Replies

Something in this article stinks, and I don't think it's the slimy telemarketer being interviewed. How exactly has the Do Not Call list impacted this sector? The people who are on the list (including myself) are there because we DO NOT WANT to be bothered by telemarketers. By definition, we are people who wouldn't be buying anything from these pushy nimrods anyway! If anything, the telemarketers should be seeing IMPROVED returns because their call centers will be wasting less time on calls that wont result in sales! How is this costing two million jobs?!?!

And yes, we SHOULD have an opt-out list for spam, and we should be able to opt-out entire domains! People like to claim that spam is victimless, but it most certainly isn't: Where I work, we're in the middle of a $50,000 transition to a new email system that will serve our approximately 4,500 employees. The number of accounts hasn't increased in years, and the amount of legitimate email has been flat for the past two years, but the amount of daily spam has been increasing at a rate of about 300% a year up until this year...when the number jumped to 500% Well over half of the email that our server now processes is commercial garbage, and it'd slowed our server to the point of unuseability (four server crashes in the past six months). So spam DOES cost innocent users REAL money. You know tho the innocent users are? You...I work for a taxpayer funded institution and YOUR tax dollars are buying our new server. Just to keep up with the spam. And this makes sense to you?!?!?

You know, everyday I go to by mailbox, and mail has been around for centuries, it's full of stuff I don't want either.

I guess I should force the government to create a large, unaccountable bureaucracy to have a "No Mail" list.

Many, many people don't like to look at billboards while driving. Maybe we should force the government to pass a law that will signal the billboard via satellite technology that I'm driving by and use a hydraulic pole to quickly retract it underground.

I would think any company that has 4,500 employees could find and IT staff smart enough to use software and monitor the spam. Much of the spam going into corporate servers is because they have open sites with a simple "contact us" link. They should create a request screen that spam writers don't bother with. I know the sales people are thinking it loses potential customers because of the extra effort, but you have to weigh those factors.

Instead of wanting the government, the least qualified people, to make bad law challenged in our courts to please people just because they are annoyed I would rather they use their power to create a guideline, or licensing, structure for internet sites. For example, porn sites would have to be licensed to an .xxx or .adult URL which is easily blocked in software filters. And we already have laws that concern this type of material in tv, video, movies, magazines, etc.

Sure, there would be lawsuits, but it's an idea that has precedent.

Something in this article stinks, and I don't think it's only the ~~slimy~~ telemarketer being interviewed.

Editorial correction for fact-checking and redundancy removal.

How exactly has the Do Not Call list impacted this sector? The people who are on the list (including myself) are there because we DO NOT WANT to be bothered by telemarketers. By definition, we are people who wouldn't be buying anything from these pushy nimrods anyway! If anything, the telemarketers should be seeing IMPROVED returns because their call centers will be wasting less time on calls that wont result in sales!

The dirty little secret of telemarketing is that it depends on the application of high-pressure tactics upon the particularly vulnerable (e.g. people with weak social skills or diminished mental faculties). People who already want your stuff will find you without telepestering. People who don't want your stuff, and will hold their ground, are not affected by telepestering. It is only the existence of people who don't want your stuff, but can be verbally bullied into buying it anyway, that makes telepestering a profitable enterprise.

The telepest industry fears the phone owner's new ability to post a binding NO TRESPASSING sign on his phone line because a vulnerable target can put up a long-term shield with a single action.

The people who are on the list (including myself) are there because we DO NOT WANT to be bothered by telemarketers. By definition, we are people who wouldn't be buying anything from these pushy nimrods anyway! If anything, the telemarketers should be seeing IMPROVED returns because their call centers will be wasting less time on calls that wont result in sales! How is this costing two million jobs?!?!

Yes, you have absolutely NAILED the false premise of this article. I'm sure the 2M out of work figure is highly inflated, also.