reason for a "not so sorry, but no." If they curse, tell them you do not have to put up with such language, and hang up on them. Other than that, you sit there quietly, wait until they are done saying whatever they want to say, then tell them "sorry but no." Repeat until they stop calling.

Re:What?

[pla]

The saying is not meant to imply that the customer is always correct, but that without customers you have no income

Not so sure that applies when dealing with a free email account. It actually surprises me they offer any support for free accounts - Hell, it surprises me their support email doesn't autorespond with something like "please upgrade to our premium service for $19.95/mo to have your request for help sent on to a real human".



There is a greater art in coverting one of those people into someone who has just given you money and is happy to have done so

Gotta agree with you there. In this case, though, it seemed clear from the conversation that she had no intention of upgrading - She started by firing off what amounts to an accusation of extortion. People like that have no intention of giving you money, they just want to suck your time and resources to extract as much as they can from you, in exchange for nothing.

Re:What?

[kfg]

Not so sure that applies when dealing with a free email account.

Are they not selling something? Are not the free accounts a pool of qualified (in the sales sense of the word) customers for what they are selling? Lycos execs did not just wake up one day and say, "Hey, let's just give away our shit for free." They saw a profit path. Just as the cheese people did.

She started by firing off what amounts to an accusation of extortion.

No. She did not start out that way. That was a response; to a response. Perhaps the request for money was made without much in the way of art.

And what it have hurt to have told her, "Ok, look, we'll help you out this time, because that's the sort of people we are. But now you know the score and we know that you know the score. Don't take advantage of us in future, 'k? We offer a reasonable service at a reasonable price and we would be delighted if you chose to avail yourself of it."

Instead of a PR problem they would this woman giving the word of mouth that "They be cool and shit."

Customers don't just show up for no reason. They need to be enticed a bit. Performing that enticement takes time, effort and money. That's just the way it is. And anything you do that furthers that cause is part of your marketing. It isn't all just about advertising and mindfucking people.

This woman is thinking, and spreading the idea, that Lycos are assholes who didn't help her when they should have, whereas if handled properly she would be spreading the news that they help when they don't have to. i.e., she would have truer sense of her relationship to Lycos that she does.

And thus far more likely to start giving them money for what they do.

People like that have no intention of giving you money, they just want to suck your time and resources to extract as much as they can from you, in exchange for nothing.

Yes, there are people like that and I have had to suffer some of them as my own customers, but I realize they do not exist in a vacuum. Getting rid of these people often means getting rid of an even greater quantity of good customers. It's a package deal. There is someone out there that abuses the Craftsman tools exchange policy, but because it exists I am a customer; and I do not. Take steps to the get rid of the abusers and you will likely introduce a step that gets rid of me.

Why not just accept it and enjoy the fact that you make a profit. That's the goal, remember?

Maximinzing your profits in theory often means losing all of your profits in practice.

KFG

Re:What?

[mgabrys_sf]

Yea - we're only getting one side of this conversation. If the customer was being a prick I'd probably cut the agent some slack.

Ditto...

[Anonymous Coward]

Just happened to me on MSN/Hotmail the other day, despite using my MSN/.Net account every day for IM/etc, my hotmail account was wiped clean, thankfully I used outlook express to download most of the emails a while back, so there was only a few new bits in there.

Re:Ditto...

[Anonymous Coward]

thats a known hotmail bug. mainly due to a browser refresh at an unexpected moment which trips the server software into opening the mail file as a new file rather than in append mode.
cant do anything about it since m$ft developers are weenies.

shorter version: ADMIN PLEASE HOPE ME

[Deep Fried Geekboy]

n/t

Mixed feelings here...

[Captain Sarcastic]

... on the one hand, it was a pretty crummy thing for Jandreau to say. "I am the manager of all of Customer Service. There is no one higher than me that you will speak with" is high-handed, arrogant, and sounds like some power-tripping Napoleon wanna-be. It was as tasteless as distilled water, and I coud understand a desire to pound on him.

On the other hand, it is a free service, and Lycos has just proven that you do, indeed, get what you pay for. It is a shame that the old E-mails are gone, and it is unfortunate that nobody thought of a way to archive them off of Lycos' servers so that it no longer cluttered their machines, but it does appear to have been part of their ToS, so my sympathy is limited there, too.

Re:Mixed feelings here...

[Anonymous Coward]

If you look at the emails that were exchanged, though, a Lycos customer service rep initially said that they could recover her emails if she upgraded her service for $20. She thought that was unfair and worked her way up the ladder. She eventually got to this guy who told her that her email was now permanently deleted and that "no amount of money can now restore [it]" which makes it sound an awful lot like he's breaking their own policy because he was annoyed with the customer.

It doesn't matter whether or not she was being unreasonable about the situation or how annoying she was to him - a customer should never be spoken to that way, especially by the head of their "Customer Service" division. He could have even said the same thing with more tact, but instead he decided on: "I'm sorry, no one here has any intentions of helping you with anything. I am the manager of all of Customer Service. There is no one higher than me that you will speak with. You violated our policy, which is, despite what you say, completely clear. No one is holding anything hostage. Your e-mails have been completely deleted, and no amount of money can now restore them." That response in any service industry is completely unacceptable and, as their's no one higher up than him, he should be fired for setting such a bad example. Someone like that is paid not to lose their cool and diffuse these kinds of situations whether the customer actually gets what they wanted to not, and it's apparent that he simply can't do his job. (captcha: aptitude)

Re:Mixed feelings here...

[Anonymous Coward]

Mixed feelings here too. That last response from customer service was rude. But it was in response to a hysterical customer. The TOS gives them the right to delete email. Yes, it didn't say REQUIRE but it was up to their discretion. The customer doesn't understand that? If she had paid for the service then I would agree that she deserved more rights. The customer is not always right.

Re:Mixed feelings here...

[quantaman]

On the other hand, it is a free service, and Lycos has just proven that you do, indeed, get what you pay for. It is a shame that the old E-mails are gone, and it is unfortunate that nobody thought of a way to archive them off of Lycos' servers so that it no longer cluttered their machines, but it does appear to have been part of their ToS, so my sympathy is limited there, too. You know, no matter what they throw in their ToS I don't think that companies (even those providing free services) should be able to hold peoples data hostage. You use the services for the features it provides, and if you part ways you should lose those features. But the data you entrust to their service is yours, you own the copyright and you should be able to do whatever you want with it (including archiving it in a convenient way). Unfortunately since the companies control the keys to the data they seem to feel it's their to do with as they please, including using it's value to pressure its users. It's the same thing with flickr and yahoo and the simple fact is as long as we entrust companies with our data with no way to get that data back out we'll be vulnerable to things like this.

Re:Mixed feelings here...

[bkr1_2k]

More importantly, the woman clearly stated that she no longer used Lycos mail because it was such a poor service. The guy needs to learn some tact, but the "customer" here blew this way out of proportion. If I was the guy's boss, I'd probably reprimand him for the bad publicity and give him a class on proper ettiquette with regard to customer service but he wouldn't be fired. He did his job properly and gave the woman opportunity to recover her mail in the manner dictated by Lycos business practices.

Re:Mixed feelings here...

[bkr1_2k]

What he said was that she had taken too long for him to be able to help her any longer. Specifically, she had taken longer than their 48 hour backup to take action, so her emails were no longer available. Now, whether that 48 hours began when she started making demands or when the mail was actually "deleted" isn't very clear, but either way, he gave her a specific timeline at some point.

Re:Mixed feelings here...

[newuserform]

This guy at Lycos is an asshole, but the woman is also no "poor victim". She's bitching that her email got deleted despite notices that email can be deleted after 30 days inactivity. And she says their policy is not clear on that because it doesn't say they're REQUIRED to delete after 30 days. Come on, wtf kind of argument is that!

Re:Mixed feelings here...

[vic-traill]

I have mixed feelings too, but in the end I actually find Mr. Jandreau's comments refreshingly straightforward. It saves his folks and Whitney from wasting any more of their time. Let's rewrite his comments:

'This request is not being worked on. There are no further points of escalation. You think our terms of service aren't clear, but we've looked at them again, and they are, and furthermore, you're in violation of them. We are not playing an angle here to satisfy a hidden agenda; your mail is gone. End of story.'

Could he be a little more diplomatic? I suppose so. Is he abusive or lying? No, absolutely not.

Are the Mail Terms of Service clear? I think so, but don't take my word for it - they're at:

http://info.lycos.com/legal/mail_terms.html

In particular, the section on Account Inactivity is Real Clear:

[--------- Begin Excerpt---------]
8. Account Inactivity. Lycos reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to delete any materials (including emails) stored in connection with an unpaid Lycos Mail account if the user's account has been inactive for thirty (30) days.
[--------- End Excerpt---------]

In this case, "an unpaid Lycos Mail account" refers to their basic, free service.

Additionally, the General Terms of Service (found at http://info.lycos.com/legal/legal.html ) say:

Before you register for a Lycos Mail account, you must read and agree to these Terms of Use and the Lycos Mail Terms of Service, including any future amendments.

[--------- Begin Excerpt---------]
Lycos offers subscription and unpaid versions of its electronic mail services. For users of the unpaid mail services, Lycos reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to limit the amount of storage space available per user or to delete materials stored for an excessive period while the user's account has been inactive. Specifically, Lycos reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to delete any materials (including emails) stored in connection with an unpaid Lycos Mail account or Angelfire Mail account if the user's account has been inactive for thirty (30) days.
[--------- End Excerpt---------]

The user is presented with both of these links as part of the sign-up process. I just signed up for an account (set the 30 day event timer *now*, 'cause I'm sure not putty any mail up there that I give a kentucky about :) ), and I saw the terms of service.

Admittedly, no-one reads the ToS - so let this be a lesson, when you're signing up for free shit, READ THE TERMS OF SERVICE. Read the Policy Privacy too - this is probably even more important in the long run. Incidentally, the Lycos Privacy Policy seemed pretty well written to me.

So, yeah, tough break Whitney - it is a drag to lose mail. But want Things to Go Your Way, that means reading stuff when you're agreeing to it, and learning and lesson and moving on when you get burned by your own actions.

Re:Mixed feelings here...

[ScottSCY]

You know, no matter what they throw in their ToS I don't think that companies (even those providing free services) should be able to hold peoples data hostage

I'm not sure what exactly the laws are, but I think the data actually belongs to lycos and they can do what they wish with it. Does anyone know what the law is?

Re:Mixed feelings here...

[quantaman]

You know, no matter what they throw in their ToS I don't think that companies (even those providing free services) should be able to hold peoples data hostage

I'm not sure what exactly the laws are, but I think the data actually belongs to lycos and they can do what they wish with it. Does anyone know what the law is? From my understanding if you write it you own the copyright and Lycros can't take it. Theoretically they could put something in their ToS to say they gain copyright when you put it through their servers but I don't think they'd want to do that as it would jepordize their common carrier status. However, you having copyright only really says that they can't do something with your data that you didn't agree to in the ToS, for instance they can't publish the book that you wrote then emailed your friend for a review. However they should be well within their legal rights to delete that data at a whim as long as it's covered in their ToS.

Their moral rights on the other hand...

to be expected

[cas2000]

well, duh!

what do you expect when you leave your email in someone else's control?

if you don't want your email to be at risk of someone else's policies (or accidents) then either run your own mail server or regularly download your mail and save it on your own machine.

This, my friends, is...

[sheepoo]

stupid!

wow

[botkiller]

what a total asshat. this guy needs to be reminded that losing a customer costs you more than bringing on a new one, and he's gonna both lose customers present and future acting like this.

Re:wow

[91degrees]

I'm not sure she is a customer though. She seems to be more of a person who absolutely refuses to be a customer. I suspect their free service is seen as advertising. If somene is'nt willing to upgrade for any reason then why bother?

Just a classic whiner being told "no"...

[NerveGas]

... and then they whine more.

  She used a free service. The terms of service said that her mail may be deleted, and that it would not be restored. She had to agree to those terms.

  When she failed to live up to her part of the agreement, they deleted her email in accordance with the terms of service, and refused to restore it, in accordance with the terms of service.

  She whines. They tell her "no". She whines some more. Just a classic luser. As for him being harsh, I worked customer service many years ago, and trust me: There are people out there (like Whitney) who simply refuse to take "no" for an answer, even when *they* are clearly the party at fault. They will simply keep pestering and pestering in hopes of getting a "break", and you have no option than to just come out and say "No, it's not going to happen."

  I really can't see anything out of the ordinary, or even remotely newsworthy about that story.

Re:Just a classic whiner being told "no"...

[HomelessInLaJolla]

I think the lie about the e-mail being completely deleted from everywhere on the planet is more important than your liberal use of the slur "whine".

Re:Just a classic whiner being told "no"...

[NerveGas]

I think that what you think doesn't really matter. Poor, little, picked-on Whitney was the only one of the two parties which didn't hold up her end of the agreement. She can whine/complain/state/whatever all day long, but she is still the one in the wrong, and it's just too bad that the world won't bend over backwards just to accomodate her free-loading ways.

The only thing that changes behavior is accountability. Facing the consequences of your decisions is always painful. Some people learn from the mistake, some people try to weasel out of it. It's fairly obvious which type of person she is, and I wouldn't be surprised if you, too, fell into the same category.

It always amazes me just how much people will whine when *free* services don't meet their expectations...

Re:Just a classic whiner being told "no"...

[Overzeetop]

The terms of service said that her mail may be deleted

I missed the part where the word "may" became "shall irrevocably". Most services in meatspace offer a grace period, and it is not unreasonable to expect a little slack on the internet. Sure, she should have logged in (I'd be afraid of what my email looked like if I didn't log in for a month), but this kind of policy does not make for happy customers. You know, the ones whos eyeballs get sold by the impression.

The policy is a poor one if you want to retain customers and compete in a crowded market. I hope they get all the negative publicity they deserve.

Re:Just a classic whiner being told "no"...

[HomelessInLaJolla]

> Facing the consequences of your decisions

Such as the decision to be deliberately cruel, to the point of making statements which are verifiably false, for the purpose of personal amusement?

Sounds like harassment to me.

Re:Just a classic whiner being told "no"...

[NerveGas]

If it sounds like harassment to you, feel free to pursue it if you want. You'll find that my actions in no way constitute harassment, and probably that you miss one of the critical parts of the definition of the word "harassment".

Re:Just a classic whiner being told "no"...

[HomelessInLaJolla]

> my actions

Were you the Lycos guy?

Re:Just a classic whiner being told "no"...

[NerveGas]

If it says that they may be deleted, then they may be deleted. Whether other companies offer a grace period is irrelevant, and in spite of the fact that an entire industry has sprung up around rescuing people from their delete key, there really is no reason to think that "delete" doesn't mean "irrevocably".

"May" or "shall", it doesn't matter. Their service and attitude weren't exactly the helpful, perky type that is sometimes offered (and appreciated), it doesn't mean that she has any right to whine when Lycos *doesn't* bend over backwards to help her...

Re:Just a classic whiner being told "no"...

[arth1]

It always amazes me just how much people will whine when *free* services don't meet their expectations...

Free? TANSTAAFL. Last I checked, Lycos was a for-profit company, and not listed as a charitable agency.
No matter who foots the bill, whether it's you or advertisers, the service is paid for.

Re:Just a classic whiner being told "no"...

[NerveGas]

I thought that you meant *my* actions, but I see that you meant the actions of the Lycos guy. Still, the same thing applies, nothing he did in any meets the definition of "harassment". In fact, if you had to pick which of the two was closer to harassment (and I'm going from *her* account of the story), it would be her.

Re:Just a classic whiner being told "no"...

[NerveGas]

It's still free to her. It's just being subsidized by paying customers. Either way, she wants someone else to cover the bill to recover her data, even though it was her fault in the first place.

Don't get me wrong, I can appreciate the idea of trying to get what you can... but there's a point where you're just being a free-loading parasite, and if *I* had acted the way she admits to acting, I'd feel like I had crossed that line.

I also suspect that she wasn't entirely forthcoming with *her* side of the story... I wouldn't be surprised to find that she was even more obnoxious than she admitted to, but we'll probably never have a complete transcript of both sides, so I can only go on what she says.

Re:Just a classic whiner being told "no"...

[arth1]

In my view, whether she was wrong, greedy, stupid or a combination thereof doesn't justify the Lycos manager being rude and gleeful. You can turn down a customer politely too, and if you're in a manager position, you better know how.

I'm sure that the lady learned her lesson, and that it's time for the manager to learn his.
Cause ultimately, this is going to cost the company, both by fleeing customers, potential customers being more wary of the service, and advertisers not wanting to be associated with a company that condones rudeness towards the advertisers' potential customers. It doesn't reflect well on Lycos, no matter who is wrong or who is right.

At this point, the smartest Lycos can do is a public statement saying this was not acting according to company standards, and that the situation has been dealt with. No matter how much they agree with the manager or disagree with the customer, cause their image is worth a whole lot more than $19.95.

Regards,
--
*Art

Re:Just a classic whiner being told "no"...

[king-manic]

I'm sure that the lady learned her lesson, and that it's time for the manager to learn his.
Cause ultimately, this is going to cost the company, both by fleeing customers, potential customers being more wary of the service, and advertisers not wanting to be associated with a company that condones rudeness towards the advertisers' potential customers. It doesn't reflect well on Lycos, no matter who is wrong or who is right.

Well, at this point it just brought lycos more attention then their entire networth could have bought.

Re:Just a classic whiner being told "no"...

[Anonymous Coward]

Therefore :

Never use anything Free! You get what you pay for! GO Microsoft!!!

Re:Just a classic whiner being told "no"...

[NerveGas]

She *was* told politely about the policies that were in force... it was the first correspondence from them that they quoted. From there, she just got repetitive and pushy. When she kept it up, the guy got more direct and blunt. I don't blame the guy one bit.

He is the CSOH!

[C_Kode]

Customer Service Operator from Hell!!!

Sweet! Give him a website! :)

Re:He is the CSOH!

[the dark hero]

No No. Just about anyone from AOhelL customer service is a CSOH. Just google "AOL" and "unsubscribe" or something of the sort. They already have plenty of websites :P

Re:He is the CSOH!

[Anonymous Coward]

And a free email account! Hell, make it two!

Top Jerk... The winner is...

[__aaclcg7560]

I'm sorry, no one here has any intentions of helping you with anything. I am the manager of all of Customer Service. There is no one higher than me that you will speak with. You violated our policy, which is, despite what you say, completely clear. No one is holding anything hostage. Your e-mails have been completely deleted, and no amount of money can now restore them.

Dogbert took the day off so this guy stepped in. He'll probably get a promotion.

Customer Service

[drewzhrodague]

I learned from my father, a musician, about customer service. There are a couple of rules which keep customers happy, and keep them coming back:

• The customer is always right
• You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar (or muriatic acid)
• Make sure your product doesn't suck

I have a hard time with this kind of reaction from Lycos, and other companies. How can they get away with being assholes?

I worked for Lycos as a contractor for two months. In that time, I survived two rounds of layoffs, in which they lost half their workforce. I didn't survive the third.

Re:Customer Service

[corbettw]

I have a hard time with this kind of reaction from Lycos, and other companies. How can they get away with being assholes?

Considering this is the first time Lycos has been in the news for several years now, I would say the answer to your question is: they don't. They're a dead company walkin', and anyone worth their salt has probably high tailed it for greener pastures long ago. All they've got left are power hungry douche bags like Mr. Jandreau.

Re:Customer Service

[drinkypoo]

There are a couple of rules which keep customers happy, and keep them coming back:

This person is not a customer; they used a free service, didn't like the terms, lost their data, and then refused to follow the terms and pay to get the data back after not logging in for 30 days.

Do you want customers like that? That only cost you money?

* The customer is always right * You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar (or muriatic acid) * Make sure your product doesn't suck

First of all, the customer is not always right. Sometimes the customer is a huge pain in the ass and you just want them to go away and never come back. At the same time, you don't want them to go running around and telling everyone that you suck, because that's not good for business from the people who actually make you money.

Second of all, make sure the product doesn't suck? I got news for you, hotmail and yahoo do the same thing. It's standard for free email. The product was ostensibly no worse than anyone else's.

This is a clear-cut case of a user IN THE WRONG. Or, well, it is assuming what we're told about the TOS is correct. Following on these assumptions, It's also a clear-cut case of a manager who is an asshole. But it doesn't make the user any less wrong. Pay, or fuck off. It's just that simple.

