# I'm not a bitch because you aren't listening. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 24, 2009, 5:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-not-a-bitch-because-you-arent-listening/504089 "2009-07-24T05:39:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 7
**Author:** ![Xploder](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/x/a183cd/32.png) [@Xploder](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Xploder)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-not-a-bitch-because-you-arent-listening/504089/121 "2009-07-26T01:52:00Z")
So, did [this](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=11372821&postcount=17) question ever get answered? ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Ashtar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ea924/32.png) [@Lord\_Ashtar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Ashtar)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 2:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-not-a-bitch-because-you-arent-listening/504089/122 "2009-07-26T02:24:13Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > Yes. A pattern of behavior on a message board. In which you willingly offer up stories about your life. ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-not-a-bitch-because-you-arent-listening/504089/123 "2009-07-26T03:06:04Z")
> [@Lord\_Ashtar](#): > > In which you willingly offer up stories about your life. You’re now offering up MY stories of MY life as your evidence for who I _actually_ am and how I _actually_ behave? That’s excellent news! It does get tiresome to have people invent a character and call her Stoid. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 3:06am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-not-a-bitch-because-you-arent-listening/504089/124 "2009-07-26T03:06:10Z")
> [@IvoryTowerDenizen](#): > > My guess is that the reason for the black and white policy is to make it easy on enforcement. Otherwise it becomes a value judgment- > > How busy is too busy? What if three computers were free, one, ten? > > What if some just started their third hour and bunch of people come in and have to wait- do kick the original person off now, or they get to finish their third hour? > > So, having a black and white policy eliminates debates with people when you decide to give a person a third hour one day and a not on another. This is correct. We had a policy of no food or drink in the store. Not because we thought everybody as going to spill something, but because we knew that was the realistic way to prevent the occasional inevitable spill. we don’t take paper checks because the risk is higher and the few times we get burned is too much to absorb. It’s much easier to have a blanket than try to make judgment calls for every person. In retail at least the ultimate guide is the bottom line so no rule is written in stone. In a library which is a free service? Consistency is probably more important. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-not-a-bitch-because-you-arent-listening/504089/125 "2009-07-26T03:25:36Z")
> [@Fenris](#): > > Really, when a customer asks “Why” to a policy, what they’re really saying is “I want to find a loophole.” and frankly, back when I was in customer service, I didn’t want to get caught up in a half-hour debate with a me-monkey over an issue I couldn’t change even _if_ I wanted to (and often, I didn’t want to) when I could be helping real customers. Yup, almost every customer who needs policies to be overlooked thinks their reason should justifiably be the exception to the rule. Look, when you do some kind of business with someone, a store of some other facility that offers a service, they have a right to set policies and are under absolutely no obligation to justify or explain them. {providing they don’t violate any law} You can decide whether those policies are worth their services. You _can_ ask why do they have that policy but they have no obligation to explain unless it matters to them whether you use thier services or not. {Like retail something for profit} It’s like coming to my house and you’re a welcome guest but I tell you, no smoking. Why? Because it’s my house and my rules? I know that but why no smoking? I don’t owe anyone a detailed explanation. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 3:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-not-a-bitch-because-you-arent-listening/504089/126 "2009-07-26T03:54:43Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > Of course. I wanted to understand the policy, and once he’s told he’s incapable of assisting with that, what would be the point in continuing? I dropped it relatively quickly anyway, when his robotic repetitions of the policy operated as a substitution for the words “I don’t know”. That’s exactly my complaint. “I don’t know” would have been simpler, faster, more straightfoward, and far less irritating. It would have taken one question and one answer to get to the same place. So you say, and that may be true for you. The librarian had no way of knowing that. The message was clear enough as you now admit. What’s been explained to you is that the repetition of policy is a good choice when you don’t know how the person will react. The proper question for you rather than to ask several times of two librarians would be go directly to, "Who’s in charge that I can talk to about this policy? Wen can I contact them? So, ultimately, aren’t you as guilty of wasting time and words as they are? ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 6:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-not-a-bitch-because-you-arent-listening/504089/127 "2009-07-26T06:16:39Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > So you say, and that may be true for you. The librarian had no way of knowing that. The message was clear enough as you now admit. No, I don’t admit it was “clear”. I “admit” that several repetitions was sufficiently irritating that it was probable that he didn’t know. > [@](#): > > What’s been explained to you is that the repetition of policy is a good choice when you don’t know how the person will react. No one has explained how irritating repetition is _less likely to piss people off_, and since the issue that most people in this thread have is pissed off people…I’m still pretty unclear about why robotic repetitions and reconfigurations of the same information is a “good” choice for _dealing_ with potentially angry people, versus _creating_ angry people. Please refer to Fenris’ clear description of how repetitive non-answers will cause the customer’s head to explode. I suppose if that’s the agreed-upon goal among those who promote the practice as a better practice than direct and clear and specific communication, then I readily agree that repetitive non-answers is an ideal choice. > [@](#): > > The proper question for you rather than to ask several times of two librarians would be go directly to, "Who’s in charge that I can talk to about this policy? Wen can I contact them? So, ultimately, aren’t you as guilty of wasting time and words as they are? No. As I’ve explained, I don’t think that people restating what they’ve just said when I ask a question calling for a different kind of answer clearly communicates anything, and I assume nothing except that perhaps they didn’t hear or understand my question. I generally give it three tries before moving on, and I moved on to exactly what you suggest. ---
**Author:** ![Martini\_Enfield](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/martini_enfield/32/11123_2.png) [@Martini\_Enfield](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Martini_Enfield)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 6:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-not-a-bitch-because-you-arent-listening/504089/128 "2009-07-26T06:40:40Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > No one has explained how irritating repetition is _less likely to piss people off_, and since the issue that most people in this thread have is pissed off people…I’m still pretty unclear about why robotic repetitions and reconfigurations of the same information is a “good” choice for _dealing_ with potentially angry people, versus _creating_ angry people. Please refer to Fenris’ clear description of how repetitive non-answers will cause the customer’s head to explode. I suppose if that’s the agreed-upon goal among those who promote the practice as a better practice than direct and clear and specific communication, then I readily agree that repetitive non-answers is an ideal choice. As has been mentioned, the problem is that _most_ people will not accept _any_ answer except “I’m so abjectly sorry for the mistake, Your Majesty; you, naturally, are exempted from any and all policies that you disagree with or run contrary to your desires, wishes, or best interests. Please, forgive me; I am unworthy to be in your sight.” You may be one of the few people for whom this is _not_ the case, but having worked in customer service for over a decade (both as staff and management), I can assure you that when someone is arguing with staff over the implementation of a policy, they’re not interested in _why_ it’s in place, they want to know _how_ it can be circumvented or otherwise made not to apply to them. And since, in a typical retail store (or possibly even a library), there is no-one there who _can_ over-ride the policy, then the staff are in a catch-22 and in those circumstances, defaulting to simply repeating “Share & Enjoy” on an endless loop until the customer goes away really is about the only way of dealing with the situation. Since the customer is already angry, nothing the staff member can say or do will placate the customer, and since the customer will invariably complain to head office anyway, the safest course of action for the staff member is to just repeat the policy so they can’t get in trouble for giving out incorrect information, arguing with the customer, or any one of a number of other trivial things that could potentially cost them their job. Honestly, if you come across a policy you disagree with, the best course of action is to simply tell the staff that you disagree with it, stress that _you’re not angry or annoyed at them personally_, and ask for the contact details for Head Office so that you can lodge a complaint _about the policy_. Chances are, the staff think the policy is bullshit too, but if you start getting mad at them, they’re not going to help you at all, out of fear you’re going to complain about them as well- and in this economy, nobody wants the threat of Angry Customers Complaining About Them hanging over their head, especially not over an issue they can’t resolve at store level. And if you think that Head Office doesn’t create catch-22s where the staff can’t win (Help the customer= Written up for breaking policy, Don’t help the customer= Written up for pissing off customer), then I suggest you go and get a job in retail (with a major retailer) and see for yourself what it’s like. Believe me, it’s not fun. ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Ashtar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ea924/32.png) [@Lord\_Ashtar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Ashtar)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 12:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-not-a-bitch-because-you-arent-listening/504089/129 "2009-07-26T12:22:33Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > You’re now offering up MY stories of MY life as your evidence for who I _actually_ am and how I _actually_ behave? > > That’s excellent news! It does get tiresome to have people invent a character and call her Stoid. Most of the time when people have the same thing happen to them more than once, they begin to question why it keeps happening to them. It makes sense to recognize that they are the common denominator in these situations and that they will have to adjust what they are doing if they want a different result. Obviously, your situations are **totally** different. ---
**Author:** ![Fenris](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fenris/32/498_2.png) [@Fenris](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fenris)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-not-a-bitch-because-you-arent-listening/504089/130 "2009-07-26T13:17:32Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > No, I don’t admit it was “clear”. I “admit” that several repetitions was sufficientlPlease refer to Fenris’ clear description of how repetitive non-answers will cause the customer’s head to explode. I suppose if that’s the agreed-upon goal among those who promote the practice as a better practice than direct and clear and specific communication, then I readily agree that repetitive non-answers is an ideal choice. You’re missing the point of my drama. The customer’s head will explode _either way_. I accept that you feel you’re the single customer in the entire world who, when they ask “But…why…?” is only looking for the pure shining light of clear reason. But with every other customer (20,000+ over about 8 years of phone support) EVERY SINGLE TIME WITHOUT EXCEPTION that the customer asked “Why” it was to create a wedge point for some kind of argument/negotiation/debate. 100%. Not one single exception ever. I have never, ever had a customer who, when told why say “Oh. Ok. Thank you.” and end it. Note that I regularly received bonuses for great customer service, I was (when I was doing it before I started managing) regularly sent boxes of cookies/thank you letters/in one case a $50.00 gift card. The point of repetition is that the customer’s head is going to explode _either way_. With repetition, you make their head explode sooner and get them the hell out of your way so you can help the real customers. Again, I understand you say you’re that one single customer who, if told “Because that’s policy” would say “Oh gosh! I didn’t know that. Thank you for your response” and go merrily away. But you have to make allowances for the fact that you are unique in all the world in that way. ---
**Author:** ![cosmosdan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/a6a055/32.png) [@cosmosdan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/cosmosdan)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 1:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-not-a-bitch-because-you-arent-listening/504089/131 "2009-07-26T13:50:03Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > No, I don’t admit it was “clear”. I “admit” that several repetitions was sufficiently irritating that it was probable that he didn’t know. Point taken, but experience might have told you that from the get go. Like you I appreciate direct honest communication and accurate choice of words. After years in retail I’ve learned that lots of people don’t or can’t. The result is you learn which responses shorten the discussion. As I said, I assume that those on the front lines don’t set policy or know why a particular policy is in place. I also know from experience that most of our policies have good reasons behind them that an inconvenienced customer won’t appreciate. > [@](#): > > No one has explained how irritating repetition is _less likely to piss people off_, and since the issue that most people in this thread have is pissed off people…I’m still pretty unclear about why robotic repetitions and reconfigurations of the same information is a “good” choice for _dealing_ with potentially angry people, versus _creating_ angry people. Please refer to Fenris’ clear description of how repetitive non-answers will cause the customer’s head to explode. I suppose if that’s the agreed-upon goal among those who promote the practice as a better practice than direct and clear and specific communication, then I readily agree that repetitive non-answers is an ideal choice. It isn’t a matter of it being less likely to piss people off. When people ask why about a certain policy there a pretty good chance the policy has already had some negative result for them, wouldn’t you say? The goal is to not enter into a long pointless discussion about the policy. That said, when I was in sales and had to hold the policy I would tell people “You’re really wasting your time with me. I’m telling you what the company allows me to do.” I instruct my staff not to enter into discussions about policy and direct customers who won’t accept it to me. > [@](#): > > No. As I’ve explained, I don’t think that people restating what they’ve just said when I ask a question calling for a different kind of answer clearly communicates anything, and I assume nothing except that perhaps they didn’t hear or understand my question. I generally give it three tries before moving on, and I moved on to exactly what you suggest. Perhaps they can reconsider the policy and make a change. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tao_s_Revenge)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 2:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-not-a-bitch-because-you-arent-listening/504089/132 "2009-07-26T14:10:45Z")
> [@cosmosdan](#): > > Look, when you do some kind of business with someone, a store of some other facility that offers a service, they have a right to set policies and are under absolutely no obligation to justify or explain them. {providing they don’t violate any law} You can decide whether those policies are worth their services. You _can_ ask why do they have that policy but they have no obligation to explain unless it matters to them whether you use thier services or not. {Like retail something for profit} If someone can find a “loophole” AKA a way to accomplish what they want in compliance with the policy what’s so fucking bad about that? > [@](#): > > It’s like coming to my house and you’re a welcome guest but I tell you, no smoking. Bad analogy. How often to be people to conduct business critical to their interests at your house? Are you saying your house is the same thing as public library, government building, or store? ---
**Author:** ![Gustav](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/919ad9/32.png) [@Gustav](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gustav)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-not-a-bitch-because-you-arent-listening/504089/133 "2009-07-26T14:23:18Z")
> [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](#): > > If someone can find a “loophole” AKA a way to accomplish what they want in compliance with the policy what’s so fucking bad about that? Because there probably isn’t a loophole, and if you do find one all that means is now we have to rewrite the damn policy to remove the loophole. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tao_s_Revenge)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 2:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-not-a-bitch-because-you-arent-listening/504089/134 "2009-07-26T14:31:28Z")
> [@Gustav](#): > > Because there probably isn’t a loophole, and if you do find one all that means is now we have to rewrite the damn policy to remove the loophole. Ah I see then, in the interaction between you and a customer, patron, or whatever, if it isn’t all about what’s best for you then the customer is a jerk who should shut up. Doesn’t this attitude strike you as a bit self centered? ---
**Author:** ![MandaJo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ac91a4/32.png) [@MandaJo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MandaJo)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-not-a-bitch-because-you-arent-listening/504089/135 "2009-07-26T14:36:47Z")
> [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](#): > > If someone can find a “loophole” AKA a way to accomplish what they want in compliance with the policy what’s so fucking bad about that? Because one man’s loophole is another man’s exception: “No one’s using the computers and I promise to leave if they get busy” and such. ---
**Author:** ![Gustav](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/919ad9/32.png) [@Gustav](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gustav)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 2:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-not-a-bitch-because-you-arent-listening/504089/136 "2009-07-26T14:38:38Z")
> [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](#): > > Ah I see then, in the interaction between you and a customer, patron, or whatever, if it isn’t all about what’s best for you then the customer is a jerk who should shut up. Doesn’t this attitude strike you as a bit self centered? No, the policy is in place because someone, somewhere wants it to be. There’s probably a good reason. All a loophole is is a way to use the wording of the policy to circumvent the intention. If management has set a 2 hour limit policy and someone wants to find a loophole to allow himself 4 hours, I’m not gonna help him find it. Not only is that not my job, I’d probably get in trouble. ---
