So better stay away from Steel Beasts dongles

[ghostryder]

Isn't this why we keep receipts? To prove we purchased our software? And you have proof of the purchase. I don't see the issue here---If replacement dongle is $35 and said customer agrees then why take any other stance? Blame the airlines? Blame the tooth Fairy--that's merely incidental---it's lost, his purchase is confirmed---honor it. Anything else is pure BS.

[Sparhawk]

I'll pass over any product where you have to have something called a "dongle" to play it. Sorry SSnake, but possibly the majority of the wargaming community has moved past your drm scheme.

[smittyohio]

I fail to see how you are losing money by letting him purchase a new dongle at nominal cost.  In fact, by taking such an illogical position, you've cost yourself potential sales from other customers.  How in the world does replacing a dongle in ANY way cause you to lose money?  How?  He certainly isn't going to buy the software and dongle at full price again.  So...  You get zero.  And zero future purchases from him.   And now from others here.   I get that it cost you a lot of time, money, and risk to create the software, but that is totally irrelevant in his case.  He's more than compensated you for that.

[dinsdale]

I'm still missing the part where eSim Games is responsible for the disappearance of the CM stick, or any other form of negligence.

Its called customer service. Perhaps this is a cultural issue, but where I live your behaviour would be unheard of. Vendors typically don't use term like negligence, weakest link or any of the other bizarre phrases you've trotted out, they just do everything possible to assist customers in order to retain them; particularly when there is no financial loss.

You have probably spent more time arguing why a licensed holder of your software shouldn't use it than it would have taken to accept payment, send another dongle and ensure that not only was the customer happy, but that he would have spread the word to others.

I can't imagine you're going to garner any new customers from your behaviour, maybe you would have gotten one, or more from the opposite.

No offence, as I say it's probably cultural.

[RyanE]

I think you are not reading this forum.  It has been repeated over and over.  No one holds esims responsible for losing luggage or the dongle.  In fact, I don't think anyone here even suggests esims is in any way officially obligated to replace the dongle.  But, and its the big but, common sense, logic, and common customer service best practices would say that if you can help a customer at no loss to yourself, you should do it.

Throw up the smoke screen that you are somehow being help responsible for the loss is one way to get a serious flame war going.  It shows a complete lack of respect for the arguments being made here.  It shows you aren't reading the posts, you are emotionally attached to your position, and you really don't care about someone else's position.

Your retort should be to use some logic to point out how helping a customer hurts esims business, shareholders, and future earnings.  Otherwise your responses only make you look, as I have said before, pedantic, unyielding, and illogical.

Now my logic might be flawed.  Please point out any of the things I have stated that I consider common sense, but you consider wrong.

As to immediately reporting I shall again consider posting the emails.  Feel free to use our exchanges to bolster your position.  If you think I would somehow be hurt by doing that, I won't be.  Your emails were very to the point and left no uncertainty in what you were going to offer.  Again, please point out where I am wrong.  Also, please point out what waiting would have done.  Would you suddenly have woken up in the middle of the night and realized the error of your ways?  Could I have sent more emails to convince you differently?  Please enlighten me on how I should have done this differently.  I am also curious if you would have offered me the four free months if I had waited a month.  Would you have?  On January 7, would have sent me an unsolicited email offering the four months.  I think everyone on this thread knows the answer.

Or maybe your feeling a little hurt that someone shined a light on an offhanded decision you made that maybe you didn't think would get the coverage it has in a community that has provided some support for you. 

Truly, I want you to respond.  Don't walk away and sulk.  Tell me what I should have done.  Post the emails.  Tell people what you offered as a negotiation.  Tell people what you would have done if I had waited a month, as one person suggested.  I am sure you would much prefer this conversation be in private on a forum where some of your friends would jump to your defense and overwhelm me.  I have no connection to this forum, and probably less than you have.  So I consider it a pretty neutral ground.  Yet, look at the response.  There are a number of people here that are probably more upset than I am over how you have responded over the last couple days.  I have defended you a couple times here.  I know you aren't some ogre with an axe to grind against me personally.  My whole point here is to show others who might engage your company what is beneath the surface.  If that bothers you, than maybe you need to look back at our email conversation and think about how you, not me, might have handled it differently. 

My philosophy in life as a business leader, and engineer, is not to treat people in a way that if they were exposed to the public, would make look like I am not fair and reasoned.  You and some of your supporters really seem bothered that this was taken public.  What bothers me more than the $125 is that you are more concerned with your decision being made public than that a customer is out $125, regardless of the reasons for the loss.  It exposes a lot about esims as a business.

[RyanE]

I am hoping I don't have to say this again, but there has to be something else going on here behind the scenes.  It just seems so illogical, as to border on randomness.  There is something going with this issue from the esims side that I/we aren't being told.  Or maybe I am the illogical one.

[RyanE]

Here is the first reply from esims.  I have redacted actual names and license numbers for obvious reasons.  So this started 5th when I sent my first email.  Below is the first reply from esims.  Ssnake is pretty unambiguous in what my options are.

