"We know you've got a licence, now prove it"



  •  I'm just applying to be a reseller of some software. As part of the reseller enrollment you have to have a licence yourself. Fair enough (it stops people becoming resellers just to buy a cheap licence for themselves).

    So, I get an email from them:

    I would like to let you know that as in order to be a Reseller with us, you need to have an Owned license. 
    So I have checked your account registered with the email address xxx@yyy.com and it shows that you have a
    SupportSuite Owned license.

    In order to proceed with the activation of your Resellers account, I would request you to please send us a
    Fax with either of the following details on your company letter head at +91-(123)-1234567 so that I may
    verify the required details and activate your Resellers account:
    1. Payment receipt of the product.
    2. Order ID
    3. Transaction ID

    So, they're saying "we can see you have a licence, now prove it to us".

    I replied (by email) saying that I thought this was daft, but, anyway, here was a copy of the invoice they emailed to me, and the email they sent to me with all the details in.

    Just to make things worse, they replied saying, "thank you, but you do need to fax it to us, you can't email it".

    We spent a while here trying to work out the logic of the procedure, but totally failed...

    (I did fax back, but my faxing method DID include a camera and a wooden desk (and an extra-small font, to save ink) - I don't really care about the reseller scheme, so if they turn me down because I took the p**s out of their enrollment procedure, it's no biggy).

     



  • 1. If you think this is a WTF and start taking the piss out of the enrollment procedure, you have a lot more WTF round the corner in Reselling.
    2.  What is the point in going through reseller procedure if you do not care about going through with it?
    3. Your attitude is to correct people when the system doesn't make logical sense - I hope you do not plan to have long term corporate customers.

    Admins, please delete this tread, not a very good WTF



  • @Helix said:

    Admins, please delete this tread, not a very good WTF
    There's a "Report Abuse" function for that.  Your message would go straight to the mods.  Don't hold out hope for them deleting it, unless it's spam.  Just mock him mercilessly and make him vow on his mother that he will come to your house and strangle you.



  • @Helix said:

    Admins, please delete this tread, not a very good WTF

    I think this is a very valid WTF. Whether anyone is able or willing to do anything about is, of course, a completely different story. The fact that this kind of WTF is pretty widespread, particularly in bigger companies, and the fact that we all have to cope with it somehow, doesn't make it any less of a WTF.

    I usually try to correct the system if it doesn't make logical sense, too. If it turns out to be immovable, then, of course, I will play along. Maybe, like the OP, trying to have a little fun with the rigidness of it.



  • The fax thing is silly, but I'm not sure about the first part.  Just because you have a license bound to your account, does that mean they would have your transaction/order IDs?  I don't know, it sounds like they're just trying to prevent duplicate licenses. 



  • @TheRider said:

    @Helix said:

    Admins, please delete this tread, not a very good WTF

    I think this is a very valid WTF. Whether anyone is able or willing to do anything about is, of course, a completely different story. The fact that this kind of WTF is pretty widespread, particularly in bigger companies, and the fact that we all have to cope with it somehow, doesn't make it any less of a WTF.

    I usually try to correct the system if it doesn't make logical sense, too. If it turns out to be immovable, then, of course, I will play along. Maybe, like the OP, trying to have a little fun with the rigidness of it.

    There needs to be a clear, unambigous, documented procedure to determine whether a WTF is really a WTF. Each step has to be checked by several instances and added to the process documentation. Statistics should be created regularly to assess the success of the process.

    Similarly, it must be clear when to press the Abuse button and what is done once the button has been pressed. 

    I can't believe that anyone can just...like...post their stuff here. That is like anarchy!



  • @spamcourt said:

    There needs to be a clear, unambigous, documented procedure to determine whether a WTF is really a WTF. Each step has to be checked by several instances and added to the process documentation. Statistics should be created regularly to assess the success of the process.

     

    First we need a committee to draft up the business process documentation for the WTF procedure.



  • @savar said:

    @spamcourt said:

    There needs to be a clear, unambigous, documented procedure to determine whether a WTF is really a WTF. Each step has to be checked by several instances and added to the process documentation. Statistics should be created regularly to assess the success of the process.

     

    First we need a committee to draft up the business process documentation for the WTF procedure.

    And before that we need an armed militant wing to ensure that no one - no one - over reacts to the suggestions of this committee ... Which is to be lead by a suitably community minded fellow - like myself.

    P.S. Anarchy? what Anarchy? ooooh this Anarchy?



  • Grammar WTF: Using "either" with more than 2 items.



  • nothing wrong with that. So the email address was used prior to register for support to a purchased license.
    Doesn't mean it's you holding that license, it could be someone else who used the address before you.

    Or the program is specific to a person, and the email address isn't enough to uniquely identify that person.

    Or they just wanted to tick you off for being a jerk to them in the past.



  • @jwenting said:

    nothing wrong with that. So the email address was used prior to register for support to a purchased license.
    Doesn't mean it's you holding that license, it could be someone else who used the address before you.

    Well, given that the software licence is tied to the domain name (so it wouldn't work if we used it on a different domain), we couldn't have bought it for someone else. All they want is for us to send us the transaction number to them by fax. That's it. So, if we had bought it for someone else, we could have used that anyway.

    But why do we have to fax it to them?

    I could sort of see why they might want us to send some proof to them, that could just be due to bad organisation at their end, but what on earth would be wrong with us forwarding the email they sent to us back to them? That's why I did that just thinking 'that's dumb, but OK'. It's when they insisted that it MUST be faxed to them that it just got stupid.

    When we've joined reseller schemes for other publishers we've had to fill in NDAs, forms and all sorts, and it's all made sense, so we haven't minded doing it. It's the 'you must FAX us just the information we already have, email is no good' that is totally nonsensical. If they wanted us to fill in a form including the transaction number, with a signature authenticating it, that would sort of make sense, but they don't want a signature, just the transaction number.

    As this is something we might make $20-$50 a year from, I really don't care that much about it..




  •  >>As this is something we might make $20-$50 a year from, I really don't care that much about it..

     

    ah ... not so much of a money spinner then, but more strategic.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.