Showing posts with label e-mail. Show all posts
Showing posts with label e-mail. Show all posts

Thursday, February 11, 2016

Ghost in the Machine

Do you ever have times when you feel you just can't get anything done? On such occasions, do you blame Mercury in retrograde, the weather, raging sunspots, or something else altogether? Whatever it is, the communication slow-down I've seen lately manifests itself in peculiar ways.

The two areas giving me the most trouble are emails and customer service. For example, I've been trying to make a change in my student loan terms since early November, and I'm beginning to think the people there are on the other side of the looking glass. First, I failed to get an important notification about my loan status, forcing me to seek the information out for myself. Then I got a customer service rep who gave me false information over the phone, just plain wrong. When I corrected her, our connection was suddenly cut off (I'm not going to say she hung up on me--all I know is that the line went dead). Since then, I've been waiting for a paper copy of a form that I requested and still haven't seen. Did the last rep I talked to really not understand that I wanted a paper form when I said, "Please mail one to me"?

I also had trouble getting my health insurance premium to post as "paid" when I used the company's online system, although that corrected itself shortly after I sent a message of complaint. Whether it would have corrected itself if I hadn't complained is more than I can say. Then there's the trouble I've had in finding out how a library in Australia got a copy of my dissertation, which is listed in their online catalog. This is a story that began months ago when I contacted ProQuest to ask whether I was due any royalties for sales. I knew the amount would be minimal, but I didn't fully understand how the system works, so I thought I'd better ask.

If Mercury really is in retrograde, he must be getting tired of back-peddling; I first contacted ProQuest with this question at the end of August. The person there told me my question about the number of copies sold would have to be researched and that the person who could do it was out. I was moderately surprised since I pictured ProQuest as somewhat bigger than a mom-and-pop operation, although I don't really know since I've never been there. Maybe it really is a small organization with a few people doing a lot of things; I've worked in places like that. However it is, I never got an answer to what I'm sure must be a very common question.

Last month, it occurred to me that I'd never heard back from them, so I tried again, and this time I got a quick response, but the person who emailed me said ProQuest had no record of any sales of my dissertation and that she didn't know who would have told me they could "research" the situation. She seemed to think that WorldCat (which merely lists libraries holding a particular work) was somehow to blame, and that I should be talking to them. I told her that WorldCat was just a giant catalog. I was a little surprised that ProQuest people wouldn't know about WorldCat . . . but the exchange was turning into sort of a "Who's on First?" conversation, so I thanked her and said I would contact the library in question at the University of Melbourne.

I contacted the library and asked them by what channel they had acquired my work, since ProQuest said they didn't make the sale; I asked if, by chance, what they actually have is the book version, published independently, even though their catalog lists ProQuest information. I didn't say they shouldn't have it (of course I want people to read my work), but naturally I'm curious as to how they obtained it--just trying to look out for my intellectual property. There's been no answer at all from them, though the email went out two weeks ago. Perhaps they haven't had time to look into it, but for me, it's a question I've been trying to get answered since July 22, when I first contacted my school about it. Is it such a difficult question that it can't be answered in a seven-month time frame?

Then there's the job application at UCLA. I went through the same automated process a couple of years ago with no technical issues that I know of. Having decided recently to reapply, I updated my materials and got everything in order except for one remaining letter of recommendation. This person readily agreed to write on my behalf and then suddenly dropped off the map, totally incommunicado; someone else offered to do it, and thence began a series of emails that have apparently disappeared either into the ether or a giant black hole.

I have applied, over the last couple of years, for jobs in 15 different states, all over the country, and this is one of the few times I've had direct contact with my references at the start of the process. If any of my potential employers had as much difficulty as I've had in communicating with references, it's no wonder I didn't get more interviews. (I'm not saying they did have trouble--I likely wouldn't have gotten calls on some of those jobs anyway--but if the part of the communication process that's visible to me is this fraught with difficulty, I have to wonder about the part that's not visible.) I'm sure I'll find a way to make this work, though it's been much more time-consuming than it ought to be.

There was a letter that I did get an answer to (so success, of sorts), from a government official, on a separate matter, which just arrived today--so that at least I know some channels of communication are open. It wasn't really a satisfactory response, but it wasn't the only avenue of inquiry I took, so it's not the last word. The only good upshot in this instance is at least getting a response, a commodity that seems to be hard to come by.

Mercury is the god of communications, so might as well blame him as anybody. He's definitely got the lead foot lately, but you know how busy he is. He's sly, too, so that you can never really tell what he's going to do. They even say he can walk through walls, though that's more than I know. I was reading about Einstein's theory of gravitational waves and the bending of space-time only today, so perhaps it has something to do with that. Maybe Mercury is, after all, a giant wave--though personifying him at least gives you someone more concrete to shake a fist at than a mere ghost in the machine. I'd take Mercury any day over a faceless bureaucrat, though who knows: maybe that's all he is.