@CalebBennett0754 I now have the alarm indicating a missing process confirmation. Reviewing the unedited video places the wait before release, so my original description of a dropped workpiece was inaccurate.

Correct the ticket with that alarm, the unedited clip and the installed versions. Ask which confirmation is missing and who owns the next diagnostic step

Should I preserve the original report when I correct it? Removing that wording might make it difficult to understand why support's existing replies focused on a drop.

Leave the original account readable and add the correction prominently. Explaining that the unedited recording shows a wait before release gives support a reason to revise its diagnostic focus

@CalebBennett0754 My own support case stalled because the robot and gripper contacts each expected the other to arrange the test. A named coordinator clarified who would organise the next action.

@SofiaAdams0108 Our correspondence shows a similar coordination gap. Both contacts refer me back to the other's response, and I can't find an assigned owner for the test.

That missing confirmation points to the gripper, so its contact should take the diagnostic lead

You're jumping from a missing signal to a failed component. It could be the interface or sequence. The alarm doesn't assign ownership by itself

You're right; I assigned the cause too early. Ask the package seller to coordinate tracing that confirmation across the interface, with both contacts involved as needed

@CalebBennett0754 When you say the seller should coordinate this, do you mean Alibaba or the business that supplied the package through the marketplace?

@ChenBennett0703 The unnamed seller who supplied your package. Alibaba is the marketplace; your technical request here is to the seller and their support contacts

@CalebBennett0754 I've several logs but haven't established which capture the event. Is sending the entire collection useful, or should I narrow the attachment set?

@MayaArcher0388 Have support identify the required diagnostic files, then associate the supplied files with the recorded event and explain how they were collected. A large unrelated collection can make the relevant evidence harder to find

In my support case, descriptive attachment names made it easier for both support and me to locate the relevant recording. Generic revision names had made the collection unnecessarily confusing.

Correcting the symptom hasn't yet produced an agreed next step with support. We still lack a diagnostic action and the underlying issue is unresolved.

Understood. Better symptom wording hasn't yet turned into an agreed test