-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sat, 29 Mar 2003 10:24:46 -0500 (EST), Mike A. Harris wrote:
> On Fri, 28 Mar 2003, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > >> yep this is all guessing and mental masturbation. maybe I made the main > >> point of my post about these rhn options a bit too subtle... > >> there is a phone number to call for sales questions. Anyone who really > >> cares about this issue should be using the phone number. At this point > >> I'm assuming anyone who keeps posting about these issue to the beta list > >> are just freeloading posting-junkies, like myself, who have no real > >> intention to ever buy any of these product, and just like wasting > >> bandwidth by exploring the boundary of the definition of spam. > > > >Actually, public feedback on what users and potential customers > >think about the comprehensibility and clearness of Red Hat's product > >information pages, and what they think about the pricing itself, is > >far more interesting and relevant than any attempts on cutting down > >the remaining traffic on this (probably already dying) list. I think > >the sales department would revise the web pages if they got many > >repetitive questions by phone. But consider all those visitors who > >don't call them and who misunderstand the pricing model. Imagine > >someone got a false picture and ordered and later learned that the > >renewal of the annual subscription is much more expensive. Surely > >something you would to avoid, even if it were only once. It doesn't > >really matter on what mailing-list this comes up. As you know, > >people from Red Hat read these lists, too. > > Sure, Red Hat people read these lists. Most of us are engineers > however, although there are others too. > > Assuming that people in sales and marketing are on the list > though, and are reading all of this is a perhaps wrong assumption > (I have no idea). By contacting the right people and doing so > directly and explaining what products you want and what services, > and at what price points you consider reasonable, the person on > the telephone will be able to make note of another customer's > feedback. > > While people at Red Hat such as myself, and other engineers often > offer help here, or comment on things like this, we are not one > the decision makers here at Red Hat, and so individual people > posting here are not going to get counted by the bean counters. > > Some may assume since they've reached "someone" at Red Hat, that > we will then pass on this information/request/whatever to the > appropriate people at Red Hat. That is generally a bad > assumption because: > > 1) I have no idea who specifically at Red Hat would be the proper > person to contact, other than to call our phone number myself > and spend my own personal time being a middleman (with no > personal benefit) > > 2) Comments to Red Hat by myself will be likely treated as an > employee suggestion, and carry much less weight than would a > number of actual customers providing direct feedback to Red > Hat sales people, etc. over time. > > I do in fact try to provide customer feedback internally to some > people. This results in responses coming back to _me_ though, > and not to the customer, and generally the responses come back in > the form of "internal employee to internal employee" and not in > the form of "internal employee to customer", and so it isn't > always easy to translate something as a middle man. > > In short, any customer who wants Red Hat to provide alternative > solutions at alternative prices needs to contact Red Hat > directly, preferably via telephone and provide this information > directly to the sales department. It is the only way that I > personally know of with which to provide feedback and request > products and services. The more people who do this, the better > that Red Hat can evaluate customers requirements and try to > work them into profitable business models. > > Also, this isn't just to the customer's benefit, it is to Red > Hat's benefit as well, as it lets us know what people want. It > only works though if the proper people hear the message. Please excuse the full quote, but your long response makes my bit above look as if I proposed this mailing-list as a way to give Red Hat feedback. That is not true. As we know, these lists are not even a substitute for bugzilla, although a few developers show up here quite regularly. Primarily, I wanted to oppose the accusation that this thread would be "wasting bandwidth by exploring the boundary of the definition of spam". Going back to the first message in this thread helps understanding how this thread started. Also note the subject line. [Even with this message, the entire thread is still legitimate.] I found an attempt to cut off this thread inappropriate. Of course, Red Hat have contact information published (phone, web, snail-mail) and explicitly offer various forms of help. For instance, contact with a sales rep. Someone, who is serious about giving Red Hat feedback, would not discuss only with other users, but at some point contact Red Hat and seek for official words. Also some questions can ONLY be answered by Red Hat. Discount options or special offers, for instance. But ask yourself -- and regardless of how this thread started -- why some people ask the community rather than Red Hat? Some would rather not tell Red Hat that they find RHEL WS too expensive, but instead boycott the product silently or complain in public message boards only. Some would rather ask the community than Red Hat. They do that NOT because they don't know how to contact Red Hat. They don't care or have other reasons. For instance, one is that they have got negative response from Red Hat in the past. The single user who doesn't want to get in contact with Red Hat might be neglectable. But imagine that many more users/customers complain without telling Red Hat. There are ways Red Hat can be made aware of that. Even somebody who was about to call Red Hat Sales in the middle or towards the end of this thread could point out that more people find the web pages unclear. - -- -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.0.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE+hfZE0iMVcrivHFQRAjZjAJ4mf8RTBoxYQ5M0n57XBlnOxe5jbACeNyaL fgL0Qh1/FU/EYfjS2mMUsWc= =lkXb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Phoebe-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/phoebe-list
