posted on September 18, 2000 07:42:21 PM new
I'm beginning to think damon is actually some sort of software that searches for keywords in a post and then spits out a prepared answer which may or may not actually address the post in question. In this case, "damon" saw the word "check", so what came out? "Email me so I can research this for you."
Uh, if any humans actually remain over at Paypal - I do believe the reference in bldrms's post was to the overused and never true excuse sellers get from deadbeat bidders: "The check is in the mail".
IOW, s/he's saying that Paypal's explanations regarding anything are utter BS/not to be trusted/absolutely laughable.
And I concur.
[ edited by HartCottageQuilts on Sep 18, 2000 07:44 PM ]
posted on September 18, 2000 07:56:31 PM new
HI HCQ,
I believe they were referring to an earlier post by CherylHahn about a check issue. That is what I was referencing. If it was a joke, I apologize, but at least I responded to it and offered resolution/assistance.
posted on September 19, 2000 06:19:01 AM newHCQI'm beginning to think damon is actually some sort of software
If that's the case then thers's no harm. BUT if Damon is a real person then I think the snide remarks and taunting comments some seem to enjoy posting are out of line. I guess if you're going to insult someone you should insult a company rep, by the very nature of their job they can't do much but accept it. Not sure which is worst, having to take it, or taking advantage of the fact you can dish it out.
posted on September 19, 2000 07:14:57 AM new"how about taking your boxing gloves off now? "
I can't type with boxing gloves on, not well anyway. What I'm seeing is a company rep trying to field customer problems as diplomatically as possible, with a few that seem to enjoy jeering at the attempt.
Imagine going to a customer service desk at a store and having a few characters leaning against the wall making comments while the store rep trys to resolve the problem.
"Honey child, he's just giving you lip service, you ain't gonnna get any help".
"That'll teach you, they don't give anything other than canned responses."
Hey, PayPal's done some things I don't approve of, but I don't think it gives me license to kick them everytime they make a post to try and address someone else's problem. Maybe you don't see insults, but I do. I don't even think they are very well veiled insults.
posted on September 19, 2000 09:05:05 AM new
uaru said "What I'm seeing is a company rep trying to field customer problems as diplomatically as possible,"
I do not see where he has tried to deal with any questions other than to give canned, cut and paste responses. He has totaly ignored questions from users that he does not have a pat answer to ie: the post thread that includes copies of the original Paypal welcome screen and TOS. It says always free for buyers and SELLERS. If he would step up and admit the deception, it may go a long way to relieve some of the tension. Now we see where buyers actualy get a rebate if they buy from a "business user" of 1%. Of course I expect that it will soon change to a 1% buyer fee once they have more buyers hooked and have pressed more sellers to accept the changes.
Field problems....NO..it is called the old run around.
edited to add,
At a customer service desk, they can not just ignore me and if I am not satisfied, I can ask to see somebody higher up. With paypal where do you go, the black hole of email.
[ edited by scrabblegod on Sep 19, 2000 09:07 AM ]
posted on September 19, 2000 09:19:33 AM new
Everyone,
AuctionWatch provides this forum so that our members can ask relevant questions of the PayPal representative. It's fine to have opinions about the message, but personal remarks about the messenger are simply not necessary.
In other words, please remember the concept of basic etiquette as you post.
posted on September 19, 2000 10:28:43 AM new
"AuctionWatch provides this forum so that our members can ask relevant questions of the PayPal representative."
pattaylor....
Thats just great, WHEN CAN WE EXPECT SOME ANSWERS??
If paypaldamon can't or WON'T then maybe they should find someone who will.
Look around....this forum is FULL of UNASWERED questions.
Would you like to take a shot at some answers? After all AW is a Partner Service with them.
posted on September 19, 2000 10:50:58 AM new
Hi packer,
Without sounding short, this will be yet another mention of the fact that I do not create policy, but your concerns have been noted and are being addressed.
