Forums/Community/Product Feedback

PlannedDoneNot planned

Admins/agents can edit ticket comments

Ted Casassa
suggested this on September 14, 2008 05:18

Every comment/update/request should be editable by an agent.


Need the ability to edit existing comments in the ticket thread

often typo's or other simple mistakes are made that need to be corrected

this is espcially relevant if a public comment is posted by mistake that has information that is not appropriate for the end user to see

 

Im sure we all run into this as good as our Agents are

Tiago Soromenho had a similar request embeded in his thread but just for the initial request

every comment/update/request should be editable by an agent

 

thanks

 

All in all pretty happy with the interface so far!!

 

Comments

User photo
Graham Robson
Coherence Design

We've had this feedback too. To some extent we have been happy enough to treat the recording on the basis of as is/as was. The audit trail is powerful. If this could be maintained/not compromised, by supporting editing then this would remove issues that get reported.

A similar use case is unintended public & non-public comments. We've had requests for these to be switchable.

 

 

September 15, 2008 10:09
User photo
David Graham

I second this. The user who created the ticket should also be able to go in and modify it's priority and status as well. For big projects I typically fix a lot of bugs that I find before I notice the ticket. In my old helpdesk, I'd ask my users to periodically review and close out any tickets that they've submitted which have been fixed; now I have to do it manually. :-(

September 15, 2008 15:06
User photo
Alan Conroy
Project CS Beta Testers

Would love to see this too, especially Graham's "A similar use case is unintended public & non-public comments. We've had requests for these to be switchable."

 

September 23, 2008 11:12
User photo
Neil Smith

I would really worry about the audit trail.  But I would love to be able to strip out signatures when users forget to remove them before sending!

September 24, 2008 06:07
User photo
NxGen Networks

I also would appreciate this feature as occasionally I get comments put into the wrong tickets. As far as the audit trail goes, why not keep a log of the deleted comments and who deleted them. It could show up in the "All events and notifications" but be removed from the comments thread. So, you keep the audit-ability and keep garbage information from cluttering up the ticket.

December 05, 2008 10:21
User photo
Mark Rothfield

this functionality exists in most wiki-based solutions and would be appropriate here.

January 19, 2009 19:44
User photo
Joshua Gordon
jagproducts

I agree that this is a really important feature that should be included. Typos, private/public mistakes, not deleting the message info Outlook inserts above the delimter line... there are plenty of way to make mistakes. Not being able to correct them is a bit scary.

January 30, 2009 08:49
User photo
Matt Pawl
hayes

Yes, I agree that admins need to have this control, and maybe select agents, but not the end user.

I think allowing users to edit their comments or original request could be trouble. With the power to edit comments, agents or admins could clean out signatures, etc.

January 30, 2009 09:12
User photo
Thomas Pedersen

We all make mistakes and typos once in a while and it would be great if we could go back in time and undo them. Unfortunately, this isn't and should not be possible in Zendesk.

The event history acts as an audit trial that records every single change to a ticket; when it happened and what caused it to happen. If you ever looked through the event history, you can see each state change as well as which triggers notified users and agents. If you were able to go back in history and change comments, this audit trial would become invalid and it would be very hard to troubleshoot the system.

Just as with email, you have to proof-read your message before you hit the send button. Once that message hits the mail server, you can't recall it.

January 30, 2009 09:17
User photo
Joshua Gordon
jagproducts

I think it's fine to retain all the changes and history in the event log, however, I see no reason that you shouldn't be able to adjust what gets displayed in the thread that is visible to the end-users.

January 30, 2009 09:46
User photo
Vincent Brendel
panviva

I agree; the audit trail and comment trail (thread) need to become separated. The agent should be able to switch between the comment trail as the user would see it and the full audit trail. Something you would see in the audit trail would be "Ticket description changed by ..." or "Comment 2 deleted by ...".

Currently it is impossible to ever take a comment back or correct a mistake, however I think only agents would need to be able to do this.

Even just to clean up signatures from the ticket description would be good. Sometimes emails contain huge threads inside them and it's almost better to delete the ticket and create a new one.

January 31, 2009 19:15
User photo
Joshua Gordon
jagproducts

Are there any plans to include this in a future update? I would say this is the single biggest issue I have with zendesk.

February 10, 2009 13:01
User photo
Jamie Jensen

I would also like to be able to edit comments.  If we had to proofread every time we entered a comment it would add too much extra time.  There have been times when I have proofread something several times and then look at it later see something wrong.  Even proofread mail goes out wrong.

Zendesk seems little more than a fancy forum application, even the most basic forums allow users to edit posts AND let you know that the post/comment has been edited.

I really like Zendesk, but I am stupid and hasty, please allow me to correct my mistakes by editing them and not blatantly showing my customers that I don't know how to speel.

Thomas - you mention that each and every change needs to be displayed for the audit trail.  If an agent edits a comment, couldn't Zendesk just make a copy of the original, add it as a Quote to the changed comment and only display the changed comment to end users?  That way we get to make changes and the original gets to stay around for the audit trail.

I'll again display my stupidity, but why is the audit trail so rigidly important.  If an end user doesn't trust you to not change comments honestly won't he keep an email and challenge you with discrepancies?

March 06, 2009 21:23
User photo
Mikkel Svane
Zendesk

Thank you everybody who have submitted their thoughts on this subject. 

I would like to point out a few impracticalities in allowing editing of the audit trail. 

1) If a public message has been posted and then later been made private, what should happen to email notifications and trigger actions that has already been sent or acted on by the public comment?

2) What if a ticket update contained a certain keyword or phrase that has fired off a number of triggers, gets updated and then fires off another set of triggers?

3) What if one of your agents tells one of your customers to "f*** off" but then later deletes his own comment?

The big idea about an audit trail is to maintain a record showing who said what and what operations were performed during a ticket's lifetime. And in case of disputes, audit trails can work as direct evidence. Ensuring and settling liability issues.