I have a hard time with this kind of reaction from Lycos, and other companies. How can they get away with being assholes?

They're offering a free service. People will use it just because it's free. Incidentally, and anecdotally, the only person I ever knew that used free lycos email was happy with it.

I worked for Lycos as a contractor for two months. In that time, I survived two rounds of layoffs, in which they lost half their workforce. I didn't survive the third.

Doesn't sound like they "lost" it to me. Sounds like it was temporary and they were done.

Re:Customer Service

[Anonymous Coward]

You catch more flies with shit than honey. Anyone who's ever seen a pile of dog shit in the Carolina summer will know this.

Re:Customer Service

[HomelessInLaJolla]

> This is a clear-cut case of

Abuse of administrative authority to belittle somebody else for personal amusement.

In the workplace such behavior (if continued over a span of time) can be the basis for a harassment lawsuit. On the street such behavior (if properly escalated) can be the basis for a criminal citation of assault.

Re:Customer Service

[slashkitty]

Actually, Yahoo did do this to me. Deleting many years worth of my email. At the time, I was a PREMIUM member, paying for my 25 megs of storage. The claimed that I deleted it, ( though, there is no mass delete ) and that there was no way to recover it. It was their error resulting from some upgrade. The fact is, paying for email doesn't necessarily mean you get backups or better service.

Re:Customer Service

[drinkypoo]

In the workplace such behavior (if continued over a span of time) can be the basis for a harassment lawsuit. On the street such behavior (if properly escalated) can be the basis for a criminal citation of assault.

Look man, I didn't say the guy wasn't an asshole. I pretty clearly specified that he was. But I'm also saying that the user is an idiot who wants a free ride. The terms of service are usually pretty clearly laid out. Log in every 30 days or lose your shit. It wasn't a secret when it was a term of service for the other free email services I used to use. I doubt Lycos made it a secret, because it's not a distinguishing factor or anything. So basically what we have here is a story about an asshole and an idiot having a fight on the internet. And you know what they say about fighting on the internet, don't you?

Re:Customer Service

[gurps_npc]

They are a customer. They pay with their attention, which Lycos sells to advertisers.

The fact that someone is not paying you cash does not change the fact that they are a customer.

It is NOT a free service, anymore than TV is free. Just as I have the right to call up and complain about NBC having stupid shows on, she has the right to call up Lycos and complain.

She may or may not have been a pain in the butt.

But a GOOD customer service rep handles pains in the butt all the time. A good customer service rep could probably find a way to fix this situation without having it get blasted all over the internet, which I assure you his boss is NOT HAPPY about. They are in the business of selling PR (ads) and that damn fool of a Customer Service Rep just gave his own business a whole bunch of negative PR.

Re:Customer Service

[HomelessInLaJolla]

> The terms of service

Are not the point.

Re:Customer Service

[aardvarkjoe]

On the street such behavior (if properly escalated) can be the basis for a criminal citation of assault.

So if someone does something stupid, and I yell "Sucks to be you!", that's now assault? Holy crap, we really live in a insane country these days.

Re:Customer Service

[drinkypoo]

The terms of service

Are not the point.

Au contraire. There is no law, rule, guideline, or expectation that someone has to be nice. The only expectation to which you have a right is that the company will honor the terms of service to which you mutually agree. Would the world be a better place if everyone were nice to each other? Sure. And if trees were made out of cotton candy, there would be a lot more tooth decay. So what? We're talking about reality here, not fantasy.

As such, the terms of service are at least half the point. Yes, it was poor customer service. No, it doesn't mean the user (not customer, user) should be entitled to anything whatsoever. Does it mean that you shouldn't do business with Lycos? Sure, it means that to me, at least. But then, I wouldn't have been doing business with those pathetic also-rans anyway.

Re:Customer Service

[drinkypoo]

They are a customer. They pay with their attention, which Lycos sells to advertisers.

This is an ultimate flaw in your logic.

They are NOT a customer. The advertisers are the customer. The users are a commodity. This is true no matter which ad-supported free email service we're talking about, be it Lycos or Gmail.

The users of Lycos' or anyone else's free email service[s] have the same relationship to the actual customers in this relationship as a cow does to the customers at McDonald's. They're a product to be sold, nothing more.

Of course, there's various grades of cattle. Buffalo, for example, won't stand for that feedlot shit. They'll just knock over the fence unless it's made of something metal, welded, and well-planted. You can be a cow over at Lycos, or you can be a buffalo over at Gmail (or some other similar service, although frankly nothing yet has been as painless and AFAIK even the people who did lose their email got it back, and without spending any money.) But all of us on the "free services" plan are still only a product.

Re:Customer Service

[LurkerXXX]

Power hungry? Why? Some customer didn't follow the policy, and then emails them about 10 times harassing them to change the policy for her. The first several emails were polite and told her exactly how and why things happened because she broke the terms of service. How many dozen emails from a non-paying user are they supposed to deal with before someone tells it like it is?

Re:Customer Service

[drinkypoo]

The fact is, paying for email doesn't necessarily mean you get backups or better service.

While this is quite true, it does mean that you have a contract with someone, and you have legal recourse if they fail to honor its terms.

Now granted, even using a free service gives you some rights, but one of them is not ignoring legal portions of the TOS. But then, that's true of a paid service as well.

Re:Customer Service

[HomelessInLaJolla]

> There is no law, rule, guideline, or expectation that someone has to be nice

Perhaps this may help.

Or this

Or this

Re:Customer Service

[tinkerghost]

I learned from my father, a musician, about customer service. There are a couple of rules which keep customers happy, and keep them coming back:

• The customer is always right
• You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar (or muriatic acid)
• Make sure your product doesn't suck

I have a hard time with this kind of reaction from Lycos, and other companies. How can they get away with being assholes?

Hmm, in order - :

The customer is always right - Have you ever done customer service for computer related issues? Would you please explain to me how it is the ISP's fault that the woman who superglued a phonecord jack into her modem & cut off the cord can't get online. (She caught her son surfing porn & this was her solution, until she wanted to get her email). Why would Lycos engage in the expense & effort of restoring this woman's email when it's obviously not even worth $20 to her.

You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar (or muriatic acid) - Butric acid actually catches flies even better - but you would never deliberately put it in the house. This woman started her issue with compaints of extortion, and given the tone of the snippet she posted, she was probably quite a bit more vitrolic in the parts she cut.

Make sure your products don't suck - Lycos is a web portal. It has free email. It has a clear policy that if you go over 30 days without checking your account, they can delete it when they want to. What do you want them to do, hold it active for eternity waiting for you to return? Not going to happen. Shouldn't have to happen. They actually have a policy that gave her an oportunity to recover that email - for a measly $20. If you can find a contractor who will rebuild an account on a mailserver from an archive tape for $20, I'd piss myself in surprise. Their service doesn't suck any more than any of the other free mail services out there - almost all of them have a come back or loose the acct policy. Most of them don't offer any way of getting the mail back.

[snip] get away with being assholes. - which part do you find being assholish? The policy is clear. There was even an oportunity to recover from the problem - according to the snippet she posted, she was given a 48hr window to make a decision on if she wanted the email back or not - given the amount of animosity in the email snippets she posted, there were probably more than she showed. Not being part of the tech team I can't say what was going on but, it's quite possible that when she notified them of the problem they put a hold on recycling the tape - which you can only do for so long before it has to go back into rotation.

I've had to deal with customers who have lost Email before - people who's clients deleted email from the server & it was gone when they reinstalled Windows, cancelled their account then tried to get their email a month later, etc. - they are nasty. If you tried the broadcast 1/10th of the conversation after you tell them it's gone, the FCC would make SWAT look like a bunch of amateurs. Did we have backups - yep, were we going to dig them out for a customer? "Not without a court order" was the actual response to the question. If she got hit in the quarterly purge, it's not surprising at all that they wouldn't touch her account after the grace period.

As for his tone that he's the last person in the chain & nobody is going to help her - there comes a point when being nice doesn't work anymore. At some point you have to say, "this is the way it is, you had your chance now go away."

Re:Customer Service

[Neflyte_Zero]

Quote: "A good customer service rep could probably find a way to fix this situation without having it get blasted all over the internet, which I assure you his boss is NOT HAPPY about."

You'd have a point there if he had a boss but as Mr. Jandreau eloquently points out, "I am the manager of all of Customer Service. There is no one higher than me that you will speak with."

Apparently Customer Service University has slipped in its enrollment standards...

Re:Customer Service

[drewzhrodague]

The customer is always right - Have you ever done customer service for computer related issues?

Yes. For years, and then for several ISPs. I have dealt with stupid users who don't know how to use the mouse who'd call everyday with the same problem. You still have to treat them properly, and help them out as much as possible. Some of the serious problem customers, if sent away at all, are sent away politely.

Butric acid actually catches flies even better - but you would never deliberately put it in the house.

I am not a chemist, but I've used acid on a sink to get rid of grime.

Make sure your products don't suck - Lycos is a web portal. It has free email. It has a clear policy that if you go over 30 days without checking your account, they can delete it when they want to. What do you want them to do, hold it active for eternity waiting for you to return? Not going to happen. Shouldn't have to happen. They actually have a policy that gave her an oportunity to recover that email - for a measly $20. If you can find a contractor who will rebuild an account on a mailserver from an archive tape for $20, I'd piss myself in surprise. Their service doesn't suck any more than any of the other free mail services out there - almost all of them have a come back or loose the acct policy. Most of them don't offer any way of getting the mail back.

Web portal or not, some of Lycos' products do suck. Some of Google's products suck. If I came to check my mail, regardless of which service I use, and it wasn't there -- I'd be pissed. I'd be more pissed if I got a customer service rep that told me about some stupid fine-print message about having my stuff deleted if I didn't check it often enough. What if I went on vacation for a month? And look what happens -- bad press for Lycos due to bogus policies.

[snip] get away with being assholes. - which part do you find being assholish? The policy is clear.

Verizon's policy about cancelling service is clear -- pay $280 if you cancel the service before the term is finished. What if the service sucks and you hate it? Too bad, you pay. That I find assholant. This is the culture we have with utilities, government services, and now our web portals.

Lycos' offices used to be here in Pittsburgh, across the street from a strip club. I'm sure they were a better company then.

Re:Customer Service

[LordLucless]

You have the right to call up NBC and complain about anything you want. And they have the right to tell you to go to hell and hang up on you. That would probably piss you off, and you'd take your business elsewhere. That's your choice. But there's no law saying businesses have to be polite to customers. If they don't particularly care about your business, they can be as abrasive as they want. It could possibly end up costing them if they get a bad rep, but that's entirely their choice.

In this case, the chick obviously wasn't paying with her attention (she hadn't logged on in a month), and Lycos discontinued their services according to their TOS. Sucks to be her. Next time, read the terms properly, or pay for a real service. I'd hate to lose my emails - that's why I run my own mailserver, and pay for a backup MX service.

Re:Customer Service

[corbettw]

"Power hungry" might not be the most accurate description, but when he said "There's no one more powerful than me that you can talk to" (in effect), it made him sound (to me) like he's power hungry.

As for how many times do you talk to non-paying customers, there's definitely a limit. But you don't have to be a jerk about it like this guy was. All that does is gets your employer dragged through the mud on numerous blogs. Kind of like the asshat that told that Army sergeant in Iraq to pound sand (no pun intended), instead of politely declining to do business with him. That guy was reportedly fired, it'll be interesting if Lycos chooses the same solution to their (new) PR problem.

Re:Customer Service

[Anonymous Coward]

I am not a chemist, but I've used acid on a sink to get rid of grime.

Butyric acid is in rancid butter and vomit. You don't throw up on your sink to clean it, do you?

Re:Customer Service

[PhxBlue]

Lycos' customers aren't the ones using their e-mail. Those are the product. The customers are their advertisers.

Re:Customer Service

[jvkjvk]

I think this is slightly incorrect...

What I see is a customer to company relationship between individuals and Lycos, and a company to customer relationship between Lycos and the advertisers. You are providing them the opportunity to with your attention and they are presumably supplying you with some sort of beneficial experience. They aggregate people's attention and sell this to advertisers.

  It just so happens that the product being sold to advertisers is the spare attention of the individuals. I don't see the value in collapsing this into a single relationship unless one wishes to disempower the individual. Oh, wait, that's exactly in the corporations' best interests!

I think that part of the value to the advertisers is that the advertising itself reinforces this message. Pretty neat feedback loop you got there, a shame if something happened to it. :)

When the cost/benefit ratio to the individual seems out of proportion then the customer will send their attention somewhere else. Which is why these types of companies either try to hide the unwanted externalities from the customer, such as selling their email address, or restrictive AUP's or TOS's, mining usage data, or their policies are relatively benign (except of course to ppl wearing tinfoil). These services have no lockin. You can move to another relatively easily, and they seem to be popping up like daisies.

YMMV, of course.

Re:Customer Service

[gurps_npc]

You don't know much about business. Yes, some one with no business sense could think the way you did. But the Lycos Management does not.

The guy she was talking to was "the head of Customer Service".

His Boss could have called him "Head of User Service". He does not. His Boss wants him to treat "the cattle" as you so rudely called people, as CUSTOMERS.

People are NOT commodities, not products Thinking that is incredibally poor business sense. Anyone with any real MBA training knows that thinking of people like that is a sure way to destroy your business, as "the cattle" are always smart enough to stampede away from your rude service.. That same thinking is part of why many government services stink - some foolish childish rude person thinks "they are not paying me money, so it is OK if I treat them like cattle". It does not matter if they are not paying you any money. If you provide a SERVICE to them, they are your customer, and you have to treat them well, no matter how rude they are to you. Otherwise they go away, and you find yourself out of a job. Happened in the USSR, can happen here, and is happening right now to Lycos, because of the bad PR they got.

She was a customer. She was a rude, bad customer, but a customer notheless. The Customer Service guy SCREWED UP. He could have kept her as a customer and avoided a ton of bad publicity. He choose to return her rudeness with greater rudeness and if I were his boss would have fired him for making a mountain out of a molehill, for turning a rude, upset customer into a raving lunatic that blasts it all over the internet.

Also, terms of service is written by lawyers. That means it is protection against law suits, NOT an excuse to treat your customers like crap. Because it is written by lawyers, it is designed to stand up in a court of law, and can not be expected to be understood sufficiently by non-lawyers, anymore than you would expect to be able to read a court settlement without a lawyer going over it.

Yes, Lycos did not violate the law. That should not be the standard of care applied to them. A good company goes BEYOND what they promise to do in the Terms of Service. That is, you write down into the terms of service the minimum that you know you can do, then try to do better than that.

Lycos severely failed to do that here. They did the minimum. It would be like going to buy a hamburger at Burger King and having them hand it to you, no box, no paper wrapping, no tray, no napkins, no bathroom, just the burger handed to you. The minimum you have to do is not enough for any real business.

That is the policy, they didn't follow it.

[Kadin2048]

Well, from what I understand of what happened, that was Lycos' policy. She didn't log in for two weeks, and her email got "deleted." I put that in quotes, because it sounds like it really got put into hiding, or escrow, or something. (Basically, a logical delete but without a physical delete, or something like it.) Then they offered to give it back to her, IF she upgraded to the $19.95 "Premium" service.

The customer got pissed, because to her, this looked like extortion (although, it's probably legit), and apparently said as such to the Customer Service Asshole.

The Asshole, rather than just toeing the company line and saying "well, I'm sorry, but that's our policy -- now cough up the $20 if you want your email back, peasant" decided to go on a power trip, and said that her email was now permanently, irrevocably deleted, and that nothing -- even upgrading -- would ever bring it back.

So they did make her the offer to restore it at one point, for a fee, but then something happened (whether it was the Asshole actually deleting it, or something else, like a deadline to re-up) and the offer went away.

It's the taking-back of the offer to recover the emails that's so suspicious. Requiring you to pay a fee to get your expired emails back is sleazy, but not that unexpected. As you point out, a lot of places do it. But what's far sketchier, is when they say they can recover it for a fee, but then abruptly change their story and claim that it's physically deleted.

Re:That is the policy, they didn't follow it.

[drinkypoo]

But what's far sketchier, is when they say they can recover it for a fee, but then abruptly change their story and claim that it's physically deleted.

It's sleazy, sure. But you have the right to refuse service to anyone on any grounds other than those which are prohibited by law, and "I thought she was an idiot and I don't mean mentally retarded" is a valid reason not to do business with someone. Assuming their TOS warns you that they may delete your email if you don't use the service in too long a time, they're really under no obligation to return it unless the TOS itself also says (or more to the point, said at the time this all went down) that you can get that mail back by spending the twenty bucks.

Ultimately, this person is an idiot for not just spending the twenty bucks. If you can't follow the TOS, and they offer to let you have your data, why not just cough up the cash, then archive your mail someplace else, cancel your service, and tell the world your story? Instead, she threw a hissy fit and got smacked down.

Basically this guy sounds to me like he is behaving like a BOFH... If this story had appeared on the BOFH website, it would be posted here as a hilarious example of a stupid user, if it were even considered newsworthy. "Stupid user... I BANISH THEE! Now get thee from my sight. Ni!"

Re:That is the policy, they didn't follow it.

[tinkerghost]

Requiring you to pay a fee to get your expired emails back is sleazy, but not that unexpected.

How much is your mail administrators time worth? How about the system time to do a recovery from a backup tape? Backup tapes are serial, not random access. Also they can be huge & require decompression.
Overall, $20 to have someone do a restore is cheap. I can't get my mechanic to plug in the EEC code reader for $20. I've dealt with Lycos before -the company I was working with at the time had a branded portal - they're not that bad, but they don't go out of their way to be pricks. I'm betting on the passing of a deadline and a recycling of the freebie acct backups. (face it it's free, they're not going to run daily, weekly, and monthly backups like they would for paying customers)

Re:That is the policy, they didn't follow it.

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't get my mechanic to plug in the EEC code reader for $20.

You're getting ripped off. AutoZone and places like that will read the EEC codes for free, and then you can decide what you want to do / where you want to get it fixed from the read-out.

Thanks Lycos!

[eno2001]

Yet another reason why I am right in running my own mail server. I've done this since I got screwed over by my old ISP in 2000. I will NEVER let anyone host my mail ever again. It's too precious to trust to idiot like the folks at Lycos. And to add to that, I finally have a reason to not bother using Lycos for anything ever again. (I used to use their People Find) Goodbye Lycos. Hope you and that asshole manager rot in hell with maggots infesting your anus and genitalia. No one screws with Frank Lazarro! NO ONE!

Re:Thanks Lycos!

[markov_chain]

That's funny, I had no idea Lycos was still in business. Last I used them way back when they were trying to be a search engine.

Re:Thanks Lycos!

[eno2001]

Come on!!! Troll? Hasn't ANYONE seen Slaughterhouse 5? What are are you? Barbarians?

What surprised me most

[snitmo]

Lycos still existed?

ADMIN PLEASE HOPE ME

[HomelessInLaJolla]

Correction:

Dear Mr. Admin, sir,

I believe you have saved my e-mail someplace. I hope that you have saved my e-mail. I adore my e-mail.

I believe, I hope, and I adore my e-mail.

Signed,

Shell Account

Re:ADMIN PLEASE HOPE ME

[khedron the jester]

Is this to do with that popular version of the Fatima prayer? That's kind of obscure, don't you think?

Re:ADMIN PLEASE HOPE ME

[HomelessInLaJolla]

> That's kind of obscure, don't you think?

So was the OPs choice of "Subject".

Some people catch on more quickly than others. Both the subject line and the OP's username "Deep Fried Geekboy" are a troll.

This guy needs some lessons in customer service

[Lank]

Maybe from the Bastard Operator From Hell!!!

This happen to anyone else with hotmail?

[c0d3r]

This happen to anyone else with hotmail? Many of my emails around 2004 and before are deleted except for about 10 before that period. I've had a hotmail account since around 1999.

Re:This happen to anyone else with hotmail?

[sylvandb]

Yup. I had one of the original hotmail accounts from before M.S. and it still worked with webdav access even as a free account. That is, it worked until late December sometime when it went away. All of it, e-mail and everything.

