MACS wrote:I understand your rationale. It's a business, and their I-T department should be better than this since it's an online retailer and I-T is a YUGE part of what they do... But mistakes happen.
I can imagine that CBid customer service has been 'avalanched' with phone, e-mail, and PM's since this happened. The 'customers' can help the situation resolve a lot faster by showing just a modicum of patience. It WILL get fixed. It ALWAYS does. We all know the CS is outstanding 98.2% of the time. When they get swamped... they're just not going to be able to respond to everyone that quickly.
Well, it's not just the "one" thing Macs.......it's the series of miscues that I think makes it inexcusable.
1) Hardware is CHEAP nowadays. And, as noted by another IT type BOTL here on another thread, this should have been rolled out and TESTED on a back-up server.....not "THE" backup server, but rather, one intended for this purpose.
If cbid doesn't own their own, and actually use a service (which is likely the case I'm guessing) - they STILL could have tested it thoroughly beforehand, as would ANY modern web enterprise, either in-house, or on a leased server. If cbid owns their own web servers? Well, then there's even less of an excuse for this "mistakes happen" explanation.
2) No contingency in the event of failure.
OK.....you rolled out your "new" site......and you crapped in the punchbowl.....there's big problems.
At this point, you simply roll back to the "old" site, and work on "fixing" your "maintenance" update, or whatever this was.
That's web maintenance 101!
Furthermore, to me, it appears as though no assessment of just how fuqed up things were was done in a TIMELY manner. Had this assessment been performed, MAYBE cbid would have thought better of continuing to accept bids, knowing that things were a mess in IT.
Now the chit hits the fan and Customer Service takes the brunt of the blowback. Unfair to La Princessa and all the fine young ladies in CS, to say the least.