[Resolved] ]Lost 5* Strange, No help in sight.

Beta-Ray Bill

broll said:

DaBeast911 said:
@d90

I sympathize with you and agree 100%. It takes no extra work to restore your 5 star, people have had it done before. I've seen entire rosters deleted on a video and then miraculously restored so restoring a character is a minor feat. It would be such a big deal if it is was a 3 star or heck even a 4 star but those 5 stars are extremely rare to come by and then to accidentally sell one is deflating. A year ago, restoring it wouldn't have been a problem, I sold a fully covered 266 Storm and had it restored, no problem. They simply looked at my roster the day before I sold it, saw it was there and replaced it. Heck, they even let me keep the ISO, which I was shocked by. I sympathize with you and hope that it works out.

It's impossible that it "takes no extra work to restore your 5 star".  I don't know how much extra work it is, but the fact that someone needs to read a ticket and respond to it invalids your statement.  If it were no extra work it would be fully automated and require 0 human interaction.  I don't know how complex it would be to restore a 5* and neither do you.  I would guess it's not overly complicated, but again I don't truly know.  Let's say for the sake of argument it takes 10 minutes and CS can do it.  If they applied a policy of everyone can blanket undo a delete of any character and 1% of the players base takes advantage of this twice a year or more.  Let's suppose the game has 100,000 active players (I'm guessing i have no idea).  CS is now spending 10,000 minutes or 167 hours or 21 business days a year just supporting fixing peoples mistakes.  It's even worse if you consider it could take developer involvement and then you're taking 21 days of development time away from the game to support this for all players.

The point is something small done a lot really adds up, a lot more than you'd initially think.  As a small company they have to make choices as far as what their CS resources can spend time doing.  They have to put barriers to the time spent on such things otherwise actual support issues and or development couldn't done (or they'd over hire, become non-profitable, and the game tanks).  

I see more validity in the argument that they should support for all or support it for none. However since 100% of their revenue is micro transactions and most likely only a small percent spend a lot and an even smaller extent spend a ton they make exceptions for those players that spend enough that losing their business would hurt.

All that to say you can spout all day how easy it is and they should just grant any request that comes buy, but at the end of the day they are a business with limited resources and they have to choose how to spend those resources effectively to keep the game running and profitable. To make a parallel let's say your roster was full of sentient characters.  If 1* Spider-Man makes a mistake that would cost you 1000 ISO to fix and there was a reasonable likelihood that more characters would make that same mistake, would you be willing to sacrifice your gameplay to accommodate them?  Even if 1* Spider-Man just deleted himself from your roster would that kill your gameplay?  Conversely if L500 Gambit made the same mistake for 1000 ISO it would probably be worth it to you to keep him from deleting itself.  These are the kinds of decisions Demi's management has to make to keep the game going.  For better or for worse.

1) stop turning things into mathematical equations. This isn’t necessary for your assumption.

2) stop making it sound like every player needs this all the time. He sold/lost (not sure which is more likely) a 5* champed hero that won’t be very easy to just get back. Have you done this before?

3) this probably takes much less effort than the exchanges they need to go through. Which they do on a DAILY basis. In fact I would be surprised if this is the only reason CS really even exists.

4) have sympathy. Because by the sounds of it, you have or at some point will be in his shoes and will be demanding they restore your shiny goods

Beta-Ray Bill

broll said:

d90 said:

Look I get what you're all saying. The "be more careful" lines are all well and good, but I maintain that I didn't sell it. The way the UI is designed, you could put the phone in your pocket and buy stuff just by the phone going around in your pocket. Even if they, with all finality, say no, at least a little more light is shed in this situation. What id like to see, is a better system for selling high level characters. Many games require you to physically type the word delete or sell to do those actions. A 2yo could grab your phone and hose 2-3 years worth of game time. . . A confirm button is not enough for 5*. 

How many confirmation buttons is enough?  The confirmation button exists to prevent these accidental sales, while it's not impossible to to still sell from a pocket push, it's pretty unlikely that the two precise button presses happen to facilitate that.  Add to that the fact that it sounds like you're saying this has happened to you twice now seems pretty unlikely.  Also locking your phone with password or bio-metric before pocketing it would go a long way towards stopping this also.

