Second Judge Blocks Do-Not-Call list

AP ^ | 09/025/03 | David Ho

[Bonaparte]

Thanks, s. It looks that way. Haven't seen Congress move this fast in a long time.

[strela]

Say, wanna start a telemarketing company specializing in selling to district court clerks over the phone? It would be more convenient than residential work since we can call them up during regular business hours. All day long.

I would prefer to try the niche market of calling only the idiot judges that make such idiotic decisions, around 3 AM, at their home. Why ping on poor wage slave clerks?

[Badray]

I guess that I'm the last person in America that is opposed to this stupid law. Who needs a freaking federal law so that the phone doesn't ring at dinner time? And no, I'm not a telemarketer.

If you don't want to answer the phone during dinner, don't.

If you don't want to miss a call, get an answering machine.

If you don't want to talk to a telemarketer (or your brother in law), get Caller ID.

All that said, what passes for judicial wisdom these days is pathetic. Free speech does not include the right to be heard or the wherewithall to make your speech.

This judge along with many others should be impeached.

[Bonaparte]

Without clerks, judges can't clear their calendars. Calling a judge at home could be risky.

[Sarastro]

HECK with the telemarketers. Don't worry about them. They can't call you without a list.

Actually they can and do. Their automated dialers plow through all numbers. If someone answers, the call is transferred to a live person. If you ever picked up, said "hello" and listened to blank air for 2-3 seconds until someone came on, you experienced this technique.

Therefore, if I say hello and get no immediate response, I hang up immediately.

Incidentally, I have a second telephone line so that calls coming in when line 1 is busy kick over to line 2. The number for the second line is unlisted and I haven't given it to anyone. Anytime I see a call coming in on that line, I know with certainty that it's a computerized telephone dialer. Needless to say, I don't even pick up.

[CurlyDave]

I hang up immediately.

You are missing out on one of life's great challenges--trying to get the telemarketer to hang up on you.

Gee, I don't have many friends--will you be my friend?

Are you wearing underwear?

What kind of underwear are you wearing?

Will you sell them to me?

[Sgt_Schultze]

Maybe Congress should look at the NDNCR from a different angle. Instead of classifying the listed homeowners as telephones to avoid, the listed numbers should be considered to be telephones willing to receive calls from telemarketers. By connecting with any listed number, the telemarketers will be invoiced $11,000. That will be the charge payable to the phone owner as his fee for receiving marketing calls.

The government will put together the list so telemarketers will know who is willing to accept their calls for the scale fee of $11,000 per call. If telemarketers call any listed number, they will be deemed to have been fairly warned and fully liable for payment of the fee. At least in this manner, telemarketers retain their first amendment rights to free speech and Congress is exercising its right to regulate interstate commerce.

[hotpotato]

I was waiting for a call from my husband's friend who was with him at an emergency room, waiting to hear the outcome. The phone rang and it was a telemarketer. I hung up on the telemarketer (I was distraught and waiting to hear about my husband). The phone rang again. I picked it up and the person at the other end hung up on me. Happened another time. I realized the telemarketer was having some fun at my expense because I had hung up on him first. Rang again and I let it ring about 25 times before they hung up and hoped it wasn't my husband's friend at the emergency room.

Telemarketers are scum.

[Badray]

Maybe the reason that I never had a problem with them is that I treat them as human beings who are trying to earn a living. Before I had Caller ID when I got a call I would do one of two things. If I was somewhat interested, I would put them on a short leash -- I'd give them a minute to get my interest. If I wasn't interested, I'd just thank them and tell them politely that I wasn't interested. If I wasn't interested in taking a call, I just wouldn't pick up. Now I run a business from home and I need to take calls, but I use Caller ID to screen. I want to know who is on the line before I pick up.

I understand that you were anxious because of the the ER call that you were waiting for, but a polite 'no thanks' taking 5 seconds would have saved you 5 minutes of grief and anxiety.

I just can't understand the deep hatred that so many people have for telemarketers.

[hotpotato]

Maybe the reason that I never had a problem with them is that I treat them as human beings who are trying to earn a living.