When I logged in again just after the new year, it said "a hotmail account has been reserved for you" and I had to accept the new user TOS agreement. No more e-mail, no more webdav, no more of anything that had been familar a month before. New e-mail now comes in to that account, but...

sdb

I'm concerned...

[Mayhem178]

I've been using Lycos Mail for over 12 years, starting out back when it was Mailcity, before Lycos bought them out. It definitely isn't the best e-mail service ever. I know exactly what Whitney is talking about with regards to their spam filters and downtime in the past few months; I experienced it first hand. But I always stuck with Lycos out of convenience. Everyone I know knows my e-mail address there. Never had a good reason to switch to anything else. This just might be a valid reason.

Re:I'm concerned...

[arth1]

I've been using Lycos Mail for over 12 years, starting out back when it was Mailcity, before Lycos bought them out. It definitely isn't the best e-mail service ever.

Then why did you stick with them? I know it's a hassle to have to give others a new email address to use, but enough to endure substandard service for 12+ years?

Looks like he took his website down

[bryan1945]

MikeJandreau.com

Just comes up as a blank page.

"There is nothing higher than my blank page!"

What a goofus.

Re:Looks like he took his website down

[Anonymous Coward]

It seems that page hasn't been updates since Aug 2005 according to the way back machine. I was goint to ask if it was the same guy, but looks like he really spammed that website all over the internet. Including this

I've just set up my account with WebsiteSource a few days ago, and their support through the process of moving all our sites to their network was amazing. I'm very pleased so far with everything. Not only are the prices great, but you actually get way more than you pay for with them. I recommend them to anyone looking for a new hosting company. I've used five in the past (and I work for the 6th largest one in the world), and I'd recommend this over any and all of them. Mike Jandreau www.mikejandreau.com

He's willing to trash his workplace to get another link to his website. What a total loooooser. I really hope they can him.

Backups not really required; logical delete.

[Kadin2048]

I think it's entirely possible that free accounts, of which there could be millions, offer no form of protection. Think logically the amount of storage that that would require for a small company like Lycos, and the likely small staff they have. I just can't imagine them having a massive backup system.

Except that, if I'm understanding what happened correctly, at one point after her email got deleted, they offered to restore it ... but only if she upgraded to the $20 premium service.

That was the beginning of the whole argument. She got mad because she felt that this was extortionate, and Lycos' Customer Service Manager basically revoked the offer and said "haha -- now you can't get it back even if you pay!"

So there was clearly a backup there at some point. Or not even a backup; they could have just logically deleted the data, but not physically deleted it yet. It wouldn't have appeared in her account, but it would have still be there on the servers somewhere. (A lot of web hosting companies do similar stuff; if you don't pay your bill, your site will disappear, but if you cough up it will reappear instantly. It wasn't actually deleted, just deactivated.) So it wouldn't be necessary for them to have much additional storage; they wouldn't need to keep a totally redundant backup system (though they probably would), just some feature in their email system that would let them render messages invisible to the user, but allow an admin or DBA to put them back later if the customer upgraded.

Re:Backups not really required; logical delete.

[tinkerghost]

That was the beginning of the whole argument. She got mad because she felt that this was extortionate, and Lycos' Customer Service Manager basically revoked the offer and said "haha -- now you can't get it back even if you pay!"

I can't read it since it's slashdotted, but if she was offered restoration for the upgrade price, and declined it, then it's entirely possible that the argument went on long enough to cycle her Emails out of the backup rotation. Given that Lycos offers both paid & unpaid services, I don't think it would be a stretch that the unpaid services were on a short backup schedule, with the paying customers having more recovery time.

I can't see the whole argument, but if her contact with Lycos CS was anything like the calls I would get doing tech support, it probably involved a lot of words that the FCC charges companies large amounts of money for using. She may just be posting the final notice after weeks of abusive behaviour. There does come a time when the answer "No, now go away & leave us alone" becomes the right one.

Re:Backups not really required; logical delete.

[computational super]

they offered to restore it ... but only if she upgraded to the $20 premium service.

That point seems to be a bit ambiguous - I get the impression that what he was trying to say was that if she had originally signed up for the premium service, then this would have been an option at this point. I'm not quite ready to jump on the "hate the customer service guy" bandwagon here yet - we didn't see the whole exchange; we just see a few excerpts presented by somebody with an axe to grind (for all we know, that last response was completely fabricated). He may have explained exactly what he was talking about, and she may have gotten a lot ruder in the blank spaces. I think it's ironic the number of Slashdot readers who are ready to crucify this guy for being honest rather than hiding behind corporate doublespeak and faux politeness - say what you want about this guy, but at least he's not an insincere, two-faced, backstabbing PHB.

Re:Backups not really required; logical delete.

[Rich0]

Agreed - when you do backups you ask yourself "why am I doing backups - what is the scenario I'm preparing for?" If it is hard drive failure you don't do backups at all - you set up RAID. If it is a server farm fire you do offsite backups, or maybe offsite mirroring. If it is software glitches you do an offline backup. If it is human/software error that doesn't get spotted for 3 months then you save backups every day for 91 days. And so on...

If I were running free email service I'd protect against reasonable data-center failures and software glitches, but I wouldn't keep my backups more than a day or two - what would be the point? The data has ZERO value to me - I just need to have a half-decent reputation. If a user deletes their own data it won't harm my reputation, so I don't need to have a long retention on backups.

If lycos stores 50TB of email, then they need 50TB*retention of storage capacity for backups. I'm sure they look to trim as much as they can get away with for non-paying customers.

Now, if I were a corporation making money by productively using my data, then I'd be a lot more caring about it, and I'd spend a lot more keeping it safe.

Re:Backups not really required; logical delete.

[Anonymous Coward]

I think it's ironic the number of Slashdot readers who are ready to crucify this guy for being honest rather than hiding behind corporate doublespeak and faux politeness - say what you want about this guy, but at least he's not an insincere, two-faced, backstabbing PHB.

Perhaps, perhaps not. He's upset at the attention and demanded the Consumerist take down his photograph, and while he's claimed he's received death threats and people have shown up at the office looking for him in his message, he says this at the end:

I immediately request that this website and photograph be removed, as it is a violation of my privacy.
Under Federal Law, you must comply with this request."

Now the photograph in question came from here and is still up at the moment. I'm also not aware of any federal law that makes it illegal to post a photograph of someone in general. Copyright might apply, but he mentions it nowhere in the message. So basically he's trying to scare them into taking it down. Still think he's not an "insincere, two-faced, backstabbing PHB"? I'd say he's proving quite well that the original quote was exactly what he said. That he thinks he can stop the negative attention he's brought on himself by being more of a jerk (using baseless threats) really proves the point quite well.

And do note that the Consumerist put this at the TOP of the page, not after the guy's letter:

If people are really sending Mike death threats and showing up at his workplace, please stop. That's no way to go about this and you're going to get yourselves in trouble.

So they're discouraging people from doing the types of things (death threats) that very well might violate a federal law or two.

Re:Backups not really required; logical delete.

[Bobartig]

Having about 3-4 years of CS experience, I can't really imagine how this guy got to be a manager of anything. I've dealt with lots of customers who've experienced data loss. They cry, they yell, they threaten to sue you. At no point is there any reason to become as hostile and belligerent as this michael guy became (not to mention petty). He lost his composure and phrased his emails poorly. There's no justification for his lack of professionalism.

Someone failed their Charisma check.

[Canthros]

Having clicked through the Consumerist write-up to the aggrieved customer's blog, it looks like the customer in question is being almost deliberately obtuse and the write-up at Consumerist is misleading.

Whitney is complaining because she doesn't want to pay for an upgraded account to get her emails back (apparently, there's a policy on that: inactive accounts can recover mail lost that way by upgrading to a paid account--not that unusual, IIRC, a half-dozen years back, and undoubtedly a valuable revenue stream for Lycos). Reading between the lines a bit, she's probably made herself a PitA by demanding that the CSRs do something they have no ability to do. (Remember that the key to a business isn't keeping every customer: it's keeping the customers that are making you money. Free email accounts probably aren't making Lycos much money, especially ones that nobody is using.)

Yeah, Lycos looks like a bunch of jerks here. I'm not saying otherwise. But I find myself in disagreement with the Consumerist's claim that they owe her a paid service for nothing just because they're jerks. Sorry about your luck, Whitney: in the future, don't store your email with Lycos.

Re:Someone failed their Charisma check.

[sabt-pestnu]

Sorry about your luck, Whitney: in the future, don't store your email with Lycos.

Correction: Don't store your email on the web. If you want to keep it, put it in storage you control - a thumb drive, a server run by someone you trust, forwarded to an account whose mail you download locally, take your pick.

For my money, the CSR person would have done well to a) restore the lost email (even if it took flagging the account "premium" for 30 seconds), and b) telling the customer "that was your one mulligan. You should take your email off our servers."

I've found in other venues that "in our discretion", "fees up to", and such like are all "expect the worst" weasel words. It is ALWAYS "what is in the company's favor". And while squealing like a stuck pig sometimes works, it is unreliable, as this case points out..

Re:Someone failed their Charisma check.

[argel]

Remember that the key to a business isn't keeping every customer: it's keeping the customers that are making you money.

As a counterpoint, I'd suggest reading Exceeding Customer Expectations.

Re:Someone failed their Charisma check.

[Anonymous Cowpat]

The number one way of dealing with any customer service department is to make yourself such a PitA that it takes less expenditure of effort to just do what you want than to keep trying to fob you off.
Lycos have tried to take the easy way out and take the lowest effort option of saying "no, go away and we won't talk to you again" and it's rightly bitten them in the ass. The reason for having a customer service department is to have people dedicated to giving a response other than that. If your policy is just to reply 'no' and then add their email address to a blackhole filter, your 'customer service' department might as well be the janitor from Scrubs.

Re:Someone failed their Charisma check.

[Anonymous Coward]

My business (large manufacturer) has customers (distributors) who are complete pains. They think they are so much better than anyone and treat people like crap and will lie to your face. When they call demanding help with anything, they get the bare minimum required, just enough to not get fired. Anyone who deals with me honestly and treats me with respect will get whatever I can do. There is alot of things that I can do to remedy just about any issue if I had the desire. Treat me dirt and I'm sorry there is nothing I can do to help them.

The danger of all storage you do not control

[DigitalCrackPipe]

While Lycos is certainly not earning any customer service points (I wouldn't do business with them), my sympathy for anyone for losing email stored online is minimal. While many online services are very reliable have been around for years, there are no guarantees. Any data stored exclusively on a remote server is unimportant data, particularly if the service is free. The only way to ensure your data is not lost to you is to have direct control over it.

I think the crux of this matter is how insulting Lycos is to the user community (or at least one user). Perhaps it is a reminder of how spotty support can be for free services. Everything is often great, but occasionally support drops out completely, without the recourse (and support) that paid services usually offer. Enjoy things while you can, but don't expect them to stay the same forever.

Re:The danger of all storage you do not control

[Anonymous Coward]

You said it - I directly control any data that is important to me.

By what about my message from Osama?

[Anonymous Coward]

All she needs to do is say she is a terrorist and the FBI will get all of her email back for her.

Re:By what about my message from Osama?

[HomelessInLaJolla]

Ignoring for a moment the personal repercussions on her own life...

That is the _perfect_ expose.

Re:It is his fault

[Anonymous Coward]

While I agree with regularly logging in to and confirming the state of email accounts, I can't help but notice a slight flaw.

All account users will not always have access to their accounts within 30 days. Accidents, illnesses, vacations, jail time, power outages, disasters, and missed bill payments. While it is nice to have a free mail account it's bridging on fantasy to work with a short account login turnaround. Forgetfulness is the fault of the user, but completely deleting all files and parading around the fact they can't be recovered (even for a free account) is just nasty.

Though in the end the true lesson is: back your mails up if they mean something to you.

Free service

[Traa]

I expect several people to come up with the "thats what you get for using a free service" reply. I'm wondering what advise those people have when someone considers using a free operating system?

Re:Free service

[Anonymous Coward]

Well, the probelm with that is that that here we mean a free as in "beer" (and later "Free as in Free Hundred Quid!!") service while the OSs you are refering to are meant to be free as in the "Give me liberty or give me death" sense.

The two are orthogonally related.

Re:Free service

[Foolicious]

That is indeed what you get when you use a free service. In terms of adviCe (noun v. verb) on using a free OS, I guess that would depend on the license that OS uses. However, the zinger you're trying to throw out there with your free OS question is based on an apples to oranges comparison. If some company decides they aren't going to support the OS they used to support, I can still salvage my data. And if their OS had some sort of strange licensing agreement about me logging into the OS to keep the OS active, well -- it'd be pretty dumb to use that OS, wouldn't it?

Re:Free service

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm wondering what advise those people have when someone considers using a free operating system?

RTFM, n00b!

</jk>

Re:Free service

[smash]

This is exactly what you get if Linux or any other free O/S deletes your data for no apparent reason. HOWEVER if you read the EULA for Windows, it is ALSO exactly what you get if Windows does the same thing.

Re:Free service

[mekane8]

They're not really the same thing, though. The point of a free OS (I'm assuming this was an attempted clever barb directed towards Linux) is that it's not just free of charge but you have freedom to use it and change it. The email service was free of charge, but obviously is not completely 'free' as in the case of open source software.

Re:Free service

[the_womble]

Much the same: in certain situations you may have to pay for support or extra services.

Of course, with OSes the alternative is that you pay for the OS AND pay for support.

Re:Free service

[massysett]

For free as in beer operating systems, my advice would be the same as it is for this woman: too bad. Don't expect any support for something that cost you nothing.

If you want support, go pay for it. That's not free as in beer. It's what keeps Red Hat in business. Support is expensive, and NOBODY is offering it for free.

Re:Free service

[jb.hl.com]

I think you won the thread. ;)

Re:Free service

[Anonymous Coward]

using a free operating system the most frequent response to any problem is "fix the source yourself or shut up"

Re:Free service

[Myopic]

I'm not a psychic, but I imagine the people who want this lady to pay for extra service from Lycos, would tell a Linux newbie that if something doesn't work, and he can't figure it out, and he can't find the answer online, and he can't find someone willing to help him for free, then he should do the same as the Lycos lady -- PAY FOR THE SERVICE HE NEEDS. Lots of Linux companies sell Linux support services.

PS adviSe is a verb, which makes your sentence unintelligible. You probably wanted to use the noun, adviCe.

Re:Free service

[Anonymous Coward]

I expect several people to come up with the "thats what you get for using a free service" reply. I'm wondering what advise those people have when someone considers using a free operating system?

Apples and oranges. One is a service and the other is a product.

Re:Free service

[e-scetic]

He/she has a point - does the linux community really want people to come to associate free with poor quality and service?

Seems like half the posts here are saying "you get what you paid for, stop your whining", which DOES seem strange coming from a free OSS/Linux-loving community.

You CAN get high quality and good support/service for something offered for free. Posters who assume otherwise are just not experiencing open source or are so far gone in the direction of capitalistic ideology they can't fathom how it's possible.

Re:Free service

[Frantactical Fruke]

Just listened on the phone to my mother upgrading to Service Pack 4 on some Windows box. She sounded worried. Apparently, every now and then an upgrade will mess up the system enough to require a reinstallation of everything. Now, I have been *asking* for that sort of behavior by using a free OS called Debian *Unstable*, obviously, but apart from minor niggles, it refuses to serve me with the adrenaline rush of unspeakable disaster I enjoyed in my Windows using days.

Still, can't complain, since I don't pay for it.

Like the Old INS

[blueZhift]

This reminds me of the customer service at the old INS. It was pretty bad and all because I guess they figured that dealing with non-citizens they didn't need to exercise anything like courtesy. Anytime you're not paying for a particular service, watch out if you have any trouble. Only money talks in the ears of corporates out to make a buck. No one wants to lose a paying customer, but someone getting free stuff, eck! Oh, and seeing ads doesn't count as payment, ever.

Re:Like the Old INS

[Captain Sarcastic]

This reminds me of the customer service at the old INS. It was pretty bad and all because I guess they figured that dealing with non-citizens they didn't need to exercise anything like courtesy.

Who says civil servants have to be civil?

Refreshingly honest and clear answer

[Per Abrahamsen]

I'd much prefer an answer like this, than the usual bullshit you'd expect from a customer service manager that would amount to the same thing.

In addition, I demand -

[wsanders]

- that you un-blackhole all that spam I used to get. Da' noive!

This person switched providers...

[rob1980]

In the last year or two, it became horrifically spammy and was often down, so I phased over to other email providers with better spam filters and more reliability.

... and didn't print off important e-mails, or forward them to the new provider. Poor customer service aside, they didn't exactly do themselves any favors here. If you're not going to use a service, then clean house and move on.

Go customer service!

[Anonymous Coward]

As someone who's worked on the otherside of the counter if I had to guess I would say that the victim here wasn't exactly being curtious in their requests to get their e-mail restored. There are plenty of people out there whom believe that they can get whatever they want from a company if they just spend enough time talking.

I did customer service for a bank and got a call from a customer who had disputed a charge on her account. The charge was for a hotel reservation which she had canceled. As most people who have used credit cards for such a reservation know you must cancel by a certain time or you get charged. So in short, she canceled late, we investigated and said "vendor did nothing wrong we can't reverse the charge" and she proceeded to talk my ear off for about a half an hour until I finally had to say something not too far off of what Lycos had said. In short, some customers just aren't going to listen until you say something like this to them.

Links are dead

[Fatalis]

Requesting cache.

You get what you pay for.

[Mex]

And I don't think the man was exceedingly rude. More like "brutally honest".

Customer's fault

[Anonymous Coward]

From the comments at consumerist.com, it seems like a lot of people are really angry at Mike Jandreau for no reason. He's not a jerk, Whitney is. She obviously whined her way up to Jandreau and annoyed everyone at Lycos customer service. It's absolutely Whitney's fault if she didn't check her email for a month---it's clearly stated when signing up for Lycos mail that the account will expire if you don't check it.

Does Lycos exist ?

[alexhs]

Well, apparently, at least their e-mail service doesn't exist anymore...

Re:Does Lycos exist ?

[kbob88]

Well, apparently, at least their e-mail service doesn't exist anymore...

1997 called and took them back

Re:Boo Hoo

[Anonymous Coward]

How exactly would one "make a local copy" of two years worth of email from Lycos' webmail service??

Who do they think they are?

[davidwr]

They sound like a certain Big-Box computer store I know.

To the lady who lost her emails :

[DrLov3]

Not worth 5 minutes of your life to make a backup of .... not worth 5 minutes complaining about losing it then.

If her emails were soooo important, she should have made a copy.

Note that when you do so(complain), you also waste 5 minutes of somebody else his life

It's about time a manager shows the customers who the boss is.

What happend to you ppl, having feelings for a n00b, what happend to the BOFH in you ..... I know you're all using vista right .... you've been brainwashed by it into user friendlyness where computers are fun.

*sigh*

[smash]

If you can't understand that "8. Account Inactivity. Lycos reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to delete any materials (including emails) stored in connection with an unpaid Lycos Mail account if the user's account has been inactive for thirty (30) days." means that Lycos may delete your data at their leisure if you don't log in, then no amount of customer service will help you.

Perhaps you would like a refund?

I just can't understand

[Jester@TheHouse]

What the hell has happened to personal responsiblity? Now the Customer service agent may have been gruff,(I haven't been able to read the blog due to it being dotted) but why can't people learn to understand the rules of the field here. They have their rules of deletion. She didn't follow them. They deleted them. They offer a service to retrieve them for a cost. She doesn't want to pay. What is the problem really here.

I think it is time that people in the IT field need to practice more tough love, this doesn't give us the right to be assholes, but computers are everywhere, in every part of life. The average joe needs to do this stuff for himself now. No more hand holding. What is it with the mindset that "oh I can just be clueless about everything, someone will sort it out for me"?

They offered to sort it out for her, for a cost. How were they to know she didn't abandoned the account?

And on the flip side again to my fellow IT grunts. Don't be asses, don't use unneeded technobabble (some is really needed sadly to properly communicate with others about computers though), and f'ing document things. Offer your info and insight to others, let them learn the rules of the field.

We all need to learn to be helpful not hapless.

Ok, Captain Angry Pants is going to rest now.

