this post was submitted on 06 Sep 2024
220 points (95.8% liked)
Technology
59569 readers
3431 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yup. For small developers (FOSS or not) that don't make money which can insulate them from this kind of stuff, it's a no-no.
You can get a phone number for a little more than a dollar a month at OVH. You can just redirect all call to voicemail and check once or twice a month and call it the day.
OK, then you're being really sketchy and screwing over customers.
Not publishing a phone number is perfectly fine. Publishing a phone number that's a black hole is extremely anti-consumer.
just have the voicemail say "this mailbox is rarely monitored and is here as a requirement for google play services; a better way of getting support is available at X"
It's also extremely anti-consumer to not offer any support. Which is likely the primary reason that Google is requiring this. There are so many apps out there that don't have any means of support, it's one of my primary complaints about google play, so many abandonwares or apps that were clearly put on there as a send and done with no intent to actually use them.
That's not better. It is not OK to have a phone number published that is not monitored regularly, no matter what message you leave when they call it.
You should have a legitimate contact method, but it is not acceptable behavior to publish a contact method that isn't handled appropriately. Publishing a number that always goes to voice mail is already really bad.
No shit?
Which is why requiring a number isn't OK. But the minute you make a phone number available to customers, it cannot be acceptable not to treat it like a phone number.
iPhone already has a lot of apps that aren't worth the effort to make available for Android, and this is going to make that meaningfully worse.
How about you post your phone number here? It seems you have no problem in sharing someone share their number in public, and I hope you put the same srandard to yourself.
You should really work on your reading comprehension. I have repeatedly made it clear that the requirement is not OK.
So what exactly is wrong with making the voice mail say "I will never check this. Email me at person@company.tld if you want help"? If the requirement is bullshit, why shouldn't people comply maliciously? As long as there's some way to contact the dev (like through email), who gives a rats ass if the phone number doesn't work? I don't need to call Lawrence Dawson cause Sync is having issues. I can post on the sub or probably find an email somewhere. It's not gonna be instant like a phone call, but it doesn't need to be.
Because it's lying to your customer to have a phone number you don't use listed. Listing a number is an advertisement that you offer phone support.
I legit can't tell if this person is a really good troll or if they're talking in circles and haven't figured that out yet.
Okay, I missed read and I apologize. However, you're just trolling. You disagree the phone requirement. Yet when others propose alternative solutions that direct uses to an equally direct communication method, you oppose that too without providing any alternatives.
The alternative is to not list a phone number and to abandon Google until they remove the requirement.
Listing a phone number you won't answer is lying to your customers.
It's no different than companies like Microsoft, you have their phone number that's a literal support line that says hey go to the website sometimes without even indicating where on the website that you go to.
I ran into that twice while dealing with an activation issue and a hardware purchase issue last year, their phone support will lead you in circles until eventually you hit a voicemail that says please go to this page. In one case it gave the location, in the other it said "this support is available on the Microsoft store website at" and it just gave you the store launchpage for ms store
"I'm only as much of a piece of shit as Microsoft" isn't a good defense.
There is no possible scenario where publicizing an invalid contact method is defensible behavior.
Honestly it just depends on the definition of invalid, it's still giving you information on where you need to go so it still gives you more information than when you started it's not like it just leaves you to a dead end number, now what some other people were proposing which is a virtual number and then just toss the phone after that I don't agree with. Nor do I agree with a number that doesn't give any info aside from just hanging up or endlessly ringing
When its not optional to publish email only, the proposed solution is pretty reasonable imo.
Stupid rules are beat by malicious compliance
That would be "accepting the premise of assholes" as Louis Rossman would say.