Hello XXX,

Tuesday, December 6, 2016, you wrote:

XX> I lost my dongle on a recent trip.  How do I get a replacement?

I  am terribly sorry, but there actually is no way to replace a simple loss,  other than a new purchase. Which is probably not what you would like to hear, and I hate being the bearer of bad news like every other guy.

The  alternative  to  CodeMeter  sticks and classic licenses are time- limited  licenses. They aren't without their own set of issues, but at least  it  wouldn't  set  you back by $125.- but rather $39.50 for the first year.

Sincerely yours,


XXX "Ssnake" XXXXXXXXXXX

[RyanE]

Second email...you'll note I waited 24 hours to see what would happen.  This the time my travel VP was "negotiating" with United to see if there was any hope on the bag.


Dear XXX,

Wednesday, December 7, 2016, you wrote:

XX> Well, ain't that a kick in the nuts.

XX> So  this  is a big thank you for being a loyal customer for years.
XX> I'll  make  sure  others  know about the risk of working with your
XX> company.

XX> I would suggest you rethink your entire DRM issue if it is keeping
XX> your customers from using your product.

Well, let me put it this way: You travel, and lose your iPhone. Do you expect a free new iPhone from Apple?

The  problem  is,  the  CodeMeter  stick is a device, a physical item.
Personally I believe you when you say that you lost it. But there's no way  to  verify that claim. Others could "lose" it at a friend's place in the expectation to get a free stick as a replacement from us. If we adopted  a  policy  to  offer  replacements depending on how good of a story someone told us, that would amount to total arbitrariness.

We offer free replacements for CM sticks that fail to work.
We  offer  a  replacement  of  CM  sticks  for  the costs of material, shipping  and  handling, if the CM stick is being damaged by the user.
The  one case where we're unable to offer is a replacement in the case of  loss - because you can't send in some bits and pieces identifiable as the remains of your stick.

I'm very sorry about that.

Sincerely yours,


XXX "Ssnake" XXXXXXXX

[RyanE]

Note he never really explains what blacklist means.  I suspect it was kind an FU reaction...your pissed at us...well we'll just kill your dongle outright.

Dear XXX,

Wednesday, December 7, 2016, you wrote:

XX> Then  you  have  a  very crappy system and I will make sure people
XX> know  about  it. I ran a HMI software company that used dongles as
XX> security and could easily disable one.

All right, you want your CM stick blacklisted?
I can arrange that.


But  that  still  requires  that  a thief, if there was one, uses this stick  in an environment with internet connection. Once that the stick has  been  disabled  I'm  happy to offer you a new one for the cost of material and handling, and to reconstruct the licenses.
The  problem  is  however that the likelihood that this will happen is low, and that it may take a very long time until it happens.

I  haven't suggested that because, well, the odds suggest that nothing will come from it. If there's some random person that finds the stick, it  would  still  require them to recognize for what it is, to install the  CodeMeter  runtime software, and then to NOT understand that they must  not  connect  to the internet while using the stick. Most people who  might find the stick will consider it useless and toss it away, I guess. But sure, we may be lucky. I'll identify the stick, and have it blacklisted for you.

Sincerely yours,


XXX "Ssnake" XXXXXXX

[SirAndrewD]

I will say that I'd had SB on my list of games to finally get around to buying in 2017.  I almost pulled the trigger in my last heavy tanker phase in mid 2015.  The only thing putting me off was the dreaded "dongle".

It's off the list now, for obvious reasons.  I mean, reading what has gone down with RyanE seems like taking crazy pills.  Maybe I'm being protective of a member of this community, but man.

And also +1 to Asid being a stand up fellow.  He turned me on to Steel Armor.  Will always thank him for that.   He's had a great experience with the product, no reason to blame him for that.

[RyanE]

And we went back and forth a few times before he "negotiated" with me for the four month license.  I will say this he was not emotional.  But neither was I.  That is how I talk at work all day.  Does anyone here think he was going to suddenly change his mind or he was setting up his initial negotiating position in those first couple of emails?

[Tuna]

He bought the software off you, or the right to use it. He did not buy or want the Dongle, you forced that on him in the DRM scheme that your company chose.

Your company chose that, because they did not want their software to be pirated. He as a customer is not 'pirating' your software. You as a business should be doing everything in your power to help the customer out.

Airline didn't lose 'his' Dongle, they lost your Dongle! Maybe Bawb has it!

[RyanE]

I was just wondering if a dongle has ever been lost in the mail on shipping to a customer.  What is esims policy on that?  Because, if hasn't happened, it will eventually.

[Boggit]

I'm probably repeating myself here but my perception of the situation is different. Someone else - United Airlines - lost the CM stick by way of losing the suitcase. That's nobody's fault but the United's. They offered absolutely insufficient compensation for their failings, in direct violation of IATA regulations (as far as I understand it). And because United is hard to deal with, the owner of the suitcase is looking for compensation elsewhere, and picking on the weakest party in sight. I almost wrote the "weakest link in the chain" but that would imply at least some marginal amount of responsibility.

