Not Going To Happen 'Cause I'm Not Harry Potter (Impossible Patron Requests)

[Amava]

Kittens improve any note book

On behalf of all puppies and other cute baby animals, I'm offended at the notion that only kittens can improve a notebook.

On behalf of all the elderly dogs, cats, and various other critters, I'm offended... ah, never mind.   

[hobish]

That's easy, just fill it with pictures of kittens

Yes.  Kittens improve the look of anything.

Oh, please no. The people i work for would then want to know the significance of the kittens, what value was assigned to the kittens, how that value was derived, how a kitten on block 2 compares in value to a kitten on block 3 ... i don't even want to think about height and weight and color and kitten availability and any indeterminate factors to evaluate kitten cuteness. It would be a kitten nightmare.

Never have i appreciated the idiotic "Page left intentionally blank" until now.

[Slartibartfast]

That's easy, just fill it with pictures of kittens

Yes.  Kittens improve the look of anything.

Oh, please no. The people i work for would then want to know the significance of the kittens, what value was assigned to the kittens, how that value was derived, how a kitten on block 2 compares in value to a kitten on block 3 ... i don't even want to think about height and weight and color and kitten availability and any indeterminate factors to evaluate kitten cuteness. It would be a kitten nightmare.

Never have i appreciated the idiotic "Page left intentionally blank" until now.

That reminds me of this exchange.

[Luci45]

Enough with the kittens already!

I want more stories about jerky peple and their lack of horse sense ane logic and rudeness!

[MissRose]

I had someone contact my company via email support today.  I explained we could not help him with his request, and gave him the company address he actually needed to contact.  He then replies back thanking me for the reply and asking me again who he has to contact? I thought he would have read the previous reply, but I rehashed the response differently.  Perhaps, he thought I was going to help him when there was nothing our company could do help him.

[Bluenomi]

"You refuse to accept that Friday happens after Thursday?"

She refuses to accept that things can change at short notice. In her world things are set in concrete a week in advanace and nothing ever changes.

I'm sorry you work for an idiot. I've been there.

Fun isn't it!

[Luci45]

I had someone contact my company via email support today.  I explained we could not help him with his request, and gave him the company address he actually needed to contact.  He then replies back thanking me for the reply and asking me again who he has to contact? I thought he would have read the previous reply, but I rehashed the response differently.  Perhaps, he thought I was going to help him when there was nothing our company could do help him.

The way you wrote this, it sounds as if you gave him the company and he was hoping for the name of an individual in the company. That makes sense to me, although I'm comfortable with 'to whom it may concern' or 'I would like to speak to someone about this', some people like more detail.

[MissRose]

I work for an internet service provider.  On the weekends, the staffing is minimal and very few people if any are available to work certain things (not something agents can control).

MissRose: Company Support, this is MissRose how can I help you sir?

Customer: This item Y is not working which causes a problem with item Z and our email.

MissRose: I have your information, let me check a few things here, just a few moments please.

MissRose: Thank you for waiting, to get this item fixed to correct your issue, we must do item S but I am sorry to say that we do not have the access to do the work.  We have someone due in later who has access in about 2 hours.  We do have an open work ticket for you from a past call.

Customer: That is unacceptable.  Have your supervisor call in that person.  Also I'd like to speak to your supervisor now.  I cannot believe that you or anyone cannot help me right now.

Customer was transferred to the supervisor.  Apparently, he thinks that the agents must have all powers to do all things.  He must think that someone will be called in to do the work that truthfully he should have requested on Friday when we have the people definitely available that can do the advanced work he needs.  We agents do not have control over the staffing of certain people that can work what he needs, and their availabilities either.

[Yarnspinner]

I have a special snowflake patron who is actually a very nice guy, but he is several lettuce leafs short of a salad and is determined to find information that proves what he wants to believe.

I don't want the thread to go all political and get closed, so I am warning ya'll, this deals with rabid politics on the part of the PATRON, not me...I am not editorializing. recommending or agenda-izing...I am just repeating.

