Live data from Hacker News

You don't need live chat on your website

timharek.no

111–120 of 235 posts

Re: You don't need live chat on your website

#111
post #96

* Live Chat * Cookie Banners * Newsletter-Offers * Java-Script moving things around What do they have in common? No benefit for the user. Remove the entire EU-Regulation upon Cookie-Banners. I would be thankful. A service is allowed implicitly to store Cookies or any other mean of "remembering" when a login is used interactively by the user. If the user doesn't login itself you aren't allowed to store any data about…

> What do they have in common? No benefit for the user.

The benefit of cookie banners is that you know to stay away from the website if possible.

Re: You don't need live chat on your website

#112
post #84
post #26

The problem isn't live chat, it's nagging . A lot of the chat bubbles that I see flash in the corner, and make the title of the page flash as well; with lots of annoying bleeps and bloops. I also find that sales is very trend driven. Currently they're trendy, but I hope that sales websites learn that you can't just stick things in people's faces all the time.

I think this is the default for services like Intercom and you can't stop it [0]. It's super annoying. 0: https://www.intercom.com/help/en/articles/5053699-how-do-i-s...

Could we simply block it with an adblocker?

Re: You don't need live chat on your website

#113
post #81
post #76

Live chat windows that pop-up automatically and hassle you once you've spent X seconds looking at a website are annoying, much like email subscription modals. But when I've been actually looking for support and made the choice to click on the chat button, I've generally had a great experience, so long as it's connected me to a human rather than a menu of chatbot options. It's asynchronous enough that I can keep doing…

I've seen a live chat implementation that starts as a chat bot, but switches you to a person after a few clicks and you can't find what you need. I felt that was a perfect compromise.

A very annoying "feature" of some of those is making you wait for the human (okay that's acceptable) BUT timing out the session if you don't reply them within a minute or such.

Re: You don't need live chat on your website

#114
Intercom client here. We use the tool for our client support (only). The website is therefore just the point of contact for something else. We do not 'engage' our clients. We do not want to 'drive sales' from leads. It's open for unregistered users as well but rarely used by them.

Humans answer. We learn a lot by speaking to our clients about how they perceive our service.

Re: You don't need live chat on your website

#115
post #81
post #76

Live chat windows that pop-up automatically and hassle you once you've spent X seconds looking at a website are annoying, much like email subscription modals. But when I've been actually looking for support and made the choice to click on the chat button, I've generally had a great experience, so long as it's connected me to a human rather than a menu of chatbot options. It's asynchronous enough that I can keep doing…

I've seen a live chat implementation that starts as a chat bot, but switches you to a person after a few clicks and you can't find what you need. I felt that was a perfect compromise.

When I need live chat support, it's because I've already exhausted the help center and can't find my answer elsewhere. I really do need to speak with a human.

Fortunately, many chatbots in my experience will indeed switch over to human support if I write "I want to speak with a human". I'm glad they take that into account.

Re: You don't need live chat on your website

#116
post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They were astounded by the quick response time, which is simply not possible with contact forms. I'm intrigued. Why isn't it possible with a contact form? The mechanism for routing a message to you could be literally identical whether it's a chat box or a form. You could get the exact same notification on your system. It'd take you the same amount of time to respond. The only difference I can see is that what you rep…

> I'm intrigued. Why isn't it possible with a contact form? - E-mail always has a round-trip latency attached, even the best systems will have at least a minute, and you have to do insane amounts of work to keep up with "deliverability" as automated anti-spam systems can and will detect high frequency of incoming emails and downgrade your score, not to mention you have to deal with bullshit like contacting providers…

On point. Plus the fact that chat has conventions that closely related to how we talk naturally vs etiquette based emails means that you can drop a whole bunch of charade and just talk to your users naturally.

Re: You don't need live chat on your website

#117
post #2

> Can I help you with anything? No. > An agent will be with you shortly! > Hi, what can I help you with? > Agent ended the session.

> Can I help you with anything?

> An agent will be with you shortly!

> Please provide:

> your name

> your email

> your phone

No, thanks.

Re: You don't need live chat on your website

#118
post #94
post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the other side of the fence - you can base your FAQs on actual questions (to the point of highlighting and bolding the most common) only to keep getting a significant amount of requests with that exact same question multiple times a day.

Absolutely. But in most cases I think it is both: FAQ isn't updated/relevant && people don't check it.

I can confirm that - at least in my experience - FAQ's are pre-made (and never or rarely updated), when a new service/site/whatever starts, it is logically nonsense that there is even one FAQ.

In theory everything should be clear from the info/documentation/manual, and when it is not so (as it often happens) and something is actually frequently asked, not only an entry in the FAQ list should be added (together with its FGA[0]) but the sheer fact that it is frequently asked should mean that the topic is not clear enough in the info/docs/etc and these should also actually be corrected/updated.

As a "disciplined" user (who actually did read both the FAQ's and the documentation) when you (manage to) contact (via mail/chat or phone) the assistance with a question/doubt there are usually three possibilities:

1) the assistant knows less than you on the topic and cannot answer properly

2) the assistant is competent and manages to answer your question, though with some difficulty (you made an original question)

3) the assistant is competent and answers your question easily because it has already been answered by him/her tens or hundreds of times (your question was not so original but never made it to the published FAQ's)

#3 is the clear sign of a failure in the way FAQ's are managed.

[0] http://jdebp.info/FGA/fga-not-faq.html

Re: You don't need live chat on your website

#120
post #115
post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've seen a live chat implementation that starts as a chat bot, but switches you to a person after a few clicks and you can't find what you need. I felt that was a perfect compromise.

When I need live chat support, it's because I've already exhausted the help center and can't find my answer elsewhere. I really do need to speak with a human. Fortunately, many chatbots in my experience will indeed switch over to human support if I write "I want to speak with a human". I'm glad they take that into account.

I'm glad you had that experience. In my experiences with both website based and call center based chat bots, the primary goal is to make it as difficult as possible to reach a real person, if I have a detailed question. I'll get a few menu options and maybe a link to an FAQ. I find it unbearable.
Post reply on HN