4 ms·

Not sure if this is in good faith or not, but escalating through an internal contact is going to skip a couple layers of support at minimum, and reduce the chan

by yojo 4y ago

Not sure if this is in good faith or not, but escalating through an internal contact is going to skip a couple layers of support at minimum, and reduce the chance of a misunderstanding. Also potentially some people in CS might be in on whatever is going on. If you were being snarky, it seems like this LinkedIn employee is trying to do the right thing. They probably don’t run support/there’s no reason to take cheap shots when they offer to help.

93po 4y ago
It's not a cheap shot. It's snarky but accurate commentary on the abysmal state of customer support and how absolutely worthless it is
- yojo 4y ago
  It felt unfair to the employee offering to help. They (probably) have no control over LinkedIn customer support. It looked like trying to scoring internet points at the expense of the person offering help.
- bombcar 4y ago
  Anyone who has worked front-line customer support knows why all the roadblocks are in place; it's a massive firehose of absolute junk 90% of the time.
  - yojo 4y ago
    Yep. My first job out of college was support at a consumer web company. The vast majority of people did not need a PMs attention. Honestly a larger percentage of them needed psychiatric help. The problem comes when there’s no escalation path for the few cases that actually do need it. Looking at you Google. I’ve never used LinkedIn support, so couldn’t say whether they would handle something like the OPs issue correctly.
    - bombcar 4y ago
      There are always escalation paths, the question is if they're official, or if the front-line support isn't trusted with putting someone on it.
  - FunnyBadger 4y ago
    Yep. One job I had was to work on a team to automate the destruction of 99% of all job applications coming from the internet while still nominally being in compliance with EEOC. We figured out a number of ways. The company actually ONLY hired people directly recommended by employees or trusted business partners. 100% of all unsolicited resumes were ignored and destroyed (yet had a paper trial for legal and EEOC compliance).
    - 93po 4y ago
      that employer is part of the reason job hunting is so miserable

by yojo 4y ago

93po 4y ago

It's not a cheap shot. It's snarky but accurate commentary on the abysmal state of customer support and how absolutely worthless it is

yojo 4y ago
It felt unfair to the employee offering to help. They (probably) have no control over LinkedIn customer support. It looked like trying to scoring internet points at the expense of the person offering help.
bombcar 4y ago
Anyone who has worked front-line customer support knows why all the roadblocks are in place; it's a massive firehose of absolute junk 90% of the time.
- yojo 4y ago
  Yep. My first job out of college was support at a consumer web company. The vast majority of people did not need a PMs attention. Honestly a larger percentage of them needed psychiatric help. The problem comes when there’s no escalation path for the few cases that actually do need it. Looking at you Google. I’ve never used LinkedIn support, so couldn’t say whether they would handle something like the OPs issue correctly.
  - bombcar 4y ago
    There are always escalation paths, the question is if they're official, or if the front-line support isn't trusted with putting someone on it.
- FunnyBadger 4y ago
  Yep. One job I had was to work on a team to automate the destruction of 99% of all job applications coming from the internet while still nominally being in compliance with EEOC. We figured out a number of ways. The company actually ONLY hired people directly recommended by employees or trusted business partners. 100% of all unsolicited resumes were ignored and destroyed (yet had a paper trial for legal and EEOC compliance).
  - 93po 4y ago
    that employer is part of the reason job hunting is so miserable