My parents were once looking to replace our windows in the house. They didn't have time to go around and price compare. One day someone called our house and wanted to send someone out to do a free estimate. They were happy. The people came and got the job.
I think we should analyze the kinds of calls we're getting, and not the fact that we're getting them. I've become quite good at politely declining and getting off the phone in less than 15 seconds. The people on the other side of the phone are humans too and should be treated with dignity and respect. And not that I've ever done telemarketing, but I'm just talking as a member of the human race.
Oh, and also, there is no law stating you have to answer the phone every time it rings. And there is no law that you have to be nice to people interupting your supper. You simply hang up. Simple really. No need to tie up congress any further. You realize WW III is going on around us as we speak.
So suddenly having the opportunity to keep your home commercial free is "socialist"? Whats with all the rights of the individual? Are the collective rights of the corporations more importent than than yours? freedom for what? persons or money?
Quote:
Originally posted by Outsider
My parents were once looking to replace our windows in the house. They didn't have time to go around and price compare. One day someone called our house and wanted to send someone out to do a free estimate. They were happy. The people came and got the job.
I think we should analyze the kinds of calls we're getting, and not the fact that we're getting them. I've become quite good at politely declining and getting off the phone in less than 15 seconds. The people on the other side of the phone are humans too and should be treated with dignity and respect. And not that I've ever done telemarketing, but I'm just talking as a member of the human race.
I have recieved 50.000+ spam mails, been served 50.000+ pop-up windows and 200.000+ banner ads since I went online and yesterday for the first time ever I actually used the service one of the pop up ads offered. It was a $25 rebate on subscribtion on the second best news paper here.
I guess the hours and hours of deleting spam mail and clicking the red traffic light on my browser finally paid of.
Oh, and also, there is no law stating you have to answer the phone every time it rings. And there is no law that you have to be nice to people interupting your supper. You simply hang up. Simple really. No need to tie up congress any further.
Hopefully there will soon be a law disallowing the phone calls. Also, it's much more satisfying to tell the idiot who called you just exactly what you think about him/her.
Tele-marketing is intrusive, and should be stopped.
So suddenly having the opportunity to keep your home commercial free is "socialist"? Whats with all the rights of the individual? Are the collective rights of the corporations more importent than than yours? freedom for what? persons or money?
I have recieved 50.000+ spam mails, been served 50.000+ pop-up windows and 200.000+ banner ads since I went online and yesterday for the first time ever I actually used the service one of the pop up ads offered. It was a $25 rebate on subscribtion on the second best news paper here.
I guess the hours and hours of deleting spam mail and clicking the red traffic light on my browser finally paid of.
Solution:
#1 - buy a caller ID box, not only does it come in handy it will help you identify marketeers. = approx. $5.00
Grow a spine. this will help you with confrontation. = Free
#2 - Buy an apple computer, the mail.app will block almost all spam. (from experience about 98-99 percent) Apple's Safari browser blocks all pop ups. (I admit that this is the most expensive option, but you will have a great computer with less problems, so that may free enough time for you to get out and enjoy the world more and avoid those telemarketers.) = aprox. $799 for a great eMac.
#3 - This one is a must IMHO. Stop your whining. What ever happened to the personal resolve, independant rugedness that this country was built on. Whiners are everywhere and everyone seems to be crying "victim" and pointing at themselves. It is making me sick.
Jesus ****ing Christ. You're so opposed to the very principle of socialism that you're prepared to abrogate your basic ****ing human right to privacy and a life without harassment just so that a complete ****ing stranger CAN TRY AND SELL YOU SOMETHING.
Privacy is a private matter. By paying taxes and getting a social security number I'm selling part of my soul to the United States. Since the phone companies receive public subsidies still, the local phone grid is a public resource. I don't believe that government should be involved in local phone grids in the first place, but to add extra layers of control adds red tape, slows things down, and costs me more money.
Beyond that trivial extent, there are lists of phone numbers publically available; being a part of one is part of the agreement you make when you get a phone line. You can get an unlisted number. Posting your email to a public space also makes that public domain. Private technologies have been developed to block most cold calls and junk email. The only real avenue for junk advertising is the one most public -- the mail service.
Anyway, I get no cold calls on my cell. I know some folks who don't even have a land line. They get no cold calls either.
Anyway, I get no cold calls on my cell. I know some folks who don't even have a land line. They get no cold calls either.