So basically the audit trail is the core component of a help desk. If you don't need an uncorrupted audit trail, you probably don't need a help desk. You may want to look for a "fancy forum application" in stead :-)

So despite the fact that I love and encourage all customer feedback, the ability to mess with the audit trail will never happen.

To prevent agents posting wrong or misspelled information or unintentionally post public messages, we have considered implementing a "grace period" for ticket updates. That would give agents e.g. five minutes from posting an update to fix spelling errors and so, before the update was submitted to the ticket.

How to deal with long mail signatures and unintentionally included mail threads is another issue that we try to deal with. We also prefer to keep the comment trail slick, to the point and free of noise.

Thats for all the comments so far.

March 16, 2009 13:28
User photo
Graham Robson
Coherence Design

I have to tend to agree with Mikkel on the importance and integrity of the audit trail. A lot like a conversation, what was said, was said.

I like the offered compromise of the grace period - I've seen this used in other applications to good effect. Given that mistakes are likely to be spotted after the post submit button moment, a grace period should cover most accidents. I guess that the grace period should be linked to triggers so that they don't fire until the grace period is up.

This would also help rectify one of my common dooh momets when I select the wrong type of comment - public vs. private.

March 16, 2009 15:31
User photo
Kevin Gilbert

So, here's a big reason that there MUST be some way to edit a comment/ticket update that comes in through an email. I have on my Help Desk right now an update that went to the wrong ticket. The ticket it went to is a ticket from a totally different client. Now one of my clients is seeing a whole bunch of info relating to private network information of a different client. THIS IS TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE. Accidents do happen. We do want to maintain the integrity of the audit trail, but there has to be the exception that proves every rule. This is that exception. I am now in an incredibly awkward position having to explain to a client why their private info is showing up in a ticket for another client and explain to that client that they should disregard all that information that just got added to their ticket regarding another client's issues and network info. THIS IS A SECURITY ISSUE!! You can provide the edit capability for the owner or admin, but not for the agents. This provides a workable solution for the rare occasion that something like this happens.

March 20, 2009 10:37
User photo
Kevin Gilbert

My partner had this to add to the discussion.  "I also would appreciate this feature as occasionally I get comments put into the wrong tickets. As far as the audit trail goes, why not keep a log of the deleted comments and who deleted them. It could show up in the 'All events and notifications' but be removed from the comments thread. So, you keep the audit-ability and keep garbage information from cluttering up the ticket."

March 20, 2009 11:02
User photo
Joshua Gordon
jagproducts

No matter how many times this is explained by Zendesk support, I still can't accept that this is such a big deal to be able to hide mistakes. In the case Kevin presents, sure... an error was made and information got out. But the fact that the information will stay there in the ticket for the wrong customer for the rest of time just seems silly. Leave it in the official audit trail, just have an option to hide it from the customer. I'm not sure why you're pushing us to a not-all-that-fancy forum application to replace an otherwise good tool in Zendesk because of stubborness on this issue. If you're doing it to protect against an agent undoing a comment they're embarrased of, make it an admin-only feature. Or, make it a global option that can be turned on or off so that the site owner can decide if they want this to be available.

April 02, 2009 10:57
User photo
Jamie Jensen

Please allow us to EDIT!!! Pretty please?  I now have a ticket that somehow took the attachment and converted it to text and it shows the entire MIME message in the ticket view.  This causes me to scroll 3 or 4 pages worth of text to get down past that one ticket.  I also have another ticket that was sent with forwarded text in the message.  That also now requires me to scroll, scroll, scroll in the working tickets view.  If I had the ability to truncate the initial message and place the relevant text in an update I would have less clutter in the working tickets view.

Protecting us from ourselves is what governments do, not our software vendors.  Give the admins the ability not the agents.  If we're doing something that we shouldn't be doing with the audit trail, then our business will eventually fail and it won’t matter that we were deleting someone’s ticket updates, changing typos or correcting major oops factors.

I don't look forward to the day when I screw up and post to the wrong ticket.  Then I can feel as bad as Mr. Gilbert and have no way to correct the mistake.  However I have already made plenty of typos to look like a 2nd grader who is just learning to speel.  It sure would be nice to go back and look a bit more educated than that… I would also hope that my typos are not going to cause triggers to fire, I would start to suspect that SkyNet is a bit too close to the project.

Mistakes happen.  They happen more often than the deliberate acts of sabotage you are trying to protect us from.  If we protect ourselves from every danger possible we end up stuck in a bubble, unable to act from the .01% potential harm by a rouge agent.

Frankly I was under the impression that Zendesk was more of a 'fancy forum' already.  It seems pretty basic compared to other help desk systems.  However, I prefer its simplicity and ease of use compared to the endless complexity and configurability of the other systems. 

I presume that if an edit were made the audit trail would pick that up.  Or is the audit trail not that robust?  I am aware of change management systems that are able to document what changes are made and who makes those changes.  Is your audit trail only tracking that a change was made and not what was actually changed?  Even word processors have the ability to strike text or show that text was removed and by whom.  It would seem to me that the ability to record deletions of "f*** off" would not be impossible.  I'm not a programmer though so I could be ignorant of the degree of difficulty that a task like that may be.

If the triggers and alerts, which I couldn’t care less about, are so important as to make edits catastrophic, give the overall admin a switch to turn editing on or off.  Then if the whole thing comes crashing down on us because of changing a typo or sentence structure it’s our fault not Zendesks.  I’ll even sign a waiver against any liability in the event my entire database goes **poof** because an edit caused a trigger to delete all of my tickets. 

April 28, 2009 07:56
User photo
Mikkel Svane
Zendesk

Jamie, I understand your issue and we should look into visually truncate very large comments in the audit trail. 

As a Solo customer you may not appreciate triggers, alerts and the other work flow functionality in Zendesk, but an uncorrupted audit trail becomes increasingly important as your team grows. 

Email alerts are fired off the instant you update a ticket including the comment you have submitted. And then it makes no sense to go back and delete or change whatever you have written, because the customer will already have received it.

