While 37signals had a pretty good point about the language (and maybe about the philosophy), I wasn’t as impressed with the way they chose to sensationalize it rather than deal with it privately.

That said, one of the things they are about is to directly, and publicly, point out design flaws and suggest ways to correct them. People who know UI know this (including the folks at GS). It can be taken as a kind of compliment, since, if 37signals takes the time to think about it, it probably is a design problem worth solving. Ultimately that’s what they’re after, so I don’t think what they did was bad… just a little sensational.

But I think GS responded really splendidly. They took the criticism at face value (because it was valuable) and are taking action to correct what they now see as a flaw.

I don’t see GS’s reaction as one of being intimidated by a mob; I see it as being able to examine themselves, take feedback, and improve. That is the very model of customer service they would like to see from everyone. Kudos to GS for walking the talk.

The only reason 37s cares – the reason that GS is even on their radar – is that you’ve built a quality product. There is no reason they couldn’t just pay, or deal with the consequences of not paying – but by whining they get what they want in exchange for $0.

You guys are victims of blog mob mentality. We have tech people coming in here and repeating the gospel truth straight from Jason Fried that you’re engaging in this and that unfair whatever and it’s simply not true. It’s just human fairness intuition being manipulated (after all, Craig Newmark pretty much nuked the newspaper industry – but he’s an ok guy, right?).

You’re kind of making it true though, now.

I will watch this blog closely over the next few weeks.

So while I certainly understand the basis of your argument, I have to disagree with you that we don’t need to listen to people who operate outside of our traditional customer base. We all now operate — and by we I mean every single one of us, not just our company — in a relatively new environment where our collective actions can be and are routinely scrutinized and criticized, sometimes politely and sometimes less so. Doesn’t matter which — learning to respond in a meaningful and measured way is one of the many skills companies need to develop to operate effectively in this new world. And since Get Satisfaction is one of the many platforms that’s actively encouraging this kind of transparent criticism, it’s also incumbent upon us to provide an example to the organizations that use us of how best to respond when this happens. And, we think we did a pretty good job. :)

To your larger point: We definitely see this as a real opportunity to reiterate our larger philosophy and our value proposition in the near term, but honestly, last week wasn’t the week for that. Last week was, for us, an opportunity to reflect on the message buried down underneath all that frustration, to understand what aspect of our service triggered it, and to make the necessary modifications to assure that that misperception (and make no mistake, it is a wild misperception of our intent) no longer exists. So, yeah, we actually are a little thankful — not for the slap itself, but for helping us understand the motivations that drove it.

You might see that as weakness, but we believe that not responding, or responding to the tone but not the content, is the true weakness here — using this as an opportunity for change and growth, on the other hand, and from there as a chance to reiterate our philosophy and spread it to the even larger group of people that’s now paying attention, well, that’s actually all kinds of awesome.

On that point, keep an eye out this week for additional blog posts and other kinds of community-oriented information we’ll be sharing that should help you better understand our values, goals, and expertise. Hopefully that will assuage some of your concerns.

Thanks again for the feedback. It means a lot to us.

Who is running this company? Who is setting the vision?

Because at the moment, it looks like it’s a narcissist named Jason Fried. I understand needing to do something about the bad press he’s given you guys, especially as it’s partly justified, but to the outsider, it looks like he’s given you s slap and you’ve thanked him for it.

It’s bordering on sycophancy.

I think it’s great to listen to feedback. But surely it should come first from your paying customers, and second from your potential ones. Clearly 37signals is neither.

But look, now I’m the one telling you how to run your company. It’s your company; decide for yourselves what to do, and make it great.

As a potential customer, I would sign up because I believe you know, to some extent, more than I do about how to provide customer support; or at the very least, to provide me with the tools to do so.

I want to buy your expertise, not your pandering. As someone not yet committed, I want you to tell me what Get Satisfaction is, I don’t want to be referred to a series of articles written by someone else telling me what it shouldn’t be.

There’s a point where being noble and “doing the right thing” unfortunately comes across as weakness.

The guys from 37 signals have good reason to question your model and intentions.

I also noticed that you have not changed the wording for all companies like you did for 37 signals. Why is that?

You can see support discussions as they flow in here: http://getsatisfaction.com/companies

How about branding what you really do and start being this honest and transparent company you like to say you are?

In fact, even your so-called big customers like Zappos do not have much traffic of any kind on their site. I think you need to focus on making what you are trying to do work before you take on something else.