I’m interested by this response as this is exactly the sort of CS response that makes me seethe - it doesn’t resolve the issue and holds out false hope. Have you seen it used effectively? Are you using shorthand here and there is more to the interaction? It’s a genuine question, not intending to provoke. There’s a particular tool I use where the support team’s typical response to anything non-standard is along the lines of “hey, great that you’d be interested in this feature! It’s not something we are planning to build! why not add it to our suggestions board though - the more people who vote on it the more chance we might consider this in the future!” and of course nothing on the suggestions board is ever implemented.

I’d much rather a company says “sorry, your use case is an edge case and not something we support; you could try doing X or Y but what you’re attempting is outside our typical use and not on our roadmap. While we’d love to keep you as a customer I’m not going to make false promises. You might be better off with a tool that specifically enables what you are attempting - or continue using us in the knowledge that this is not possible. Sorry we can’t be more help.”