**Author:** ![TokyoBayer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tokyobayer/32/13989_2.png) [@TokyoBayer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TokyoBayer)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 2:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-not-a-bitch-because-you-arent-listening/504089/137 "2009-07-26T14:45:24Z")
> [@Stoid](#): > > No. As I’ve explained, I don’t think that people restating what they’ve just said when I ask a question calling for a different kind of answer clearly communicates anything, and I assume nothing except that perhaps they didn’t hear or understand my question. I generally give it three tries before moving on, and I moved on to exactly what you suggest. My sister was laid off years ago. Sales were bad and there were rumors going around about a week before it happened. One morning, she got a call to report to Conference Room XXX and she knew it wasn’t going to be for a promotion. There were two HR people who read a prepared statement saying her services were no longer required. She asked why and they reread the prepared statement. As she told me later, she knew that asking again wasn’t going to help. And this had only happened to her once, not the regular occurrence our OP finds. In general, more people than not make the connection and few make the assumption that the person didn’t hear or didn’t understand the repeated question. Especially after the question is posed more than twice and gets the same response and especially after this has happened with more than one situation, let along many times. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tao_s_Revenge)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-not-a-bitch-because-you-arent-listening/504089/138 "2009-07-26T15:01:32Z")
> [@MandaJo](#): > > Because one man’s loophole is another man’s exception: “No one’s using the computers and I promise to leave if they get busy” and such. Wait, that’s an exception not a loop at all unless the rules mention something about it not being busy. A loop hole is a technicality in the rules. An exception is something that violates the rules but allowed anyway. Would you please explain a 2 hour only rule for library computers could be written so it technically allows more time? > [@Gustav](#): > > No, the policy is in place because someone, somewhere wants it to be. There’s probably a good reason. All a loophole is is a way to use the wording of the policy to circumvent the intention. If management has set a 2 hour limit policy and someone wants to find a loophole to allow himself 4 hours, I’m not gonna help him find it. Not only is that not my job, I’d probably get in trouble. Your company would punish you for enforcing their policy? Your bosses are complete assholes then, and you’re either in desperate situation at the need of their mercy for a job, or an utter ass licking sniveling tool for putting up with it. Do you have your policy written down somewhere for them to read? If not, then you’re intentionally hiding relevant information. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@The\_Tao\_s\_Revenge](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Tao_s_Revenge)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-not-a-bitch-because-you-arent-listening/504089/139 "2009-07-26T15:04:56Z")
> [@TokyoPlayer](#): > > My sister was laid off years ago. Sales were bad and there were rumors going around about a week before it happened. One morning, she got a call to report to Conference Room XXX and she knew it wasn’t going to be for a promotion. There were two HR people who read a prepared statement saying her services were no longer required. She asked why and they reread the prepared statement. As she told me later, she knew that asking again wasn’t going to help. > > And this had only happened to her once, not the regular occurrence our OP finds. In general, more people than not make the connection and few make the assumption that the person didn’t hear or didn’t understand the repeated question. Especially after the question is posed more than twice and gets the same response and especially after this has happened with more than one situation, let along many times. What it have killed them to show some humility and level with her and say “we’re sorry, times are tight, we have to let some go to keep the company solvent”? ---
**Author:** ![Stoid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stoid/32/272_2.png) [@Stoid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stoid)\ **Post date:** [July 26, 2009, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-not-a-bitch-because-you-arent-listening/504089/140 "2009-07-26T15:32:32Z")
> [@Lord\_Ashtar](#): > > Most of the time when people have the same thing happen to them more than once, they begin to question why it keeps happening to them. It makes sense to recognize that they are the common denominator in these situations and that they will have to adjust what they are doing if they want a different result. Yes, I could stop asking questions, that would end the restating/non-answer result. But since it would also stop all the actual answers I get at other times, it would ultimately prove less useful than asking and enduring these kinds of answers. After all, just as the customer service people of the world can’t know what kind of reaction they will get from a customer, I can’t know what kind of reaction I will get until I ask - so I guess we’ll both stick with policy. (By the way, for those who think I’ve never been in customer service… I have. I am now in my own business, and I have rarely ended a phone call with a customer where they weren’t thanking me and telling me what great customer service I give, and that very much includes the ones who were looking for a fight. It’s really not that hard.) [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-not-a-bitch-because-you-arent-listening/504089.md?page=6) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/im-not-a-bitch-because-you-arent-listening/504089.md?page=8)