| |
Main
Date: 12 Aug 2006 02:13:08
From: Eric
Subject: Customer complaints - to investigate, to apologise, to respond or NOT!
|
There is loads of free advice on how to deal with customer complaints
available on the Net. So why is one well known astronomical
organisation choosing to ignore serious complaints about two employees?
Is it indolence, ignorance, stupidity or something more sinister? You
don't need to be Perry Mason to realise that such career threatening
allegations would also reflect badly on the people conducting the
investigation.
In spite of whatever these blinkered scientists have to say about the
validity of the complaints - the Courts will decide - or whatever
the response should be to their relentless propaganda about the (zero)
scientific merit of most of their work should we allow the tax
payer's dollars to be used to prop up their crumbling edifice?
|
|
| |
Date: 12 Aug 2006 07:53:57
From: RMOLLISE
Subject: Re: Customer complaints - to investigate, to apologise, to respond or NOT!
|
Greg Crinklaw wrote:
> Huh? A few specifics might have made this more intelligible. Just a
> thought.
>
> --
> Greg Crinklaw
Hi Greg:
Judging by this post, my money's on the "blinkered scientists."
;-)
Peace,
Rod Mollise
Author of:
Choosing and Using a Schmidt Cassegrain Telescope
and
The Urban Astronomer's Guide
<http://skywatch.brainiac.com/astroland >
The Annual SCT User Imaging Contest is Underway!
<http://www.rothritter.com/contest/2006/ >
|
| |
Date: 12 Aug 2006 07:52:33
From: RMOLLISE
Subject: Re: Customer complaints - to investigate, to apologise, to respond or NOT!
|
Eric wrote:
> There is loads of free advice on how to deal with customer complaints
> available on the Net. So why is one well known astronomical
> organisation choosing to ignore serious complaints about two employees?
> Is it indolence, ignorance, stupidity or something more sinister? You
> don't need to be Perry Mason to realise that such career threatening
> allegations would also reflect badly on the people conducting the
> investigation.
>
>
Hi:
What in god's name are you talking about?
What company?
What complaint?
How do you expect us to help you?
|
| |
Date: 12 Aug 2006 08:49:13
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Customer complaints - to investigate, to apologise, to respond
|
Eric wrote:
> There is loads of free advice on how to deal with customer complaints
> available on the Net. So why is one well known astronomical
> organisation choosing to ignore serious complaints about two employees?
> Is it indolence, ignorance, stupidity or something more sinister? You
> don't need to be Perry Mason to realise that such career threatening
> allegations would also reflect badly on the people conducting the
> investigation.
>
> In spite of whatever these blinkered scientists have to say about the
> validity of the complaints - the Courts will decide - or whatever
> the response should be to their relentless propaganda about the (zero)
> scientific merit of most of their work should we allow the tax
> payer's dollars to be used to prop up their crumbling edifice?
Huh? A few specifics might have made this more intelligible. Just a
thought.
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/comets.html
To reply take out your eye
|
| |
Date: 12 Aug 2006 04:13:58
From: Ed
Subject: Re: Customer complaints - to investigate, to apologise, to respond or NOT!
|
I dunno Eric but I have no idea what you are talking about!:)
|
| |
Date: 13 Aug 2006 00:18:11
From: Candian Lurker
Subject: Re: Customer complaints - to investigate, to apologise, to respond or NOT!
|
I work in the area of consumer affairs - astronomy related companies
and organisations seem to the target of far more complaints that you
would expect given the economic size of the sector.
Silence usually means that your complaint was justified and they have
no defense or excuse.
I agree with other posters that a name would have been nice but perhaps
the matter is "sub judice"?
Eric wrote:
> There is loads of free advice on how to deal with customer complaints
> available on the Net. So why is one well known astronomical
> organisation choosing to ignore serious complaints about two employees?
> Is it indolence, ignorance, stupidity or something more sinister? You
> don't need to be Perry Mason to realise that such career threatening
> allegations would also reflect badly on the people conducting the
> investigation.
>
> In spite of whatever these blinkered scientists have to say about the
> validity of the complaints - the Courts will decide - or whatever
> the response should be to their relentless propaganda about the (zero)
> scientific merit of most of their work should we allow the tax
> payer's dollars to be used to prop up their crumbling edifice?
|
| |
Date: 14 Aug 2006 20:43:47
From: Ed
Subject: Re: Customer complaints - to investigate, to apologise, to respond or NOT!
|
Eric,
On second thought,if you are really good and stop being so much a smart
ass
you might learn something from Rod.
He knows more than you do.
|
| |
Date: 14 Aug 2006 20:42:11
From: Ed
Subject: Re: Customer complaints - to investigate, to apologise, to respond or NOT!
|
Ok Eric, you've just proven yourself another troll.
In other words, scat kid before we call the cops!
|
| |
Date: 14 Aug 2006 11:24:14
From: Eric
Subject: Re: Customer complaints - to investigate, to apologise, to respond or NOT!
|
Rod, relentless self publicist, Mollise chips in with his usual
unhelpful comments.
Let me give you a hint.
The first is in aggressive but not in polite
The fifth is in sanctimonious but not in mature
|
| | |
Date: 14 Aug 2006 12:45:59
From: Greg Crinklaw
Subject: Re: Customer complaints - to investigate, to apologise, to respond
|
Eric wrote:
> Rod, relentless self publicist, Mollise chips in with his usual
> unhelpful comments.
>
> Let me give you a hint.
>
> The first is in aggressive but not in polite
>
> The fifth is in sanctimonious but not in mature
Well, gee I guess that clears everything up!
Let me give you a hint.
The ninth is in PLONK.
But seriously, I politely but not aggressively suggest you just failed
the Turing test.
Sorry.
--
Greg Crinklaw
Astronomical Software Developer
Cloudcroft, New Mexico, USA (33N, 106W, 2700m)
SkyTools: http://www.skyhound.com/cs.html
Observing: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/skyhound.html
Comets: http://www.skyhound.com/sh/comets.html
To reply take out your eye
|
|
