Customer Service and Moderation (but not CFC moderation)

[BvBPL]

This is a post in part about forum moderation, but not CFC forum moderation. Instead it is about the forums at a completely different site, and it isn't even all about forum moderation as much as it is about business / customer relations.

I realize that a post about forum moderation may run close to the line as to CFC's forum rules. If the mods have a concern about the post then I encourage them to reach out to me so that we can rework the premise of this thread in a manner that is acceptable.

In any case, I would strongly encourage all parties who comment here not to stretch this into a discussion about CFC forum moderation.

So in the early summer of 2013 I backed a Kickstarter project with an estimated delivery date of Sept, 2013. At this writing, I have received no fulfillment of the primary thing I paid for (I have received fulfillment of an ancillary thing) nor have other backers. As you can understand, many of the fans are deeply frustrated at the delay. The creators have slowly fed the fans who Kickstarted this project occasional updates. The fans have an active community at the creators' forum, other forums and such, and in other places.

The creators' forum is one of the key places where the creators interact with the consumers of this product. Lately the creators who control the forum have taken a much harder line as to people complaining about the tardiness of the project. They have stated that only "constructive" criticism will be acceptable from here on out and that "destructive" criticism will face heavy review by moderators.

The application of this rule appears to be that any criticism of the delay that is not "constructive" is automatically "destructive" and therefore forbidden. People have been banned because they raised concerns in a confrontational but civil manner.

This strikes me as a very poor way to handle customer relations. Banning or otherwise censuring people who complain about a delay of a product they backed condemns the advocates who backed the project and supported it from the beginning. It turns the passion and drive people have about a product into a reason for people to stop caring.

And frankly, if you are a company selling a product to the public then it is part of your job to take criticism and respond to consumer complaints.

I'm uncertain what course of action I may take going forward. I might ask for a refund, but I'm told that when the issue was raised in the past the company said all the money was tied up (which seems unlikely). If I don't get a refund then I am left with either rolling over and taking it from the company, a passive acquiescence to their poor treatment, or taking a more severe response like suing them. Which isn't really something I want to do because I love the game and the company, but I'm getting real sick of being dicked over.

Has anyone else had the experience of being manhandled by a company you believe in or having the company try to shut out public opinion? What did you do? What do you think would be appropriate?

If nothing else, this should demonstrate to you that customer relations are important. This particular company has no customer relations staff and it shows.

 

[Cutlass]

From what you are describing, I would tend to think that you are in the right here, and they are in the wrong. I have a fair amount of experience in the customer service field. I'm not sure exactly where a kickstarter falls in terms of a legal contract, but it seems most like a business investment, IPO, or loan. In which case, your ability to get the money back would be determined by the terms of the contract. You're the law student, so you should know the way to pursue how to do that. If you can show fraud, or negligence on their part, you may get somewhere. If you can contact the other investors, you may have a class action issue.

As to the customer service end, it's not really a customer service end. It's investor relations. And it's sucking crap investor relations, and sucking crap customer relations into the bargain. People cared about their product enough to advance them money, and they treat these people like that? I'd be strongly tempted to raise holy hell. But, before you do, get outside contact information for as many of the other people who are also upset about what is going on as you can. So that you can stay in contact by email if you get booted from the forum.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

So in the early summer of 2013 I backed a Kickstarter project with an estimated delivery date of Sept, 2013. At this writing, I have received no fulfillment of the primary thing I paid for (I have received fulfillment of an ancillary thing) nor have other backers. As you can understand, many of the fans are deeply frustrated at the delay. The creators have slowly fed the fans who Kickstarted this project occasional updates. The fans have an active community at the creators' forum, other forums and such, and in other places.

The creators' forum is one of the key places where the creators interact with the consumers of this product. Lately the creators who control the forum have taken a much harder line as to people complaining about the tardiness of the project. They have stated that only "constructive" criticism will be acceptable from here on out and that "destructive" criticism will face heavy review by moderators.

The application of this rule appears to be that any criticism of the delay that is not "constructive" is automatically "destructive" and therefore forbidden. People have been banned because they raised concerns in a confrontational but civil manner.

This strikes me as a very poor way to handle customer relations. Banning or otherwise censuring people who complain about a delay of a product they backed condemns the advocates who backed the project and supported it from the beginning. It turns the passion and drive people have about a product into a reason for people to stop caring.

And frankly, if you are a company selling a product to the public then it is part of your job to take criticism and respond to consumer complaints.