Also as stated someone else (2 year old or not) grabbing your phone and effecting your game is also on you.  Lock your phone.  It's on you if you leave an unlocked phone in reach of a 2 year old or any other human without supervision.  

I hope you can get your Strange back, but if you do or don't you need to learn from your mistake or be doomed to keep repeating it.

You obviously don’t have kids lol. Lock your phone isn’t an option in some families. The excuse of “sorry hun, but I locked my phone so our son couldn’t sell my video game roster” will NEVER fly. It’s suspicious in relationships to change stuff like that. Gives an impression you’re hiding things just so you can not worry about your phone games lol

NotBAMF

Beta-Ray Bill said:

broll said:

d90 said:

Look I get what you're all saying. The "be more careful" lines are all well and good, but I maintain that I didn't sell it. The way the UI is designed, you could put the phone in your pocket and buy stuff just by the phone going around in your pocket. Even if they, with all finality, say no, at least a little more light is shed in this situation. What id like to see, is a better system for selling high level characters. Many games require you to physically type the word delete or sell to do those actions. A 2yo could grab your phone and hose 2-3 years worth of game time. . . A confirm button is not enough for 5*. 

How many confirmation buttons is enough?  The confirmation button exists to prevent these accidental sales, while it's not impossible to to still sell from a pocket push, it's pretty unlikely that the two precise button presses happen to facilitate that.  Add to that the fact that it sounds like you're saying this has happened to you twice now seems pretty unlikely.  Also locking your phone with password or bio-metric before pocketing it would go a long way towards stopping this also.

Also as stated someone else (2 year old or not) grabbing your phone and effecting your game is also on you.  Lock your phone.  It's on you if you leave an unlocked phone in reach of a 2 year old or any other human without supervision.  

I hope you can get your Strange back, but if you do or don't you need to learn from your mistake or be doomed to keep repeating it.

You obviously don’t have kids lol. Lock your phone isn’t an option in some families. The excuse of “sorry hun, but I locked my phone so our son couldn’t sell my video game roster” will NEVER fly. It’s suspicious in relationships to change stuff like that. Gives an impression you’re hiding things just so you can not worry about your phone games lol

If your relationship is so unstable that this completely viable thing to do would instantly create tension and suspicion, you are in an unhealthy relationship.

Beta-Ray Bill

NotBAMF said:

Beta-Ray Bill said:

broll said:

d90 said:

Look I get what you're all saying. The "be more careful" lines are all well and good, but I maintain that I didn't sell it. The way the UI is designed, you could put the phone in your pocket and buy stuff just by the phone going around in your pocket. Even if they, with all finality, say no, at least a little more light is shed in this situation. What id like to see, is a better system for selling high level characters. Many games require you to physically type the word delete or sell to do those actions. A 2yo could grab your phone and hose 2-3 years worth of game time. . . A confirm button is not enough for 5*. 

How many confirmation buttons is enough?  The confirmation button exists to prevent these accidental sales, while it's not impossible to to still sell from a pocket push, it's pretty unlikely that the two precise button presses happen to facilitate that.  Add to that the fact that it sounds like you're saying this has happened to you twice now seems pretty unlikely.  Also locking your phone with password or bio-metric before pocketing it would go a long way towards stopping this also.

Also as stated someone else (2 year old or not) grabbing your phone and effecting your game is also on you.  Lock your phone.  It's on you if you leave an unlocked phone in reach of a 2 year old or any other human without supervision.  

I hope you can get your Strange back, but if you do or don't you need to learn from your mistake or be doomed to keep repeating it.

You obviously don’t have kids lol. Lock your phone isn’t an option in some families. The excuse of “sorry hun, but I locked my phone so our son couldn’t sell my video game roster” will NEVER fly. It’s suspicious in relationships to change stuff like that. Gives an impression you’re hiding things just so you can not worry about your phone games lol

If your relationship is so unstable that this completely viable thing to do would instantly create tension and suspicion, you are in an unhealthy relationship.