Mr. Snowflake is in his sixties and heckbent on proving that Franklin Delano Roosevelt was/is responsible for the decline of the City In Which I Work.  He has all sorts of elaborate diagrams worked out in his mind that connect FDR with our very own whackadoo mayor  of the 1940s who is famous for some crazy stunts.  His latest idea is that, before FDR contracted polio, he and Herbert Hoover were actually quite similar politically.  He is in every day, asking us to find speeches in which Roosevelt praises Hoover or extols the virtues of being a *******.
He will not accept that we cannot find what he wants because it....just....doesn't...exist.....

[PeterM]

This doesn't actually belong here because I did in fact comply, but it really chapped a certain portion of my anatomy that shall remain nameless.

I'm one of two people who answers an email help-line for my county library system. Got an email today from a guy who had a problem that turned out to be a bit of a head-scratcher. Nothing big, just "Huh. Why'd they do it that way?"
 
I responded to the guy's email and explained things and pointed out his options, including one or two he'd probably need help with. So I went back to work but made a mental note to check that email again before I left work.

He had responded. Or rather, his email provider had responded, with a form letter explaining that the gentleman I had dared to email was not willing to accept emails from just anyone. No, he had standards, and if I wanted him to respond I had to hie myself to the provided link with hat in hand and give a darned good reason why the gentleman should condescend to grace me with a reply. I'm willing to concede the remote possibility that the actual email contained slightly less scorn, but you get the gist.

If it had been a personal correspondence I would've just ignored that email and the guy could wonder why he never heard back. Given that it was part of what I'm, y'know, paid to do I held my nose and filled out the form. Under "Why should I read your email?" I wrote that I was responding with help and advice that he had asked for. I left off, "You knob," but it was a close thing.

[Yarnspinner]

This doesn't actually belong here because I did in fact comply, but it really chapped a certain portion of my anatomy that shall remain nameless.

I'm one of two people who answers an email help-line for my county library system. Got an email today from a guy who had a problem that turned out to be a bit of a head-scratcher. Nothing big, just "Huh. Why'd they do it that way?"
 
I responded to the guy's email and explained things and pointed out his options, including one or two he'd probably need help with. So I went back to work but made a mental note to check that email again before I left work.

He had responded. Or rather, his email provider had responded, with a form letter explaining that the gentleman I had dared to email was not willing to accept emails from just anyone. No, he had standards, and if I wanted him to respond I had to hie myself to the provided link with hat in hand and give a darned good reason why the gentleman should condescend to grace me with a reply. I'm willing to concede the remote possibility that the actual email contained slightly less scorn, but you get the gist.

If it had been a personal correspondence I would've just ignored that email and the guy could wonder why he never heard back. Given that it was part of what I'm, y'know, paid to do I held my nose and filled out the form. Under "Why should I read your email?" I wrote that I was responding with help and advice that he had asked for. I left off, "You knob," but it was a close thing.

Peter M, you seriously are one of the coolest librarians ev-ah!

[PastryGoddess]

This doesn't actually belong here because I did in fact comply, but it really chapped a certain portion of my anatomy that shall remain nameless.

I'm one of two people who answers an email help-line for my county library system. Got an email today from a guy who had a problem that turned out to be a bit of a head-scratcher. Nothing big, just "Huh. Why'd they do it that way?"
 
I responded to the guy's email and explained things and pointed out his options, including one or two he'd probably need help with. So I went back to work but made a mental note to check that email again before I left work.

He had responded. Or rather, his email provider had responded, with a form letter explaining that the gentleman I had dared to email was not willing to accept emails from just anyone. No, he had standards, and if I wanted him to respond I had to hie myself to the provided link with hat in hand and give a darned good reason why the gentleman should condescend to grace me with a reply. I'm willing to concede the remote possibility that the actual email contained slightly less scorn, but you get the gist.

If it had been a personal correspondence I would've just ignored that email and the guy could wonder why he never heard back. Given that it was part of what I'm, y'know, paid to do I held my nose and filled out the form. Under "Why should I read your email?" I wrote that I was responding with help and advice that he had asked for. I left off, "You knob," but it was a close thing.

People sign up with these email providers because they provide a way to weed out most of the spam that comes in.   No offense, but it has nothing to do with you, his friends and family members have to do the same thing.  I have several friends and family members who have a 3rd party spam filter that requires you to fill out a short form to verify that you are an actual person they know.  I don't take it personally and It only takes a few seconds to complete.

