🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: alt.consumers
Article #235

Re: Ultimate Revenge on Telemarketers

#235
From: Geoff Miller
Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2006 13:38
73 lines
4411 bytes

George Grapman  <sfgeorge@pacbell.net> writes:

> I got an automated call from a candidate last night. 

[...]

> I noted that had there been an emergency I would have lost
> about 30 seconds.


So get call waiting.  Problem solved.  Is this a great country,
or what?  There's nothing you can't get here in the Big PX.

Your objection comes across as a bit sanctimonious.  If you don't
have call waiting, you potentially miss an emergency call every
time you're on the phone -- especially when you engage in the
sort of extended, casual chitchat with friends and family that we
all use our telephones for from time to time.

It seems to me that if you were as concerned about missing emer-
gency calls as you profess to be, you'd limit the number and 
duration of your own calls to the absolute minimum.  And it's
possible that you do just that -- but it isn't terribly likely. 
So why not just be forthright about what really bugs you, and 
tell the candidate that his automated calls are objectionable
because they're annoying and intrusive?  Seems to me, that's 
plenty good enough.

_My_ objection to automated calls is a bit different.  I've been
getting an awful lot of election-related phone spam of late.
There was yet another automated message on my answering machine
when I came home last Friday evening.  Being tired after a long 
day, not to mention sick of telephonic political pestering, I 
listened to just enough of it to determine that it was yet another
recording and then hit the Delete button.

The next morning I read a transcript of the recording in a local-
interest newsgroup, ba.mountain-folk; it turned out that everyone
in my community had received it:

"This is the Santa Cruz County Sheriff's department with a recorded
 message.  It's 7:20pm on the 20th of October.  We're calling to 
 notify the residents of the Boulder Creek area that we are looking
 for an armed and dangerous, wanted subject who may be on foot in 
 your area.  His name is Bobby Dean Wilson.  He's a white male in
 his 40's.  He's approximately 5 feet, 9 inches tall and he has a
 stocky build, with shaggy, reddish-blond hair and a moustache, and
 no clothing description at this time.  He is considered armed and
 dangerous.  If you see him or anyone suspicious in your area after
 receiving this message, please stay inside or remain in a safe 
 place, and call 9-1-1 immediately.  Thank you." 

Neat, eh?

Granted, I probably should've listened to the message a _bit_ longer
than I did, but I was tired after a long day, it was Friday evening,
and I was in one of those "Leave me the the hell alone, world" moods.

Maybe this raises a good reason to consider outlawing automated phone
calls not of an emergency nature.  If people get inured to them to the
point where they delete them without even listening to them, there's a
certain "boy who cried 'wolf'" dynamic at work that will eventually
cause somebody to miss something he really does need to hear. 



Geoff

-- 
"The best delineator of high status is the tossed salad."
				-- Vance Packard
Technical Details
Message-ID: <ehnpch$k0d@u1.netgate.net>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!newshub.sdsu.edu!tethys.csu.net!nntp.csufresno.edu!sn-xt-sjc-02!sn-xt-sjc-08!sn-post-sjc-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!u1.netgate.net!not-for-mail
References: <bearclaw-29937E.14115624102006@news.supernews.com> <2Ou%g.15796$GR.2689@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net> <1161725081.731055.260860@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com> <HHv%g.2739$T_1.1412@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
X-Google-Thread: 10f73f,74fdd225e5c97239
X-Google-Thread: 11474a,74fdd225e5c97239
X-Google-Thread: 106595,74fdd225e5c97239
X-Google-Thread: 107518,74fdd225e5c97239
X-Google-Thread: f6c48,74fdd225e5c97239
X-Google-Attributes: gid10f73f,gid11474a,gid106595,gid107518,gidf6c48,public
X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!g2news2.google.com!news4.google.com!newshub.sdsu.edu!tethys.csu.net!nntp.csufresno.edu!sn-xt-sjc-02!sn-xt-sjc-08!sn-post-sjc-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!u1.netgate.net!not-for-mail
From: geoffm@u1.netgate.net (Geoff Miller)
Newsgroups: alt.consumers,alt.consumers.experiences,ba.consumers,misc.consumers,misc.consumers.frugal-living
Subject: Re: Ultimate Revenge on Telemarketers
Followup-To: alt.consumers,alt.consumers.experiences,ba.consumers,misc.consumers,misc.consumers.frugal-living
Date: 25 Oct 2006 06:38:25 -0700
Organization: Former Fetuses For Choice
Message-ID: <ehnpch$k0d@u1.netgate.net>
Sender: geoffm@netgate.net
References: <bearclaw-29937E.14115624102006@news.supernews.com> <2Ou%g.15796$GR.2689@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net> <1161725081.731055.260860@e3g2000cwe.googlegroups.com> <HHv%g.2739$T_1.1412@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com>
Reply-To: geoffm@netgate.net
X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com
Lines: 74