Not completely true. Just because someone has issues against not being open doesn’t mean your relationship is unhealthy and unstable.

maybe your relationship stays healthy and stable by not having locked phones and having the idea there is nothing to hide

moss04

Beta-Ray Bill said:

NotBAMF said:

Beta-Ray Bill said:

broll said:

d90 said:

Look I get what you're all saying. The "be more careful" lines are all well and good, but I maintain that I didn't sell it. The way the UI is designed, you could put the phone in your pocket and buy stuff just by the phone going around in your pocket. Even if they, with all finality, say no, at least a little more light is shed in this situation. What id like to see, is a better system for selling high level characters. Many games require you to physically type the word delete or sell to do those actions. A 2yo could grab your phone and hose 2-3 years worth of game time. . . A confirm button is not enough for 5*. 

How many confirmation buttons is enough?  The confirmation button exists to prevent these accidental sales, while it's not impossible to to still sell from a pocket push, it's pretty unlikely that the two precise button presses happen to facilitate that.  Add to that the fact that it sounds like you're saying this has happened to you twice now seems pretty unlikely.  Also locking your phone with password or bio-metric before pocketing it would go a long way towards stopping this also.

Also as stated someone else (2 year old or not) grabbing your phone and effecting your game is also on you.  Lock your phone.  It's on you if you leave an unlocked phone in reach of a 2 year old or any other human without supervision.  

I hope you can get your Strange back, but if you do or don't you need to learn from your mistake or be doomed to keep repeating it.

You obviously don’t have kids lol. Lock your phone isn’t an option in some families. The excuse of “sorry hun, but I locked my phone so our son couldn’t sell my video game roster” will NEVER fly. It’s suspicious in relationships to change stuff like that. Gives an impression you’re hiding things just so you can not worry about your phone games lol

If your relationship is so unstable that this completely viable thing to do would instantly create tension and suspicion, you are in an unhealthy relationship.

Not completely true. Just because someone has issues against not being open doesn’t mean your relationship is unhealthy and unstable.

maybe your relationship stays healthy and stable by not having locked phones and having the idea there is nothing to hide

Why not lock the phone and give the overly paranoid girlfriend the code??

CharlieCroker

moss04 said:

Beta-Ray Bill said:

NotBAMF said:

Beta-Ray Bill said:

broll said:

d90 said:

Look I get what you're all saying. The "be more careful" lines are all well and good, but I maintain that I didn't sell it. The way the UI is designed, you could put the phone in your pocket and buy stuff just by the phone going around in your pocket. Even if they, with all finality, say no, at least a little more light is shed in this situation. What id like to see, is a better system for selling high level characters. Many games require you to physically type the word delete or sell to do those actions. A 2yo could grab your phone and hose 2-3 years worth of game time. . . A confirm button is not enough for 5*. 

How many confirmation buttons is enough?  The confirmation button exists to prevent these accidental sales, while it's not impossible to to still sell from a pocket push, it's pretty unlikely that the two precise button presses happen to facilitate that.  Add to that the fact that it sounds like you're saying this has happened to you twice now seems pretty unlikely.  Also locking your phone with password or bio-metric before pocketing it would go a long way towards stopping this also.

Also as stated someone else (2 year old or not) grabbing your phone and effecting your game is also on you.  Lock your phone.  It's on you if you leave an unlocked phone in reach of a 2 year old or any other human without supervision.  

I hope you can get your Strange back, but if you do or don't you need to learn from your mistake or be doomed to keep repeating it.

You obviously don’t have kids lol. Lock your phone isn’t an option in some families. The excuse of “sorry hun, but I locked my phone so our son couldn’t sell my video game roster” will NEVER fly. It’s suspicious in relationships to change stuff like that. Gives an impression you’re hiding things just so you can not worry about your phone games lol

If your relationship is so unstable that this completely viable thing to do would instantly create tension and suspicion, you are in an unhealthy relationship.

Not completely true. Just because someone has issues against not being open doesn’t mean your relationship is unhealthy and unstable.

maybe your relationship stays healthy and stable by not having locked phones and having the idea there is nothing to hide

Why not lock the phone and give the overly paranoid girlfriend the code??

