Here is the English version, concise and professional:
Subject: Feedback on Support Quality
I would like to provide feedback regarding a recent support interaction. Despite clearly stating multiple times that an existing, functioning script should not be modified but only minimally extended, the suggestions repeatedly introduced significant changes. These changes caused the previously working setup to break (including issues with SSH behavior and missing progress updates in the dashboard).
Several proposed solutions were unstable, not reproducible, or did not fit the existing environment. In addition, new errors were introduced, resulting in unnecessary additional effort.
I would have expected a more consistent adherence to the stated requirements, specifically:
- minimal and targeted changes instead of major rewrites
- better alignment with the existing working system
- more stable and reliable solutions
I kindly ask for improvements in the accuracy and quality of support in such cases.
Additional Feedback – Critical Incident
I would also like to report a separate incident from a previous interaction. During troubleshooting, I followed a suggested permission command which resulted in severe system damage. The change affected large parts of the system and rendered it unusable.
As a consequence, I had to spend over eight hours restoring functionality, including recovering from backups and restoring full system images.
This issue appears to have been caused by a command that was too broad and not sufficiently safeguarded for the given environment. I would expect clearer warnings and more cautious, context-aware recommendations when suggesting commands that can impact system-wide permissions.
Such incidents can have significant consequences, and I strongly recommend improving the safety and reliability of these types of instructions.
Additional Feedback – Communication and Instruction Handling
I would also like to highlight an issue regarding communication and adherence to instructions. Throughout the interaction, I repeatedly requested that any proposed changes be provided as a complete script, rather than partial snippets.
Despite stating this requirement multiple times, the responses often ignored this instruction and provided incomplete or fragmented code. This led to repeated misunderstandings and required me to restate the same request numerous times.
This significantly increased the time and effort needed to proceed and made the process unnecessarily frustrating.
I would expect clearer adherence to explicitly stated user requirements, especially when they are repeated multiple times. Consistency in following instructions is essential for effective and efficient collaboration.
Here is the English version, concise and professional:
Subject: Feedback on Support Quality
I would like to provide feedback regarding a recent support interaction. Despite clearly stating multiple times that an existing, functioning script should not be modified but only minimally extended, the suggestions repeatedly introduced significant changes. These changes caused the previously working setup to break (including issues with SSH behavior and missing progress updates in the dashboard).
Several proposed solutions were unstable, not reproducible, or did not fit the existing environment. In addition, new errors were introduced, resulting in unnecessary additional effort.
I would have expected a more consistent adherence to the stated requirements, specifically:
I kindly ask for improvements in the accuracy and quality of support in such cases.
Additional Feedback – Critical Incident
I would also like to report a separate incident from a previous interaction. During troubleshooting, I followed a suggested permission command which resulted in severe system damage. The change affected large parts of the system and rendered it unusable.
As a consequence, I had to spend over eight hours restoring functionality, including recovering from backups and restoring full system images.
This issue appears to have been caused by a command that was too broad and not sufficiently safeguarded for the given environment. I would expect clearer warnings and more cautious, context-aware recommendations when suggesting commands that can impact system-wide permissions.
Such incidents can have significant consequences, and I strongly recommend improving the safety and reliability of these types of instructions.
Additional Feedback – Communication and Instruction Handling
I would also like to highlight an issue regarding communication and adherence to instructions. Throughout the interaction, I repeatedly requested that any proposed changes be provided as a complete script, rather than partial snippets.
Despite stating this requirement multiple times, the responses often ignored this instruction and provided incomplete or fragmented code. This led to repeated misunderstandings and required me to restate the same request numerous times.
This significantly increased the time and effort needed to proceed and made the process unnecessarily frustrating.
I would expect clearer adherence to explicitly stated user requirements, especially when they are repeated multiple times. Consistency in following instructions is essential for effective and efficient collaboration.