There is a rampant problem on this site with users changing direct lines to main company numbers. There are times when once I revert the number back to the direct line, the user changes it again - and after a battle of three to four changes I have to file a support request to get this to stop. This (alongside users graveyarding valid contracts for no apparent reason) is among the most abused ways of users stealing royalty of contacts.
On Jigsaw you could not keep changing something back and forth. While reversion is nice, there has to be a limit to how many times something can be changed back and forth, and once this wall is hit it should trigger a support dispute and resolution process.
Please bring back the ability yo properly challenge and get resolution of issues such as these so these users get warned and/or banned for harming the database (and wasting a lot of time for users like myself).
Right now, if someone deactivates one of my contacts, they get Royalty Ownership; if I reactivate the contact, the other user keeps RO - for the contact that they deactivated. Same with other flows on the new system with regards to Royalty Ownership. It seems arbitrary and the logic seems twisted. If this change has been made purposely, can we getb an explanation of why it has been made? If not, can we revert to the old logic of RO?
Sadly, data.com has become a less useful tool for lead sourcing and qualification I find I use it less often; consequently my contributions of new companies and contacts has decreased as have updates and changes. If my experience is shared by others, this means the quality and reliability of the database as a whole will decline if users stop adding new or modifying existing entries.
Case in point: I found it extremly helpful to search within the "company" for a particular contact if I had a first or last name. Now, with data.com the only way to search for a contact is to exit the company info screen and go back out and perform a whole new search. Very time consuming and not at all user friendly.
Sorry if my title doesn't make sense, but I noticed that I found a contact in the graveyard back in 6/13, and brought it back to life because the contact is still active. But I found today that the user that put the contact in the graveyard is still the royalty holder. I don't think this is fair, especially if the user only put the contact into the graveyard, and incorrectly at that. Can you please change your policy for that?
I was a faithful user of jigsaw.com and could easily navigate my way around it and used it multiple times daily. I logged in this morning and it was terrible. This new site is aweful. I am sorry to say, I most likely will find another site to use. It takes much too long to find anything where as the other site took only a few seconds. This is a terrible site.
When an update is performed, regardless of minor or major update, the system should transfer royalty to the member performing the update when the currently royalty owner is no longer an active/unlocked account
There are far too many times I have removed contacts from the GY or updated the information that was abused and not captured royalty for it - rather it stays with the locked member
If someone's been locked out for abuse, can you guys please revert all the changes they made back to the original. I was looking for a contact at the school only to discover then entire school district and 400 contacts have been graveyarded.Now I have to wait for the company reactivation to be reviewed and then ungraveyard the contact I need. At this point, I don't know if that contact has been graveyarded lefgitimately or by default.
So...in the old "jigsaw" version, we were able to resolve data duplicates, by merging records.
Now I encounter (many times) contacts that have updated email addresses but when I attempt to update with the correct email address I get the message "Contact already exists with that email address". Take for example:
Chris Sebald, who formerly used the email address: christopher.sebald "@" domain A and now uses: Christopher.Sebald "@" domain B
There are two records for this one person. This scares me for when purchasing data. I could potentially be purchasing multiple contacts who are the same person. This hurts email marketing campaigns. Just imagine how you would react if you received two or more duplicate emails from the same person...not going to be as effective.
I added a new contact today and found it was inactive. This is a contact I know well. There was no question he is still at the conpany. All data on the inactive record was visible. I made the contact active and corrrected the title. Upon saving, I was presented with an active card and the invitation to "Get this contact's phone and email." I called support and subsequently got an email followup: "It would seem that you only have the ability to unlock the record to update it .... however the system won't give you the contact as Jigsaw.com did."
My Suggestion: Give users ownership for updating a record, and royalty ownership if the update is significant. In my example, the subject record would still be inactive if I had not updated it. If updating a record doesn't yield ownership or royalty ownership, there is a lot less incentive to update.
I don't understand why the Wall of Fame was removed in the new build. It seems like a pretty simple and cheap way to honor those contributors that built this city. I understand that names can be removed if it is discovered that status was achieved by less than licit means, but it is important to pay respect to the people who have contributed huge amounts of time and data to make this database what it is today.
Again, another of the most basic features that made Jigsaw an attraactive product, I don't understand why this would be removed. Please restore the ability to export companies and company data in Connect. For those of you who do not remember, Free Company Data was one of the first ad campaigns ever for the original Jigsaw.
My favorite and most frequently used feature was exporting companies and contacts directly into Salesforce. It is very disappointing and frustrating that this feature is no longer available. I called the customer support line and was told it is on the "road map" for future functionality but did not have any timeline. Can we get a general idea on when this might be available again? Thank you!