But what if your partner then leaves your phone unlocked, then your 2 year old sells your shiny 5*.  Back to square one.

But all in seriousness the OP has lost the use of a character that has taken a lot of time and possibly money to complete and with the dilution of classic 5*s has next to zero chance of rebuilding (barring Strange being featured in a new release pack).  Can't believe this is something CS won't rectify for the OP when it's known they've done the same or more for other customers previously.  Lack of ,000's spent notwithstanding.

Beta-Ray Bill

moss04 said:

Beta-Ray Bill said:

NotBAMF said:

Beta-Ray Bill said:

broll said:

d90 said:

Look I get what you're all saying. The "be more careful" lines are all well and good, but I maintain that I didn't sell it. The way the UI is designed, you could put the phone in your pocket and buy stuff just by the phone going around in your pocket. Even if they, with all finality, say no, at least a little more light is shed in this situation. What id like to see, is a better system for selling high level characters. Many games require you to physically type the word delete or sell to do those actions. A 2yo could grab your phone and hose 2-3 years worth of game time. . . A confirm button is not enough for 5*. 

How many confirmation buttons is enough?  The confirmation button exists to prevent these accidental sales, while it's not impossible to to still sell from a pocket push, it's pretty unlikely that the two precise button presses happen to facilitate that.  Add to that the fact that it sounds like you're saying this has happened to you twice now seems pretty unlikely.  Also locking your phone with password or bio-metric before pocketing it would go a long way towards stopping this also.

Also as stated someone else (2 year old or not) grabbing your phone and effecting your game is also on you.  Lock your phone.  It's on you if you leave an unlocked phone in reach of a 2 year old or any other human without supervision.  

I hope you can get your Strange back, but if you do or don't you need to learn from your mistake or be doomed to keep repeating it.

You obviously don’t have kids lol. Lock your phone isn’t an option in some families. The excuse of “sorry hun, but I locked my phone so our son couldn’t sell my video game roster” will NEVER fly. It’s suspicious in relationships to change stuff like that. Gives an impression you’re hiding things just so you can not worry about your phone games lol

If your relationship is so unstable that this completely viable thing to do would instantly create tension and suspicion, you are in an unhealthy relationship.

Not completely true. Just because someone has issues against not being open doesn’t mean your relationship is unhealthy and unstable.

maybe your relationship stays healthy and stable by not having locked phones and having the idea there is nothing to hide

Why not lock the phone and give the overly paranoid girlfriend the code??

Completely missing the point I’m making

Dogface

OP can have my 5/2/0 Strange. I never play it without his yellow. 

mega ghost

Assuming we have the full story, I think it's absurd that CS wouldn't fix this in a heartbeat. Give him his character back, remove any ISO and HP he got for accidentally selling it, and that's that. It's an easy win for CS, and it keeps a paying customer happy. This isn't a situation of "I sold a character I didn't like for roster space and resources and now I'm regretting it," it was an extremely unfortunate accident that they can rectify with minimal effort and there's no reason they shouldn't do it.

Treras

The rockett said:

Example 1:  A video was oisted of a 500+ roster and he raged quit about 3 weeks ago. Sold everything due to Gambit.  
Resolution:  Roster restored fully. 

Example 2:  460 5* roster rage sold due to 15 dupe BB covers and CS not helping out because he could not pull the one darn color he needed.  2 weeks ago. 
Resolution:  Roster restored fully. Rolled back 1 week. 

Example 3:   500+ roster had major FB saving issues. Entire account gone. 
Resolution:  Account fixed and was very well compensated. 

Example 4:  500+ roster locked out due to FB saving error.  This was end of last season. 
Resolution:  Account fix BUT he got no end of season rewards personal or ally. Got no other compensation. 

Example 5:   Account got its 4th time 1 time exception of a cover swap for another 5*. 

All of the above.  As someone else said it, D90 is still far from platinum level. 