You don't get cold calls on your cell because you pay for those incoming calls.
Telemarketing calls to cell phones used to be common until complaints (and, I believe, the law) stopped them. Now the handy-dandy telephone dialling machines exclude the cell phone exchanges.
The telemarketers can f*ck off and crawl back into the same hole inhabited by their fellow businessmen: spammers, deposed Nigerian gov't officials, etc.
Push marketing on the web is the most annoying part of the experience. (eMode pop-up ads most definitely included.) The same can be said about push marketing into my home.
The do not call list is just plain un-American. The Bill of Rights has really been taking a beating in recent years, and once again we have fools begging the govenment to whittle away at our freedoms.
The Bill of Rights: Amendment I
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
The government should not be able to curtail communication between the citizens of the USA. It does not mater if someone wants to save your soul, get you to vote for a political party, a sell you an encyclopedia, or chat about the weather. Freedom of speech, is so important, so intrinsic to the success of a free and democratic society, yet it is always under attack, frequently from its own short sighted citizens who do not want to hear opposing views, or wish to do away with a minor annoyance.
The do not call list is just plain un-American. The Bill of Rights has really been taking a beating in recent years, and once again we have fools begging the govenment to whittle away at our freedoms.
The Bill of Rights: Amendment I
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
The Bill of Rights doesn't give anyone the right into my home. They can't peaceably assemble in my living room, even if I leave my front door open. Limiting that is not abridging the freedom of speech.
The Bill of Rights doesn't give anyone the right into my home. They can't peaceably assemble in my living room, even if I leave my front door open. Limiting that is not abridging the freedom of speech.
They can send mail to your home, they can ring your doorbell and speak to you face to face. It is your choice to have a phone, opening a line of communication that is no difference from those above. The do-not-call list is certainly infringing on the right to free speech, and I hope that the supreme court will will find it unconstitutional.
I must admit that I do find tele-marketers annoying, but I am not willing to lessen civil liberties to do away with them. Use caller ID or an answering machine to screen your phone calls, don't lobby congress to take away our rights.
They can send mail to your home, they can ring your doorbell and speak to you face to face. It is your choice to have a phone, opening a line of communication that is no difference from those above. The do-not-call list is certainly infringing on the right to free speech, and I hope that the supreme court will will find it unconstitutional.
I must admit that I do find tele-marketers annoying, but I am not willing to lessen civil liberties to do away with them. Use caller ID or an answering machine to screen your phone calls, don't lobby congress to take away our rights.
They can send mail to your home, they can ring your doorbell and speak to you face to face. It is your choice to have a phone, opening a line of communication that is no difference from those above.
Right. And you can 1) Refuse the mail (return 2 sender) and 2) post no tresspassing signs which they must respect on private property or face prosecution.
And you are correct, a phone is no different. You should be able to protect your privacy exactly as you may for any other median. This means at the very least MANDATORY caller ID info for all calls coming into the home. Is this available? No. So instead a DNC list is *one* way of dealing with it. I'm sure their are others but until they are put forth I appreciate congress and the president giving me the ability to CONTINUE to protect my own privacy as you can do with mail and in person solicitation.
They can send mail to your home, they can ring your doorbell and speak to you face to face. It is your choice to have a phone, opening a line of communication that is no difference from those above. The do-not-call list is certainly infringing on the right to free speech, and I hope that the supreme court will will find it unconstitutional.
I must admit that I do find tele-marketers annoying, but I am not willing to lessen civil liberties to do away with them. Use caller ID or an answering machine to screen your phone calls, don't lobby congress to take away our rights.
Of course, I could also shoot someone coming up to my door if I say I thought they were going to rob me. Or I could get a dog that could take a chunk out of their leg.
Right. And you can 1) Refuse the mail (return 2 sender) and 2) post no tresspassing signs which they must respect on private property or face prosecution.
And you are correct, a phone is no different. You should be able to protect your privacy exactly as you may for any other median. This means at the very least MANDATORY caller ID info for all calls coming into the home. Is this available? No. So instead a DNC list is *one* way of dealing with it. I'm sure their are others but until they are put forth I appreciate congress and the president giving me the ability to CONTINUE to protect my own privacy as you can do with mail and in person solicitation.
Returning your mail is your prerogative as is screening a call or hanging up your phone -- there is no law stopping people from sending you mail in the first place and there should not be one for phone calls -- restrictions like that are a bad idea and should be unconstitutional.