An audit trail documents all changes to a ticket. Allowing for changes whilst preserving an uncorrupted audit trail would only grow the size of the audit trail, and would ultimately only highlight what you want to hide.

April 30, 2009 06:14
User photo
Scott

Unfortunately this is probably a show-stopper for us.  We need to be able to edit both the end user and admin posts to tickets.  For our business an audit trail is completely unecessary.

Here is another security problem to highlight the need for this: an end user types their full credit card number and expiration date into a ticket (yes, people really do that!)  Leaving that number stored on your servers is a violation of our merchant account agreement, and may even have potential legal consequences.

May 06, 2009 22:00
User photo
Mikkel Svane
Zendesk

In that case, Scott, you can have an admin delete the ticket.

May 07, 2009 04:12
User photo
Scott

Yes, we could.  But to copy the text, delete the ticket, edit the text, and then paste it into a new ticket is a lot of unecessary work.  Plus creating a new ticket would confuse our customer.  I'm starting to wonder whether we should use a system where we don't have control over our own data anyway, so I'm going to look at some self-hosted help desks too.   Thank you for your response.

May 07, 2009 21:11
User photo
Andy Madge

Mikkel, I don't agree with your arguments.

There would be design decisions to be made regarding triggers and email notifications, but that's all they are - design decisions.  There are several ways to deal with these, you just need to pick the best.  Obviously the simplest (though not best) option would be that triggers and notifications don't happen for edits.

Nobody is asking to "mess with the audit trail", we just want to be able to edit posts -  the 2 are not mutually exclusive.  That's how wikis work - they show you the 'latest' version, but the audit trail is there if you choose to view it.

I can understand that this might require some changes to the design and underlying structure of Zendesk, but if this is the reason you don't want to do it then please be honest with us and say that.

Mistakes happen.  A lot more often than malicious actions do.  Part of software design is allowing for that fact.

 

May 08, 2009 05:26
User photo
Mikkel Svane
Zendesk

Andy, I agree that you have a point and allowing for changes to past comments whilst preserving the changes in the audit trail can make sense, although it introduces some possible dilemmas with regard to workflow. But let me also point out, that it wouldn't solve Jamie's issue where he wants to permanently delete very long emails/messages from the trail because they clutter the interface, and it wouldn't solve Scott's issue where he permanently wants to delete credit card information in a ticket.

May 09, 2009 13:54
User photo
Andy Madge

Good point, although I suppose you could design around that by making the edit audit trail visible only to admins.  In most cases where the audit trial is used to prove something, an admin would be involved anyway.  Still doesn't solve Scott's problem though - as you say there's no way around that other than deleting the ticket.

I really like the idea of the grace period since most of the time you do spot mistakes within a couple of minutes.

May 11, 2009 01:45
User photo
Alexander Kludt

Ok that whole integrity trail is good to know, BUT how about just making an option out of that ? There must be some way for special sysadmins to edit a ticket, is that so hard? And if you do not want that you just give that right to the super admin.

We were just trying something with a new agent, I was explaining him that he might post private comments - he tried that but accidentially missed that checkbox. Now my end user has a test comment I can not delete EVER, the only thing would be to recreate the ticket (wtf?) or to appologise to the customer for the inconvience.

Come on, give us a possibility for that!

May 13, 2009 10:37
User photo
Mikkel Svane
Zendesk

I would suggest you apologize to the customer in any case as he has already received an email with your unintentional update. Which he would in any case regardless of you tinkering with the audit trail.

May 13, 2009 14:32
User photo
David Jacobson

I'm all for keeping the audit trail sacred.  I agree that's one of the charcateristics that makes a ticket a ticket.  But, I wish I could go back and embellish / add to / express opinions on or changes I *would* have made to the history of a ticket.  Kind of like creating a branch (or a parallel timeline StarTrek terms ;-) ).  Or at least (I've requested this before) add additional new tags to closed tickets for historical reporting reasons.  But, I see Mikkel's conundrum on that; do you keep audit trail of the audit trail of the audit trail of the branch of the branch of the branch???

But, as for cleaning up a customer facing mess because an agent f'up... that's where I'd do the "close (and maybe even delete) that ticket and start over."  The customer would probably appreciate a brand new ticket number in some circumstances.

David.

 

May 15, 2009 07:58
User photo
Mikkel Svane
Zendesk

Jake, the audit trial is there to document what actually went on and was said. If you don't need an audit trail for that, why do you need it. And if you don't need it that much then why worry so much about what's in it?

And come on, we make a ton of decisions on behalf of the customer when we make a service like Zendesk. 

May 21, 2009 13:23
User photo
David Jacobson

Well, working for a SaaS hosted application company myself (not Zendesk), all I can say is that one thing that is definately worse than not allowing the customer control of their data is to accidently *lose* their data (even if it's just *perceived* as a loss, maybe they enabled some not-so-well-understood-feature that caused it, etc.).  Disabling an audit trail is controversial.  My company has been criticized by security audits for lack of auditing in specific circumstances, until we fixed those 'circumstances'.

Having said that, I still think you can have your cake and eat it too, with creative app design.  You can give the customer immense control of the data, and audit everything they do along the way.

May 21, 2009 13:29
User photo
Josh Duffek

i have a question...what happens to the audit trail when you delete a ticket?  does it get removed?  if not what happens?

IF, it does get removed from the trail your argument is completely invalid...in my ignorant opinion.  if the data is not removed from the trail, then why can't the same be done to one comment instead of the whole ticket?  doesn't add up.

 

at this point i dont have much time invested in ZD, so i am now looking into other solutions.  it's not so much this one feature...also the principle...sounds like a lot of customers need this to fix some really annoying issues but all ZD comes back with is "NO you cannot mess with the audit trail"....at this point...i dont think most people care so much about the audit trail.   our customers trust us enough...if they don't that's a problem we need to fix...

