6 ms·
This is what happens when you use frontline staff to unilaterally isolate anyone worth talking to. The isolated miss things that, if asked, they would choose t
by forgottenpass 13y ago
This is what happens when you use frontline staff to unilaterally isolate anyone worth talking to. The isolated miss things that, if asked, they would choose to hear. Everyone is ignored as if they were an asshole with a bone to pick about the company.
Sure there is weight to the argument the attackers could have made better attempts to contact Bell, or use clearer communication with support staff. Anybody trying anything can always try harder or improve their methods. But at some point the responsibility for failure to communicate has to swing on to Bell. They decided they don't want to hear from customers, just help grandma connect to the service so she doesn't cancel. This is exactly what they asked for.
- resemc 13y ago>Sure there is weight to the argument the attackers could have made better attempts to contact Bell, or use clearer communication with support staff. Anybody trying anything can always try harder or improve their methods. Careful: that turns into a "no true Scotsman" argument fairly quickly if we stray too far down that road.
- forgottenpass 13y agoYup, that's the kind of detrimental reasoning I want to sidestep with that statement. There are no steadfast absolutes in what is reasonable to expect from Bell or the hackers. Even if you don't think the hackers made every attempt at contact they could/should have, that's no good reason Bell's bureaucracy can't also be at fault.