Re:I just can't understand

[nuzak]

Regardless of who is at "fault" here ... keep in mind that this Jandreau fella is probably the God of Customer Service on the pay side too. I guess their IT must still be pretty good, since I can't imagine anyone who actually pays Lycos money actually tolerating the treatment.

My guess is that Jandreau will find out that there is in fact someone higher up than him, because that someone will fire his ass.

Ever heard of a backup?

[Sandbags]

Ever heard of a backup? ...guess you haven't. Use a client for e-mail when you can, and the web only for remote access to your mail. I have years of e-mail stored in my local client from several current and former web based free-mail clients. I leave the "delete from server when downloaded" box unchecked so I allways have 2 copies of all my mail. I periodically archive to maintain a reasonable database, launch time, and scan time. I can re-mount any archive at will and have all my old mail at my fingertips. If one of my free-mail systems clears out my inbox, I can run any number of tools to put all the mail back. I archive to DVD periodically as well, just to be sure.

If you don't protect your own data, why are you surprised they didn't either?

Re:Ever heard of a backup?

[nevermore94]

Can you please eleborate on the putting the mail back on the server part?

I use IMAP for my mail viewing from the server. Since IMAP is 2 way, theoretically you could back it up remotely and then restore it to the mail server remotely if necessary. Can you tell me of software for doing this?

Re:Ever heard of a backup?

[Doctor Faustus]

Do you know of a way to do this with GMail? Hell, I'd happily pay at least $20/year for GMail, maybe $50, especially if I could get local backups.

Re:Ever heard of a backup?

[Pathwalker]

You can turn on POP access for gmail, and it won't cost you anything.
The instructions are here.

No such thing as a free lunch

[91degrees]

Whenever something is free, I try to work out where the catch is. Nobody will spend money giving away a free email service. Lycos is quite clearly hoping to tempt you into their paid subscription service. Fair enough. They're clearly going to do everything poissible to encourage you to do that. I say good luck to them. I find lycos useful for disposable email addresses, so they're not going to get me to convert. I'm most likely a cost to them. If I'm going ot be a freeloader, the last thing I expect is customer service. They'd prefer to get rid of anyone who obviously isn't going to upgrade.

Free Service

[Stoggie]

If you want something for free, you have to follow by their rules. It's as simple as that. Why should they take extra time and effort (MONEY money money) to have someone do something that is out of the automation. Ads bring profit only if everything else is automated. They also have bills. Don't complain if you are getting it free and aren't using it by the rules.

Re:It is his fault

[Arathrael]

That wouldn't necessarily have helped. My hotmail account got marked inactive, and all the email in it wiped, despite my checking it at least once every couple of weeks.

According to their support people, their system thought I hadn't logged in for 30 days because opening it via msn doesn't count. Here's the exact quote:

Sign in to your account directly. You need to manually enter your password in the MSN Hotmail sign in page in order for our system to detect that you are still actively using your account. If you access your mailbox through MSN Messenger and others where you do not manually enter your password, our system will not be able to detect you actively using your account.

Oddly, I only ever check my hotmail via msn and this only happened once over a period of many years. Personally, I think they just delete random accounts occasionally for a laugh. Fortunately I never really trusted them to start off with so I didn't use it for anything serious. It was still annoying though.

Of course, the best bit of the response was where they suggested I subscribe to Hotmail Plus and said they looked forward to providing me with a 'consistent and effective service'...

Funniest thing I've read all week..

[msimm]

Of course I'm sorry about the loss, thats no fun even if it is a policy.

But why on earth didn't anyone google-map him?

I'm going to go out on a ledge and guess he lives (lived?) in the apartment across from the dirt patch googles pointing to. :)

Also, I saw the two sites listed as being his have been taken down (bandwidth is a bitch!).

But someone missed topfivealbums.com. For shame.

And to top it all off idaho-hum.com goes down in a puff of smoke (or CPU usage quote exceeded?). Its an entirely appropriate Friday now!

Get Gmail!

[Mizled]

1) Tell Lycos to F*** off!

2) Sign up for Gmail. http://gmail.com/

3) Use Gmail with Thunderbird. http://www.mozilla.com/en-US/thunderbird/

4) ???////

5) Profit.

Wahhh

[PlasticArmyMan]

Could someone join me in a cry of "waaaaaaahhhhhh" for this person. Someone didn't read the T&Cs properly. Also, I bet that person bitched and bitched and bitched to get an annoyed Customer Service response like that. You can get snooty but it takes a fair bit to get a really pissed off response back. I know, I've tried.

Re:It is his fault

[DrLov3]

No amount of accidents, illnesses, vacantions, jail time(there's computers in jail now), power outages, disasters, missed bill payments can keep a Grade A human being(slashdot reader) off the internet for 30 days.

I would need to be a in a coma for 30 days to be kept off the internet for so long, and in that case, losing my emails would not be much of a concern since when I wake up I most likely won't be able to type anymore.

Anyone grade B and under, gets Grade B and under services from CEOs sorry. Beside, you good ppl mentioned above that even if the service was free, Lycos was still making money from advertisement, well no, because she didin't use the service for 30 days, therefore, she wasen't being advertised to.

I doubt you can backup WebMail

[denis-The-menace]

I doubt you can "backup" WebMail without removing it from the web service.
I have Yahoo WebMail and when you connect with POP3, your Webmail Inbox gets emptied.
As far as I know, you cannot backup any WebMail service, free or otherwise.

Re:I doubt you can backup WebMail

[synx]

not true - you can retrieve your gmail emails via pop3 without emptying your inbox.

Re:I doubt you can backup WebMail

[heroofhyr]

Normally there's an option in your POP3 retriever of choice to leave the messages on the server. It's in the RFC for POP3 that only mail which is marked for deletion during the transaction will be deleted, and even then only after an update command has been sent. So whatever program you're using to get your mail should have the option to preserve it. In fetchmail it's the -k flag. In Thunderbird it's in the account preferences dialog. Unless Yahoo is manually doing this after you've finished retrieving your mail, which I doubt, it's deleting your messages because you didn't configure it not to--because by default a lot of email clients assume you don't want to keep it on the POP server as POP was not designed for sending the same messages to the same account(s) at multiple sources--that's IMAP's purpose.

I found this in Google in about 5 seconds. It should help you, even if it's specific to Outlook Express:

To control deletion of messages from the Yahoo! Mail Server: 1. From the Tools menu, choose "Accounts." 2. Select the "Mail" tab. 3. Double-click the account labeled "pop.mail.yahoo.com." 4. Select the "Advanced" tab. 5. In the Delivery section at the bottom of the window, check "Leave a copy of messages on server" if you want to save your Yahoo! Mail messages on the Yahoo! Mail server as well as on your local computer. Do not check this box if you want your messages to be deleted from the Yahoo! Mail server once you have received them in Outlook Express. If you want proof that it can be done, I can say safely that it does. With GMail at least. I have one computer with fetchmail and Mutt, one with Thunderbird, and in Windows I just login to the GMail account through Firefox. All of them work and all of them have identical inboxes because I don't delete any of the downloaded messages. Occasionally I will login from the web and push them into Archive when the list gets too long, but each computer's inbox still has the locally stored version.

Regarding the article, I've seen a lot of people fighting when in fact both of them have a point. 1) The user was to blame because I have an old Lycos account that I rarely use and even I know their policy. That's why I log in to it every few weeks just to keep the inbox, which contains some things from ~7 years ago (amazing I still have them considering the previous 5mb limit Lycos imposed), from being emptied. Anyone who bothers to read the ToS should know this and expect it. They are offering a free service, but not running a charity. If they kept every message from every user regardless of the last time they logged in, their storage devices would be full of crap from people who died, lost internet access, forgot about the account, don't use it anymore because there are better ones out there, or were just using it for some sinister or immature purpose. If something is really important to you you should be printing it out anyway. The second point is, this Lycos manager should either be fired or at least punished. It doesn't matter how correct Lycos' policy was and how much the customer ignored it, you don't use that kind of language. I've noticed from working in customer service myself that most of an angry, hostile customer's initial behaviour towards the representative is just frustration, and if you actually make an effort to understand them and sympathise, you can usually get them to compromise. I can't believe this guy is a manager. I don't know any manager who wouldn't have just bit the bullet, gave them a free month of the pay-for-use service, restored their e-mails, and hoped they had the sense to download them or forward them to another account and walk away from the service. They'd be happy and the company would only have lost a few dollars. Now they've got all this bad publicity over a $29.95 or whatever it was fee.

Re:I doubt you can backup WebMail

[swell]

Each of my WebMail services allows me to forward mail. When I find a piece worth saving I forward it to the service that will store it with other important mail--on my hard drive.

If forwarding is not available from your service, I suggest you dump them real fast.

Re:I doubt you can backup WebMail

[Ranx]

Just checking "leave mail on server" will probably do it.

How much would it had cost Lycos...?

[rzei]

I wonder how much would it had cost Lycos to just give those emails back. Sending a message like (and unlocking the account) could had given them that $15 and possibly some nice karma:

Hi, you can go to this address to unlock your Lycos email account with your old password!

Please remember next time that accounts get locked up if they are un-used more than 30 days. You can avoid this by upgrading your account to for only $15.

Please note that this special offer is only available for your account, and it will expire in 10 days from now.

I mean, how much does it cost to be nice to people? I cannot see how this move made Lycos save or make any money..

Similar experience with local ISP

[nevermore94]

I had a similar experience with our local cable modem internet provider. They are a large multi-state cable company. I had been a loyal customer paying their exhoribitant fees for many years, so definately not free. Their mail server for our city crashed overnight and the next morning 4 years worth of saved email was gone, but not just for me, for the whole city. I at first figured it was temporary, so I started by emailing and then phoning after I got more concerned. There answer was that they only keep a nightly disk backup and that got corrupted also and that they had no tape backup whatsoever. Being a sysadmin myself I was completely aghast. But they basically told me no amount of complaining could ever bring it back and all they offered was a free month of service. On top of that, they also told me that I should not even be leaving my mail on their server. I use their IMAP service so I can have access to my mail from several home and work computers, but they told me I should only be using POP and saving it on my own computer. The worst part is since they are the only decent network provider in the area, I still use them as an ISP, but not for any important email.

Re:Similar experience with local ISP

[king-manic]

I had a similar experience with our local cable modem internet provider. They are a large multi-state cable company. I had been a loyal customer paying their exhoribitant fees for many years, so definately not free. Their mail server for our city crashed overnight and the next morning 4 years worth of saved email was gone, but not just for me, for the whole city. I at first figured it was temporary, so I started by emailing and then phoning after I got more concerned. There answer was that they only keep a nightly disk backup and that got corrupted also and that they had no tape backup whatsoever. Being a sysadmin myself I was completely aghast. But they basically told me no amount of complaining could ever bring it back and all they offered was a free month of service. On top of that, they also told me that I should not even be leaving my mail on their server. I use their IMAP service so I can have access to my mail from several home and work computers, but they told me I should only be using POP and saving it on my own computer. The worst part is since they are the only decent network provider in the area, I still use them as an ISP, but not for any important email. I think you got adaquete but not great service. Things happen. Never trust someone else when it comes to data back up. If I lost all my mail. I'd be okay, because of a streak of paranoia I keep local back up and off site backups of anything of any significant value to me. I'm sure you've learned your lesson. And while the failure to get your mail back is somewhat bad, they compensated you to a reasonable degree. If you think your mail is worth more then 1 mo of your inet service.. then you really should have back it up. I can see their response was reasonable although their data integrity processes seem to be lacking.

Re:Similar experience with local ISP

[JoeF]

I keep local back up and off site backups of anything of any significant value to me

And do you actually check that the backups are ok?
I thought I had backups of my mail archive, only to find out recently that some of the backups are corrupted...

Re:Similar experience with local ISP

[king-manic]

I don't frequently check. I just assume redundancy will save me :D most I can lose is 1 mo. I backup when I pay my bills.

Re:Similar experience with local ISP

[nevermore94]

I keep backups of most typically irreplacable emails like something containing account information, but it was things like emails from a loved one who is no longer with me that I missed the most, and yes I should have had them backed up too, but it never occured to me until it was too late, and no amount of monetary compensation makes up for that.

Now on to a technical question. Since IMAP is 2 way. Theoretically you could back it up remotely and then restore it to the mail server remotely if necessary. Does anyone know of any software for doing this?

Firing Customers

[king-manic]

Working in customer service, I can attest there are some customers that you should fire. These are the low to no profit customers who demands time and vastly over estimate their importance in the world. The ones who demand to speak to your VP or assume the media is interested in hearing of how the evil phone company cut their phone service just because they're 6 months behind on their bills.

At some point a customer demands more then their current and future business is worth and you have to set your foot down. I suspect Ms. Whitney is one of these, and the lycos rep put his foot down. It happens fairly often but with more diplomatic language in every company. There is simply a certain class of person who such a hassle to deal with that you want to direct them to yoru compitition.

Re:Firing Customers

[Myopic]

Thank you for correctly using "they're". You mistook "then" for "than", though.

Yours,
grammar nazi

Re:Firing Customers

[zymurgy_cat]

At some point a customer demands more then their current and future business is worth and you have to set your foot down.

I agree that you need to "fire" unprofitable customers. But there's a difference between "firing" them and telling them to fuck off.

If you want to fire a customer, you simply state the policy in a professional manner and then ignore any more correspondence. You don't berate them, no matter how they treat you. If you ignore them after simply, professionally stating the policy, you fire them. If you treat them in a mean fashion, you end up on slashdot. How would you prefer to be remembered?

How high is he?

[curtlewis]

There is no one higher than me that you will speak with. No one higher, eh? I guess he must be referring to drug usage because I'm sure he reports to someone.

I'm not aware of any company where the Manager of Customer Support is equivalent to CEO/Chairman...

Re:How high is he?

[7grain]

True. But I think the operative words are "that you will speak with."

Presumably his boss is aware of the situation, backs him up, and doesn't want to speak to the irate customer. Been there!

Re:How high is he?

[linuxrocks123]

Read what he said. He didn't say there was no one higher than him in the company. He said there was no one higher in the company who would waste time speaking with this stupid woman.

Re:How high is he?

[CRiMSON]

Learn the read before you post kthxbai!

Re:How high is he?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, I'm going to guess that the CEO doesn't talk to customers. Laywers maybe, customers no.

Re:How high is he?

[SeaFox]

Most businesses have a setup like this.

There is a magic level of customer service where you work on customer issues, but do not actually interface directly with customers. The front line CSRs and their supervisors act as intermediates. This level of employee usually starts with higher ups in the accounting departments and the low level IT workers. They do not talk to customers, and they like it that way. I would go as far as to say some would seek new jobs if they were suddenly required to start making contact with customers directly about issues they deal with (since many times their decisions are not what the customer wants to hear).

The problem is customers put far too much faith in what they are told over the phone, and some seem to think they have some legal right to talk to whomever they want. Most of the time the first level "supervisor" they speak to is not really a supervisor but a senior agent. They think if they ask to "speak to your supervisor" you are obligated to transfer them up, that the name you give them is your real name and you have to give your last name if requested, ect. They think the customer service tree is a ladder they can climb up until they are eventually speaking to the company president. This is mostly based on the fact that the higher one goes you will often times find the person more lenient to individual situations. So while a lower rep may deny a credit request that goes against company policy (or is simply ridiculous in its scope) a higher up may give the customer what he wants.

I once had a guy mention this, he said that he would just "keep going up the ladder" until he got some answers. I told him "Sir this isn't a ladder, it's a step stool. And guess what... you're on the top rung."

Re:It is his fault

[aardvarkjoe]

While I agree with regularly logging in to and confirming the state of email accounts, I can't help but notice a slight flaw.

That's not a flaw; that's a feature. Free e-mail services generally make their money either from advertisements, or by using it to convince customers to pay for more or better service. (It sounds like Lycos does both.) A free account user that never logs in is using up resources, but is not bringing in any money at all. Deleting the files makes good sense.

I work in customer service

[hellfire]

His response sucked. I'm a supervisor and if I was his boss, I'd have severely reprimanded him. At the same time, I have no idea what their complete exchange was because the sites have been /.ed.

I will say this. If she's posting personal information and people are identifying him and sending death threats, I want this woman prosecuted, persecuted, and hung from her toenails. As a support rep, personally attacking someone and putting their life in danger is immoral and wrong on so many levels.

1) You singled out a peon who works at a big company, even if he is the supervisor. He doesn't make policy, he only enforces it. Blame the company, not a single person.

2) It's email. It's not a kidney transplant. You had a lot of opportunities to get it back, and it's not the end of the world. Okay, if one of the emails contains the formula for nuclear fusion or the location of your small child and you can't find it anywhere else, I'll understand. Otherwise get over it.

3) You want help? Take the high road. This is the low road. To said "he's a jerk and I'm making fun of you for ever and ever." How mature is that?

4) He's getting death threats. OMG I'm going to find YOUR address and YOUR picture and get a bunch of support reps to give you death threats, you stupid bitch, and see how you like it! Death threats are nothing to laugh at, and are completely over the top, no matter what he said about your email.

5) I'm shocked and amazed at people who torment support reps as incompetant, rude, and unsocial. Do you realize how much shit we get thrown at us every day and how hard this job is because people like this? The nicer you are to me, the nicer I am for you. I get people yelling at me every day, and I help them, but I don't wanna, and I can't help that feeling. When I call someone for service, and I never yell at the person on the phone. I know form personal experience that being nice is the way to go. Now you've completely ruined your chance at ever getting your email back because, when an asshole pissed you off, you decided to be an even bigger asshole.

He has every right to sue her, and I hope she gets taken to the cleaners. Yes I'm emotional about this because this is scary to me. You don't take out your petty problems on a support rep. The support rep is just a cog in a wheel. Keep it oiled and it will do the job, but don't take a wrench to it just because it won't do what the machine can't do.

Re:I work in customer service

[DeepCerulean]

Wow...just...wow... >I will say this. If she's posting personal information and people are identifying him and sending death threats, I want this woman prosecuted, >persecuted, and hung from her toenails. As a support rep, personally attacking someone and putting their life in danger is immoral and wrong on >so many levels. She posted his name...hardly anything criminal or immoral. It's not her fault people know how to use google (in fact...if *you* knew how to use google, you could easily find the "complete exchange"). She's also not responsible for other people making threats against him. >1) You singled out a peon who works at a big company, even if he is the supervisor. He doesn't make policy, he only enforces it. Blame the >company, not a single person. As a *customer service* rep. (no way he's a manager), it IS his responsibility to not be an asshat. He failed...I blame him for that...I blame the company for hiring him. >3) You want help? Take the high road. This is the low road. To said "he's a jerk and I'm making fun of you for ever and ever." How mature is >that? He was an ass from the get-go...he was trying to extort money from her (and, actually, the $5.95 plan ensures "Account Preservation" so trying to force the $19.95 plan on her was even more over the top. >4) He's getting death threats. OMG I'm going to find YOUR address and YOUR picture and get a bunch of support reps to give you death threats, >you stupid bitch, and see how you like it! Death threats are nothing to laugh at, and are completely over the top, no matter what he said about >your email. Like I said...she just posted his name...everyone else took it from there. >5) I'm shocked and amazed at people who torment support reps as incompetant, rude, and unsocial. Do you realize how much shit we get thrown at >us every day and how hard this job is because people like this? The nicer you are to me, the nicer I am for you. I get people yelling at me >every day, and I help them, but I don't wanna, and I can't help that feeling. When I call someone for service, and I never yell at the person on > the phone. I know form personal experience that being nice is the way to go. Now you've completely ruined your chance at ever getting your >email back because, when an asshole pissed you off, you decided to be an even bigger asshole. If you were competent, polite, and social perhaps you wouldn't get so much shit. Most of the CS reps I've dealt/worked with know how to read a troubleshooting flowchart and that's about the extent of their "competence". You deserve the shit you get. >He has every right to sue her, and I hope she gets taken to the cleaners. Yes I'm emotional about this because this is scary to me. You don't >take out your petty problems on a support rep. The support rep is just a cog in a wheel. Keep it oiled and it will do the job, but don't take a >wrench to it just because it won't do what the machine can't do. Sure, he could sue her...he'd lose. Badly. And in many states he'd end up having to pay her court costs.

Re:I work in customer service

[DeepCerulean]

Reposting in a sanely formatted manner...fuck you HTML formatting...

Wow...just...wow...

