这几日，有一则新闻信息引起了我的注意，大意是这样。
沃尔玛超市宣布即日起停止支持支付宝，手机支付改为仅支持微信支付，并出了通告如下图。
对于这点，我忽然想起了几年前国内3Q大战(360同腾讯QQ之间的较量)时，某一日，腾讯QQ出了个公告，大意是自己做了个沉痛的决定，从即日起将在装有360软件的电脑上停止运行QQ软件，倡导必须卸载360软件才可登陆QQ，等。
表面上看，似乎这些企业都是为用户着想才“被迫如此”，其实则不然。作为企业，推出的产品用户自然有选择权，用户可以喜欢360，也可以喜欢腾讯QQ，但是你作为一个企业，不能强奸民意，不能强迫用户必须喜欢你的产品，甚至不乏动用一些手段，这显然是荒谬和令人无法接受的，更为可笑的是，在这装腔作势之下，还把自己伪装成一幅受害者的弱者样子，企图希望用此来博得大众同情，岂料大众眼睛这次是雪亮的，根本不买帐甚至群起自发抵制，后来腾讯被迫压力终于收回。。。
而时过境迁，同样类似的事情又发生在沃尔玛身上，其实坦白说，这几年国内超市发展迅猛，在众多眼花缭乱的超市包括现在兴起的无人超市等竞争之下，在国内人们甚至都不一定能想起沃尔玛，直到我看到这则信息，才想起原来多年前沃尔玛在国内那是多么的风光无限，而如今竟靠着一条八杆子都打不着的三线资讯却重新获得了人们的一丝关注。
且不说沃尔玛这种商业背后的竞争或利益如何，我们看下腾讯这次的反应：尊重用户的选择。自从上次3Q大战时腾讯出的那个烂招以来，我一直都认为腾讯公关部门的应急措施反应真是差强人意，危机之下竟是步步烂招，这次面对民众的回应，我认为还不如不讲，讲了可能更让人有种“此地无银三百两”不打自招的感觉。
无独有偶，我前阵子信箱里收到了一条今日头条发来的信息，一般来说，这类企业经常会发送些广告等垃圾邮件给我，但这次有一条邮件却出乎我的意料，见下图：
大意是今日头条正在同某企业存在纠纷。有纠纷很正常，可以找对方协商，协商不成就去法院上诉。但这头条却偏偏不，非得发封邮件告知他所有的用户，仗着自己用户数量多，也不管用户同不同意，就在邮件中义正词严地斥责对方企业等，我就搞不明白了，你这发给广大使用者用户，是想让用户帮你解决问题？这用户也没这能力啊？还是像打群架时，为了给自己壮胆，先扯张虎皮拉个大旗，装装样子，多拉几个人头造下声势，力图从气势上赫到对方？
这都二十一世纪了，咱能不能不来这套？下次你们之间闹矛盾，能否不要再拿用户做挡箭牌？
English Version On Todays Article:
In the past few days, there was a news message that caught my attention.
Wal-Mart Supermarkets announced that it will stop supporting Alipay from now on. Instead, mobile phone payment will only support WeChat payment, and it will be announced as follows.
(Picture)
For this, I suddenly remembered a few years ago the domestic 3Q World War (360 and Tencent QQ contest), one day, Tencent QQ made an announcement, the effect is that he made a hard decision, from now on Will stop running QQ software on the computer with 360 software, advocates must uninstall 360 software before landing QQ, and so on.
On the surface, it seems that these companies are "forced to do so" for the sake of users, but it is not. As a company, users of the products launched have the right to choose. Users can like 360 and can also enjoy Tencent QQ. However, as a company, you can't rape public opinion, can't force users to like your products, and even use some means. This is obviously It is ridiculous and unacceptable. What is even more ridiculous is that, under this posership, he also disguised himself as the weak person of a victim in an attempt to win public sympathy. Unexpectedly, the eyes of the public are bright. , do not buy it at all or even spontaneously boycott, and later Tencent forced the pressure to finally recover. . .
Time and again, the same kind of thing happened to Wal-Mart. In fact, honestly speaking, domestic supermarkets have developed rapidly in the past few years. Under the competition of many dazzling supermarkets, including unpopulated supermarkets that are now emerging, people in the country may not even be able to Remembering Wal-Mart, until I saw this message, I remembered how much Wal-Mart was in the country many years ago. However, now that I rely on a three-line information that cannot be reached by eight poles, I have regained the attention of people.
Not to mention the competition or interest behind Wal-Mart's business, we look at Tencent's response this time: respecting the choices of users. Since the bad move of Tencent in the last 3Q wars, I have always believed that the response of Tencent's public relations departments is really unsatisfactory. The crisis is actually a bad move. This time, in response to the public’s response, I think it’s not as good as Do not speak, talk about the feeling may make people more kind of "no silver three hundred and two here" does not play tricks.
Coincidentally, I received a message from today’s headline in the mailbox. In general, such companies often send advertisements and other spam to me, but this time there was an email that was beyond my expectation. Picture: (picture) The general idea is that today's headline is in dispute with a company. It is normal to have disputes. You can find the other person to negotiate and the negotiation does not result in an appeal to the court. However, this headline was not correct. I had to send an e-mail to inform all his users. Even if the user had the same number of users, and he or she did not agree with them, he rightly rebuked the other company in the e-mail. I would not understand it. This is for users, is to let users help you solve the problem? This user does not have this ability? Still like gang fights, in order to give their own courage, first pull Zhang Hu Pila a banner, pretending to be, Dora a few heads made the momentum, trying to get from the momentum to each other?
This is the 21st century. Can you not come to this set? The next time you are in a conflict, can you stop using your users as a shield?
Thanks my friend for written those type of good content and share such a great photos with us.
Sir @rivalhw Thank you so much for supporting me. I show respect to you. I hope you will present such a good post in front of us in the future. I hope sir will write something better in the future that we will be very proud of you.
这种手段低端但有效。。。
大伟哥息怒，我们可以先从steem开始做起，有一说一，有二说二
没怒，只是平心说事 发帖下个人看法 :)
接招:借刀杀人
--企业: 借顾客之手,捍卫企业尊严.
良好的信息
擾民哪！
举用户之名誉，行企业之利的套路，确实俗
这大概是有意误会了“用户是我们的靠山”……
公关能力不过关，反映出企业内部问题。
3Q大战之后的腾讯蜕变了，能买就买不能买就投资你，战略布局跟之前是天壤之别。沃尔玛一共也没去过几次，尴尬...
这种情况的出现原因之一是：微信和支付宝在国内有一定垄断地位，其他支付因种种原因尚未形成气候，等未来市场自由竞争的虚拟货币支付普及后，或许可以改善这种胁迫用户的境况。
我觉得企业间无论怎么竞争，都不应当以损害用户体验为代价，有这样胁迫用户逼他们做选择的行为，会让我重新看待这个公司