MCI Lays Off 4,000, Cites Do Not Call List

Yahoo! News ^ | March 26, 2004 | MATTHEW BARAKAT

[breakem]

you bet

[mean lunch lady]

I had a Zapper but it didn't really seem to reduce the calls any. Is there a newer, better one out now?

[GSWarrior]

Two words: Direct Mail

[palmer]

But I see it as more analogous to them blowing their horn every time they pass.

But that's just noise. The proper analogy is they are calling into your property from public property trying to sell you stuff. What's more, you have placed a tube from the sidewalk into your house to make it easier to do so. The government should not be in business of regulating who gets to talk into the tube and who doesn't. We would end up with an army of tube police with way too much power.

One issue that hasn't been discussed much is the First Amendment. If a politician calls you, the government should not regulate that. Nor should they decide what consititutes a charitable cause asking for donations. Once they do, they can easily undermine private charity efforts that compete with the government and prevent challenges to the established politicians.

[XBob]

still waiting for your phone number so we can 'help' you.

[Old Professer]

I read once that a small survey showed that the average sales slip at those 99cent stores came to just under $20.00.

[potlatch]

It's supposed to be against the law to record people on the telephone without their consent. It sure could pay off in cases like that - just the threat that you have it on record might give them a scare.

[1L]

It depends on what you mean by "without their consent." You can't record a conversation that you aren't a party to in any state (without proper legal authority -- i.e. warrant), but in most states (43 or so), you CAN record a phone conversation you are a party to without telling the other party you are recording, and without their consent. Maryland, as we found out with Linda Tripp, is one of the idiotic 7 or so states that are 2-party -- i.e. require both (or all) parties to consent. The only somewhat tricky issue is whether I in Texas (a one party state) can call someone in Maryland (a two party state) and record the call without their consent. I'm of the opinion that I can.

[potlatch]

As another Texan, I thank you for that information. Wonder why I've thought differently all these years??

[unixfox]

So they admit that they had 4000 useless people on the payroll...

Unlike any Federal, State or Local governments.

[doug from upland]

When they call me, I have a little fun with it. I try to sell them a piece of commercial real estate. I demand that they give me their social security number, monthly income, net worth, etc. I don't let up until they hang up. One guy actually told me he made 50K per year. I felt sorry for him and told him that I was actually just sticking it to him because I was tired of being called.

[MeekOneGOP]

Ah ! Good point, folks ! Thanks for that info ...

[steve-b]

If I called you at all hours that is harassment. If I call you once during dinner, it is not.

Sorry, Chuckles -- if I post public notice that you are not permitted to call my phone and you call it anyway, even once, it most certainly is trespass and harassment.

[steve-b]

The no trespassing sign is negated when you open your gate and invite people in

That is precisely why the government should have done it the other way around -- set up a "Do Call" list, and put telemarketers on notice that they are permitted to call those numbers, and only those numbers, posted to that list by their owners.

[steve-b]

How is the no-call list any different in principle to a no trespassing sign on my fence?

Because the bed-wetting namby-pambies won't let you shoot people for violations of the former.

[steve-b]

The proper analogy is they are calling into your property from public property trying to sell you stuff.

No, the proper analogy is that they routinely ignored NO TRESPASSING notices, whined and cried like little babies when an effective system for enforcing NO TRESPASSING notices was finally created (the DNC list), and now are reaping the fruits of their past misbehavior.

[palmer]

Steve, did you really post notice that telemarketers couldn't call your number? I think it is more likely that you signed up for a service that allowed anyone to call your number, then you decided you didn't like that and you and like-minded people lobbied to get a better service from the government. Also please make up your mind whether it is trespass or harassment. You have not made a case for either so you have to hedge and say it's a little bit of both.

[steve-b]

did you really post notice that telemarketers couldn't call your number?

Yes; my number is on the DNC list.

Also please make up your mind whether it is trespass or harassment.

It is both an entry onto my property without my consent, and indeed against my express prohbition (trespass) and a deliberate pattern of conduct designed to annoy (harassment).

You have not made a case for either

Bill Clinton called. He wants you to return his dictionary.

And while you're at it, look into a line of work more respectable than telemarketing, such as numbers running or pimping.