• mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 days ago

      I hope ticket systems have ways to assign priorities to users, so you can deprioritize any future requests coming from them

      • Cevilia (she/they/…)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 days ago

        It’s been a very long time since I worked on the helldesk but I seem to recall requests were prioritised by a mixture of how critical they are to the business and the seniority of the requester. Past requests had no bearing on future priority. :/

        • mrgoosmoos@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 days ago

          seniority of the requester. damn. there’s a way to ensure that critical business functions are possibly stalled excessively.

          hopefully requester priority was just reference

  • neidu3@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    Little over a decade ago I dealt with internet on trains. One ticket read “internet doesn’t work”.
    No info who submitted it.
    No info when.
    No info which carriage.
    No info which train.
    No info which route or any other clues as to the geographical location. Could have been inside of a tunnel for all I know.

    <delete>

    • skooma_king@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      ·
      5 days ago

      This is actually where a phone call can be beneficial if you’re assertive about the questions and cut them off when they get squirrely. Some people will never figure out how to get to the point over a ticket because they cannot organize their thoughts no matter how well formed your written instructions are. Get them on the phone and just remote to their workstation.

      • Xaphanos@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        20
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 days ago

        And when remoted, open the ticket system and fill it out for them as they answer your directing questions. Once done, let them know that the new ticket will be handled according to the sla. At low priority.

    • Empricorn@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      4 days ago

      For real. I get tickets like this issued for/on behalf of a location. So I don’t know who, what, where (within that location), when, why, or how…

  • Honytawk@feddit.nl
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    4 days ago

    Malicious compliance to the rescue.

    Call them just to say “ticket closed” and hang up.

  • BurningRiver@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 days ago

    Opens ticket

    Ticket only says “read customer email and advise”

    Email chain is a mile long going back 3 months

    Closes ticket with “please clearly and concisely explain the problem in the next ticket you open”

    3 day SLA on our tickets, so back to the end of the line they go.

    • bleistift2@sopuli.xyzOP
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      4 days ago

      Email chain is a mile long going back 3 months

      Oh yes, I love those. Maliciously complying would mean taking the morning to read that novel, thoroughly.

      • varyingExpertise@feddit.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        4 days ago

        Maliciously complying would be to have an llm extract the relevant info from that pile and log half an hour anyway.