We are sorry that we gave you this perception. Our Spam filter is self-learning and the algorithm responds to user markings. If we have your account information or the headers of the sample mail, we will be able to look into it and identify what went wrong. We request you to write to support (at) zohomail (dot) com with those details and description about the other issues you faced. We will definitely address it for you.
Downvoted for:
(a) Sounding like a canned response
(b) "We are sorry that we gave you this perception" passive aggressive gaslighting and abdication of any responsibility to the user. Really, I've barely ever heard of zoho and had no opinion of them _until_ this response. Now zoho's on my fuck-them list for talking this way to a customer.
Responding to "your spam detection is not working" with what is essentially spam has to be one of the most unintentionally funny things I've read on HN.
Hello! This was definitely not a canned response, but we can understand why it was seen that way. Tone is a really tricky thing through text, and we didn't mean to sound like a robot. We hope you won't mind if we try again:
We are very sorry that the spam filter is giving you such trouble. It has self-learning capabilities, but algorithms are not always perfect. If you could send us your account details and the headers for some of the emails, we will look into this right away. Please send us an email at support (at) zohomail (dot) com when you have a few minutes and we will dig into the details.
I appreciate y'all trying again. Here's some constructive feedback:
(1) Look at other responses from people directly responding to issues from customers here at HN. Look at how specific, authentic, and action-oriented those responses are. Then look at yours again.
(2) Notice how they don't use the royal "We." It's 2020, we're all working from home with small spots of clean behind us for zoom, the royal We has to die. Unless the speaker is actually a committee or Borg, please use I.
(3) "not always perfect" is garbage. It failed the user at its basic job. Say so. Any apology without admission isn't an apology. Actually, kill the entire sentence. Nobody cares about the capabilities of a system that doesn't work right.
(4) They've already said that they tried you and you failed. Explicitly ask for a chance to make it right. Why would they bother working with you again, if you don't even ask them? They'd be doing you a favor. Ask for the favor.
(5) Nit: The last two sentences redundantly ask for the customer to contact you. Combine into a single request for an email with (btw, you don't have to explicitly "send us an email" when you're giving them an email address to contact -- it's a side-ways way of talking down to the customer's intelligence) account "details" (Which details? The account name? Credentials? What?) and headers.
Hey, thanks for taking the time to offer such constructive feedback. It's really hard not to sound like an automaton at times, and I am grateful for your help.
As for the royal we...I think you are right. In 2020, with the world the way it is now, I think everyone can use more personalization and less of the anonymity provided by we. I take your point, and will do my best to implement it.
Again, thanks for your time, and for your passion. Have a great one!
