Recent searches
No recent searches
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/fa3bd/fa3bdcceeb96061a69ae1fff9529c338bcdc0abd" alt="Danny B.'s Avatar"
Danny B.
Joined Oct 16, 2021
·
Last activity Oct 29, 2021
Following
0
Followers
0
Total activity
6
Votes
3
Subscription
1
ACTIVITY OVERVIEW
BADGES
ARTICLES
POSTS
COMMUNITY COMMENTS
ARTICLE COMMENTS
ACTIVITY OVERVIEW
Latest activity by Danny B.
Danny B. commented,
Thank Rich Shupe. I totally understand where you are coming from.
Just from an auditing perspective, which we experienced, once you allow anyone to update a "closed ticket", you are opening it to a whole new complexities, regardless what ticketing system you used.
Another option is to create a 'child-like' ticket that is related to a the "closed ticket". You can have a new custom field i.e. "closed linked ticket id" so you'd be able add new information (i.e. tags, internal notes, etc,) and still be able to search, report on these tickets accordingly.
View comment · Posted Oct 29, 2021 · Danny B.
0
Followers
0
Votes
0
Comments
Danny B. commented,
I used to have this understanding that we would need to update a ticket even if it is close (same use cases as above), but with some realizations, a "close" ticket is a close ticket, you should never touch those, once you opened it again or even just an update to a field, becomes an Auditing nightmare!!!
What are team did is fine tune some process management, update what you need to update i.e. fields, comments, etc, before setting the ticket status to "solve". You can even add your own "internal status" as a custom field. Then configure an automation that if the ticket status is "Solved", and no updates to the ticket for 'x' no. days, then set to close.
Else, you will never have an end state to your ticket lifecycle.
View comment · Posted Oct 28, 2021 · Danny B.
0
Followers
0
Votes
0
Comments