The biggest problem I see is that I can't just reroute them to your home phone and you can talk nice to them. btw, most are not humans. Most calls I get are from computers and recorded messages. And when it isn't a recorded message but a live person, I can't say how many times I've had a computer disconnect with me because it was dialing multiple numbers at the same time and some other poor bloke answered before I did and the telemarketer disconnected from my phone after I picked up went to THAT phone and left me hanging repeating "hello" into the phone. You are either completely ignorant of telemarketing or you are a telemarketer. I got more news for you.... I used to be a telemarketer. I was a top marketer because I *accepted* that I was a nuisance and never let the hangups get to me because I knew I deserved them. I quit the business after two months and found *real* work that didn't annoy 99.99% of those I came into contact with. I worked for MCI. They even connected me to a senior citizen at a nursing home. Made me ill.

[hotpotato]

I understand that you were anxious because of the the ER call that you were waiting for, but a polite 'no thanks' taking 5 seconds would have saved you 5 minutes of grief and anxiety.

btw, this is the most incredibly stupid response I have ever seen. I hope no one you care about is ever victimized or at the least, you never learn about it. I suspect with an attitude like yours, there is much that goes on around you that you never hear about.

[kingu]

If you don't want to talk to a telemarketer (or your brother in law), get Caller ID

This makes sense, buy more stuff, pay for more telephone services, so that you can stop telemarketers from using the phone you pay for (plus taxes.)

[Badray]

Wow!

Given your description of telemarketers and your attitude towards me, I think that you belong back in your old job. I replied civilly to your comments and you attack me.

I guess my 'treat every like like a human' policy really doesn't work on everyone.

[Badray]

Then don't buy any services. That is your choice. So I spend ten cents a day to know who is calling me. Big deal. I get 20 to 50 calls a day and I don't always have time to take all the calls and there are calls that I don't want to miss.

To me, that's a better way than to run to the freaking federal government for 'protection'.

[Badray]

My frustration in all of this is the fact that we -- on this supposedly conservative forum -- are running to government to take care of an relatively minor annoyance.

That is what the liberals do. The telemarketers are not raping, robbing, or killing us although to hear some people describe it, that is exactly what is going on. Even those offenses are state, not federal crimes. I can almost understand a state 'do not call' list.

There are market based solutions to handle this. Do we really need FEDERAL intervention?

[kingu]

There are market based solutions to handle this. Do we really need FEDERAL intervention?

Since telemarketing is an interstate industry, it would naturally be under the control of the federal law anyway. Indeed, it is under the jurisdiction of the federal government because the transactions occur via the common carrier phone system.

The argument of market based solutions is the same as saying that if you don't armor plate your home, you're responsible for the theft that occurs. And we are taking a case of theft. People are using a phone service that you pay for and maintain and equiptment that you pay for and maintain. They are using this without permission, which makes it theft. The argument that usually is replied that you pay for the services anyway falls flat - you did not get telephone service with the intention of getting sales calls, you got it for your own personal communication needs.

I'm all for the industry creating a 'do-call-list', and you're welcome to sign up for it. I could even see the industry offering reduced rate telephone services in exchange for the right to call you with sales pitches.

[steve-b]

Maybe the reason that I never had a problem with them is that I treat them as human beings who are trying to earn a living.

There's your mistake. It simply would never occur to me to do that, any more than it would occur to me to treat al-Qaeda as human beings who are trying to express a political grievance.

[discostu]

The list isn't as big a piece of information as you'd think. Some telemarketers just sequential dial, no list needed. If we took away their ability to sell lists then the only effect would be to increase the frequency of sequential dialing. Not that the privacy bill isn't a good thing, but it won't touch this problem.

[eno_]

One reason this isn't unreasonable is that the entire mobile phone industry works just FINE without telemarketers.

There are numerous laws on the books against nuisances. As a small-l libertarian, I have no problem with laws against leaving dog poop on the sidewalk. Telemarketing calls are verbal dog poop delivered right to your dinner table. Unless you assiduously ID every caller, and don't find a ringing phone to be an intrusion that ought to come with a good reason behind it, laws against telemarketers are perfectly reasonable.

[Concerned]

SGT_SCHULTZE WROTE: "Maybe Congress should look at the NDNCR from a different angle. Instead of classifying the listed homeowners as telephones to avoid, the listed numbers should be considered to be telephones willing to receive calls from telemarketers. By connecting with any listed number, the telemarketers will be invoiced $11,000. That will be the charge payable to the phone owner as his fee for receiving marketing calls."

I LOVE IT!!! I could use a few hundred thousand dollars/month extra:

ONE Call/month/line x $11,000 = $11,000
THIRTY Calls/month/line x $11,000 = $330,000

With THREE PHONE LINES/NUMBERS at home...WOW!!!

I'd be a MILLIONAIRE in a MONTH!!! BRING 'EM ON!!!