>I will say this. If she's posting personal information and people are identifying him and sending death threats, I want this woman prosecuted,
>persecuted, and hung from her toenails. As a support rep, personally attacking someone and putting their life in danger is immoral and wrong on
>so many levels.

She posted his name...hardly anything criminal or immoral. It's not her fault people know how to use google (in fact...if *you* knew how to use google, you could easily find the "complete exchange"). She's also not responsible for other people making threats against him.

>1) You singled out a peon who works at a big company, even if he is the supervisor. He doesn't make policy, he only enforces it. Blame the
>company, not a single person.

As a *customer service* rep. (no way he's a manager), it IS his responsibility to not be an asshat. He failed...I blame him for that...I blame the company for hiring him.

>3) You want help? Take the high road. This is the low road. To said "he's a jerk and I'm making fun of you for ever and ever." How mature is
>that?

He was an ass from the get-go...he was trying to extort money from her (and, actually, the $5.95 plan ensures "Account Preservation" so trying to force the $19.95 plan on her was even more over the top.

>4) He's getting death threats. OMG I'm going to find YOUR address and YOUR picture and get a bunch of support reps to give you death threats,
>you stupid bitch, and see how you like it! Death threats are nothing to laugh at, and are completely over the top, no matter what he said about
>your email.

Like I said...she just posted his name...everyone else took it from there.

>5) I'm shocked and amazed at people who torment support reps as incompetant, rude, and unsocial. Do you realize how much shit we get thrown at
>us every day and how hard this job is because people like this? The nicer you are to me, the nicer I am for you. I get people yelling at me
>every day, and I help them, but I don't wanna, and I can't help that feeling. When I call someone for service, and I never yell at the person on
> the phone. I know form personal experience that being nice is the way to go. Now you've completely ruined your chance at ever getting your
>email back because, when an asshole pissed you off, you decided to be an even bigger asshole.

If you were competent, polite, and social perhaps you wouldn't get so much shit. Most of the CS reps I've dealt/worked with know how to read a troubleshooting flowchart and that's about the extent of their "competence". You deserve the shit you get.

>He has every right to sue her, and I hope she gets taken to the cleaners. Yes I'm emotional about this because this is scary to me. You don't
>take out your petty problems on a support rep. The support rep is just a cog in a wheel. Keep it oiled and it will do the job, but don't take a
>wrench to it just because it won't do what the machine can't do.

Sure, he could sue her...he'd lose. Badly. And in many states he'd end up having to pay her court costs.

Re:I work in customer service

[UbuntuDupe]

You singled out a peon who works at a big company, even if he is the supervisor. He doesn't make policy, he only enforces it. Blame the company, not a single person.

Oh, really? So, there's someone higher to appeal to, with more authority that has the responsibility for these matters?

I agree. And that's precisely why the this manager should not have said: "I am the manager of all of Customer Service. There is no one higher than me that you will speak with."

Because that might give the wrong impression that's actually the last person to go to regarding the matter.

Re:I work in customer service

[Vellmont]

I agree with everything you've said. It pissed me off that people are taking this to some big extreme and sending the guy death threats for being a bit rude to someone. It's kind of frightening that the internet can create this instant mob of people against one guy who made one small mistake.

The only thing I'd like to add is that while I always try to be polite to support reps, it doesn't always work just being polite. Most of the time it fails when the rep start being unreasonable in what they'll offer in exchange to resolve your problem. You don't have to be rude or anything, just polite but firm. My point is that being polite doesn't mean you have to let the reps do whatever they think they can get away with. The Verizon .002 cents and .002 dollars incident comes to mind. The guy was very polite and patient, but he didn't ultimately get anywhere until the incident went public. (He also didn't act like a baby like this woman did, nor did he single out some support rep).

The problem, I think is that too many people assume that being polite also means you can't be firm in what you're asking for (i.e. polite=nice=weak). They take the opposite extreme and assume that they need to get all tee'd off to get what they ask for, otherwise the rep is just going to take advantage of their niceness. You can certainly be nice, polite, and firm at the same time.

Re:I work in customer service

[Jherek Carnelian]

Now you've completely ruined your chance at ever getting your email back because, when an asshole pissed you off, you decided to be an even bigger asshole.

Who knows how this case will turn out. But based on experience, I totally disagree with that statement.

It has been my experience that when a company's customer service reps give you the run around, the absolute most effective way to halt the run-around process and get some relevant support is to be a total ass. I believe it is a modern version of "the squeaky wheel gets oiled."

My process is pretty simple, the customer service people get two chances to actually provide service. After the second non-helpful response, I start in with the vulgarities and go from there. That tactic almost always causes an immediate escalation to someone who will make an effort to fix my problem.

I think this is a terrible way to run a customer service group, because it encourages customers to treat the reps as poorly as possible. I suspect that the companies that run this way (almost all of them) are quite willing to sacrifice the mental/emotional health of their front-line support reps because there are plenty of people who won't assert themselves enough to break past the run-around, thus saving the company lots of money by avoiding the costs of supporting those who give up.

So, while I totally understand about how much it sucks to be a cog in the wheel of the machine, I think your blame is misplaced. The guilty party isn't the irate and abusive customer, it is the employer who sets up the system so as to cause customers to act abusively if they actually want a reasonable level of service.

Re:I work in customer service

[Anonymous Coward]

Look, people turn rude when the other person doesn't listen. He IS the last person to go to regarding this matter, but somehow that seems to be unacceptable information. Customers will not speak to the people who make policy, only to people who explain it and at most to people who enforce it. IMHO the correct way to deal with someone like her is to send a polite reply and in case the customer doesn't accept it, ignore further complaints (>/dev/null).

Re:I work in customer service

[Anonymous Coward]

He has every right to sue her

Actually no, he doesn't. I'll assume your statement was a part of your emo rant and not an example of the breadth of your legal knowledge.

Re:I work in customer service

[UbuntuDupe]

But what if they guy they're giving death threats to is wealthy? What if he has a lot of "power"? I guess the death threats are okay then.

I mean, that's basically how you think it should work, right?

Re:I work in customer service

[hellfire]

She posted his name...hardly anything criminal or immoral. It's not her fault people know how to use google (in fact...if *you* knew how to use google, you could easily find the "complete exchange"). She's also not responsible for other people making threats against him.

If she posted his name in order to single him out, along with his picture, exactly what did she expect? A lot of nicely formatted disgruntled little letters asking him to be slapped on the wrist? He does have an expectation of privacy as an individual. As a corporation, one of the employees did something bad, and she's singling out an employee as a person, not the company who's responsible for the actions of one person.

And by all means, find the complete exchange and post it here. Of course a site like this is going to get slashdotted, why don't you *service* the community and post a link here please?

As a *customer service* rep. (no way he's a manager), it IS his responsibility to not be an asshat. He failed...I blame him for that...I blame the company for hiring him.

Did he set the policy that deleted her email? No? did he actually delete her mail? No. The company set the policy and the company deleted the mail. As a *customer service* rep, it's his responsibility to do what he can to assist the customer, using the tools and policies set down by his company. As the face of the company, yes he is an asshat. The problem is that this action makes him out to be the person who was at fault for deleting the email. He's an asshat for being rude, not an asshat for deleting the email.

And I think he is a manager, because most customer service department are chop shops (hell, how much specialized knowledge does one need to support email). I have the pleasure (kinda) of working in a business to business support desk. The pay is higher, call volume is lower, but the consequences are higher for not doing a good job on service. He'd never be a manager in my company.

He was an ass from the get-go...he was trying to extort money from her (and, actually, the $5.95 plan ensures "Account Preservation" so trying to force the $19.95 plan on her was even more over the top.

Again, not his issue. You are attacking an individual, not a company. He's an asshat for being rude. He personally cannot restore emails. However, I think Lycos should own up to a mistake and do their best to help out. I'm not saying he didn't fuck up. I'm saying she's created a undeserved shitstorm.

Like I said...she just posted his name...everyone else took it from there.

Like I said, what did she expect? Scare him into being a good rep from now on? Posting specific names does no good and only could end up doing harm.

If you were competent, polite, and social perhaps you wouldn't get so much shit. Most of the CS reps I've dealt/worked with know how to read a troubleshooting flowchart and that's about the extent of their "competence". You deserve the shit you get.

Ah... I see now, you are a troll. Because if you weren't a troll you'd have realized you have no fucking clue what you are talking about. My job, personally, is way more complicated than a troubleshooting flowchart. Come, come sit at my job, find out how much money I make, and then see if you can do it without getting the shit I get. I get yelled at when there's a bug in the program, and I'm polite. I get yelled at when I won't give something to someone for free when if I did, I'd get fired, and I'm polite. I get yelled at when I don't have time to look at 8 system downs because my department is understaved, and I'm polite.

The customer is not always right. Customers are asshats too. In this case, what I'm saying is that both people are asshats. And you're an asshat for insulting me at my job.

Other support departments yes have to read a flowchart, but that's all the training they get. My job actually requires thinking outside the box, where as typical support jobs don't.

Re:I work in customer service

[LihTox]

Like I said, what did she expect?

She was trying to publicly shame him for his rudeness, an age-old technique. People are often ruder when they think they are anonymous, or think that no one will call them on it.

She probably did not expect complete strangers to send the guy death threats. Or to visit his building looking for him, which (according to Lycos) 6 people did today (though I have my suspicions about this claim). She should not be held responsible for either of those, if she did not instigate them herself (which she might have done, of course).

Re:I work in customer service

[PietjeJantje]

>4) He's getting death threats.

Puhlease! Let's rephrase that into, "According to Mike Jandreau, Mike Jandreau had 81 death threats last night."

Not even Dubya receives 81 death threats a night. Since you didn't figure out yourself and you seem kind of emotional about it, let me asure you no one intends to kill Mr. Jandreau or has threatened to kill him. He was a mere asshole to a stranger. Maybe he got 81 mails telling him that? Maybe one teenager failing to be funny sending 81? Or maybe he's trying to extort the site into doing what he demands. That would be utterly tasteless and completely over the top. It would also conform to a pattern. Learning moment: whenever you throw in a "I got death threats" into the argument, be modest and start at just a couple, so you don't give it away straight away.

Re:I work in customer service

[Eivind Eklund]

You do have a choice when it comes to policy: Quitting. I have quit over an employer giving bad customer service.

Eivind.

Re:I work in customer service

[r3m0t]

She didn't post his picture - that was found by a different website online.

After she found out that people had been sending death threats, she deleted his last name from her blog and deleted the comments that mentioned it.

Re:I work in customer service

[Jherek Carnelian]

To whomever rated this a troll, do you think I made this up? It works, I think it is stupid that it works, but that doesn't stop it from working. A troll is someone posting something they know is false just to provoke a reaction. My post is neither false, nor intended to provoke anything but reflection on how screwed up typical customer service departments are.

Gmail

[Eravnrekaree]

One word: gmail. If she needs an account I will be more than happy to send her an invitation. You never have to worry about losing e-mails again.

Mike Jandreau is not the first

[applecore]

...to be outed after stupid behavior:

Laura K Pahl is a plagiarist!
Subway pervert Dan Hoyt was arrested by police and charged with public lewdness
The Ultimate Best Buy Extended Warranty Nightmare outs by name a couple of store managers...
And many, many more.

In these cases, there seems to be acceptance of truth by the accusers; how many others are fabrications? If Jandreau's accuser were a jilted ex-girlfriend with a creative, convincing lie, how would he undo the damage?

Will the continued slashdot-front-paging and diggability of these stories dwindle as we become numb with their commonness?

Linux Customer Support Hotline

[Penguinshit]

1-800-DEV-NULL

Re:The real Mail Nazi!

[Harmonious Botch]

I run a business which deals with customers. In my 20+ years experience, 99% of customers are decent people. The other 1% are assholes. Unfortunately the good customers will do their business and leave, whereas the assholes seem to hang around. So at least 10% of your time is spent dealing with the assholes.

These assholes will make your employee's life a living hell if you don't allow your employee to protect himself. ( look at customerssuck.com for examples ) No employee will work for your company very long if you tell him that he must take shit from anybody 8 hours a day.

But a good customer service manager - and I mean the real boss, not the arrogant guy who claims to be the head of customer service - will train his people how to tell a customer to go away without getting embroiled in a pissing contest. ( Saying "I'm sorry that this happened..." is a good start. It's possible to empathize with a customer without admitting that the company is at fault. )

Yes, the customer was naive and foolish. Yes, the customer service rep was an asshole. But the real person to blame here is an unnamed manager who put this guy in customer service without proper training.

Oh, damn...

[BrokenHalo]

No mail for me either - I haven't logged into my lycos account for at least, let's see, 3,650 days. Perhaps I should complain and demand my spam back... Seriously, I thought most free email services had a policy of this sort, though most (AFAIK) operate on a 3-month cycle, and many (such as Yahoo) offer the facility to retrieve mail if the account is dormant for some time after the expiry date.

Re:Oh, damn...

[Mysticalfruit]

I just laughed when I saw the name "Lycos". The first thing I thought was "They're still around????" I would have thought that MSN or Yahoo would have bought them up and absorbed them by now.

I can only imagine there's what 10 people working there still???

With that all said, there's no excuse for customer service asshattery.

Customer Service...

[Kelson]

...where the company services the customers.

I have to wonder where this guy came up with the arrogance to believe that she couldn't possibly reach anyone higher than him.

I take it no one writes letters of complaint to the presidents of companies anymore?

My grandfather does this (or at least used to) whenever he feels he's been treated badly by a company's customer service. He often gets an apology, sometimes a partial refund or a coupon. Not that there's anything to refund in this case, but unless the head of customer service is also the head of the company, there's always someone higher up.

One's an ass, but right, the other is wrong.

[kinglink]

Seriously, the guy is a jerk but he's pretty much spot on about this. If the server deleted the data it's gone. (though I'm suprised there's no backups).

Then again if you had to deal with people complaining about your free internet email accounts all day I think you'd be pissed too.

Btw the article says that she should get a restoration of her email. If they had it on backup then the tech lied. But I'm betting it actually is gone, so no, unless they want them to handwrite 104 weeks of email it ain't happening.

And the one question, was she a bitch before this guy finally resorted to saying that? I'm willing to be a complete asshole on the phone with tech support especially if there's nothing they can do to help me because it makes me feel better. I'll admit that, but it's usually because I also am in the moral right. ("Customer service for cable? We'll come between 10 and 2? how about I shove my foot between your ass and cheeks!") However if someone said this to me I'd say you and hang up but I'd have to admit he is right.

Then again he's wearing a boston red sox's hat, he can't be all bad.

We do this

[jidar]

At the ISP I work at we do not backup customer email (we do daily incremental back ups of accounts and settings, but due to sheer volume not email) and we do not guarantee that we will not delete mail from inactive accounts.
Usually we don't delete stuff that often, but if we need disk space we might run a script that wipes out email on accounts that haven't been accessed in a set amount of time (90 days typically).
Once it's deleted, it's gone.

It's a free service, we make no money on it whatsoever, and we tell people not to rely on it to back up their email. I hope everyone doesn't think that's terribly mean of us.

Netscape did this too

[rwa2]

I had a netscape.net email account back in the day. One day, all of my folders were just emptied.

I didn't complain about it (it was a mostly spam account anyway... they didn't have as good spam filters as yahoo did at the time). I just simply stopped using my netscape.net account for filling out account registrations and crap like that. No advertising eyeballs for you :P

I'd never use one of those free accounts for doing anything serious. Too bad one of my early beta gmail accounts pretty much went to waste :P

And thanks to the fetchyahoo perl script, I have to admit I don't really deal with the yahoo ads much either. But again, it's mostly a product spam account, so I wouldn't really miss it much... just have the inconvenience of changing the various product email update lists I somewhat care about to my new marginally useful spam account address :P

Re:Netscape did this too

[QRDeNameland]

Yeah, Netscape burned me on my account, too. I did have a couple old things that I was a little pissed off about losing, but in the end, it taught a valuable lesson: Don't count on a third party to secure any data you might care about, and doubly so if you're not paying them any money.

Lycos - Worst of All

[Anonymous Coward]

This is why I only use Lycos email as my 'throw down' account. Hello? Their interface sucks. Hello? Their service level sucks. Use ANYONE but Lycos for real email that matters.

The best part of this...

[Anonymous Coward]

... is that, for the rest of his working life, if a prospective employer googles him, this will probably be the first thing that pops up. Just the guy you want dealing with your valuable clients!

Re:I doubt you can backup WebMail: WRONG!

[whoever57]

I doubt you can "backup" WebMail without removing it from the web service.

Wrong. If you turn on the POP option in Gmail, there is another option as to whether the emails should be deleted after they have been downloaded or retained

I have Yahoo WebMail and when you connect with POP3, your Webmail Inbox gets emptied.

Wrong again. All you have to do with Yahoo mail is to configure your POP client to not delete emails off the server.

Re: Resume for Mike Jandreu

[Dreben]

Dear Mike,

Good luck with your new job search.

Dreben

Both are wrong, and both are paying for it

[KingSkippus]

That's the most insightful post I've seen in these comments.

They were both wrong, plain and simple. It just so happens, though, that Lycos has the power to do what it wants. This lady is paying for her mistake with missing e-mails. Lycos might pay for its mistake in a tarnished customer service reputation. I don't really see either as being more right than the other, and it looks like they are both going to just have to suck up the consequences.

It's too bad, really, considering that both had the opportunity to set things right before it got to this point. Oh well, maybe there will be some lessons learned by both of them from this incident.

(But probably not.)

Lycos still exists?

[v3xt0r]

I think that is more of the shocker here.

not a suprise

[Anonymous Coward]

a hacker got into my yahoo account and changed my info. when i told yahoo about it (for 3 years) they still refused to help because i didn't know my security question, which was deleted. when i tried to use it a blank spot was there. as a result i haven't used yahoo in almost 8 years. this is a common trend among companies. if you don't believe that, wait until you have to remove a mark on your credit.

Contrast with Google

[DrHow]

I have a gmail account which I am not using, and it has gone for months without my accessing it. Yet the account continues to exist. I think it is clear that Lycos's policy is designed to generate revenue. It does so in a way that is bound to antagonize the users.

This is pretty one-sided

[cgreuter]

I'll wait until the entire unedited email exchange gets published. The snippets the blogger posted are really short and may be completely out of context. For all I know, she had spent the previous twenty or so messages spewing obscenities at the Lycos tech-support people. I'll agree that the tech-support guy was unprofessional and out of line, but I have only the word of the offended party that his actions were unjustified.

MOD PARENT UP

[Anonymous Coward]

Why?

It's informative, addresses GP's points, and does so in a clear, concise manner.

Poetic Justice

[arth1]

I found this snippet, posted by the very same MJJ a few days ago on moviesnobs.net:

"Not sure what happened, but earlier this week, our server had a major hiccup, which caused the site (and our other sites) to dissappear for a day and a half. We also lost e-mail for that time, which was a royal pain."

Poetic justice?

Pay for GNU/Linux, if you want support

[Per Abrahamsen]

I'd suggest most people using GNU/Linux in a professional setting to buy one of the commercial distributions, including a support package at the level needed.

Move On Whitney (was Only Losers Use Free Webmail)

[vic-traill]

I agree - I actually find Mr. Jandreau's comments refreshingly straightforward. It saves his folks and Whitney from wasting any more of their time. Let's rewrite his comments:

This request is not being worked on. There are no further points of escalation. You think our terms of service aren't clear, but we've looked at them again, and they are, and furthermore, you're in violation of them. We are not playing an angle here to satisfy a hidden agenda; your mail is gone. End of story.

Could he be a little more diplomatic. I suppose so. Is he abusive or lying? No, absolutely not.

Are the Mail Terms of Service clear? I think so, but don't take my word for it - they're at:

http://info.lycos.com/legal/mail_terms.html

In particular, the section on Account Inactivity is Real Clear:

--------- [Begin Excerpt---------]
8. Account Inactivity. Lycos reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to delete any materials (including emails) stored in connection with an unpaid Lycos Mail account if the user's account has been inactive for thirty (30) days.
--------- [End Excerpt---------]

In this case, "and unpaid Lycos Mail account" refers to their basic, free service. There

Additionally, the General Terms of Service (found at http://info.lycos.com/legal/legal.html ) say:

Before you register for a Lycos Mail account, you must read and agree to these Terms of Use and the Lycos Mail Terms of Service, including any future amendments.

