Disclaimer:

Even though the title says “my”, this is not my blogpost.

  • Dremor@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    24
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    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.

    • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      54
      arrow-down
      10
      ·
      2 months ago

      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.

      • Pika@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        39
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        2 months ago

        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.

        • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          37
          ·
          edit-2
          2 months ago

          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.

          • Pika@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            14
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            2 months ago

            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

            • conciselyverbose@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              2 months ago

              “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.

              • Pika@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                edit-2
                2 months ago

                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