I'm uncertain what course of action I may take going forward. I might ask for a refund, but I'm told that when the issue was raised in the past the company said all the money was tied up (which seems unlikely). If I don't get a refund then I am left with either rolling over and taking it from the company, a passive acquiescence to their poor treatment, or taking a more severe response like suing them. Which isn't really something I want to do because I love the game and the company, but I'm getting real sick of being dicked over.

Has anyone else had the experience of being manhandled by a company you believe in or having the company try to shut out public opinion? What did you do? What do you think would be appropriate?

If nothing else, this should demonstrate to you that customer relations are important. This particular company has no customer relations staff and it shows.

Doesn't Kickstarter itself have rules that the people/organizations that ask for money have to follow - like regular updates and being honest about delays in providing the goods/services promised to their backers? I've never participated in anything like this, so I have no idea how it's supposed to work.


As to forum management and money/goods/customer service issues... hoo, boy.

Years ago I belonged to a Doctor Who forum that was heavily focused on Tom Baker. The owner of this site offered Doctor Who merchandise, and things went well for awhile, until suddenly they didn't. Orders started arriving late, or sometimes never, and sometimes items arrived broken, and sometimes they were discovered to be fake. People were polite at first, since nobody wanted to believe that the guy running this site was a crook or a fraud, and he provided a free forum for all of us to hang out on and talk about Doctor Who.

But finally some people had had enough. Polite questions got no results. Firm questions got no results. Firm statements got no results. A few people did end up banned from the forum. A lovely lady who I will refer to as "PA" was one of those who was cheated out of a lot of expensive stuff - her collection of Tom Baker memorabilia is impressive, even without the items she paid for and never received (or received literally in pieces).

PA realized that without going to court she would never be able to get anywhere, so she was forced to accept that she was permanently out of luck. And what happened next was this: She and several dozen other people walked off that forum and created another one. PA invited me to be one of those several dozen who left (I hadn't lost money to the fraudster who ran that site, but I was someone who spoke up for those unfairly banned for voicing legitimate complaints), and I accepted.

So a new Tom Baker forum was born. That was 9 years ago, and I am now PA's co-admin. One of the first things that happened in the first month was that the owner of the old forum found out what we'd done, and charged in with a lot of ranting, calling us a bunch of ingrates, how DARE we leave and make a forum to compete with him! A few people told him off, PA (who is extremely gracious in the face of rudeness) would have allowed him to stay and discuss Doctor Who, but he was given the ultimatum of staying and behaving, or leaving. He left, and a few months later we heard that his forum had folded and his site was gone. Looks like a whole lot more people voted with both their wallets and feet. I have no idea if he ever had to answer for what he did to people - taking their money and either not providing the items they ordered, not making good on damaged items, or using fakes instead of genuine items.


So... my suggestion is this: If you enjoy the forum activities and have enough people who would be willing to support a breakaway forum, go ahead and create one (or agree to keep in touch at other related sites). There are lots of free hosts where you can do this. At the very least it would be a way for people to keep in touch if they get banned from the official site. It's not disloyal or illegal or unethical. Just be mindful of any copyright issues concerning images and keep your new site commercial-activity free, and there should be no problems.

As for what to do about Kickstarter... sorry, but that's outside my experience. The only time I've ever been the least bit tempted was to do with the Star Trek fan films. But since my cats need to eat more than I need some piece of Star Trek memorabilia, I decided not to go for it.

Best of luck, whatever you opt for.

 

[BvBPL]

As to the customer service end, it's not really a customer service end. It's investor relations. And it's sucking crap investor relations, and sucking crap customer relations into the bargain. People cared about their product enough to advance them money, and they treat these people like that? I'd be strongly tempted to raise holy hell. But, before you do, get outside contact information for as many of the other people who are also upset about what is going on as you can. So that you can stay in contact by email if you get booted from the forum.

My opinion is that the relationship is one of a consumer to a producer, rather than being an investor. If I were to profit from the project then I would see my rights as being more in line with an investor's.

In either case, the relationship aspect is, I think, the critical fall down here. The company in question has no consumer / investor relation employees. Consequently, critical aspects of the relationship, like expectation setting and regular communication, have fallen down.

One of the critical aspects of customer service is setting expectations. If a customer expects the moon and the stars then she will be disappointed when the company merely delivers what they said they would. It is the role of the customer relation staff to help manage what the customer expects from the company. With no such relation staff here, the customer is left expecting whatever she believed the initial promise would be.