 

i made a stupid mistake on a ticket...its not a big deal at all...but i really could see how this could screw us later down the road.

 

please help.

 

jd.

July 15, 2009 15:03
User photo
Tom Duke

Mikkel,

I accept the point re: the audit trail within a help desk application.   Could you not allow for an erroneous comment to be changed from public to private however and have that change logged in the audit trail?

We have to clean up a ticket now and the only option is to delete the ticket and and in a new ticket with 'cleaned' data.  Same result - just a lot more work for us - and we lose the audit trail for the original ticket.

 

- Tom

 

October 01, 2009 01:38
User photo
Renee
Code42

I agree 100% with Zendesk's position and if they did implement the feature to edit comments, the account owner (not just any admin) should be able to disable the feature.  IMO, the power of the audit trail outweighs any advantages of being able to edit responses would bring. Of course, even the best support team members make mistakes once in a while, but I still would rather have a permanent audit trail where there is absolutely no question of the ticket conversation's validity.

A grace period is a nice idea.  You should have the ability to edit the grace period or disable that feature if it is implemented, however.

October 02, 2009 10:18
User photo
Ben Wilson
Versata

With regards to workflow and emails being sent, why not just have an email sent that shows the ticket was updated.  Then the end user can log in and view the comment, that way it can be edited if there was an error and there is no harm done.

October 02, 2009 13:04
User photo
Edward Downer
senergyoilandgas

I have to agree with the majority of people in this discussion. A comment posted as public when it was intended to be private should be allowed to be changed/edited/made private if not deleted.

If the option was there for an admin/account owner to set up the priviledges of their agents then the onus would be on Zendesk Customers (us) to configure Zendesk as to how we wish to operate (as far as audit trail!). If it were made a private comment then the audit trail would be there anyway. An erroneous comment made publically when intended to be private could be very damaging to us. 

I find it a bit disconcerting how unaccommodating Zendesk are being with this (looking back through the posts). Surely Zendesk can do something to satisfy their customers on this issue?

October 21, 2009 09:31
User photo
Adam Sentz

I, too, would like the ability to edit comments (with granular permission). Users frequently reply with the entire email conversation up to that point in every reply. This very quickly makes it difficult to go back and review the interaction that took place. It seems like all you would need to do would be to add the edits to the audit trail. You could have inline versioning of each comment - perhaps just the original and the "edited for clarity" version. 

November 18, 2009 17:14
User photo
rick

Much of the above seems to be in the context of "tickets," which to me means a support incident. So maintaining an "audit trail" (or as some have put it, rather ironically, "audit trial") may be well and good there, but my concern is with companies who also use Zendesk as a simple public forum. I know of no other forum software that doesn't allow you to edit your posts. It's painful only being able to edit the top post of a thread you originate.

November 29, 2009 15:02
User photo
Mikkel Svane
Zendesk

Rick, in the forums Admins have a little 'Edit" link next to the comments that allows editing of the comments.

November 30, 2009 21:32
User photo
rick

I was speaking as an end-user. I'm starting to see Zendesk forums pop up in various places.

November 30, 2009 22:20
User photo
Samuel Brazier
operitel

We really would appreciate the ability to edit/delete comments.

I think it should be limited to admins only for audit processing. Furthermore, I think that all original comments should be kept "hidden" in the ticket, so that even when admins edit / delete comments they can still be reviewed if necessary.

December 05, 2009 13:51
User photo
rick

I don't quite get all this talk of auditing and tickets. Not every use of Zendesk is in a capacity where anything like that is needed. Sometimes a forum is just a forum, where public people pose public questions on whatever the product/service is and expect to be able to edit themselves as appropriate. If someone posts nuclear launch codes, then an admin can amend a particular post. Like every other forum in the world.

December 05, 2009 14:37
User photo
Jake Holman
Product Manager
@Rick: This thread is exclusively about Tickets - not Forums, which is what you're talking about here. If you would like to talk further about Forums, then I'd like to invite you to begin a new discussion by going to https://support.zendesk.com/forums/1848/entries/new As you can probably see, this thread is very active, it gets confusing when two discussion happen at the same time :)
December 05, 2009 18:11
User photo
Adam

I'm very new here and am still wrapping my head about things.


But, it seems to me like what ZD has done, is take the concept of "forums" and apply it to everything:  FAQs, Tickets, and what we traditionally think of as forums.  You've kind of made your forum engine the stem cell so to speak, and it may become a few different things.


Forums are conventionally public, or semi-public tools that customers/users use to reference or figure things out.   I don't think anyone would argue that users and admins should be able to fix/change something on a public forum (at least, that is standard practice).


Tickets are conventionally a private communication between company and customer.  The audit trail is crucial  here and should not be messed with, although there are certain circumstances such as SSN's or CCN's where there should be a mechanism for removal (I believe HIPPA regulations would prohibit us from storing a CU's SSN in ZD's DB, yes?).  I used to jr. admin a RightNow instance, and I believe RN prettymuch did the same thing; you had to have one of their admins remove stuff from the RN thread DB.  Fair enough.

But, what ZD has done has blurred the line between tickets and forums.  Unless the agent checks the 'private' box, the "ticket" thread effectively becomes (again in conventional parlance) a publicly searchable "forum" thread.  At that point, the circumstances become more common to need to edit the original post, to correct what has become a reference document.   And, I would argue the audit trail argument switches from the more compelling "ticket" one to the far less compelling forum one.

December 22, 2009 17:31
User photo
Adam

Finally, it seems to me that you can have the audit trail reflect any changes that were done, with a version model such as basecamp or google docs, so that admins can see exactly what was changed, when, by whom, and to what. 

December 22, 2009 17:35
User photo
Paul Tracy

We just completed our evaluation of Zendesk as a candidate to replace our 10 year old helpdesk system. This is the one issue that prevented us from making the switch. Our current system has an audit trail that tracks EVERYTHING but ticket information can still be edited. My support reps are good but not perfect. The inability to correct comments, or delete them or at least flip the public/private tag was a deal killer for us. At least let admins or owners edit comments.

