But I'm not sure if RyanE is actually interested in a solution other than total surrender on my part. It may not be intended like that, and my hand remains outstretched for further negotiations despite a somewhat difficult atmosphere at this point.
I may be looking like a pedantic ass, but if there is one thing where I react very badly, it's blackmail and extortion. When I gave the technical explanation how the blacklisting worked, this thread was opened already to drag the case into the public.
#STEEL BEASTS PRO PE CRACK GAMES LICENSE#
Rather, I was accused of stealing his license (just in case that the suitcase would show up, after all- apparently there still is a chance for that) which is rich - after all, I blacklisted the stick on his direct request, as fast as I could. When I complied with the demand to blacklist the CM stick I wasn't even given the time to explain that it wouldn't work immediately. I tried to offer an alternative view point to look at the situation to find a creative way out, but it was roundly rejected. The way it appears to me is that we are being singled out as the most vulnerable party, and that the essence of the negotiation tactic is extortion: The unreasonable policy of his employer to cover only a part of the loss that occurred during a company-mandated travel. Our guideline is whether a claim can be verified.Īlso, I find it somewhat unfair that eSim Games is blamed for mistakes that others made - the airline, which lost the suitcase to begin with, and offers a mere pittance for compensation. Maybe I am pedantic in my attempt to eliminate personal bias and the quality of the story being told. The point I was trying to make is that we set up a policy where it shouldn't matter whether I (or anyone else who might be working on customer support) believe a claim to be true.
0 kommentar(er)