#restorestrange

jredd

i received a 4* star lord cover from a 3* gamora champ level. the cover didn't go into my cover cue. it applied itself directly onto my 4* star lord. i checked with cs and they confirmed i 'used' the cover. i'm pretty sure they track things well enough to figure out what happened. a roll back or full restore should be done. any one of us would hope it would be if it happened to us.

Yepyep

mega ghost said:

Assuming we have the full story, I think it's absurd that CS wouldn't fix this in a heartbeat. Give him his character back, remove any ISO and HP he got for accidentally selling it, and that's that. It's an easy win for CS, and it keeps a paying customer happy. This isn't a situation of "I sold a character I didn't like for roster space and resources and now I'm regretting it," it was an extremely unfortunate accident that they can rectify with minimal effort and there's no reason they shouldn't do it.

To me, this is exactly right. It makes no difference if it has happened before (putting abuse aside, which is easily handled on its own terms). Very easy call here...

MacEifer

Treras said:

The rockett said:

Example 1:  A video was oisted of a 500+ roster and he raged quit about 3 weeks ago. Sold everything due to Gambit.  
Resolution:  Roster restored fully. 

Example 2:  460 5* roster rage sold due to 15 dupe BB covers and CS not helping out because he could not pull the one darn color he needed.  2 weeks ago. 
Resolution:  Roster restored fully. Rolled back 1 week. 

Example 3:   500+ roster had major FB saving issues. Entire account gone. 
Resolution:  Account fixed and was very well compensated. 

Example 4:  500+ roster locked out due to FB saving error.  This was end of last season. 
Resolution:  Account fix BUT he got no end of season rewards personal or ally. Got no other compensation. 

Example 5:   Account got its 4th time 1 time exception of a cover swap for another 5*. 

All of the above.  As someone else said it, D90 is still far from platinum level. 

#restorestrange

Do you have indications that case 1&2 were not their 1st time exceptions?

As 3&4 were not self inflicted, of course they would need CS to fix them. These should be the cases you have CS for.

Unless I'm mistaken, Cover swaps for LL pulls when you are capped on that colour wouldn't be one time expections but simply assistance by policy.


And honestly, this isn't even the argument. Even if people got support in ways that don't line up with policies as they are explained to you, that doesn't make one eligible to receive the same benefit. That's like saying you should get out of a murder charge because OJ got out of a murder charge.

If you haven't done game support, I'll break it down for you.
60 - 90% of the stuff on your desk is stuff you should be helping with according to your policies.
5 - 35% are people you can't help. You simply can't change what their problem is and you ask them to submit feedback so whatever they're struggling with can be improved.

The last 5% are the unpopped popcorn kennels. Pleaders, chancers and scammers.
Now technically you get these in other support jobs as well, but here it's different because it's a game.
When I don't get someone a new phone because they asked nicely, that conversation ends.
When you don't give someone something in a game and they don't want to end the conversation it doesn't end because "it doesn't cost anything" and "that guy in my guild got the same thing" and "you're supposed to keep me as a paying customer". Game communities are highly networked and their members flock to spectacular cases of company intervention. This generates "precedent" and like anyone who has seen 3 episodes of LA Law and smoked cigarettes behind the gym with the lawyer's son we all know that precedent means that "that's how it's done now".

The problem there is that that's not how you can run customer support. You could run a search to see how many WoW characters are out there named "donotrestore". Little hint, there shouldn't be any, but you can see that's where some people messed up. There's some characters in WoW that have very funny achievements, like achievements their class shouldn't be able to complete. But they do because sometimes people in customer support can mess up.
If someone messes up in that way in game support, it is news, sometimes small, sometimes big.

None of this is a precedent. None of this makes you eligible for anything like it just because you know it happened.
In the end, CS has an obligation to find the correct response to your request. Not the best one, the correct one. It might not be the best for you, it might not be what you wanted, but it's the correct one and when you got the correct one that doesn't mean you're supposed to be happy about it, but you should know you did all you can.

