🚀 go-pugleaf

RetroBBS NetNews Server

Inspired by RockSolid Light RIP Retro Guy

Article View: comp.sys.next.software
Article #1021

Re: Telephone Message DELIVERY / Answer Center

#1021
From: Scott Hess
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 00:09
51 lines
3419 bytes
In article <1992Nov11.211855.6278@leland.Stanford.EDU>,
	gcolello@biosphere.Stanford.EDU (Greg Colello) writes:
>I work for the Green Party of California. We have faced a problem
>that I'm sure many underfunded groups encounter: internal communications
>(ie.  delivering messages inexpensively to our local members).
>
>I figure the only solution is the telephone, since an unlimited
>local calls line can be had for $15/month; while US Mail can run
>$hundreds/month. Now comes the rub. A simple dial-up a central
>number and listen to the recorded message (like movie theatres)
>doesn't work, because a lot of people simply don't make the call.
>On the other hand many people are willing to receive a recorded
>message called to their phone.  Especially if it's at a certain
>hour and their message machine will intercept it. Delivering messages
>by phone is too hard and unreliable for human beings to do (as in
>a "human phone banking/tree" system).

This is a problem many organizations have, including telemarketing
organizations.  And, your idea is a good idea.  That's the problem
- the idea is _too_ good for telemarketing organizations.  Automated
calling machines of the sort you describe are illegal in many states
because it makes things too easy for those annoying telemarketers
to just feed databases of numbers to computers and let them loose
calling people.  A computer is _loads_ cheaper than a bank of
operators.

This isn't to say that such legislation is highly prevalent.  All
I know is that this is how things work in Minnesota.  Even then,
there _may_ be loopholes for certain situations.  For instance, in
your situation you could have people give you written permission
to have the computer call them and leave messages, which means that
you've removed the major complaint about such systems (the harrassment
sort of concerns).  But, the lucrative bucks would be in selling
such systems to telemarketers, who'd be paying thousands of dollars
for them whereas I suspect your underfunded group will not be
willing to pay.  And the package _is_ almost exactly the same
(precisely, anything that does what you want done could also be
used for automated telemarketing stuff).

[Note that the above applies only to _calling_ machines.  You can
set up automated answering machines to your heart's content, and
it's not a problem - people can easily choose not to call the
machine if they don't like it.  But, if the machine is calling
_you_, then it can be a problem ...]

Later,
--
scott hess <shess@ssesco.com>     <I will not spin the turtle -Bart Simpson>
12901 Upton Avenue South, #326  Burnsville, MN 55337 (612) 895-1208 Anytime!
  * ... like a big church choir with all it's members' mouths wide open, *
               * singing silence   -Blood Music, Greg Bear *
Technical Details
Message-ID: <SCOTT.92Nov12000933@nic.gac.edu>
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wupost!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!noc.msc.net!gacvx2.gac.edu!gacvax2!scott
References: <1992Nov11.211855.6278@leland.Stanford.EDU>

Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!sparky!uunet!cis.ohio-state.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!wupost!spool.mu.edu!umn.edu!noc.msc.net!gacvx2.gac.edu!gacvax2!scott
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next.software
Subject: Re: Telephone Message DELIVERY / Answer Center
Message-ID: <SCOTT.92Nov12000933@nic.gac.edu>
From: scott@nic.gac.edu (Scott Hess)
Date: 12 Nov 92 00:09:33
References: <1992Nov11.211855.6278@leland.Stanford.EDU>
Organization: Gustavus Adolphus College
Nntp-Posting-Host: nic.gac.edu
In-reply-to: gcolello@biosphere.Stanford.EDU's message of Wed, 11 Nov 92 21:18:55 GMTLines: 51
Lines: 51