January 07, 2010 12:05
User photo
Samuel Brazier
operitel

An ideal solution would be for end users and agents to be able to edit or delete comments (with configurable permissions of course) and for any changes that are made to be recorded in "All events and notifications" on the ticket. This would seem logical as currently all other changes are tracked here.

There would need to be however, full functionality for admins to set permissions on whether end users or agents can edit or delete comments.

January 07, 2010 12:11
User photo
Edward Downer
senergyoilandgas

Paul, I've posted on this topic before, but I would just like to agree with you fully. This continues to be a bug bear of mine. Not only are there the occasional mistakes by our support agents, but also we have clients regularly send data to us via the portal and then ask us not to keep a record of the data once the support ticket is solved. As you say the only way is to delete the whole ticket. This happens again and again.

I look forward to Zendesk addressing this issue sooner rather than later.

January 07, 2010 12:52
User photo
Easterntranstech
i just setup zendesk 2 days ago and am very impressed. as a new admin by mistake i posted a reply when i was "assuming" the identity of an end user. i wanted to delete the comment and re-post it under my own identity but could not. so i just had to post it under my own identity and leave the confusing post from the "end user" on there. (he will be wondering, "did i write that?" hah. otherwise, great system!
February 10, 2010 19:25
User photo
John Ferrari

I just want to put my vote in for the ability to edit/delete comments.  However, at the very least, we would like to see the ability to switch a comment as visible/hidden from end users.

April 08, 2010 09:33
User photo
Emilio C.S.

Although I am happy with Zendesk, I am deeply disappointed at not being able to do something as simple as to edit/delete posts/comments that may have errors. I agree with Ted Casassa and all the people like Samuel Brazier that need to edit post/comments.

Para la comunidad en Español:

Aunque estoy bastante satisfecho con el uso de Zendesk, debo reconocer que encuentro una limitación grave la imposibilidad de editar las consultas realizadas por lus usuarios, así como sus respuestas por parte de administradores o agentes. 

Es muy común que un usuario inicie una consulta reenviando un mensaje, esto provoca extensos y confusos mensajes que impiden ver de forma sencilla y eficaz el texto principal del mensaje (este desastroso resultado de Zend tiene muy poco, es todo lo contrario).

También es un error común que un agente comenta algún error o falta ortográfica en sus respuestas, y no tenemos la opción de solucionarlo. Sólo podemos añadir una nueva respuesta que aclare un error anterior, lo cual es redundante y muchas veces molesto (por no decir innecesario).

En definitiva, que un administrador o agente con permisos no pueda editar el enunciado o cualquier respuesta (aunque quede registro de ello) me hace sentir muy limitado en mi tarea de ofrecer la mejor atención posible a mis clientes. Me hace sentir como el usuario final de un sistema que no tengo privilegios de administrar. Espero que pueda solucionarlo pronto.

April 19, 2010 01:36
User photo
David Coales

I am also very worried about not being able to switch a comment from public to private, although I do take the point that the comment will have already been emailed to the customer by then.  The approach we have had to take is that we assume all comments entered into zenddesk are public - the agent must assume this in order to avoid embarrassing mistakes.  We have then added a custom field called internal notes where we can log anything that we don't want the user to see.  

Not ideal but it is the only place that we can guarantee our comments will never be shown to the user.

April 21, 2010 04:03
User photo
Joy Montgomery

We are new to ZenDesk and are just finding our way. The problem of not being able to edit a ticket is an issue for us, too- if an Agent creates a ticket for a job/project, and then needs to change details, all the info is spread throught the ticket and not in one place. I agree that the audit trail is important, but surely there is a way to do both??

April 29, 2010 10:18
User photo
Wyatt Shaw

1) Ability for comment owner to Edit/Delete a comment - Zendesk clients have been asking for this since Sept 14th or 2008.  In the threads people have openly stated that they have not purchased Zendesk due to this lack of control - I'm not sure what else Zendesk needs to hear to make this happen.  Full CRUD capabilities should exist for every type of data element in the system - the only exception is where a CRUD function would cause the system to no longer function.  The Audit Trail and Comments should be separate eintities - Jira has a great model for this.

2) Ability to set comment to Public/Private at any time - Use Case: On occasion an engineer will post a response to a ticket via the Jira plugin.  By default these comments come over as 'Private'.  The helpdesk representative will review the comment to ensure it is in context and client friendly.  The helpdesk rep should be able to simply set that Comment to 'Public' - instead they have to copy/paste and add a new comment.  This is inefficient - your lack of simple functionality is adding complexity to our internal processes.

May 17, 2010 12:55
User photo
Conrad Selle
Project CS Beta Testers

End users need a way to edit task dates set during initial ticket creation, if those dates change without needing the agent to make the change for them.

June 07, 2010 20:51
User photo
Johnny Yeip

I too would love to see this feature!  It would be very helpful to our team as we are using Zendesk as a task management system instead of a customer service system per se.  If one of our users makes mistake or needs to update an attachment, it would be much easier to edit it instead of adding another comment to the thread (and keep it from getting too long).  Why couldn't it be an option that could be turned on/off by the Admin?

July 27, 2010 10:22
User photo
Christopher Lasota

I just accidently replied to "Josh" as "John". I cannot edit the ticket. What am I left with? (A) Pretending it did not happen and laughing it off when I'm called on it or (B) deleting the ticket all together and recreating. 

This is crazy. Come on guys. Get this done. 

August 20, 2010 08:55
User photo
Geoff Flamank
Project C Beta Testers

We desperately need this feature for dealing with security related information being passed. Right now our only recourse is to delete that ticket and copy/edit/paste into the new ticket. We all understand the ramifications of editing the audit trail. Maybe just flag the ticket or the comment as "dirty" or something like that.

 

Thanks,

- Geoff

September 07, 2010 15:46
User photo
gerry

Hmmmm, thread started Sept 15, 2008. It's now Sept 16, 2010. 2 years without a response. This is starting to feel a little hopeless. Any chance of getting some sort of explanation as to why this feature is not on the radar?