Now there's some things I've been called out for, first of all The rockett called my out for calling you all 13 year olds, which was not my intent. I said "It's like a gaggle of 13 year olds in here who think their parents should drive them to the cinema because they can drive them to the cinema."
The point here is 13 year olds see there's a car in the driveway, their parents are home and they want to go to the cinema. That is all the information they see. The fact that their parents may have had 10 hour working days, money might be tight or that they haven't done their homework in a fortnight doesn''t occur to them. It's the same here. Everyone talks as if they couldn't possibly be missing anything important because all the information they need to argue in their favor clearly is there.

The other thing is that I said "This thread will go on for another 20 pages because you're asking the wrong questions and demanding the wrong things." without saying what it is you should be asking and that's a fair callout. I might as well just have said it instead of being all mystical about it.

The questions D90 would need to ask of CS should be along these lines:

Do you have a full record of our previous interactions?
Was I offered an explanation of what a one-time exception is and what the potential magnitude of it was?
Was I given the opportunity to accept or reject the restoration of the 4* cover at the time after being educated on the mmechanics of this exception?
Was I informed of whether this exception will be renewed at certain intervals? (some one-time exceptions are actually "one-time-per-year" or "one-time-per-expansion-cycle" etc for some games.It#s different from company to company)

Now CS would usually be able to provide information of this nature to a customer and the answers to it should give you an idea on whether they have an education process in such cases and if it was followed.
You can always make a case of process over merit. If the original one-timer was done without appropriate warning about the nature of the request, then you should be able to plead for them for a do-over with an appropriate education this time and if they see it that way you might actually get it.

Sorry if I come across a bit tense on the subject matter. I've spent a lot of time having my decisions torn apart on reddit and the forums for a half dozen games over the last decade or so. There's professionals sitting on the other end who come to work every morning to help you as best they can. Don't get cynical with them. Nobody can pay them enough to get dragged out into the yard like this for the resident cynics to descend upon them and question their motives.

LifeofAgony

All that text is predicated on a very simple, but unvalidated fact - that there is some actual guideline that they’re following.

I’ve seen tickets where people have sent literally the exact same requests, word for word, without any snark or negativity.  One approved, one denied.  Neither having previously received exceptions nor having spent more than 50 bucks.

I am sure there are CS that function in the manner you describe, but from personal experience and seeing the experience of numerous other players or varying spend levels and time playing, they don’t seem to follow any real guidelines.  It’s blind luck.  So the cynics come out in droves because they have seen CS time and again do the most random things.

The information you talk about them providing is something they have always seemed unwilling to share.  It’s what we keep asking for - tell us the rules, tell us the hows and whys.  This is where you see the forum backlash - the reasons are rarely given, and when they are, is usually boilerplate or ambiguity.

I wish they would just actually communicate this stuff.  It would avoid pages of threads like this - but until they choose to pull back the curtain a little, we’re left exactly where we are - a player getting the short end of the stick for a request that has been done for others and will be done for others in the future with no understanding as to why.

carrion_pigeons

MacEifer said:

Treras said:

The rockett said:

Example 1:  A video was oisted of a 500+ roster and he raged quit about 3 weeks ago. Sold everything due to Gambit.  
Resolution:  Roster restored fully. 

Example 2:  460 5* roster rage sold due to 15 dupe BB covers and CS not helping out because he could not pull the one darn color he needed.  2 weeks ago. 
Resolution:  Roster restored fully. Rolled back 1 week. 

Example 3:   500+ roster had major FB saving issues. Entire account gone. 
Resolution:  Account fixed and was very well compensated. 

Example 4:  500+ roster locked out due to FB saving error.  This was end of last season. 
Resolution:  Account fix BUT he got no end of season rewards personal or ally. Got no other compensation. 

Example 5:   Account got its 4th time 1 time exception of a cover swap for another 5*. 

All of the above.  As someone else said it, D90 is still far from platinum level. 

#restorestrange

The problem there is that that's not how you can run customer support. 

That's not *my* problem.  I have nothing but sympathy for CS agents required to follow the letter of the law because it's the letter of the law.  *My* problem is that someone, somewhere along the line, made a decision that major, roster-altering errors worth literally hundreds of hours of time are counted the same as "please, I accidentally fat fingered and sold a cover".  I'm not arguing for any kind of exceptions to be made.  I'm arguing that the policy is wrong, and that it ought to be a non-issue to correct it.