[PeterM]

He had responded. Or rather, his email provider had responded, with a form letter explaining that the gentleman I had dared to email was not willing to accept emails from just anyone. No, he had standards, and if I wanted him to respond I had to hie myself to the provided link with hat in hand and give a darned good reason why the gentleman should condescend to grace me with a reply. I'm willing to concede the remote possibility that the actual email contained slightly less scorn, but you get the gist.

People sign up with these email providers because they provide a way to weed out most of the spam that comes in.   No offense, but it has nothing to do with you, his friends and family members have to do the same thing.  I have several friends and family members who have a 3rd party spam filter that requires you to fill out a short form to verify that you are an actual person they know.  I don't take it personally and It only takes a few seconds to complete.

It took more than a few seconds this time, due to some problems with the site. But I do understand your point. The thing is, though, if you're deliberately emailing someone and asking for a response, I think it's on you to proactively add that email address to your approved list. As I said, if this had been a personal communication I would've just ignored it and not bothered to do what was necessary to get my reply through. Since it was work, I jumped through the hoops. But I still think it's ridiculous, and I'd like to see whatever evidence exists that this significantly cuts down on spam.

[CuriousParty]

He had responded. Or rather, his email provider had responded, with a form letter explaining that the gentleman I had dared to email was not willing to accept emails from just anyone. No, he had standards, and if I wanted him to respond I had to hie myself to the provided link with hat in hand and give a darned good reason why the gentleman should condescend to grace me with a reply. I'm willing to concede the remote possibility that the actual email contained slightly less scorn, but you get the gist.

People sign up with these email providers because they provide a way to weed out most of the spam that comes in.   No offense, but it has nothing to do with you, his friends and family members have to do the same thing.  I have several friends and family members who have a 3rd party spam filter that requires you to fill out a short form to verify that you are an actual person they know.  I don't take it personally and It only takes a few seconds to complete.

It took more than a few seconds this time, due to some problems with the site. But I do understand your point. The thing is, though, if you're deliberately emailing someone and asking for a response, I think it's on you to proactively add that email address to your approved list. As I said, if this had been a personal communication I would've just ignored it and not bothered to do what was necessary to get my reply through. Since it was work, I jumped through the hoops. But I still think it's ridiculous, and I'd like to see whatever evidence exists that this significantly cuts down on spam.

I don't think that's how these programs work, though, or at least not all of them. My dad has one at one of his email addresses and I've had to do the same thing to reply to a question he asked me. I'm pretty sure I'd be on any list he creates of "approved" senders, but the program is just automatic.

[Ceallach]

He had responded. Or rather, his email provider had responded, with a form letter explaining that the gentleman I had dared to email was not willing to accept emails from just anyone. No, he had standards, and if I wanted him to respond I had to hie myself to the provided link with hat in hand and give a darned good reason why the gentleman should condescend to grace me with a reply. I'm willing to concede the remote possibility that the actual email contained slightly less scorn, but you get the gist.

People sign up with these email providers because they provide a way to weed out most of the spam that comes in.   No offense, but it has nothing to do with you, his friends and family members have to do the same thing.  I have several friends and family members who have a 3rd party spam filter that requires you to fill out a short form to verify that you are an actual person they know.  I don't take it personally and It only takes a few seconds to complete.

It took more than a few seconds this time, due to some problems with the site. But I do understand your point. The thing is, though, if you're deliberately emailing someone and asking for a response, I think it's on you to proactively add that email address to your approved list. As I said, if this had been a personal communication I would've just ignored it and not bothered to do what was necessary to get my reply through. Since it was work, I jumped through the hoops. But I still think it's ridiculous, and I'd like to see whatever evidence exists that this significantly cuts down on spam.

I agree.  They shouldn't give out their email address unless they're willing to receive replies.  It should be setup in such a way that if THEY email a particular address, then they get all the replies unless they actively block that address at a later date.    I can understand the filter for unknown and unsolicited emails but I think it's very rude when it's somebody they've actively emailed or contacted to require the person to jump through hoops in order to reply.

It's like walking up to somebody, saying hello, then demanding they submit a written explanation of why you should listen to a word they say / engage in a conversation.    I'd just say "Um, YOU started this conversation!" and walk away.