Yes, United Airlines lost the dongle. That was never in contention. Where do you get that the owner of the suitcase is looking for compensation elsewhere and picking on the weakest party? As far as I - and it seems fellow forum members - can determine, you are not being asked for compensation but for a replacement dongle, for which RyanE is offering to indemnify you on costs. You imply that he is asking you for compensation, but on the testimony put forward by RyanE that is not the case.

You perception of the facts is flawed because you are confusing a request for a replacement dongle (with your cost covered) as a request for compensation. Do you not understand the difference? It really is very simple, and not at all controversial.

A purchase was made, years ago. That purchase compensated eSim Games for a decade of work invested into the development of the software. We delivered a CM stick, and a license, and both worked. We offered upgrades to the software. The customer decided that the upgrades were worth the price that we were asking for. On every single occasion eSim Games fulfilled its contractual and moral obligations. Licenses were delivered, the software worked as advertised. That much is undisputed.

Indeed. What is the point of stating that though? It is irrelevant to the issue in case.

I'm still missing the part where eSim Games is responsible for the disappearance of the CM stick, or any other form of negligence. eSim Games fulfilled its part of the various deals to the fullest extent; often enough we ovedelivered, with software features that were included (but not advertised), offering free licenses in competitions, and other stuff.
That we would offer a free replacement in case of loss was never advertised, never implied, never promised.

Do you really not read the posts here, or is it just a blind spot you have when it comes to disappearance of the dongle that causes you to ignore what has been made very clear already? No one here has suggested for a moment that eSim games is responsible for the disappearance of the dongle. You then waffle on about more irrelevant issues to the disappearance of the dongle until you come to

"That we would offer a free replacement in case of loss was never advertised, never implied, never promised."

Mmm. Interesting this idea of a free replacement. You haven't been asked for one. RyanE has offered many times in this thread alone to pay for the cost of replacement. Where does "free replacement" come into it? It doesn't does it? So why talk about it as though it was the issue?

No - the matter was almost immediately taken to the public to depict us in a negative way. You may see it as objective "citizen reporting" to "warn" everybody about eSim's business policies - but the fact remains that the responsible party for the whole mess, United Airlines, never stood at the focus of the attention. Was a similar stink raised with UA's hotline, their web site, or in social media?
I haven't checked, but based on what I read so far I highly doubt it. The customer, at least, hasn't bothered much to mention their role - except when pointing out that the Airline was so "kind" to raise its compensation from $100 to $300, when IATA regulations suggest a liability in excess of $1300.- ... is that a new manifestation of the Stockholm syndrome?

Again... you miss the point. United Airlines might have lost the dongle, but it was you RyanE asked for a replacement dongle. Did you think United Airlines could have provided him with a replacement dongle, or do you think that perhaps it was more rational for him to ask you - the supplier?

That UA are at fault isn't the issue here. We all know they are at fault for the loss of RyanE's luggage, that is why they are being asked for compensation and you are not. You, let me repeat, are merely being asked for a replacement dongle - for which you are being offered an indemnification of costs so that you are not out of pocket.

eSim Games is perceived as most vulnerable to attack - plain and simple. It's cyber bullying in its purest form, and you're taking part in it - wittingly or not. Before you all double down now, ask yourself if you're doing it because the cognitive dissonance of admitting that you're in the wrong is more difficult to accept.

Again you are so incredibly wide of the mark to the point where I have to ask if you are being delusional or at worst paranoid about this issue? This is a reasonable customer service request, not some extortion racket operated by RyanE. For heaven's sake man, he's offered to cover your costs for the replacement dongle! If you had handled RyanE's request in a common sense way you wouldn't even have seen this thread.

It seems to me that it is your pride that is getting in the way of resolving this issue sensibly, because you keep digging yourself an ever deeper hole with the irrelevant arguments you keep relying on to make excuses for your failure to act reasonably towards a reasonable consumer. Is a little humility difficult for you? I had to laugh at your sentence "ask yourself if you're doing it because the cognitive dissonance of admitting that you're in the wrong is more difficult to accept.". Really? Were you talking about yourself, because based on what you have said so far, it seems like it.

I just can't help feeling that you are acting out Otto's level of common sense in the film "A fish called Wanda"

It's a bit late, but maybe you can still retrieve the situation by having the humility to apologise to RyanE for the "misunderstanding" and then resolve this sensibly with him? I hope so, because as someone with no stake in the matter, you really do come out of this badly as an exercise in how not to do customer relations.

[Bardolph]

I have to say that the dongle thing kept me from buying SB for a long time, and I loved the first version (and spent many hours futilely trying to get it to run on newer versions of Windows).
I finally bought a year license after reading some of Asid's posts, but I would much rather have bought the game (sans dongle).