September 16, 2010 20:46
User photo
Jake Holman
Product Manager

Hi Gerry, this thread has had many responses from Zendesk staff, both myself and Mikkel, our CEO, has commented - I apologise if that wasn't immediately clear. I'd also marked this as "Not Planned" some time ago, so as not to make anyone think it's something we're going to do. 

As for why it's not on the radar, I'd recommend reading through Mikkel's points earlier in the thread - he outlines exactly why we're not able to do this. 

September 16, 2010 21:09
User photo
Dwight V. Doyley

I'm surprised so many people asking for this feature isn't enough for Zendesk to think it's worth doing. E-mail sigs and disclaimers are bad enough but I've just had a user send two Christmas party invites in reply to an open ticket and I can't get rid of them.

Can you not even implement it as a switchable option so that those who want it can switch it on and those who don't don't have to?

November 10, 2010 09:09
User photo
gerry

@Jake, yep, my bad. It was definitely answered above.

 

My 2 cents though... re integrity of the audit trail, etc... is that as the owner of your own business, you should have certain controls over your business. If YOU think that the audit trail should be this way or that way and then for some reason make a decision that because you see it as right, others should also agree with you.... that is a problem. This is clear by the long trail of complaints about the issue and you having to repeat your reasonings over and over. Sad fact is, people tend to disagree with you.

IF there are that many of your customers who disagree, perhaps its not a decision you should force on anyone.

Personally, I think as an professional business owner,I should have the ability and freedom to make certain decisions about my own business and how it operates.... Like, for example, if I walk into my office in a hurry for an important meeting that will be happening in 5-minutes and in the confusion I spill open my briefcase and somehow my wife's panties fall onto my desk, I should be able to make the informed decision to pick them back up and put them back in the briefcase (and, figure out how the hell they got there, later). ;-)

I'm not going to just leave them there and when Mr Yakimoto comes in say, sorry for the undies, but I can't pick them up. What's done is done. Please excuse me.

No, obviously that's an exaggerated example but makes a point, none the less. When it's a technical issue, that's one thing. But, when philosophical questions come into play, you have to consider that you're going off of your own definitions and to you what you might consider an "audit trail" is nothing more than "ticket history" to the rest of us and something we should be allowed to edit if we so choose.

That said, I'm sure you can go on and never address the situation. My guess is people will continually run into the problem again and again.

I love zendesk. I have not complaints (other than this one). You all are doing an awesome job. Major props, for sure.

I'm just hot sure the whole 'purity', elitist argument should be made. AND, I would at minimum really appreciate at least having 5 minutes to edit tickets... that would have saved me in my situation.

BTW, I'm really just playing devil's advocate, no offense intended to anyone, I'm sure everyone has good intentions.  :-)

November 10, 2010 13:48
User photo
Christopher Lasota

Gerry,

This is a long standing head scratcher. Give up, they are not going to do it. It makes no sense. It is very disappointing and is a major annoyance that they will not correct. 

Sorry Jake, but I have read the reasons and I'm not satisfied. This needs to be done. But it never will be. 

November 10, 2010 14:03
User photo
Jimmy Soho

@Mikkel @Jake: a list of comments is not equal to an audit trail. If someone edits or deletes a comment this could result in a NEW audit trail record. Default you'd show the list of comments. In case of a dispute an agent or admin could fall back to the view of audit trail records.

November 30, 2010 16:40
User photo
Michael Craddock
iqmetrix

Jimmy is correct on this.  Comments and an Audit Trail should not be considered one in the same.  Many other Help Desk options offer several options.  A Journal entry log for all comments, and a System log for changes to the actual ticket itself.  Journals have the ability to be hidden or shown after creation.  If a mistake is made and the incorrect ticket is updated, an internal comment not hidden etc... It is unfathomable that the only workaround would be to create a whole new ticket.  More customization should be allowed, and restricted to an admin level.  I understand the point of not wanting comments deleted as they are a history, but this is something that can be set and determined on a per help desk basis.

January 13, 2011 19:12
User photo
Kris Rackham

If this feature is not planned or will never be implemented, can you at least find a way to keep tickets free of clutter (e.g. mail signatures and legal statements at the end of a client's response)?

We are currently testing Zendesk and the load of clutter that grows in every ticket is a huge disadvantage for us.

February 27, 2011 07:28
User photo
Dwight V. Doyley

Every time I get another e-mail with a mile long signature full of company logos, insincere 'warmest regards' and so called legal disclaimers, and I mean every time, I think to myself 'maybe I should try another helpdesk system?'. I like Zendesk a lot, both as a company and as software but this one issue and the reasons for it really are getting in the way for me.

February 27, 2011 07:37
User photo
Marc Vermeulen
Disappointing to see that 2.5 years after initial request people are stil arguing about whether the feature is useful and/or whether is should be prioritised. If this number of people votes for a feature then it should be seriously considered even when the implementation might not be straightforward and probably be rather complex.
March 14, 2011 13:22
User photo
Tim Turner

I have had many cases where I typed info that was meant only for internal people to see but then don't uncheck the box and then it is visible to the person who submitted the ticket... and then to my knowledge no way to undo that, edit it or delete it?  Or maybe I can just delete the entire thread.

 

Regardless, we use infusionsoft and customerhub and are being directed to use Tender instead of Zendesk since it is integrated with customerhub.  I like the ease of use of Zendesk.  And I like the visual appearance and organization and ease of use... but the non responsiveness on this one is definitely bothersome. 

March 30, 2011 06:53
User photo
Spees, Daniel

I know this may be redundant since the powers that be have already closed the door on this request.  However, if they are continuing to read this thread perhaps they would take this to heart...

