Matt McLean

Moe,

Those 2 look logically equivalent to me.

The nice thing about using the "contains at least one of the following" within the "ALL" block is that it allows you to have slightly more complicated logic, for example if you wanted any other "ANY" conditions to also be evaluated besides the Tags.

For example if we changed your examples and wanted to check the inbound email address,

ALL
Ticket | is | created
Tags | contains at least... | Tag 1, Tag 2, Tag 3

ANY
Received at | is | SupportAddress1
Received at | is | SupportAddress2

Would be different from

ALL
Ticket | is | created

ANY
Tags | contains at least... | Tag 1
Tags | contains at least... | Tag 2
Tags | contains at least... | Tag 3
Received at | is | SupportAddress1
Received at | is | SupportAddress2

The first example would only evaluate "true" when Tag1,2,or3 is present AND the received_at address is 1 or 2.
The second example would evaluate  "true" when Tag1,2,or3 is present, OR the received_at address is 1 or 2, even if none of the tags are present.

Moe,

You are correct that the first statement means that All 3 tags must be on the ticket.

The second statement means that Tag1, Tag2, OR Tag3 must be on the ticket.

All conditions in "ALL" are "AND"ed together, but some conditions can have their own "OR" property, such as [Tags] [Contains at least one of the following] and [Comment text] [Contains at least one of the following words].

All conditions in "ANY" are "OR"ed together, but it's also important to note that at least one of the "ANY" conditions must be true for the full set of both ANY/ALL conditions to return "true", and for the trigger to run.

IF ((ALL1 AND ALL2 AND ALL3 AND …) AND (ANY1 OR ANY2 OR ANY3 OR …))
 Return TRUE
ELSE
 Return FALSE

Would be nice to be able to embed the dashboard into the email itself, too, even if only as pngs, rather than as an attached pdf, csv, or xls file.

Allowing us to use "has attachment" in a trigger would allow us to automatically scan all new attachments with an external virus scanner such as https://www.reversinglabs.com/ https://www.opswat.com/ or the private API version of https://www.virustotal.com/ - this could potentially prevent the issue seen on this page:

https://support.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/articles/115000833188--Users-are-getting-malicious-content-and-red-harmful-programs-warning-screens-when-trying-to-access-ticket-attachments

Otherwise, a malicious attachment could be downloaded and cause Google "Safe Browsing" to flag our domain as "hosting malware" - for at least 12-72 hours while ZD responds to Google, deletes the malicious attachment on our behalf, and gets our domain re-checked and OK'd once again.

Allen,

Michael is suggesting that Zendesk "allow" ooo-replies from End Users to show up in the ticket, rather than showing up in the "Suspended Tickets" view.

The mention of the Out of Office app was just that it is irrelevant to solving this issue.

Having more options around "suspected spam"/vacation responses would be helpful, especially when customers are using their own email providers' spam filters already.

I can see the logic in an automated / spammy NEW email being routed to the Suspended Tickets view, but if the email is a reply to an existing ticket, it would make a lot more sense for it to show up in that ticket. I understand Zendesk needs a way to prevent "mail loops" but unless both the Agent AND the End-user had auto-replies running, a loop wouldn't happen - End Users aren't normally notified of their own (email) replies. Additionally, even if both the agent and end-user had auto-replies enabled, many auto-reply systems, for example Gmail, don't re-send a vacation response if the same thread gets another reply within a certain amount of time.

Proposed options for handling auto replies:

[ ] Allow for Requesters

[ ] Allow for Agents

[ ] Allow for CCs

Unchecking all the boxes would be the way things are currently - don't allow auto-replies; send them to Suspended Tickets View (though really it would make more sense for it to be Suspended Emails that can then be routed to an existing ticket OR a new ticket)

Checking the first box is what Michael is asking for.
Some ZD customers may want to check the middle box or both top boxes.
I expect very few customers would want to check the bottom box, but it would be a nice option.

In short, Zendesk, please give your customers more control and more options! Keep sensible defaults and hide the options behind multiple settings screens if you must, but give us the options!

Everyone interested in this feature might want to check out this new Early Access Program:

https://support.zendesk.com/hc/en-us/community/topics/360000030928-Zendesk-Support-EAP-Agent-as-End-User-AEU-

I agree with this request.

If anyone is worried about "gaming" the survey results, the results could be broken down by "agent" surveys, "light agent" surveys, "end user" surveys, etc. "End user" surveys would be the exact same thing as the current survey results, and wouldn't be tainted by team members giving one another undeserved ratings.