The threads, more or less, contain the same issues.
posted on September 19, 2000 11:05:47 AM new
Damon,
If the threads all contain the same issue, it should not be very time consuming to cut and paste a valid and truthfull statement without all of the posturing and deception. Admit they lied to us to suck us in and let us get on to a reasonable resolution of the trouble you/they have caused. [email protected]
There are only 8 Q words in scrabble that don't start with Qu.
posted on September 19, 2000 12:16:28 PM new
paypaldamon...with all due respect....No one has said that YOU PAYPALDAMON is creating the DAMN POLICIES.
As to date "THE" policy is a bunch of "mish mash". I for one am not getting a clear picture of it.
YOU as a SPOKESPERSON can maybe clarify it for me/us.
Damon you say "your concerns have been noted and are "being addressed"."
BEING ADDRESSES?,Could you point me to them PLEASE? Or better yet do some "cut & paste" here.
I know I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed, but hey...gimme a break.
posted on September 19, 2000 12:22:17 PM new
Hi packer,
This is specifically what I reported yesterday:
1. Sellers want to know why they have to pay 1.9% on all incoming transactions if they have a business account.
2.. Sellers are also upset that the buyers are getting a one percent back on bank account purchases and paying the 1.9% incoming.
3. We may need to define what is exactly a person-to-person transaction.
4. Auction sellers want to know if the amount defining a business is going to be defined by the number of transactions or dollar amount.And What constitutes a business?
These are the primary questions that need to be addressed.
posted on September 19, 2000 12:46:59 PM new
While your at it here are a couple of more that need to be address!
(1)You should also be reporting that sellers are upset because now you have added a $.25 per transaction fee. Which is totally unfeasable for the small dollar amount sellers.
(2)You should also clarify in your "OFFICIAL PAYPAL STATEMENT" ........
"When people STARTED using it for e-commerce, we evolved as a company, expanded our features, and in June created Business Accounts (for companies) and Premier Accounts (for individual entrepreneurs). We told our users that we wouldn't force people to upgrade, but that didn't mean it was OK for business users to violate our terms of use and conduct their commerce with a PayPal Personal Account."
What about this - "When people started using it for e-commerce.
You say STARTED.....we have alway been SELLERS, your target groups was the AUCTION SELLERS(business) ALWAYS FREE - Remember????
And now you say if we SELLERS don't upgrade we are in violation.
Take that back to your policy makers and ask them to CLAIFY.
edited for packer by packer!!
Having a BAD hair Day! ...
posted on September 19, 2000 09:10:12 PM new
Hi Damon,
Please also communicate to your higher-ups that some sellers would like an APOLOGY for being made to look dishonest.
And please tell your higher-ups that some of us really value being dealt with in an honest, forthright, up-front manner -- and we don't feel PayPal has even dabbled in any of those areas.
The most important commodities for PayPal are trust and credibility. Both are suffering mightily. It will not be easy to regain either.
I've personally seen more than my share of corporate and political tap-dancing and spin control over the years. PayPal isn't very good at either and should stop any further efforts to tap or spin.
It's best to admit errors were made, apologize and promise it won't happen again. Then you can move on.
None of this is directed at you personally, Damon. It's a message for the corporate entity.
posted on September 19, 2000 09:25:13 PM new
While you're at it PPD .. I think YOU should ask for an apology from them as well. They've put you on the front line with no ammunition!
I have a memory like a steel trap .. unfortunately it's rusted shut!
posted on September 20, 2000 01:26:17 AM new
Can I add a question too?
If passing along surcharges to customers is against credit card companies' rules, how can PayPal pass these fees along? And if PayPal can do it, why can't we, especially since we as sellers aren't even dealing with the credit card companies?
Okay, two questions!
How come buyers get 1% cash back when paying a "business" seller? Why not use that money toward these fees, so sellers won't have to pay so much? If PP needs the money so bad and all ....