--------- [Begin Excerpt---------]
Lycos offers subscription and unpaid versions of its electronic mail services. For users of the unpaid mail services, Lycos reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to limit the amount of storage space available per user or to delete materials stored for an excessive period while the user's account has been inactive. Specifically, Lycos reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to delete any materials (including emails) stored in connection with an unpaid Lycos Mail account or Angelfire Mail account if the user's account has been inactive for thirty (30) days.
--------- [End Excerpt---------]

The user is presented with both of these links as part of the sign-up process. I just signed up for an account (set the 30 day event timer *now*, 'cause I'm sure not putty any mail up there that I give a kentucky about :) ), and I saw the terms of service.

Admittedly, no-one reads the ToS - so let this be a lesson, when you're signing up for free shit, READ THE TERMS OF SERVICE. Read the Policy Privacy too - this is probably even more important in the long run. Incidentally, the Lycos Privacy Policy seemed pretty well written to me.

So, yeah, tough break Whitney - it is a drag to lose mail. But want Things to Go Your Way, that means reading stuff when you're agreeing to it, and learning and lesson and moving on when you get burned by your own actions.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Move on Whitney (was Only Losers Use Free Webmail)

[vic-traill]

I agree - I actually find Mr. Jandreau's comments refreshingly straightforward. It saves his folks and Whitney from wasting any more of their time. Let's rewrite his comments:

This request is not being worked on. There are no further points of escalation. You think our terms of service aren't clear, but we've looked at them again, and they are, and furthermore, you're in violation of them. We are not playing an angle here to satisfy a hidden agenda; your mail is gone. End of story.

Could he be a little more diplomatic. I suppose so. Is he abusive or lying? No, absolutely not.

Are the Mail Terms of Service clear? I think so, but don't take my word for it - they're at:

http://info.lycos.com/legal/mail_terms.html

In particular, the section on Account Inactivity is Real Clear:

--------- [Begin Excerpt---------]
8. Account Inactivity. Lycos reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to delete any materials (including emails) stored in connection with an unpaid Lycos Mail account if the user's account has been inactive for thirty (30) days.
--------- [End Excerpt---------]

In this case, "and unpaid Lycos Mail account" refers to their basic, free service. There

Additionally, the General Terms of Service (found at http://info.lycos.com/legal/legal.html ) say:

Before you register for a Lycos Mail account, you must read and agree to these Terms of Use and the Lycos Mail Terms of Service, including any future amendments.

--------- [Begin Excerpt---------]
Lycos offers subscription and unpaid versions of its electronic mail services. For users of the unpaid mail services, Lycos reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to limit the amount of storage space available per user or to delete materials stored for an excessive period while the user's account has been inactive. Specifically, Lycos reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to delete any materials (including emails) stored in connection with an unpaid Lycos Mail account or Angelfire Mail account if the user's account has been inactive for thirty (30) days.
--------- [End Excerpt---------]

The user is presented with both of these links as part of the sign-up process. I just signed up for an account (set the 30 day event timer *now*, 'cause I'm sure not putty any mail up there that I give a kentucky about :) ), and I saw the terms of service.

Admittedly, no-one reads the ToS - so let this be a lesson, when you're signing up for free shit, READ THE TERMS OF SERVICE. Read the Policy Privacy too - this is probably even more important in the long run. Incidentally, the Lycos Privacy Policy seemed pretty well written to me.

So, yeah, tough break Whitney - it is a drag to lose mail. But want Things to Go Your Way, that means reading stuff when you're agreeing to it, and learning and lesson and moving on when you get burned by your own actions.

Free email services

[grasshoppa]

What do you expect? It's someone else's playground; Your data lives on their servers by their good graces. If it's even your data, which I would suspect to be not the case if you closely read the TOS.

The asshole-ness of this rep is immaterial; She should never have left her data on that server if it was this important to her.

So how does one back up their gmail account ?

[Anonymous Coward]

So how does one back up their gmail account ?

G

Re:So how does one back up their gmail account ?

[belg4mit]

POP or perhaps an unsupported 3rd party tool like gmailfs

NSA, CIA, FBI, KGB, Scottland Yard, Surete...

[flyingfsck]

I'm sure there are numerous backups of her email, but the owners of those backups will most probably be equally unhelpful...

Lycos Deleted My email also!!!!

[Greenfday6]

http://throwthemind.com/blog/2007/02/02/lycos-dele ted-my-email-also/

Yahoo and Hotmail does it too

[flyingfsck]

I have had accounts with those, simply for access to the chat servers and they eventually deleted the email - it probably took more than 2 months, but still - same thing.

Re:Yahoo and Hotmail does it too

[lvcipriani]

Yahoo will delete emails on free accounts after 90 days of not using it. I lost a few years of email on one account.

This is why I don't use web office apps...

[AmazingRuss]

...or any 'application as a service'. For whatever reason, the people hosting your app can lose, delete, or steal your work. You may have legal recourse, but this isn't a practical consideration in most cases.

If my data is going to be lost, *I'M* going to be the one to lose it.

Big Brother can get it

[swell]

Why can't she?

Doesn't the government require such companies to keep a couple years' worth of our private communication so they can examine it at their leisure?

Bullcrap

[Cervantes]

I call shenanigans.

From her own writeup (google cache) she admits that she'd been using the service less and less. From the sounds of it, she hadn't been using it at all. But she was dumb enough not to forward her uberimportant emails to another account.
And then, looking at the way her email quotes are cut, I think there was a lot more there that she chose not to share with us.

Having been in the managers position before, I think he was harsh, but she's spinning this to make him look like a dick. She probably demanded to talk to the highest ranking C*O in the state. He didn't say "I'm the highest", he said "I'm the highest that you will be talking to", and I've said the same thing (in different words).

I have the feeling that Lycos tried to explain to her, patiently, that her account had been deleted in line with the terms of service (and the disclaimer on their homepage), and that restorations were only offered to people who were Plus (or Premium or whatever the fudge it was), and she went off the handle, accused them of "holding her emails hostage", used bad language, and got all snotty with them. At that point, they probably didn't want her business, I wouldn't either.

The bottom line, is she did not log in within 30 days, as the homepage clearly says you have to do if you want to keep your account. Lycos told her what she had to do if she wanted her email back, she decided she didn't want to do it, said some bad things to them, and so they decided to tell her to go fuck herself. I say, good on ya, Lycos. Yes, customers deserve to be treated with respect, but it's gone too far in some cases, where privileged little fuckwads think they deserve everything they want, and anyone who says otherwise is mean, mean, mean. I think it's crappy that she's calling this guy out, selectively editing the conversation to make them seem like dicks, and especially crappy if it's true that people are starting to harass him.

Were I him, I'd post the ENTIRE email chain online, not just her edited version... and lets see how sweet and innocent she really is.

Re:Bullcrap

[taustin]

I have to agree. Even in her edited version, she looks like a whiney little brat, complaining that they did what they said they'd do in their policy. If she hadn't failed to log in for too long, it wouldn't have happened. If she hadn't used a free service for something important - being too cheap to pay for a better service - it wouldn't have happened.

The customer is always right, except when they're wrong. This guy was more polite to her than I would have been.

What Are The Words That I'm Thinking Of?

[IHC Navistar]

Ohhhhhhhh BURNED!

Suggested meta tags:

Faced!, pwned, burned, SlashBombed, fired.

Re:What Are The Words That I'm Thinking Of?

[HomelessInLaJolla]

> Social Obligations means working for your own money, not making other people work for it so it can be given to you

Politicians, bankers, stock brokers, investment brokers, what?

Re:What Are The Words That I'm Thinking Of?

[Anonymous Coward]

I think I see your problem. Dump the pot and the beer, get a job, and you'll get the other two.

Re:What Are The Words That I'm Thinking Of?

[IHC Navistar]

Welfare. Evrytime I hear someone justify Welfare, they call it a social obligation. I have no problem with welfare going to Honorably discharged Veterans, the mentally retarded, or the *TRULY* physically handicapped ( a sprained ankle or McDonalds Belly doesn't count). When it goes to people with 6 kids or those who don't want to go through the inconvenience of looking for a job and doing what it takes to hold one, THAT is what I am against.

I have given money out of my own pocket to Veterans, and the only mentally retarded people I know are already getting State assistance. If you don't have a job, go look for one. It's not even remotely difficult. Jusk go in and ask. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Politicians, yes, I will give that to you; They don't do anything for people except use them for PR photo ops.

Bankers EARN their salary. Stock Brokers get their commission when you decide to make a trade through them. Investment brokers make their commission when you choose to got through them to make a deal with a buyer or seller.

Re:What Are The Words That I'm Thinking Of?

[HomelessInLaJolla]

> If you don't have a job, go look for one

What the heck have I paid taxes, over the last 18 years, for?

I type, and I make a good showing, and every pharmaceutical company within 200 miles has my resume.

I've already done everything which could be reasonably expected. If there are no employment opportunities in my Inbox it is no longer my fault and, therefore, no longer my problem.

Re:What Are The Words That I'm Thinking Of?

[IHC Navistar]

That wasn't directed at you!

Re:What Are The Words That I'm Thinking Of?

[IHC Navistar]

I read your info page and you worked in some horrible place with a shady pay/bonus scheme, and Betelle.

But, seeing as how you missed the context it was in and took this personally:

Try going in and asking for a job or by calling an scheduling an interview rather than checking your Inbox. Seeing as how there are other ways of getting a job other than checking your Inbox, it is still your fault.

Re:What Are The Words That I'm Thinking Of?

[HomelessInLaJolla]

> seeing as how you missed the context it was in and took this personally

How did you miss the "Homeless" part in my handle?

> Try going in and asking for a job

I would never make it past the front desk. You probably knew that.

> by calling an scheduling an interview

HR reps don't post their telephone numbers on the front page (or any other page) of the open corporate website nor do they list themselves in the yellow pages under the company's heading. You probably knew that.

> Seeing as how there are other ways

Such as responding with my resume, over the course of an entire year, to every position for which I was qualified for?

> it is still your fault

The ball is in somebody else's court. It is not my fault. Not this time.

Re:What Are The Words That I'm Thinking Of?

[IHC Navistar]

"> seeing as how you missed the context it was in and took this personally

How did you miss the "Homeless" part in my handle?"

-----Still missed the context. The statement was non-specific in its directive, being rhetorical and not directed at a specific individual, or you, but at society.

Why wouldn't you make it past the front desk?

Also, just because you responded for a position that you were qualified for doesn't obligate companies to hire you. You were probably one among dozens of applicants that applied for the job. Just because you were "qualified" for the position doesn't mean that there were not other applicants who had more appealing resumes.

Apparently, you have forgotten that it is your responsibility to find a job, not others to give jobs to you.

"The ball is in somebody else's court. It is not my fault. Not this time."
If you think getting a job is a game, you're wrong. Regardless of who has the "ball" or who's "court" it is in, you still lose if you blame the company for not hiring you, because there are dozens of people who they will hire if they are more appealing than you. And given the fact you mentioned Pharmaceutical companies, I'm sure that there are dozens of applicants who applied, not just you.

Actually, now, I don't blame companies for not hiring you. With the kind of "It's their fault, not mine!" mentality, who would want to hire you? I wouldn't hire anybody no matter how qualified or skilled he was if he blamed others for his failures.

BTW, have you figured it out yet that you could probably earn more money from working at the local hardware store (provided you get hired) than you could by blaming other companies for your failures? Did you ever think that even though you may be 'qualified', that there are other people who are more skilled than you? And that they may have hired them because they were just as qualified but had more experience or skill than you?

My father didn't buy his house because he waited for people to approve his resume, he went looking for a job until he found one and hasn't stopped making his money since.

Funny, I've been able to get jobs without a resume, and so did other people, and they have their own houses or apartments, so I'm pretty damn sure it is possible to get a job that will support both you and a home.

Re:What Are The Words That I'm Thinking Of?

[IHC Navistar]

BTW, if you need marijuana, maybe its better for the contributing members of society if those pharmaceutical companies that you sent your resumes to DIDN'T hire someone who smoked pot.

Re:What Are The Words That I'm Thinking Of?

[HomelessInLaJolla]

> Why wouldn't you make it past the front desk?

Because nobody without an employee badge, employee escort, or a preexisting appointment with an employee makes it past the front desk. Where have you worked? Fast food?

> You were probably

Maybe. Maybe not. Do you know?

> you have forgotten

No I have not.

> your responsibility to find a job

I've sent over 1000 resumes to positions for which I'm qualified.

> he blamed others for his failures

I blame others for their failures. I take credit for my own.

> by blaming

You're pretty hooked on that word.

> Did you ever think

Psychological belittlement.

> there are other people who are more skilled than you?

Maybe. Maybe not. Do you know?

> they may have

Maybe. Maybe not. Do you know?

> he went looking for a job until he found one

I'm still looking. Do you have any leads?

> I've been able to get jobs without a resume

Are those social connections I hear in your background? Are you sharing?

Re:What Are The Words That I'm Thinking Of?

[Anonymous Coward]

Wow, freaky. You actually go around believing that the world OWES you a cushy job in pharmaceuticals. If you're qualified to wash dishes, you better well take a job, and quit your bellyaching. If you're not looking for work, then it IS your fault if you don't find any. That's how I live my life and I takes me chances. Lie or die, don't care. I don't go around clamoring about how I've been cheated, and screaming "Give me your money, you cheap bastard!" Actually, I think you're a mad scientist conducting an experiment. Please, DO post the results. And if you really are homeless, go to Vegas. you might find people to be a little more generous.

Re:What Are The Words That I'm Thinking Of?

[Anonymous Coward]

> Social Obligations means working for your own money, not making other people work for it so it can be given to you

Politicians, bankers, stock brokers, investment brokers, what?

He says on the way to the church to get his free sandwich...Are you just mad because people give them more money than they give you? You gotta bring home some bacon, dude. Don't like it? Tough titties. That's life on planet earth.

Re:What Are The Words That I'm Thinking Of?

[HomelessInLaJolla]

> if you need

Nobody needs anything. We could all exist on two peanut butter and jelly sandwiches per day. Anything above that is fluff. I'm sure there's plenty of fluff in your life.

> DIDN'T hire someone who smoked pot

On what do you base this opinion? I'll be happy to point out your logical faults all day long.

Re:The real Mail Nazi!

[computational super]

You think Lycos' customer service is bad? I just got an e-mail from Bank of America about how they need me to click through this link and verify my client information, and I don't even have an account there! I messed them up, though - I clicked through and input my account details with my actual bank account with Washington Mutual. That ought to confuse somebody in processing!

So much for federal regulations, I guess

[misterhypno]

What happened to that pesky federal regulation that REQUIRED ISP's to ARCHIVE all emails for up to TWO YEARS?

It would seem that those emails have to be somewhere?

Re:So much for federal regulations, I guess

[Anonymous Coward]

Lycos is not an ISP

Re:So much for federal regulations, I guess

[belg4mit]

They're on the internet and they're providing a service aren't they? :-P
Heh, they're right up the road, I thought they were based overseas, or
maybe that was excite.

What about copyright

[Registered Coward v2]

Interestingly enough, someone owns the copyright to that picture - and I f=doubt the consumerist web site has teh owner's permission to use it. So independent of how you feel about the issue they are still subject to copyright rules and "fair use" isn't exactly applicable - they are not commenting on or criticizing the photograph; nor is it parody; nor did they use a small portion since they took the entire paragraph.

I'm surprised no one has played the copyright card yet. In theory the original photographer could sue for damages.

Why don't they just UNDO

[mschuyler]

Oh, right. There's no Undo in Unix. rm * is permanent. :-) The customer service attitude sucks, for sure, but I kinda gulped with recognition at the headline. I've done it, accidentally. Oops. Sorry.

A Self-Admitted ASSHOLE

[Anonymous Coward]

Check out this customer "service" dude's website. His "Top 5" movies are really 6, "because I said so". He claims to love "movies" but "Running Scared" is on his "Top 5" list. He claims as one of his passions "not caring about the world". Mother fucker.

Re:The real Mail Nazi!

[asc99c]

Not sure if this can really be true, but it does appear that the guy genuinely is the head of customer services. Regardless of whether it's a free service or not I think a company that intentionally behaves with that attitude deserves all it gets. It's free because they're getting advertising revenue, so they're being paid indirectly.

Hotmail did similar stuff to me which was very annoying and lost me a few years of email. I've just moved to using Gmail instead. My hotmail account is still used a lot but not much important stuff happens there - it's just for stuff where I expect to be spammed.

Wow! Lycos is still in business?!?

[mkcmkc]

Now there's a name I haven't heard for a while...

Re: Being homeless...

[Fubari]

"Being homeless, I need five things: a job, marijuana, money, beer, and food."

If you have the others, why do you need a job?

I've heard this kind of thing before ...

[ScrewMaster]

I believe Mr. Jandreau used to work at Paypal, but I could be mistaken.

And he's wrong about one thing. He's not the CEO of Lycos, so there most certainly are other people to whom she could have spoken.

Many years ago, back when Mr. Coffee-style coffeemakers started to become common, my father bought one from Proctor & Gamble. Nice machine, but unfortunately the coffee it brewed had a rather unpleasant chemical taste. The day after he bought it he tried to return it to the store where he originally bought it ... no dice. They were jerks. So he called up the Customer Service number from the owner's manual: he tried calling several times and got different people that refused to help, "Sorry, we don't replace coffeemakers because you don't like your coffee", etc. etc. Spoke to supervisors, no help there either. Finally he'd had enough and called up the CEO of Proctor and Gamble, and explained the situation. The gentleman was very pleasant, and cheerfully admitted that that model had a problem with the type of plastic used in a small tube that carried water from the reservoir to the heater, and overnighted Dad a brand new model for no charge.

A similar story happened to a friend of mine. He had sent several high-speed modems back to U.S. Robotics (about a year or so after 3Com acquired them) for repair. Keep in mind that each of these devices cost nearly a grand at the time, so we aren't talking chump change. Well, U.S. Robotics' service department issued RMA numbers, took receipt of the modems ... and lost them. Now, that wouldn't have been so bad if they had at least admitted that they had lost the equipment and offered to replace it. No, they simply denied that he had ever sent the stuff in. "But I have RMA numbers and receipts from UPS!" he told them. Didn't matter ... nobody there would own up to knowing anything about it, but they were happy to forward his call to the Sales Department so he could order some more. After several hours of annoying various secretaries at USR, he ended up talking to a woman who was the VP in charge of inside service. She was very displeased to hear about his situation, apologized profusely and explained that the department was still in flux after the 3Com takeover, and stated that she would get to the bottom of it personally. She did and he got his stuff back, all fixed, a couple of days later. Amazing how a little pressure from above made all that nonexistent hardware magically reappear.

The moral of the story is: don't take no for an answer and don't let some underling tell you "there's nobody higher than me you can talk to." That's a line of crap designed to get the pissed-off customer to simply go away and not get them in any hot water with their bosses. Don't accept it: climb the corporate ladder until you get some satisfaction, even if it is only an apology.

Re:I've heard this kind of thing before ...

[Anonymous Coward]

each of these devices cost nearly a grand at the time, so we aren't talking chump change

Compare to: Woman admittedly left the service for a competitor, only keeps the account "just in case", doesn't log in for over a month, which is long enough to trigger automatic account expiration, doesn't want to pay $20 for an account upgrade which would have allowed customer service to restore her mail, and accuses Lycos of extortion for even suggesting that that is an option.

Sadly, with all this attention she just might get to talk to someone higher than the head of customer support, but the world just got a little crappier because of that. If I were that higher-up, I would reword the response in finest corporate speak, with sugar on top, but keep the original "get lost" theme. I would tell the customer service representative to stop responding when people have made it clear that they don't want to be a customer any longer. I would not fire anyone, I would not reprimand anyone.

Hmmm

[scubamage]

Well, after more than 10 years in the pits of customer service, all I can say is this: this guy is my HERO. Please, please dear god lycos, start making posters with him. Please! My cubicle needs one so bad.

Adolf Eichmann was only doing his job.

[Lord Balto]

In fact, that was his fucking defense at his trial.

The bottom line is this guy's job isn't to be an obnoxious dickhead. What exactly do you think that second word in "customer service" means? Is this really rocket science to you Ayn Rand groupies?

Re:Adolf Eichmann was only doing his job.