I really don't understand what editing of a comment has to do with the audit trail.  When a user chooses to edit the comment keep the original, flag it as replaced with the new comment and display the new comment.  Provide a means for admins to view the original comments in addition to what they were replaced with.  This is common functionality in any data driven system that has to keep historical changes to information.  To say it's not possible because of the audit trail is misdirection at best.  It may be expensive and require some significant reworking of underlying logic and structure.  But, it's clearly possible to allow visible comments to reflect changes while preserving the original comments in the database to provide for the audit trail.

What's the real reason for closing the door on this request?

April 13, 2011 07:05
User photo
gerry

Sorry to say, but I agree totally. I honestly don't think it has anything to do with the audit trail. I think they'd rather just not put time into this as it may not be the most valuable use of their time in the big picture. I'd rather hear that than an excuse. Of course customers are going to give up on this issue eventually and the World will go on. Just doesn't feel great. But, oh well, still a good product. I'd like to see the changes happen, though, myself.

April 13, 2011 07:58
User photo
Indiana Romaire
Blueback-reservoir

Hi,

Is there any updates?

I/we need as well to be able to edit comments (mines at least).

July 19, 2012 01:11
User photo
Dwight V. Doyley

4 years of 'No' is your update Indiana. If it matters that much to you who's in control of your workflow, give up, like I did  and go elsewhere.

July 19, 2012 02:23
User photo
gerrycramer

Where did you go, @Dwight, if you don't mind me asking...?

July 19, 2012 02:44
User photo
Josh Duffek

Dwight wins the internet tonight.

July 19, 2012 02:50
User photo
Dwight V. Doyley

I looked at a lot of alternatives and they either has similar (or the same) limitation or were prohibitively expensive so being a programmer and a small operation I rolled my own. It's not Zendesk but it does exactly what we need. 

July 19, 2012 02:53
User photo
Josh Duffek

DVD, ninja insert a plug to your new thing.

July 19, 2012 02:56
User photo
Dwight V. Doyley

It's not commercial. It's ugly but functional. If Zendesk gave us what we needed, we'd seriously consider coming back because it's beautiful and functional but needlessly (in my view) crippled in key areas. That's why I'm still monitoring this thread.

A very interesting thing though is that when we were building it, we had to consider exactly the situation Zendesk we're all talking about.  Our solution was to allow limited ticket editing by certain users and keep an audit trail and when a ticket is closed, it's closed. No users replying to e-mails from weeks ago when they should be starting a new ticket. And no party invites etc. sent to the service desk address!

July 19, 2012 03:07
User photo
Eli Blankers
accelitec

Simply put:  We should be able to take back a comment in the following minutes (or two).  Kind of like facebook?

July 20, 2012 13:25
User photo
Dan Goldman
wealthvest

I also second this request for all the reasons outlined above. Separate the audit trail form the ticket thread.

Listen to your users - if so many of us are telling you we need this then perhaps you should be looking into ways to make it happen instead of looking for excuses why you will not.

Thank you.

January 10, 2013 17:59
User photo
Elyse Kanagaratnam
Zendesk

Hi all,

Thanks to you all for contributing so much to our online community! I have some pretty fantastic news, but firstly, let me start with some housekeeping notes. To keep this thread a bit simpler, I've edited the title to no longer include end-users. This request was initially marked Not planned because we currently have no intention of allowing end-users to edit ticket comments. If this is something you feel is very important to your workflow, please feel free to start a brand new thread around only that.

We are, however, moving forward with a feature to allow admins (and potentially agents) to "redact" ticket comments. This will allow you to remove any sensitive or extraneous text from a ticket thread. Please understand that this function is similar to deletion in that the data is destroyed and cannot be recovered. In addition, this feature will allow admins to remove attachments and screenshots.

At this time, I do not have an exact ETA for release. We will certainly keep you posted as this moves along. Thanks again!

/Jennifer, Customer Advocate

February 22, 2013 11:48
User photo
Tobias Braun
global

We are just trying the Zendesk Trial and have not much E-Mail Traffic in Zendesk yet but i definitely see the need in such a feature. It should be easy for Agents to follow the ticket history and look for essential information within the ticket. So, please try to provide us the tools you can :-)

March 03, 2013 03:31
User photo
Tobias Braun
global

Erm, just an idea ... Jake Holman once said that editing or deleting comments from a ticket is not so good because someone could abuse this and claim he never said this and that... Something like this.

What, if you would implement some kind of comment history? I mean, the author of the comment could be allowed to change the text or correct typos he made and then a new version of the comment is saved, but everyone could still access the old version of the comment. The author could even delete the comment and it would be just disabled so it does not appear in the comment stream but its still available.

What do you think?

March 03, 2013 13:31
User photo
Elyse Kanagaratnam
Zendesk

@Tobias - Thanks for the suggestion! First, let me expand on our current plan:

As the current plan moves forward, only admins will be able to delete ticket comments, sections of ticket comments, attachements, and screenshots. They will not be able to add anything, only take things away. To be clear, they will have this capability across all comments on all tickets, not just their own.

It's not definite yet, but it's possible that we'll allow admins to give agents this permission, as well. But please understand that at this time, we have no intention of allowing end-users to edit ticket comments in any capacity. We consider this to be an additional feature request, so you're welcome to start a new thread if necessary.

As far as Jake's comment goes - He's absolutely right. This is why we have been so hesitant to allow the editing of ticket comments in the past. However the feature we are currently working toward rolling out, we see as a security improvement. It is not intended to be a typo-corrector or extraneous text cleaner (although, it can certainly be used in that capacity). It is meant to remove sensitive data that should no longer be available to view at all. Does this make sense?

March 04, 2013 16:14
User photo
Johnny Yeip

Couldn't a ticket comment be “editable” by and Admin/Agent for a short period of time after submitted?  I've got to believe people realize they make a mistake soon after they submit a comment so 3-5 min. should be ample time.  Even then, all changes would be documented so there’s an audit trail (like @Tobias outlined above)

Seems like a good compromise to me.  Thoughts?

