Customer Service

[George Roffe]

Josh Brockman wrote:

>I apologize for being a bit angry, but I don't know why any claims against
>them are to be dismissed.

Josh, the issue is *not* about your anger.  I, nor do I think anyone else,
feels you shouldn't be angry.  I would too.  I don't think your claims are
being dismissed either.  I agreed that Courtesy is slipping.

The real point is you accused them of fraud.  You cannot support this other
than the fact they charged you when you shouldn't have been.  That does not
constitute fraud.  What you wrote was *very* wrong, and as I said, *very*
close to libel.  Bitch and moan about it (within reason), OK.  Call them
out on it, OK.  But just stick to the facts.

>I can show you my bank statements if you want to
>see where they have charged me without having made any order. If it was
>anyone other than Courtesy, I'd be allowed to call that fraud.

If it was about any place that people here didn't care about, well, they
wouldn't care.  But Courtesy has been *very* good to this list and still is
despite their customer service issues.  They have a help the list, the
club, and individuals in many many ways, so don't think folks won't come to
their defense when you post something you cannot back up.  You can back up
that they charged you when you didn't make an order.  Nobody is bitching at
you for calling them out for that.  But, you also said they defrauded you,
and that's where *you* crossed the line.  Until you can prove otherwise, I
and most others here are inclined to believe it was a simple, but stupid
and large mistake.  You, OTOH, made a deliberate accusation you cannot
prove.  That is the difference.

>I should have worded things differently - I didn't intend to literally wish
>harm on anyone, but rather to get them to place themselves in the position
>of someone who has been hurt by this company.

Then that's what you should have said.

>If people care more about defending a company who has enough money to be able
>to get its act together, than about a fellow member who is a student and
>doesn't exactly have the money to deal with something like this happening,
>then fine.

Again, that is *not* the point.

They were certainly wrong in what they did, but they admitted it and claim
it to be a human error.  I believe them.  What you did was willfully wrong.
 There is a big difference.  Oh, and who has how much money is not the
point either.

>Now that I understand my lack of value in
>comparison to them and others on the list, I guess the best thing to do is
>leave.

Well, that's your decision.  Only you can make that call.

But, regardless of what you decide to do in that regard, you have still
haven't retracted your statement or anything.  You just tried to justify
doing wrong.  As I've said a few times now, just stick with the facts.

George Roffe
Houston, TX
<http://home.earthlink.net/~geo3/>