Communication is another aspect of where they fell down, and another role that a consumer relations staff would handle. The Kickstarter PROMISED weekly updates. I underscore that promise because it was one of the things that enticed people to give the company money. That promise was not fulfilled. Almost immediately the updates went down to twice a month or once a month.

Those two goals could have easily been merged into one task. Just have someone send out weekly updates that help to set expectations that the design team is going back to rework thus and such a system to make it better for the consumer, we now expect delivery to be pushed out to thus and such a date (or even say "we don't know when delivery will be"), by the way, here's some concept art / snippet of material for you to drool over. Not only would that have helped to both manage expectations and communicate with backers, but it also would have given the fans added value by throwing in some little tidbits of excitement. It would have kept the fans on the same page and excited about the project.

Doesn't Kickstarter itself have rules that the people/organizations that ask for money have to follow - like regular updates and being honest about delays in providing the goods/services promised to their backers? I've never participated in anything like this, so I have no idea how it's supposed to work.

I'm uncertain what the standard is for Kickstarter as this is the only time I've kickstarted something. I do think that if a project fails completely, the creator needs to refund backers to the best of his ability and explain to backers where the money that was spent went. However, this company promised updates on their own.

The ability of a backer to obtain recourse is somewhat limited. Kickstarter doesn't want anything to do with a failed project so they wipe their hands of it. Instead, the aggrieved backer is limited to the generosity of the creator to give back a refund. Here the company has stated that refunds are off the table because the money is tied up (which seems unlikely, that seeming could be another thing that better communication would address). Which means I'm left with suing the company or taking other extreme action.

I have very mixed feelings about that prospect. On the one hand, it hardly seems to be worth it to sue over $130 or to sue a small company whose products I have enjoyed for years and hope to enjoy in the future. On the other, I feel really dicked over by these guys, and I know I am not alone.

 

[dutchfire]

My opinion is that the relationship is one of a consumer to a producer, rather than being an investor. If I were to profit from the project then I would see my rights as being more in line with an investor's.

That's not really how one should see Kickstarter (and not what you get if you read the fine print, I suppose), there's always risk involved with Kickstarters.

 

[BvBPL]

I am a customer buying something via kick starter. That's the only reasonable way to look at it.

Edit: actually I can see why ppl might have a differing opinion. When I am not typing in a phone I will provide more info on why my customer theory is more applicable in this case than it might be in other ones.

 

[Loppan Torkel]

If you suspect fraud - be as much of a dick about it as you can or want. If you don't suspect fraud, but more of a failed project, I'd view the money spent as charity to keep them in business. Not much to do about it. No use getting riled up unless the relations have soured totally. I guess that could be on both parties though. I wouldn't fund a kickstarter with money I couldn't do without...

 

[dutchfire]

The promoted comments at the bottom of this article sketch the situation rather well IMO: http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2015/02/on-kickstarter-everyone-is-peter-molyneux/

Essentially, all marketing suggests you are a customer, many people believe they are a customer, but the legal details try to stay away from that point of view as far as possible.

 

[BvBPL]

That's not really how one should see Kickstarter (and not what you get if you read the fine print, I suppose), there's always risk involved with Kickstarters.

Okay, yes I understand that there are risks involved in kickstarting a project. However, those risks are tempered by how trustworthy the creators are. Here the company regularly uses kickstarter as a means to raise money for its new projects. They have had at least fifteen kickstarters at this point. Last fall I compared how many of these projects were fulfilled in a timely manner versus how many were delayed in fulfillment. About three quarters of them were fulfilled in a timely manner or within a few months of the anticipated fulfillment. A few, earlier ones, had longer delays; obviously the creators have learned from their past items in a manner than enables more timely fulfillment. Only one, other than the one I backed, had a prolonged fulfillment delay that stretched out past a year. That related to a unique issue about die-cut printing and/or international shipping, an incident that was unique and from which the creators learned how to avoid in the future.

Most of these kickstarter projects were things that were largely complete when the kickstarter launched meaning that the kickstarter did not fund the creation of something (paying the creative personal) but funding actual orders for products. Presumably, if not explicitly, the case was similar here. The project is for a different line from most of the creators' projects, but it is still in the same general vein as the past products. In fact, this product is for a new edition of an existing product. So it is not as though the creators were starting from zero.