March 04, 2013 16:23
User photo
Elyse Kanagaratnam
Zendesk

@Johnny - By "editable", do you mean they should be able to add things? Currently, the feature we're working on is "redaction", a.k.a. deletion. The reason we are not making the information available again is because we assume deleted comments are a security risk, such as credit card information or social security numbers. The audit log will, however, specify whether or not text/attachments have been redacted.

March 04, 2013 16:30
User photo
Dan Goldman
wealthvest

I think you're all making this far more complicated than it needs to be.

Give each company the option if they want to edit tickets.

Give each company the option to enable this feature for whichever class of users they want.

If a company can't handle this they can't elect to not permit modifications. I don't want the time limit myself.

Jennifer - if you're saying we'll only be able to delete things how then would we be able to use it to clean up typos etc? Isn't there a contradiction in what you are saying? I would like full capability to edit/delete/whatever. Our use cases don't preclude this functionality. Again - why not let companies decide for themselves how to use this feature instead of trying to coerce only one use case on everyone? We all have different needs. Why should some of us be limited just because others don't want to be responsible for using the system appropriately?

Thank you for your consideration.

March 04, 2013 17:41
User photo
Johnny Yeip

I 100% agree with @Dgoldman's idea - let the company decide on implementation, but I have been following this topic for at least a year and a half now and Zendesk has been very reluctant to allow for this.

This is why I thought the time limit would be a good comprimise.  I would need to edit/add/update text and attachments though - just having the ability to delete doesn't really help me.

March 05, 2013 00:37
User photo
Dmitry Podshivalov

+100 to  Dgoldman's comment

April 26, 2013 02:51
User photo
Dmitry Podshivalov

please give us possibility to decide - want we edit comments or not and add audit of all action on comments.

Audit log for public comments (until they become private) should be available to a customer. Or better if it will be configurable

April 26, 2013 03:02
User photo
Jon

Hellooo? Anybody there?  I have never worked on a support platform that did not allow editing/deleting comments.  It is oddly restrictive in my mind.  3 things at a minimum need to be put in place.

1. Admins should be able to permanently delete any comment or part of any comment, (in case someone typed a CC number, etc.)  There should be a time stamp/log of when this was done but the deleted info should not be logged/stored anywhere.  It is gone forever.

2. Agents should be able delete/modify any comment but their deletions/mods will be logged and stored in the history of the ticket.

3. All comments should be collapsible to make it easier to scroll through and find the date/time you need to look at.  You could include the agent/user name, date/time and a parsed version of the latest comment.  Similar to what you see when hovering over a ticket in any of the views.

Well...at least that is want I would like to see implemented. 

May 21, 2013 09:33
User photo
Luke Stratton

When is the 'redaction' feature due to be released?

I also agree with everything Jon says above.

May 30, 2013 06:23
User photo
Diane Albert
schoolannual

We get multiple FWD: in our tickets if a customer emails their rep directly and then the rep emails us to help them.  I need to clean up that "stuff" like I would responding to a FWD email...I get rid of all the email address and signatures.

Additionally, this would help with those tickets that are opened when a customer responds to a closed ticket.  I get all the previous information that has absolutely nothing to do with my current ticket, but that means my customer's email is VERY VERY long.

 

Diane

June 06, 2013 13:40
User photo
Jon

Still no replies from a ZD rep. since March 4th?

June 21, 2013 09:55
User photo
Lyn

ZenDesk, please add me to the list of folks who want our Admins to be able to deleted posts that were incorrectly posted in the wrong ticket.  As others have stated, sometimes these were public comments sent to the wrong customer making us look foolish or worse.  If preserving the audit trail is that important to you as a company, please keep the unedited one in the comments list but allow us to fix mistakes in the one that is displayed...put a note stating why the comment was deleted at the point in the chain of comments where the deleted one was with a display option or similar.  Thanks.

July 18, 2013 07:14
User photo
Helle Buhl
maxmanus

I'am also very interested in being able to edit comments.

I fully agree with the suggestions that Jon made.

July 30, 2013 02:37
User photo
Felton Frantz

Why not a best of both worlds approach?

Keep original  posts intact as an audit trail and detailed support.

Add a corresponding "Abstract" view which could be cloned from, edited and linked to the original thread as a high level and clean primary source for tier 1 research, review, and knowledge base inclusion. Using cross linking, Abstract and Original posts could be toggled for a high level of a drill down view. 

August 09, 2013 07:00
User photo
Ben Rohrs
Product Manager

Thanks everyone for your continued feedback on this functionality. It's been awhile since Zendesk has responded, but I wanted you to know we are still planning on building some of the functionality requested here.

First of all, as stated earlier, we don't plan on providing the ability to add text to a ticket comment. Allowing modification of existing comments violates the integrity of the ticket, which can lead to doubt and confusion as to what was previously written. However, to ensure you can remove sensitive data from a ticket, we plan on building functionality which allows you to remove text from a comment, or delete objects attached to the comment (e.g., file, screencast, voicemail). A ticket's audit log would record what has been redacted. This functionality is often called Redaction.

For those of you interested in Redaction, along with the feedback here, I'd like to meet with a few customers to understand specifically how groups would delete content as part of their team workflow. If you’re interested in this specific discussion and you're available to jump on a quick call with me, please comment here and I’ll reach out to as many of you as I can.

Once I collect this feedback and define requirements I'll update this thread with information on when we plan to implement this feature.

August 14, 2013 09:35
User photo
Lyn

Would like to be able to one or both of the following:

  • Delete a comment posted to the incorrect ticket auto-replacing it with a note stating something like 'Comment deleted:  posted in incorrect ticket' with a click link to see what was deleted...could be in popup box.
  • Allow Admins to edit a comment and displaying a click link to see the original unedited text.

This preserves the original comments (somewhere) but allows us to cleanup incorrect comments in the active chain.  Thanks!

August 14, 2013 10:13
User photo
Fernando Duarte
zuora

@Ben,  I am interested in Redaction.  Please count me in

August 14, 2013 10:16