I realize that not everyone here is arguing that, and I completely agree with you that you can't operate a CS department by seat-of-your-pants exception-making.  But even then, I think you'll notice that the people who are arguing for "exceptions" to be made here aren't really arguing for exceptions to be made.  They're arguing that exceptions *have* been made, and since they've been made, there's evidence to support that what has been exceptional in the past could be made into the norm.  None of those people want D90 to be the only guy to get what I'm going to call fair treatment - they want it for everyone.  They want a better standard that *isn't* based on CS making exceptions.

And yeah, that turns the conversation into yet another series of impotent complaints about MPQ's unfair business model, but honestly, when was it ever not?

MacEifer

LifeofAgony said:

All that text is predicated on a very simple, but unvalidated fact - that there is some actual guideline that they’re following.

I’ve seen tickets where people have sent literally the exact same requests, word for word, without any snark or negativity.  One approved, one denied.  Neither having previously received exceptions nor having spent more than 50 bucks. </quote> 

Right, and of course all the things people say on the internet are true and nobody has ever misrepresented their case in a court of public opinion and of course all factors in every case you have seen small sets of data of are identical in every way that matters.
Well turns out none of the above is true, not by a long shot. About 90% of CS cases that are dragged into the forums are grossly misrepresented. I've gone through hundreds of CS cases connected to forum threads and the amount of omissions and misrepresentations people commit, wittingly or unwittingly, is ridiculous. I've had someone in an MMO I worked for stage protests for his unbanning. Like 200 people clogging a town sit down protests. After a week he made the mistake of telling me publicly "He's not afraid of the truth and if I would post his chats the community would surely see that they are justified and vindicated.". Turns out he really didn't know that we don't have to protect his personal data if he allows us to post it publicly and the community didn't speak to him again long after his suspension ran out. I had to soft-censor a lot ofit before posting. We're talking about Nuremberg trials level of hatespeech here. I've had someone find out the home phone of a vice CEO in that job, call his wife because he got suspended for spamming and then walk into the forums and complain that CS wouldn't talk to him about his billing issues anymore. Of course these are crass cases, but the smaller versions of these happen every day and the vast majority of them that I had to review would clearly exonerate CS if they were at liberty to give you the full spectrum.
That's, again, not to say that CS departments never mishandle a case. They do, all the time, it's just not an argument that helps you with your own case.

All things considered, saying they can never be right because there's cases where they haven't been right isn't a way to make an argument. CS cases are handled case by case. I've easily handled 2000 cases in my life that had some version of "you did it for the other guy, same situation" in it, and off the top of my head I think maybe a half dozen of them actually could be considered the same situation. The whole "but other people do" argument never works and as I pointed out the OP needs to go at this from the angle of his own case, the processes applied to it and the goodwill that CS can afford him. If he can't get past the whole one-time exception thing, then he has no case. If CS has no policy to do a do-over on a one-time exception, then he has no case. Comparing what you need to assume are apples and oranges just because you have some confidence that they all look like apples to you is not productive.

carrion_pigeons

I'm afraid I don't actually see what all of that about chat logs has to do with the situation here.  My best guess at your line of thinking is that "the OP is probably misrepresenting his case and that company policy is actually completely fine, here let me give an example of that happening".  Except, of course, you know neither of us actually have any evidence one way or the other.

All we can really trust to be true is that CS declined to restore a single championed 5*.  Let's start from there.  If you were establishing CS policy for your own game that happened to be structured exactly like this one, I'm interested to know what the circumstances would be where you would think that such a refusal is good CS policy.  Some kind of evidence of abuse?  What would, or even *could* constitute abuse?  Some threshold of expended time?  Does that threshold justifiably fall below the time it would take to automate the process?  Why would it?  Some other reason?

I am explicitly asking you to avoid the argument "they didn't do it because it was against their policy".  I'm not interested in that discussion.  Clearly it's true that some people along the line had no power to change the policy, and the only way for them to change the outcome here was for them to break the rules.  But I'm not saying those people did anything wrong.  I'm asking you about the choices of actual policy-makers.