In fact, the creators sold their backers on their expertise. The risk section stated in part:

"Risk: The books will take a long time to produce and anger the backers.
Solution: We've learned many lessons with our previous Kickstarters and we're becoming much better at estimating the various pitfalls that will delay a KS project. That being said, backers need to be aware that they are enabling a process, and not a pre-order opportunity, and things do sometimes run slower than we want or anticipate with that process. We've found that an open flow of communication between us and the backer community is vital so once the project funds we will deliver Updates on progress at least once a week via Kickstarter as well as our website...."

So they knew that delays were a problem in the past, they said they learned from that, and their recent kickstarter history demonstrated that they had learned from the past. They use Kickstarter as a key means to sell their products; they aren't a bunch of film students looking for people to fund their first movie. They are experienced at this, and they get a lot of money from people using the Kickstarter to sell their works model. So I feel like backing this project had low risk.

What's more, they recognized that communication had been a problem in the past and they committed to communicating with their backers with greater frequency. But, of course, they didn't. They backed right out of that commitment.

The company's regular use of kickstarter makes my interaction with them much more like a producer-consumer interaction than many other kickstarter interactions.

As to the question of my rights, I am certain that I have rights as a customer. Yes, those rights are more difficult to enforce in a Kickstarter model, but that doesn't mean I don't have any rights nor that those are consumer rights. Nothing in the Kickstarter arrangement bars me from enforcing my rights against them for what I consider to be breaches of the agreement that I made with them via Kickstarter.

 

[Perfection]

How much money did you lose in this venture?

 

[classical_hero]

Repeat after me. You are not a customer. The fact that you think you are means you don't understand the model properly and are not using your money wisely.

 

[BvBPL]

Some $130 or so.

 

[warpus]

Has anyone else had the experience of being manhandled by a company you believe in or having the company try to shut out public opinion? What did you do? What do you think would be appropriate?

I stopped doing business with them and have instructed others to do the same. There isn't really much more you can do, usually.. and when there is, I've got better things to do than going after companies, who have access to resources that I just do not..

In this case I guess you can't get your money back. But you've hopefully learned a lesson - to never give them money again.

 

[Mise]

BvBPL, I don't want to kick you when you're down, so I'll accept your premise that you are a customer of that company, and comment solely on how a company should treat its customers, particularly online.

If a company has taken money in exchange for a product for delivery on a set day, and that product hasn't been delivered, then clearly you are entitled to a refund. If that company can't fulfil that refund, because it doesn't have enough cash, then it is insolvent, and should be put into administration. However, IIRC, consumers are fairly low down the priority list when a company goes bankrupt. So you'll be waiting a while either way.

As for moderation online, what they're doing is totally dumb, but frankly a lot of companies are totally dumb, especially online. To me, customer service is about customer retention: it's about ensuring that you generate enough good will for that customer to be happy doing business with you in the future. Repeat business is the best kind of business, and so most businesses take customer service very seriously. But what if the business doesn't care about your custom? What if that business has so many customers that it can't even satisfy demand for its present customers, let alone its future ones? Well, they don't really need to care about customer service. Look at Google: it basically has no customer service, and trying to contact them for any sort of help is an exercise in futility. Why? Because they have plenty of customers, and the cost of servicing everyone personally is greater than the value of that customer to Google, multiplied by the probability of them leaving if they are dissatisfied with Google's customer service.

And it's the same thing with your Kickstarter guys. Clearly they can't fulfil the orders they already have, so (a) why would they care about your future custom, and (b) why would they care about your present custom? Besides, they already have your money.

On the basis of what you've written, I wouldn't buy anything from their Kickstarters in the future. That's the best you can do now.

 

[filli_noctus]

As a fellow customer of this company I am going to do what I did the last time and point out that the Ex3 fiasco is hardly representative of the company and the way you are portraying them is pretty unfair.

It was their fifth KS and only the second major one, the first of which still hadn't shipped by the time it was funded. It was funded more than anyone could have expected (1,141% of what was originally pitched) and with stretch goals out the wazoo. Yes, they severely underestimated how long it was going to take - but that's pretty common for KS projects and since then they've been pretty good. I've backed five of their projects and of the four that have been delivered so far only one I've been unhappy about and that was their first venture into KS.

As for their moderation, it's far far lighter than CFC moderation. The subforum in question has a reputation for spewing bile and as yesterday's blog shows they are getting some pretty nasty abuse from certain members of that community and when they ask people to tone it down they have been essentially told that they deserve it because of the delay.

Personally I find their customer relations pretty incredible given that they only have three full time staff and two of them were only hired in the past six months or so.