I now have an appointment on Monday with Guest Visitor Lrcdb!

The conversation was quite reasonable. But the AI never asked for contact info.

The appointment details say: Guest Visitor Lrcdb meet with Keith, Bald Guy Marketing, Apr 8, 2024 1:00 PM , 1:00 pm - 1:45 pm

So, although theoretically this issue has been addressed it isn't working correctly.

Ticket # 2104360

I realize that people with 3rd party apps to sell are going to push their solution. Which means ideas board suggestions to fix the problems in the native version don't get enough votes. My interest is in improving HL. I am interested in optimizing the native LeadConnector user experience. I am promoting a “don't use 3rd party apps unless they do something that HL doesn't do" approach.

A year ago I effectively created the class booking calendar function. But the native version is a much cleaner user interface. Because I am not financially vested in selling my solution I can easily release my claim to having the best way to solve that particular problem. The native version is good enough for most small businesses.

HL has decided that Conversation AI and Workflow AI will be native functions.

Shaun Clark could have decided to only incorporate Content AI. He didn't. He said, we are going to use Conversation AI to give small businesses a Live Chat function on their website. I am all in to support his decision.

Maybe what I am asking for are "enhancements" rather than "bug fixes." But they absolutely are not "new feature" requests. I think I shouldn't have to ask.

When HL launches a MVP they should have a planned improvement cycle to remove the limitations. Don't tell us something is complete and then wait for us to complain to decide what improvements to make. You know you are launching a MVP. Don't deliberately leave it to languish there; have a plan to make it world class. Or don't launch it in the first place.

These aren't "new feature requests." These are essential improvements to make the feature a product suitable for sale to the market. I am willing to use it as-is for myself (and possibly lose customers). But I will not let my customers use it given the current poor level of performance.

In my opinion, the Conversation AI bot in Workflow and Live Chat should check for sticky contact and profile identity in addition to looking at standard fields to find out if the person already exists in the database.

If the person is Contact Type = Lead the behavior should be one thing (usually attempt to book an appointment, then Q&A).

If the person is anything else the behavior should be Q&A only, unless the person asks for an appointment.

Really? Conversation AI doesn't recognize my sister?!?!? :D

The business name is right there. Why is Conversation AI asking for it and why is HL not updating the contact database?

Another conversation in which the person gave name and business name. Conversation AI recognizes the data. But does not pass the info to the Contact record.

And then...when the contact says "sure" in response to "are you a plumbing company" the bot says that my company does not provide marketing!!!

Here I used a different browser (to reset the cookies) I gave it my contact info. The workflow ran; triggered by Reply Channel = Live Chat. Update Contact action returned an error for email and phone, and overwrote "Guest Visitor Jurzi" not with "Keith Besherse" but with "Guest Visitor Jurzi"! :D :D :D

Another example. I hand typed the all lowercase first name so I can do a manual merge once I am done with this comment.

Here we have a case where a HL automation is talking to one in another HL agency (obviously it would be a privacy violation for the two databases to share contact info, but the point is the info is there, why does the platform not recognize the Contact ID?).

Meanwhile the appointment in question is right there on the calendar. Clearly the Conversation AI is not using the subaccount database as a critical element of the context for the conversation.