1969 Problem. Answer from Google

Hi all
Some of us have had problems with the December 31st 1969 google
"feature"

I have had a reply from them, which I thought was very nice.

"Hi Paul,

Thank you for your note. We're aware of this 1969 problem, and our
engineers are currently investigating. We hope to have this fixed
soon. We appreciate your patience."

It does go on further about other things, but are not related to the
1969 prob.

I hope this info puts people's minds at rest.

plh
Paul

Paul Burke <webmaster (AT) firstpeople (DOT) us> wrote:

Hi all
Some of us have had problems with the December 31st 1969 google
"feature"

I have had a reply from them, which I thought was very nice.

Why do I think if we wrote them

"I'm having errors with lack of personal attention...."

we'd get a reply like this:

"Hi Paul,

Thank you for your note. We're aware of this lack of personal
attention problem, and our engineers are currently investigating. We
hope to have this fixed soon. We appreciate your patience."

?

On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 17:19:02 -0500, Neal <neal413 (AT) yahoo (DOT) com> wrote:

Paul Burke <webmaster (AT) firstpeople (DOT) us> wrote:

Hi all
Some of us have had problems with the December 31st 1969 google
"feature"

I have had a reply from them, which I thought was very nice.

Why do I think if we wrote them

"I'm having errors with lack of personal attention...."

we'd get a reply like this:

"Hi Paul,

Thank you for your note. We're aware of this lack of personal
attention problem, and our engineers are currently investigating. We
hope to have this fixed soon. We appreciate your patience."

?

At least they wrote back. Which IS something these days. It is nothing
about personal attention or anything else like that. I am only passing
on the info as others have said that they have wrote and not received
a reply.

Neal wrote:

Paul Burke <webmaster (AT) firstpeople (DOT) us> wrote:

Hi all
Some of us have had problems with the December 31st 1969 google
"feature"

I have had a reply from them, which I thought was very nice.

Why do I think if we wrote them

"I'm having errors with lack of personal attention...."

we'd get a reply like this:

"Hi Paul,

Thank you for your note. We're aware of this lack of personal
attention problem, and our engineers are currently investigating. We
hope to have this fixed soon. We appreciate your patience."

Yeah, in the past I had some weird replies from Google back to me. Odd,
since they seem to hire only the "best of the best". From the reply I got I
got the impression it wasn't read by a human... hmmmmm....

--
John -> http://johnbokma.com/ Firefox: http://johnbokma.com/firefox/
Perl SEO tools: http://johnbokma.com/perl/
Experienced (web) developer: http://castleamber.com/
Get SEO help: http://johnbokma.com/websitedesign/seo-expert-help.html

Well, some humans can pass themselves off as machines pretty good, and have
very little personal customer relations skills. It fits this case good in my
view because
the 60 minutes show last week showed the employee entry level test more
focused on solving complex math problems, more than inter personal skills
with other people.

I have Emailed google myself about this particular issue recently too, and
got the same response. Also, before that, I was asking why my site totally
vanished except for 1 page from their index, and while whoever read the
messages had no clue , or was unwilling to offer help, they did sound like
human responses each time we exchanged emails. But the end result is basicly
the same, and you get the feeling its a waste of time to email them.

Yeah, in the past I had some weird replies from Google back to me. Odd,
since they seem to hire only the "best of the best". From the reply I got
I
got the impression it wasn't read by a human... hmmmmm....

On Wed, 5 Jan 2005 18:20:21 -0500, "Techforce" <spam (AT) linhax (DOT) com>
wrote:

Well, some humans can pass themselves off as machines pretty good, and have
very little personal customer relations skills. It fits this case good in my
view because
the 60 minutes show last week showed the employee entry level test more
focused on solving complex math problems, more than inter personal skills
with other people.

I have Emailed google myself about this particular issue recently too, and
got the same response. Also, before that, I was asking why my site totally
vanished except for 1 page from their index, and while whoever read the
messages had no clue , or was unwilling to offer help, they did sound like
human responses each time we exchanged emails. But the end result is basicly
the same, and you get the feeling its a waste of time to email them.

If it was a robot talking to me, then it was a bloody good one,
because the letter talked about other problems I was having as well.
I *do* think this was a human written letter.
Still, at least they are looking into it and hopefully it will be
fixed sooner rather than later.
plh
Paul

Paul Burke wrote:

If it was a robot talking to me, then it was a bloody good one,
because the letter talked about other problems I was having as well.
I *do* think this was a human written letter.

Could be both. Modern help desk software (phone and email)
monitors what the customer says/writes[1] and presents a menu of
possible paragraph-long answers that the human can insert or
read to you. The human can also answer himself, and then the
development team tries to figure out why none of the paragraphs
fit.

That is why at times you will get an email with one paragraph
has bad grammar. It is also why at times you get unconnected
paragraphs in a help email; the human is choosing answers
randomly so as to keep his time-per-customer number down.

[1] I haven't seen this, but I have heard of voice recognition
software being used here. The system I saw had the human typing
in keywords as the customer spoke.

On Wed, 05 Jan 2005 15:43:09 -0600, Paul Burke
<webmaster (AT) firstpeople (DOT) us> wrote:

Hi all
Some of us have had problems with the December 31st 1969 google
"feature"

I know I know - old thread; but some folks shared in the past
suffering from this glitch/bug/quirk/whatever - so used an old thread
as a segway.

http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2005/2/5/183516/0997

So - those of you whom in the past had problems with the 1969 dating
.... were those affected pages, in your sites, 302 hijacked?

Carol