[OT] Stupid response from MS about C# spec typo

[Sam Sungshik Kong]

(This posting might be off-topic.)

Hello!

Today, I got a very funny email from Microsoft ContactUs. I want to share
the story with this group. I am not anti-MS. I just don't understand the way
they do. Let's just think about this kinda absurd situation...

Days ago, I downloaded a C# 2.0 Specification from
http://download.microsoft.com/download/8/1/6/81682478-4018-48fe-9e5e-f87
a44af3db9/SpecificationVer2.doc .

I found the link from
http://weblogs.asp.net/sbehera/archive/0001/01/01/232485.aspx which popped
up from google search.

I found a typo at page# 66. It says "sematically" instead of "semantically"
(n is missing). Of course, it's not a big deal. However, I wanted to let MS
know that. And I reported it from MS Contact Us page. They sent me an email
and requested the site url from which I downloaded it. I replied with the
two url's above.

Today, I got a reply saying the following.

<snip>
I am sorry to inform you that Microsoft is not the best group to address
your concern on the typhographical error you have located.

Your concern is best addressed by Suresh Behera Contact. Their Web site is
http://weblogs.asp.net/sbehera/contact.aspx. Please note that Suresh Behera
is not related to Microsoft.

I am sorry I cannot be of further help on this matter. If you have other
concerns, please feel free to write back.
</snip>

Isn't it funny? What could Suresh Behera do if I informed him/her of the
typo? He/she may have to contact MS again like me. Then what would MS say
about it?

Are some resources of MS site controled by some people who are not related
to MS? If the reply from MS is serious, then this is my best guess.

At first, I thought that the message was handled by a very stupid AI
program. Probably not, right?

Here's the whole message.

-------

Hello Sam,


Thank you for contacting Microsoft.com Customer Support regarding the "C#
Version 2.0 Specification" Microsoft Word document file located at this
site: http://weblogs.asp.net/sbehera/archive/0001/01/01/232485.aspx.


I am sorry to inform you that Microsoft is not the best group to address
your concern on the typhographical error you have located.


Your concern is best addressed by Suresh Behera Contact. Their Web site is
http://weblogs.asp.net/sbehera/contact.aspx. Please note that Suresh Behera
is not related to Microsoft.


I am sorry I cannot be of further help on this matter. If you have other
concerns, please feel free to write back.


Sincerely,


Microsoft.com Customer Support


PLEASE NOTE THAT BY USING ANY REFERENCED LINKS, YOU WILL ACCESS THIRD PARTY
SITES. SUCH SITES ARE NOT UNDER THE CONTROL OF MICROSOFT AND MICROSOFT IS
NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR SUCH SITES, THE CONTENTS OF SUCH SITES, ANY LINK
CONTAINED IN SUCH SITES, OR ANY CHANGES OR UPDATES TO SUCH SITES. IN
ADDITION, SUCH THIRD PARTY SITES MAY HAVE THEIR OWN PRIVACY POLICIES AND YOU
SHOULD REVIEW SUCH PRIVACY POLICIES BEFORE SUBMITTING ANY PERSONAL
INFORMATION TO SUCH SITES; MICROSOFT IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR HOW SUCH SITES
COLLECT OR USE INFORMATION ABOUT YOU. MICROSOFT IS NOT RESPONSIBLE FOR
WEBCASTING OR ANY OTHER FORM OF TRANSMISSION RECEIVED FROM ANY LINKED SITE.
MICROSOFT IS PROVIDING THESE LINKS TO YOU ONLY AS A CONVENIENCE AND THE
INCLUSION OF ANY LINK DOES NOT IMPLY ENDORSEMENT BY MICROSOFT OF THE LINKED
SITE.


--- Original Message ---
From:
To: (e-mail address removed)
Sent: Fri Oct 22 13:11:45 PDT 2004
Subject: Re: CST178702077ID - RE:Microsoft.Com ContactUS


Hi!

Thanks for the reply.

I downloaded the word document file from
http://download.microsoft.com/download/8/1/6/81682478-4018-48fe-9e5e-f87
a44af3db9/SpecificationVer2.doc .
I found the link at
http://weblogs.asp.net/sbehera/archive/0001/01/01/232485.aspx .

It's not a big issue to me.
I just want you to know that there's a typo.

Sam Kong

----- Original Message -----
From: Microsoft ContactUs

To:

Sent: Friday, October 22, 2004 12:00 PM
Subject: CST178702077ID - RE:Microsoft.Com ContactUS

Hello Sam,

Thank you for writing to Microsoft.com Customer Support and
taking the time to submit the issue you are having with our Web site.

I understand you encountered a typographical error 'sematically'
instead of semantically in the page you accessed on our Web site. We
apologize for the inconvenience you have experienced and we are more
than glad to assist you.

For us to investigate this issue, we will need more specific
information, Please reply to this message and describe in detail the
steps you took to reproduce the issue.

Please remember to indicate the following details:

1. Complete Web site address you accessed
2. Specific links you may have selected

I am truly sorry for not being able to provide you with the
information immediately. I know how important it is and we look forward
to hearing from you soon and resolve your issue at the soonest possible
time.

Thank you for your patience and cooperation.

Sincerely,

Oliver
Microsoft.com Customer Support

--- Original Message ---
From:
To: (e-mail address removed)
Sent: Thu Oct 21 13:42:20 PDT 2004
Subject: Microsoft.Com ContactUS


URL:http://www.microsoft.com/
LANG:English (United States)
LOC:US
BR:windows nt 5.1/msie 6.0/en-usIn the C# 2.0 spec
(SpecificationVer2.doc) has a typo.
In the page 66, 'sematically' is a typo for 'semantically'.

Sam Kong

 

[Bonj]

Well, they're right - stupid! How can it be Microsoft's fault? !

It's not Microsoft's fault. It's the fault of whoever wrote the Oxford
English Dictionary* - they typed it into there wrong.
If you go to McDonald's drivethrough and spill hot coffee over yourself, who
else can possibly be to blame but the FD of McDonalds?
Similarly if you crash your car into a tree, it's not your fault - but the
fault of whoever planted the tree there in the first place.

Take it with a pinch of salt, refuse to be fazed by it, don't give it an
inch of slack, and above all take the p**s out of it as much as possible.
That's all you can possibly do, against corporate attitudes and blame
culture these days.


* (or equivalent)

 

[Bob Grommes]

Why did you give them both URLs? http://weblogs.asp.net is not a Microsoft
site, and the fact that it was they who directed you to the actual document
*on* a Microsoft site is irrelevant.

Of course if MSFT had anyone but an automaton reading your message they
would have filtered this out, but the truth is, when communicating with a
bored peon in a gigantic company you have to be as to-the-point and specific
as possible, otherwise they will latch onto the first thing that gives them
an excuse to blow you off. That's because it's faster and easier to blow
you off than to actually address the problem. ("Look! I had the most
resolved issues today! I get the employee-of-the-day award!")

--Bob

 

[Sriram Krishnan]

Did you try following up? Give them the link to this newsgroup post on
Google groups

 

[Sam Sungshik Kong]

Well. I'm just a small man. I don't want to fight a big dinosaur...

Sam

 

[Sam Sungshik Kong]

I wish you had advised me before I contacted MS...
I didn't know MS customer service would be that stupid.
I wanted to give them info as accurate as possible so that they can handle
the problem easily.
Maybe I was so naive...

Sam