[Anonymous Coward]

What exactly do you think that second word in "customer service" means?

I know what the second word means, but do you know what the first word means? She didn't log in to her free account for over a month, which made her not-a-customer per the terms of service and then, when she was offered to become the kind of customer to whom data restoration is offered, she declined. Customer service is service for customers, not for obnoxious freeloaders.

Re:Adolf Eichmann was only doing his job.

[Emperor Cezar]

Hey, some of Ayn Rand groupies think this guy is an idiot and a douche.

Lycos the Burninator

[RomulusNR]

Let's see. What if someone could DOS Lycos Mail for 30 straight days?

No, he's NOT being honest...

[msauve]

Their TOS states:

"8. Account Inactivity. Lycos reserves the right, in its sole discretion, to delete any materials (including emails) stored in connection with an unpaid Lycos Mail account if the users account has been inactive for thirty (30) days. "

It says nothing about logging in for 30 days, it says "inactivity."

Do you really thing a 2+ year old email account can go 30 days without at least receiving some spam? That's "activity."

Re:Wow! Lycos is still in business?!?

[dan828]

Seriously. My first reaction to this story was "Fucking Lycos is still around?"

I support the customer service guy

[shinobiX]

From what I can see on consumerist.com's website, everyone involved are just a bunch of cry babies! I looked at mail.lycos.com... the policy is obviously designed to promote their $5.00 email package. the policy is also stupidly obvious and clear. Only a truly brain dead moron would read that and not know what it means. The person who lost their mail is completely to blame for their situation and should consider taking some responsibility for their own actions.

Also this vigilante attack on the customer service guy is awful. So he was a little rude, that doesn't make it right to attack him personally.

and the rest of consumerist.com belly aching is pathetic.. terrible site.

Yahoo! just deleted my account after 4 months

[larryfreeman]

In the past, when Yahoo! made an e-mail account inactive, they didn't delete anything. Recently, I logged into my account (granted, I am mostly using gmail now) after 4 months and 1 week and found that all my mails were deleted without a possibility of getting them backed up. All I can say is this is really a terrible business decision by Yahoo!. On principle now, I will never spend any money there. If they had given me some kind of warning that their policy had changed, then I would have backed up my information and would not be so outraged by what happened. So Lycos does it have 30 days and this is pretty terrible, it reflects a trend. Everyone's losing to Google. I think that this is a reminder that Yahoo! and Lycos and many other companies are on the decline. It's really too bad. Once upon a time, these were amazing companies. -Larry

So, why recommend "free" services?

[jbn-o]

It's sad to see so many /. posters getting so lost in side issues—was there enough storage for backups, railing against charging for services late in the game, differentiating between a percieved deletion (logical) versus an actual delete (physical). The more significant issue here has to do with placing one's trust in gratis services.

Many people I know recommend Google, Yahoo!, and other "free" services (IM, email, word processing, database, etc.) without ever mentioning how your data is hostage to the proprietor and probably indexed so these services can sell information about you (not that you'd know it if that's what happens). Then there are the data leaks (whether accidental or on purpose), you stand quite a bit to lose there by becoming dependent on the service. We should remember the so-called "anonymized" search data Yahoo! released some months ago where two New York Times reporters tracked down someone based on the anonymized data in her searches.

I'm sure that whatever comes out of this, people will narrowly interpret the results to arrive at ridiculous conclusions like avoid Lycos for email, use Google instead; avoid Yahoo! for web searches, use this other service instead. The bigger picture has to include not merely shuffling the deck chairs of which unaccountable corporation you'll trust for gratis services.

Right now Google is the elephant in the room: I know people on /. love Google without reservation, but how many more episodes like these do we have to see before we'll understand Google is just another organization that doesn't care about your privacy or your data?

We need better solutions for these things that allow anonymous searching, local hosting of one's own email (with remote availability), and ease-of-use that allows non-technical people to enjoy the fruits of progress as well. I don't know exactly what that would be, but I'm sure smart people can come up with something to improve upon.

Re:So, why recommend "free" services?

[jcr]

I know people on /. love Google without reservation,

Whatever gave you that idea? Google gets knocked when they deserve it, just like any other company.

-jcr

Re:So, why recommend "free" services?

[jbn-o]

This thread gave me that idea (I've already touched on some of the horrid logic I've seen here so far). As I type this, the highest moderated posts in this thread have to do with clarifying that "this is as much about them deleting her email as it is the responses she received from management" and "There are probably more than a hundred different archives, tarballs, and tape backups from which they could salvage...". In other words, technical analysis of issues that don't even scratch the surface of the privacy issues involved. No clear objection to how much "free" costs the user.

Take a look at other threads on discussion groups like /. (digg, for instance) when it comes to Google. It seems to me that every time Google comes out with a new service there are plenty of posts "critiquing" it from the lamest perspectives: how convenient is the new service, what browsers will the new service work with, how does one get access to the new service, what software/hardware are they using behind the scenes, etc. rather than thinking about the structural issues of giving your data away to a firm that indexes things about you.

The cost of "free" services rarely comes up, and if it does I've become accustomed to seeing those comments moderated down; it seems to me that the unpleasant truth breaks the rah-rah atmosphere and is duly punished. I think it's a side-effect of teaching people to think primarily of business interests and then only in narrow economic ways (as if only money matters). I certainly don't see anywhere near the number of threads chatting up these kinds of issues as I do celebrating the latest lame service Google whips up.

You get what you pay for

[AlHunt]

I'm sorry, no one here has any intentions of helping you with anything. I am the manager of all of Customer Service. There

The guy was certainly a piss ant, but if the lady was concerned about securing her mail, she should have saved it all to her own computer and then backed it up to boot.

I know a lot of /.er's save all their e-mails. I almost never do unless there's a document I need or something. I delete it with impunity.

If it's important to you, keep it under your control.

This has been a public service rant, courtesy of alhunt.

Re:You get what you pay for

[BCW2]

Add the fact that saving email on a web based service is just begging for something like this. If it's important keep it in Thunderbird or another "in your possesion" email client. Lycos record for customer service is not very good and niether is their record of honouring contracts.

Re:You get what you pay for

[AlHunt]

Your sig:

Professional Politicians are not the solution, they ARE the problem.

I'll probably get modded down for replying to your sig, but I've been beating that drum for several years now - never, ever elect incumbent politicians. Glad to see some one else spreading the word.

Re:You get what you pay for

[BCW2]

Nice to know I'm not alone. Change crooks every election, party doesn't matter, they are all crooks.

Why don't you ask him? His AIM is: ChokeYourHeart

[DietCoke]

From his OSCommerce profile, his AIM is ChokeYourHeart.

Lesson learnt, time to move on to another service

[Anonymous Coward]

She should have paid better attention to the terms regarding inactivity expiration of an account. Most services even put up reminders about inactivity if you cut it close. Seems many free services have this nuance, so it's not a “gotcha” hook that's exclusive to Lycos. Even hotmail has an expiration date (or at least did, but I'm not sure now as they're trying to be a little more competitive these days).

Now she learnt the lesson the hard way. What she needs to do now is suck it up a bit, get over it, and find someone with a few spare G-mail invites. (There has to be at least one person she knows with G-mail.) Then of course she'll have to deal with the opposite worry of nothing ever disappearing.

but that's good news, not bad news

[Anonymous Coward]

Are the emails still subject to subpoena? If not, then that's a good reason to use lycos rather than gmail.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:They're still here?

[astronouth7303]

In Soviet Russia, your mail deletes Lycos.

Re:The real Mail Nazi!

[Firehed]

umm, that's not really a serious post. You just got *wooshed*.

Re:The real Mail Nazi!

[x-caiver]

There went the joke, flying by just inches over your head

Re:It is his fault

[Arathrael]

Because the person I was replying to specifically referred to Hotmail, because it's a webmail provider with a similar policy to that of Lycos, and because the experience I had with Hotmail had some similarities to that described in the article?

Seems pretty relevant to me. I'm sorry if that's too subtle a connection for you though...

Re:The real Mail Nazi!

[gsn]

His initial mail -

...Should you want to restore the previous contents of your account, you will need to upgrade to the Lycos Mail Plus service...Restoration is not available to members who do not upgrade, and our policy will be strictly enforced. To have your account restored, you must upgrade, and pay the $19.95 upgrade fee. This is non-negotiable. Here response -

So let me get this straight: you're holding my emails hostage until you get $19.95 from me? I checked your policies, and didn't see that listed. This hardly seems like a customer-friendly policy, especially toward someone like me, who has been with Lycos for several years. There were many times when Lycos was not in compliance with its own terms of service, and I didn't try to extort $19.95 from you. This is just the snippets she cut and pasted on her blog. Not the full emails. I'd love to see them. She sounds like she has already gone of on him in the first reply. Nothing about his initial email is rude or unprofessional. She on the other hand is rude and whining about their policies and accusing them of not being in compliance with their own terms of service (which they can arbitrarily change of course) and of extortion... over 20 bucks.

Now you might argue that she is a customer that thats hardly justification. A more compelling argument is that its his job to never lose his cool and always be polite. So he'll get fired over this. Which is a shame because in my book he tried to do his job and dealt with an angry customer the right way. People don't like it when your firm and clear with them and want things sugar coated. She wasn't worth it. She hasn't ever paid them a dime herself so her being a customer itself is debatable - user yes. She was eyeballs for advertising. She didn't backup her mail. She didn't feel that two years worth of email was worth logging in to check up on every thirty days. She didn't pay 20 bucks to get it back when she lost it. IMHO her email is rude and accusatory. No sympathy.

Re:The real Mail Nazi!

[3m_w018]

When I used to ride the Long Island Railroad to work, you'd occasionally see an asshole passenger start fighting with one of the train conductors about some inane shit. And you know what would happen next? The conductor would apologize for the inconvenience, EXPLAIN WHY SUCH AND SUCH HAPPENED, and do all of this in a calm, firm, non aggressive tone. Most passengers accepted the answer, sat down, and STFU for the rest of the ride.

That's professionalism in a people-oriented job position. Maybe corporate america should start hiring LIRR conductors for customer service training...

Re:Move On Whitney (was Only Losers Use Free Webma

[joeljkp]

There's a certain kind of person/company who relies solely on technical accuracy without regard to reality: an asshole.

Yes, a professor may be technically correct to hold a test without so much as a mention other than a small entry on a little-used syllabus, and yes, Lycos may be technically within its right to delete the user's email after 30 days without any warning or sympathy, but by doing so, they both deserve the despise they get.

Ah, but Exchange is particularly retarded

[Colin Smith]

Most other email systems are sane and don't require the restoration of a 5 terrabyte database from tape when anything goes wrong. It's a dumb dumb design decision by someone with experience only of small mail systems (100 users max).

Nice Manager

[Sukaafeisu]

That is the best Manager. (no sarcasm intended)

Re:The real Mail Nazi!

[Thexare Blademoon]

You missed the joke. :(

Re:The real Mail Nazi!

[kimvette]

She didn't backup her mail.

. .. and how do you propose she do that? Does Lycos offer IMAP or POP?

As an isp...

[GiMP]

Everyone here is talking about the ex-communist style 'service with a snarl', and I agree that customer service rep here was a little too blunt. It isn't necessarily rude, but too blunt. He forgot the golden rule of customer service: never stop apologizing. "I'm sorry, but we can't help you." is a lot nicer than, "We have no intention of helping you." His job should be to "intend" to help, even if he cannot. That is what customer service is. There is no indication if this performance is common for this single employee, nor if this is indicative of the entire company. Do not judge Lycos by his actions, but by their policies.

I understand Lycos' position. They're providing a free service, they must purge accounts, and they use it to help drive some revenue for the customers that clearly aren't otherwise generating income (via ads), yet wish to continue utilizing the service. That said, I do question the fact that the account's data was removed so suddenly. For instance, if my company suspends a customer, we provide a 30 day window in which a customer can have their account reactivated without losing any data. Lycos should have suspended the account after 30 days, and removed the data after another 30 days. This would give adequate time for the customer to reactivate. Additionally, once the customer expressed an interest in obtaining the data, they should've provided an extension to the timeline for restoration.

Bad employees happen. Bad days happen. Bad customers happen. Downtime happens. Accidental loss of data happens. Intentional loss of data happens. Sh*t happens. Bad policies, however, don't just happen.

They should improve their policies, provide scripts for their customer service for such situations, give the employee a slap on the wrist (or fire him *IF* this is a continuing pattern), and clarify their policies with their existing customers.

i bet he isn't even the real head of CS

[timmarhy]

this guy is probably just some middle managment dick, i can't imagine the "head" of any reasonably large customer service division having such piss poor people skills.besides, since when do heads of departments deal with such small matters?

ugh....

[sloth jr]

.... yes, okay, the manager popped a fuse and started telling her what he actually thought. He could have and should have responded differently, but .... I guess I'm relating too much to the frazzled manager.

We spend a lot of time training people how to be good customer service agents, but little time training people how to be good customers. I'm willing to talk to anyone who can express their concerns, no matter how serious or dire, in language that isn't designed to target ME personally. If they can speak rationally and reasonably, then that's fine. I'm 100% positive that that wasn't the approach this woman followed. Instead, she went "locked-and-loaded" because she didn't understand the conditions of using this service, and fucked up. Her ignorance is now suddenly supposed to be of concern to a business.

[devil's advocate: of course, given how much time I'm sure this woman consumed and grief caused, it would have been easier if there was a way to do so to recover her files, allow her to transfer to a different service, and THEN cancel her account]

For operational managers of especially IT concerns, these sort of conversations are extremely damaging, and over years of such abuse, erode the necessary "service" muscle. Heat and pressure don't always make diamonds; sometimes they collapse bridges. Part of this is PHBs expecting their technically gifted system architects to somehow also be a smooth and urbane diplomat of the highest order. Yes, I think this is a little much to expect of technical resources (I don't know whether this guy was or wasn't, but it seems like he's no longer suited for the realities of his position).

sloth jr

Why this guy is good.

[Sukaafeisu]

I like this manager. The customer is NOT always right. Infact the customer is DUMB. Why should he have to waste his time explaining why she has no email? It was deleted. You cant get it back. end of story. And the part where he says no amount of money can get the email back was nice too. This just means it is technically impossible to get the email back but because the customer is dumb and doesnt know this, she will get angwy. This is nice because the manager will get some own back. (no sarcasm intended)

Re:Why this guy is good.

[poopdeville]

Except, when she first contacted Lycos, her account wasn't deleted. It was simply inaccessible. Restoring access would have cost $19.95.

He's supposed to serve the customer. From her perspective, he's just rubbing the shitty job he did in the first place in her face.

Lycos is still around?

[no1nose]

I thought they went the way of web rings and personal homepages.

Hello? 1998 called. They want their portal back.

Re:The real Mail Nazi!

[paeanblack]

Now you might argue that she is a customer that thats hardly justification. A more compelling argument is that its his job to never lose his cool and always be polite. So he'll get fired over this. Which is a shame because in my book he tried to do his job and dealt with an angry customer the right way. People don't like it when your firm and clear with them and want things sugar coated. She wasn't worth it.

She also doesn't know how to get things her way.

Never let your first point of contact with customer service escalate the call if the problem is actually your fault. Keep trying different avenues of approach until you hit the soft spot. Push for empathy, and don't blame anyone or anything. Use phrases like "I've really found myself in a bind here, and I'm not sure who can help me out." Note the important implications of "found myself"="could happen to anyone", "in a bind"="not quite life-or-death", "I'm not sure who"=easy handoff for the stonewallers, and "who can help me out"="obviously someone can help me". There will always be some eager trainee that doesn't know or a jaded short-timer that doesn't care about corporate policy. Let them be your hero. If possible, target the opposite sex.

If you still can't find a way in, then politely escalate the issue. Never mention how many times you contacted them or what the other contacts told you. That's the difference between desperation and nagging.

Re:The real Mail Nazi!

[gsn]

Yes actually... as part of their premium $19.95 service. So aparently the ability to backup her mail isn't worth 20 bucks a year. They also have a 6 buck account preservation thing where your account wont get deleted. Also they've had POP access since 2002 http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m0EIN/is _2002_May_14/ai_85911533 i.e. before she got her account. And if her ISP gave her an email address she could have forwarded all incoming mail. Not easy but you'd have a backup.

so...
1) 2002, Company offers free service with additional features like account protection/backup capability at a price.
2) 2005, New customer signs up for free service without additional features that she sees no value to.
3) Two years on she loses all her mail because of the ToS of her free service.
4) She now sees value of additional features.
5) Emails customer support asks for help.
6) Is told please pay 20 bucks to get your mail back.
7) Despite apparent value of offer, she accuses company of extortion and refuses to pay.
8) She loses all her mail.
9) and gets told to FOAD by customer service rep.

Am I missing something?

Offtopic?

[msimm]

Lol. Slashdot mods crack me up. Of course how could this post possibly be on topic...oh, wait! I RTFA! Silly me, I never learn. :)

Well he *told* you not to use Lycos!

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, a quick google on Mike Jandreau uncovers that he wouldn't use Lycos himself or recommend it to anyone else: http://www.websitesource.com/clientarea/testimonia ls.shtml
      "I've just set up my account with WebsiteSource a few days ago, and their support through the process of moving all our sites to their network was amazing. I'm very pleased so far with everything.
    "Not only are the prices great, but you actually get way more than you pay for with them. I recommend them to anyone looking for a new hosting company. I've used five in the past (and I work for the 6th largest one in the world), and I'd recommend this over any and all of them.
      "Mike Jandreau
      "www.mikejandreau.com"

Not that you can take *his* word for it, because most of the websites he's designed are missing or suffering from extreme lameness.
      www.mikejandreau.com
      www.mjjdesigns.net
      www.testofskill.com
      www.topfivealbums.com (less than 60 lists in 5 years?!?)

But I will admit he has the unintentionally funniest self-promotion for his "true work of art" album, from google cache of: http://mikejandreau.com/bio.php
      "Most of all, he wants his audience to feel - anger"

Sounds like he's brought his musical attitude to the workplace, too! He claims he's the designer of the "Lycos Help Site" -- judge for yourself his leet skills:
        help.lycos.com

I'm going to hurt myself chuckling....

The wording is a problem?!?

[Heddahenrik]

> It isn't so much Lycos' policy that's the problem (though that requires some scrutiny), but the response

What?!? Someone gets all their emails deleted by a company that has a really crappy policy, and then the BIGGEST problem is how the wording is? Is this the same culture that says that saying "fuck" is worse than killing people?

I personally wouldn't care a shit if the response was "Sorry Sir, but we have tried our very best, but due to how our system works, we just can't help you restore your emails." or "Hahaha! You lost your emails because you didn't follow our guidelines! Screw you!". What I care about is that the emails are lost.

Seems like some people just aren't able to put their finger on what is really important.

What about for non-customers

[pbhj]

>>> Customers being wrong or stupid doesn't mean it's sound business to have rude people staffing support

What about for non-customers, ie those not directly paying a fee to consume your resources? Surely if it looks like the potential customer (signed up initially and used the free service) has moved on (stopped logging in even and so clearly doesn't value the service) then being rude is ideal. You've not broken any contract and they leave and waste someone elses resources!

I know, holey.

Truthfully...

[Anonymous Coward]

I was not even aware Lycos was a provider for e-mail.
Seems they've proved my ignorance correct. Triple word score!!!

It was AOL, not Yahoo!

[Behrooz]

We should remember the so-called "anonymized" search data Yahoo! released some months ago where two New York Times reporters tracked down someone based on the anonymized data in her searches.

    That was AOL, not Yahoo!-- the released search results were from subscribers using the AOL browser.
 
    There are solutions that smart people have come up with to improve on e-mail, searching, and remote hosting... but they cost either cost money or are not reliable. The primary issue is users regularly expecting to get more than what they have paid for.
 

No, it's really not

[tkrotchko]

"Which is a shame because in my book he tried to do his job and dealt with an angry customer the right way."

Actually, he didn't.

Let's assume you're right and that the woman was out of line, and that the guy was 100% right.

Here's his one-time response.

"Dear :

Again, let me apologize that you feel Lycos has let you down. As stated in my previous email, this in accordance with Lyco's policy and your only option at this point is to pay $20 to have your email restored. I understand you may not find this option to your satisfaction, and I apologize but those are company rules"

And then here's the key.... don't respond any more. Even if the woman calls him the worst names possible. Just. Walk. Away.