Alsmir

Ducky said:

DaBeast911 said:

fight4thedream said:

**Mod Mode: ON**

While I do sympathize with d90's situation, posting private messages either from the forum or emails from CS is a violation of rule 7. Please refrain from doing so in the future. Thank you.

**Mod Mode: OFF**

On a more personal note, I hope you are able to get your 5* Strange back. 

Rule 7 says:

7. Treat your fellow users kindly. We will not tolerate any of the following;

• Trolling, or posting something just to get a rise out of someone.
• Flaming, or insulting / bashing / harassing another user.
• Posting offensive material. This includes anything that could be considered racially, religiously, or sexually demeaning or insulting. Posting a link to material of this nature is equally forbidden.
• Offensive or profane forum user names.
• Posting threatening material of any kind.
• Referencing specific player names, for instance, in order to question in-game actions, or accuse of cheating (this includes nicknames and acronyms)
• Congratulation posts [and the mentioning of other players] are permitted as long as they are done in a sincere and respectful manner. However, in the event that the player being mentioned is not comfortable with the post, they have the right to request the post or their name be removed. Please contact a moderator with your request.
• Acting like a jerk.
• Posting content from private messages

There is nothing regarding posting an email between yourself and customer service. The rules need to be amended to include emails if that's what's to be interpreted.

That's because he techincally broke rules 7 and 8. If you had read the rules, the next rule states:

8. We reserve the right to delete any material that we deem inappropriate for our forums, including, but not limited to:

• Offensive topics
• Offensive profile avatars
• Advocating cheating
• Hack links
• Insulting others
• Spoilers
• Data-mined or misleading information
• Customer Support ticket conversations
• Etc.

Ah, the glorious rule #8 which can be translated to: "We do whatever we want".

Quebbster

Alsmir said:

Ducky said:

DaBeast911 said:

fight4thedream said:

**Mod Mode: ON**

While I do sympathize with d90's situation, posting private messages either from the forum or emails from CS is a violation of rule 7. Please refrain from doing so in the future. Thank you.

**Mod Mode: OFF**

On a more personal note, I hope you are able to get your 5* Strange back. 

Rule 7 says:

7. Treat your fellow users kindly. We will not tolerate any of the following;

• Trolling, or posting something just to get a rise out of someone.
• Flaming, or insulting / bashing / harassing another user.
• Posting offensive material. This includes anything that could be considered racially, religiously, or sexually demeaning or insulting. Posting a link to material of this nature is equally forbidden.
• Offensive or profane forum user names.
• Posting threatening material of any kind.
• Referencing specific player names, for instance, in order to question in-game actions, or accuse of cheating (this includes nicknames and acronyms)
• Congratulation posts [and the mentioning of other players] are permitted as long as they are done in a sincere and respectful manner. However, in the event that the player being mentioned is not comfortable with the post, they have the right to request the post or their name be removed. Please contact a moderator with your request.
• Acting like a jerk.
• Posting content from private messages

There is nothing regarding posting an email between yourself and customer service. The rules need to be amended to include emails if that's what's to be interpreted.

That's because he techincally broke rules 7 and 8. If you had read the rules, the next rule states:

8. We reserve the right to delete any material that we deem inappropriate for our forums, including, but not limited to:

• Offensive topics
• Offensive profile avatars
• Advocating cheating
• Hack links
• Insulting others
• Spoilers
• Data-mined or misleading information
• Customer Support ticket conversations
• Etc.

Ah, the glorious rule #8 which can be translated to: "We do whatever we want".

Rule 8.1: The mods are always right.
Rule 8.2: In the event that the mods are wrong, please see rule 8.1.

Borstock

I find both sides of the debate rather compelling. I was particularly impressed by the person who noted that mistakes are part of the game, and those that make the fewest number of mistakes should enjoy the advantages that come with it.

That being said, I don't think it's unfair for someone who spent $700 on this game to ask for a mulligan. I hope the OP gets their Strange back.