It's nothing personal. He doesn't get it. And you look at the pictures, it's pretty obvious he's just a kid trying to do an adult's job. He hasn't been adequately trained to deal with the public.

But you cannot seriously think this is the right way to deal with a customer no matter how abusive.

Re:No, it's really not

[gsn]

I'm not saying he was 100% right at all. I'm saying he *tried* to do his job.

He gave her the standard ToS - the (presumably) standard 20 buck offer - not rude. I have no idea what the mail she sent him looks like. After that all I have to go on are cut and paste snippets on her blog. Even those make her out to be unreasonable. Even his next reply is not rude but a tad brusque. She argues that theres nothing that REQUIRES them to delete mail from inactive accounts. There is also nothing requiring them to keep it of course. Still no sight of mails from her.

Now he stops trying. Up till here he has done everything any reasonable person would require him to. Other than restore the mail. Thats just business. After this if you want to accuse him of being rude you can make a decent case. I'd call it being blunt and telling her to take a hike. It is his job to be professional to customers. He certainly tried. He failed. He will get fired. Its a shame because I sympathize with the guy. He tried to do his job and lost his cool and I can't claim I'd have reacted differently in his place.

Yeah sure, the right business thing to do is to respond exactly as you say. But I'm not sure thats the same thing as the right thing to do. I don't know what is but I feel it involves his fist and her face. I've just no sympathy for her whatsoever.

Re:No, it's really not

[honkycat]

Well, I agree that I have sympathy for the guy -- I'd probably lose my cool, too. But, if I acted as unprofessionally as he did, I'd deserve to lose my job. Part of doing a job is doing it professionally, even if that is difficult.

Re:No, it's really not

[lav-chan]

He gave her the standard ToS - the (presumably) standard 20 buck offer - not rude. I have no idea what the mail she sent him looks like.

I disagree. I mean he wasn't a total dick, but his initial response was pretty stand-offish. For example, 'Restoration is not available to members who do not upgrade, and our policy will be strictly enforced'. The last part really seems unnecessarily gruff-sounding. So does 'This is non-negotiable'. It's like he's already arguing with her, even though she doesn't start the rebuttals until the next e-mail.

This is assuming, of course, that she gave the (more-or-less) full exchange. If there were some other e-mails in between it might be a different story.

If I worked for Lycos

[NotQuiteReal]

I would give her DOUBLE her money back. Out of my own pocket, if I had to.

Caveat Emptor... no, wait that's not right. How about you get what you pay for ? (usually).

I've lost "hotmail" many times. I am just glad that they "reserve" my user name.

Most of the confusion among the Slashdot crowd probably comes from the total lack of comprehension about how one can fail to check an email account less often than 42 times a day.

They changed the TOS

[Error27]

Everyone seems to think she somehow agreed to the TOS or something but she didn't. She agreed to the TOS they had during the dot com boom.

What happened is that Lycos used to have a decent service but they were going broke so they made it suckier and suckier to force people to move away from the free version. Eventually it got to current levels of suckiness. The woman is obviously pissed and grumpy. The guy is doing a miserable job. His job is to make the free version suck more and he hates it. He hates the customers who complain all the time and he hates his bosses. Secretly, he wishes they would fire him.

If I were Lycos, I would just sell everything and shut down. Maybe I would start a commune or a coffee shop. Why not do something that gives people joy?

An Armed Society Is a Polite Society

[joe_n_bloe]

Mike Jandreau just discovered that, on the Internet, everyone carries a big stick.

He doesn't really deserve to have his entire life go to Hell in a handbasket. On the other hand, he wrote a spectacularly asinine response to a situation that most people will find at least some sympathy for. If that's his normal way of interacting with customers, and his business is customer support, it was only a matter of time.

The moral is: Sometimes you really do have to treat others the same way you would like to be treated yourself.

Re:The real Mail Nazi!

[Anonymous Coward]

Word! ;)

But seriously, I myself know of these sort of things. I had a webmail account with Yahoo! Used it constantly from 1999-2002. Then in 2002 they announced (shock! horror!) that customers would have to PAY to have POP3 access.

So what did I do?

I used POP3 before it went away, and sucked all my emails away.

I still have them in my current mail accounts and thus have a nice email history. These are accounts on my own, hosted, domains.

This person hasn't got a leg to stand on. She was using a free service, and she should expect to get what she pays for...

When Idiots Collide

[mbeckman]

They're both idiots. He for being a rude jerk, she for being a vindictive whiner. Posters taking either side are missing the point. When idiots collide, they generate extremely small, extremely elementary particles that I call "morons". Morons themselves are so tiny they are invisible, but their existence is revealed by the squirmy trail of brainless comments they spew as they zing through the netvapor.

Re:What? - Even better response

[ancientt]

The other day a call was brought to my attention by someone at our help desk. I'm a system admin, not a customer service rep, but the caller wanted something that the rep could not provide. Simply put the caller was dissatisfied with the service we were able to provide and was angry that we could not.

The honest answer was that we could not do what the caller asked. I explained that to the customer but used a technique that has always served me well when dealing with people who are unhappy with me or the company I work for. I sympathized. The biggest battle the customer faces is getting someone to say that they are right. It doesn't matter nearly so much whether they get what they ask for when they're already frustrated, what is important is that they know that they are understood.

In my case I walked the customer through a convoluted solution that had them using third party software and making format changes to the original data. They had to go through probably a dozen steps of effort to get the final result they wanted. As I said, it wasn't simply that we weren't able to do what the caller wanted, the real problem was that they wanted somebody to actually care.

With humor and patience the caller's opinion of the busines that pays my salary was changed from frustration and a desire to have no contact with us to one of feeling important and understood. The service rep later received a follow up call just to praise our company for trying so hard.

That caller will benefit us, whether it is by speaking well of us to others or continuing business with us, it will eventually pay off in making sure that my paycheck is just a little more secure. It is selfish gain, but the key is to actually care about and try to understand those that are most important to your success.

The Lycos rep could have made all the difference by doing no more than apologizing to the customer. If he had gone the extra mile of setting the customer's email to hold, doubtless something he could have managed the minute it was apparent there was a problem, then he could have told the customer that despite their policies and despite the additional cost incurred by the company they had stabalized her email beyond its normal period. He could have explained that he had already done more than their policy stated and explained that Lycos has a real need to stick to its policies and that he was unwilling to go against policy further. This would have established a rapport with the customer where the customer would feel she was understood, valued and worthy of effort. It would have been reasonable then when she was asked for understanding in either allowing them to regain valuable resources or receive compensation for their already expended efforts on her behalf.

It is not necessary to say that you are the manager of all of support, but it helps when you're willing to take responsibility for an issue to explain that, if it is really the case, that you alone have the ability to "buck the system" as much as you have on someone's behalf.

Pity, sympathy, understanding, effort. They are small words that mean a world to customers and make the difference between a company people are loathe to do business with and a company people will be loyal to beyond mere price competiveness.

I did forget that. TY. (n/t)

[ArielMT]

I did forget that. Thank you.

Re:The real Mail Nazi!

[grilled-cheese]

Was the email also asking to help a nigerian prince get surplus oil out of the country?

Ummm...

[Anonymous Coward]

Honestly, what does she expect to get for free?
Lycos could have been much more polite about it, but that doesn't excuse her
from paying attention to fine print.

my opinion

[papasui]

I don't fucking care.

Interesting screen name he uses...

[Trellame]

His AIM: Chokeyourheart The porn site he has a personal ad up at: http://www.holeinthe.net/wsnm/users.php?w=ch0ke&s= ac90b9dd5960d968e5dfd9c2dcc83aaa In fact, he's member number 2 on that site, maybe he's involved with it?

And here is some info about our complainer

[Anonymous Coward]

Her name is Whitney Rearick, she is 37, a "political activist".

This is her Flickr page: http://www.flickr.com/photos/whitnuld/
These are her Delicio bookmarks: http://del.icio.us/whitnuld
A yahoo profile (with a picture): http://profiles.yahoo.com/whitnuld
She writes reviews of music for boise weekly: http://www.boiseweekly.com/gyrobase/Content?oid=oi d%3A102639

She works for Boise state university and her contact info there is:
Whitney Rearick - University Planner
whitneyrearick@boisestate.edu
Phone 208.426.4180

Now thats a power of Google.
Disclaimer: the information above is gathered from open public sources.

Re:The real Mail Nazi!

[iocat]

It's important to note that Lycos is owned and run by Europeans, in Europe. Euros don't understand, care for, or practice good customer service, because they're all a bunch of socialist jerks who can never be fired. Oh, and they expect people -- even Americans -- to be able to do things like read and understand warnings and policies. (That's right, I just insulted Europeans, and Americans in one post. That just happened.)

Here's a thought

[Legion303]

Don't leave your email on someone else's system if it's that important to you.

I'm finding it rather hard to give a shit about either side here.

I stand corrected, but not really.

[jbn-o]

Thank you, I stand corrected on the service provider, and I appreciate that others can keep the pertinent details in mind. And at the same time, I'm resigned to think it almost doesn't matter; it's not like one of them is inherently more trustworthy than the other. The larger point I'm trying to make here stands.

I don't think the issue comes down to getting what you paid for. There are so many of these leaks it's apparently hard for me to remember all the specific actors involved. Wasn't there a University that recently had a leak of student record data? What about the US military inadvertently releasing info about many soldiers? How many times have US government officials lost laptops with sensitive information on them? People pay for these institutions and their services, yet these things happen. I find it difficult to believe that if people paid more money we'd see a reduction in leaks (purposeful or accidental).

Re:The real Mail Nazi!

[Harmonious Botch]

On the basis of that post, I'd offer you a job if I had an opening.

Re:It is his fault

[zakezuke]

That wouldn't necessarily have helped. My hotmail account got marked inactive, and all the email in it wiped, despite my checking it at least once every couple of weeks.

I hardly ever check mine, once every few months at best. No e-mail deleted except for the spam folder.

I wish they would delete my pre-msn hotmail account so I can re-open it as I forgot the password.

In all fairness, my lycos and excite accounts do get deleted, which were handy as they offered free SMS to Europe, but a pain as I have to find someone in the UK willing to accept an SMS to active the service.

so?

[Anonymous Coward]

yeah so? hotmail does the same thing lycos does

If her email was that important to her...

[Cannelloni]

The Lycos rep behaved in a very user-antagonistic way. The guy and is clearly not trained or suited for the job. It's a case of somebody having risen above his ability. (Actually, it hurts me personally, because I've had that response from many companies in the past. Oftentimes, the staff is underpaid, underqualified and under a lot of stress.) On the other hand, if the email was so very important to the customer, why didn't she pay for the recovery of it, or, better still, select a more reliable commercial email provider that supports regular POP, so that her email conversations would be stored on her computer? All in all, the issue has been managed very poorly by Lycos. Whuldn't it have been easier to just let the nagging woman keep her measly 100 MB of email, or what ever the megabyte count was? Stupid Lycos. Stupid, rigid, user-unfriendly company policy.

Perhaps large online mail systems are deceptive...

[AaronLawrence]

I think the person who lost mail was a bit silly and complains too hard, but;
Looking at it another way.

Given that many people now value email strongly, and the new large spaces allowances (like 1GB) that free email systems offer; perhaps it is just a stupid and deceptive service to offer. Effectively, it's "unreasonable" that an online mail service doesn't have long term retention.

It's a bit like someone offering to sell a very cheap car that "may explode if it turns left too often. Please remember to turn right at least once every 10 corners to avoid this". Basically, they would not be allowed to sell it because a basic expectation of a car is that it shouldn't explode, and likewise, perhaps a basic expectation of email is that it WILL NOT be spontaneously deleted.

To put it more bluntly: maybe there should be minimum standards for anyone offering a large scale public email system.

Re:The real Mail Nazi!

[MrNaz]

Inches? Man, if he looked straight up he'd need binoculars to see it.

So what's the problem?

[Helvidius]

So what is her problem? If she were a paying customer she would have some ground to stand on. But since she had the basic account, she needed to follow the terms of service. It costs a lot of time and money to restore e-mails from a backup (especially if it is a tape backup). Companies that offer free e-mail as a service to people with the only compensation to them being ad revenue do not have the time nor the resources to store people's mail indefinitely.

It seems to me that Lycos was being more than reasonable.

Well...

[Anonymous Coward]

While I can see her being upset. The policy seems clear enough to me. She says shes been a customer for several years. Well thats one hell of a customer when they use your free email for 7 years. Make sure everyone tells her not to switch to hotmail either because I know if you are inactive on there (unsure of the exact time) they delete your email as well. But because its a free account I'm not gonna yell at them because I didn't log into the account.

What's the problem?

[Bearhouse]

Hell, I'd pay 20 bucks for someone to delete my mail...

Re:Boo Hoo

[SengirV]

Maybe we have different email habits. To me, I'd copy all the addresses, and I only have a couple important emails from over the last couple of years on my FREE email account. And if they were SOOO important, then she should have paid.

I don't understand the problem here. She wants a company to bend over backwards to help her, even though, I'm sure, she accepted the terms.

Bull!

[__aailob1448]

No, I'm sorry. I'm not going to argue about the LEGALITY of what they have done. I'm sure they covered their asses with all those EULA and TOS things nobody ever reads. I'm not even going to argue that they are evil-er than other mail hosting companies. i know hotmail deleted one of my accounts after 30 days of non-use a few years back (do they still do this?). And yes, I know that backing up your emails is a sound and prudent thing to do (that practically nobody actually does).

The bottom line is that deleting someone's emails after 30 days of inactivity is ethically WRONG. Period. It's just a really assholish, greedy thing to do and I would be mightily and righteously pissed off if they did it to me. These are EMAILS we're talking about. A few compressed Megs, not a huge strain on the system. The only reason such policies are in effect is to legally hold your emails hostage unless you pay for ludicrously overpriced "premium packages".

A year of inactivity before deleting emails seems like a much more sensible policy to me. I would have sided with Lycos in that case. As it stands, they're the bad guys.

Re:Bull!

[onepoint]

I only have issue with your statement " A few compressed Megs, not a huge strain on the system "

that's could be a wrong point of view. you need to look at it from the business standpoint of how many accounts have this issue, it should add up over time.

Now I think what they did is wrong also, since they should have a variable where the longer the account life has been around the longer it will take before it goes to the deleting Que.

it makes perfect sense ( at least in my eyes ) that keeping a client where some revenue is generated ( she's been their for 2 years ) is going to yield more profit than running the delete file.

onepoint

Re:The real Mail Nazi!

[Anonymous Coward]

People don't like it when your firm and clear with them

"you're".

She didn't backup her mail.

"back up". ("backup" is a noun.)

I agree, though, that people who don't back up their data should blame no one but themselves.

Why? Earthlink just archives it for you

[Anonymous Coward]

I know this is late, but the other day I checked out my earthlink.net email after 3 years of never checking it and I had a nice email informing me that all my email has been archived and my email address has been disabled. Apparently logging in re-activated my account, but it looks like there's some hoops to jump through to access my archives. I think Lycos would be wise to adopt Earthlink.net's email policies.

What a asshole.

[BoneFlower]

"I'm sorry, but emails are subject to deletion after the account is not accessed for thirty days. While we understand your frustration and apologize for the inconvenience, there is no way to recover the lost emails. I will make a note on this ticket regarding your displeasure about the deletion policy."

Thats how he should have said it. IF the emails are gone, they are gone and he couldn't help even if he wanted to. But there is no need to go asshole on the customer no matter how much the customer would dislike the answer, even if the customer is screaming at you.

Or even a trick I've seen work well:
"Ok, I understand your frustration. The emails have been removed, and backups are designed to cover disaster recovery rather than deletion per policy. If I can put you on hold for a few minutes, I'll check with our server admins to see if there is anything we can do" *Puts customer on hold and plays Nintendo DS for five minutes* "Ok, I checked with our admins, unfortunately they are unable to restore your emails from server backups"

After one of the above, perhaps offer a courtesy credit if it's a pay service, maybe a temporary upgrade to a pay version of your free service, and the customer will be satisfied more often than not. Won't exactly be happy unless you are able to fix the problem, but they will accept the answer and be satisfied with the level of service they got in that call.

Re:What a asshole.

[Anonymous Coward]

In essence, you're suggesting that it's better to bullshit people than to be blunt. How does it make your life easier when you can't tell anymore if someone is mad at you or actually wants to help you? And people wonder why we live in such a superficial society...

Re:The real Mail Nazi!

[hawaiian717]

POP access is one of the premium features she didn't pay for. I did for a few years but switched to a free account with Lycos after I moved much of my email to Gmail.

Re:What? - Even better response

[hawaiian717]

That caller will benefit us, whether it is by speaking well of us to others or continuing business with us, it will eventually pay off in making sure that my paycheck is just a little more secure. It is selfish gain, but the key is to actually care about and try to understand those that are most important to your success.

At one of my previous employers, an online/telephone based travel agency, we were allowed to suggest that customers might want to check with airlines we didn't have the ability to sell (notably Southwest and JetBlue) when they weren't liking what we had to offer. The idea I believe was we'd essentially already lost the sale but by providing the information they would need to get what they wanted, it would leave a positive impression and hopefully they'd come back to us next time, or at least maybe we'd still be able to get the car or hotel booking.

The same company told us in training, "the customer is not always right, but the customer is always the customer", and I think that goes along with what kfg was saying earlier in this thread.

A Jedi he will be.

[Celsius10]

"I am the manager of all of Customer Service. There is no one higher than me that you will speak with." Waves hand in front of monitor.

Re:The real Mail Nazi!

[bhiestand]

It's free because they're getting advertising revenue, so they're being paid indirectly. I think you're taking this all the wrong way. The advertisers are their customers. Their advertisers are paying them to bring eyeballs to ads. The user is not the customer; the user is the product. Sometimes, you get a defective product and need to discard it. Reading the blog, it should be obvious that this product was defective and repairs were going to cost more than disposal. The product was, however, given the opportunity to become a customer instead.

My hotmail account is still used a lot but not much important stuff happens there So you're saying you still make them at least as much money because you're still being a good product, but in retribution for them treating you poorly you don't really get anything useful out of them anymore? With so many people thinking like that, I'm amazed that companies act as responsibly as they do.

Butric acid....

[tinkerghost]

It's what gives vomit it's distinctive smell - a drop will clear the floor of a building. A dropped bottle will clear the whole building - and probably the surrounding area while it vents away.

So in your experiance as a tech you never had 1 person who just knew that you could fix the problem with their computer if you wanted to? You know, the one who's modem had smoke coming out of it yesterday but since the computer boots, they can get on if you would just help them. The one's so completely divorced from reality that "Ma'am, it was smoking yesterday, it's a dead modem & we can't help you until you get it fixed." translates to "I can't be bothered to help you." The ones who, once politely gotten off the phone, call back to scream at the supervisor because nobody will help them. And then scream at the manager. And then call back to try to scream at the president? There are people out there that you cannot send away politely. They have decided how life is & until you conform to their belief, they'll be back. You try to help them at the beginning. You try to be polite. But at some point you tell them that the universe does not revolve around them & no amount of screaming on their part is going to make it so.

As for the rest, you might not like the policies companies have, but if you don't - don't deal with them. Yep, Verizon is a bunch of pricks - as Cingular they charged me the disconnect fee 3 months in a row - and refused to acknowledge that until court. I don't deal with Verizon at all now. But I knew going in that when I cancelled the service I would pay the fee and I accepted that when I cancelled service. Same with the portals, they don't hide it in some fine print, it's right on the signup page. You want the free service they offer, you take it on the terms they offer it - you don't whine when you get caught in a part of the TOS you don't like.

As for being a bogus policy, what do you want them to do, hold onto every piece of mail delivered to every account created on their service for the rest of eternity? At some point a company has to decide when to clean up abandoned accounts. Lycos set abandoned at 30 days & cleanup whenever they get around to it. What policy do you want them to have? Remember to include the pro's of your proposal in light of the fact that a large number of portal accounts are spamtraps people create to use when they sign up on other websites. Also, include the business case for having the mail admin spend his time recovering a free account for people that don't value the account at $20.

Re:The real Mail Nazi!

[initialE]

I for one would like to know when and where was this "whoosh" thing first used. Was it a movie or something?