You agree that phone is no different from the mail -- I receive pieces of mail that have no hint at the contents, so why would you require a mandatory caller ID?
Free speech can be annoying, that is why it needs to be protected. I just can't believe how many people want to do away with it.
I must admit that I do find tele-marketers annoying, but I am not willing to lessen civil liberties to do away with them. Use caller ID or an answering machine to screen your phone calls, don't lobby congress to take away our rights.
Your right as an individual citizen is not infringed upon by this decision. Only national companies are effected.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the US Constitution afford greater protections to non-commercial free speech?
The issue at hand is not individual free speech, but rather corporate/commercial speech.
Think about it. How can you seperate the two? You can't and shouldn't. Just hang up the phone, or go without. When you buy the service from the Phone Company you create a portal for people to enter your house.
I personally have killed my land line and have a cell phone and reciev no sales calles unless I ask for them. Problem solved and I didn't even trample on any of the rights to free speech.
Think about it. How can you seperate the two? You can't and shouldn't. Just hang up the phone, or go without. When you buy the service from the Phone Company you create a portal for people to enter your house.
I personally have killed my land line and have a cell phone and reciev no sales calles unless I ask for them. Problem solved and I didn't even trample on any of the rights to free speech.
Oh and it is cheaper too.
A window is a portal to my house. Try to enter my house that way, to sell me something (or steal something), and you won't be walking for a while.
I buy service from the phone company so I can make calls to people I know and receive calls from people I have given my number to. At no time have I given implicit consent to any commercial entity to contact me through that number, except for those companies with whom I do business. It boggles my mind that there would be an objection to an implicit request that I receive no unsolicited commercial phone calls.
I still haven't read a decent counter-argument from anyone that explains why the DMA is concerned about lost sales when the 50,000,000 numbers on the list are obviously not going to result in any sales to begin with.
A window is a portal to my house. Try to enter my house that way, to sell me something (or steal something), and you won't be walking for a while.
I buy service from the phone company so I can make calls to people I know and receive calls from people I have given my number to. At no time have I given implicit consent to any commercial entity to contact me through that number, except for those companies with whom I do business. It boggles my mind that there would be an objection to an implicit request that I receive no commercial phone calls.
I still haven't read a decent counter-argument from anyone that explains why the DMA is concerned about lost sales when the 50,000,000 numbers on the list are obviously not going to result in any sales to begin with.
Please don't tell me that you are that short sighted. This has to do with the greater good or evil, depending on how you look at it:
To push to have rights of free speech, commercial or personal, revoked to any degree, opens the door for some other person or entity to exploit that law and add addition restrictions. Not to mention, if you expect the government to enforce this kind of law, it will cost every taxpayer more.
There are so many of these type things taking up congress' time. It is insane really.
Passing laws to inhibit communication is a very bad idea. If you allow the government the power to block freedom of speech from corporations it could keep Green Peace from soliciting funds or publishing studies on the environment.
People just don't think these things through. While some form of liable and truth in advertising laws are necessary, in general laws that infringe on communication are very, very dangerous, and should avoided as much as possible.
Comments
Originally posted by Outsider
My parents were once looking to replace our windows in the house. They didn't have time to go around and price compare. One day someone called our house and wanted to send someone out to do a free estimate. They were happy. The people came and got the job.
I think we should analyze the kinds of calls we're getting, and not the fact that we're getting them. I've become quite good at politely declining and getting off the phone in less than 15 seconds. The people on the other side of the phone are humans too and should be treated with dignity and respect. And not that I've ever done telemarketing, but I'm just talking as a member of the human race.
Oh, and also, there is no law stating you have to answer the phone every time it rings. And there is no law that you have to be nice to people interupting your supper. You simply hang up. Simple really. No need to tie up congress any further. You realize WW III is going on around us as we speak.
Originally posted by Outsider
My parents were once looking to replace our windows in the house. They didn't have time to go around and price compare. One day someone called our house and wanted to send someone out to do a free estimate. They were happy. The people came and got the job.
I think we should analyze the kinds of calls we're getting, and not the fact that we're getting them. I've become quite good at politely declining and getting off the phone in less than 15 seconds. The people on the other side of the phone are humans too and should be treated with dignity and respect. And not that I've ever done telemarketing, but I'm just talking as a member of the human race.
I have recieved 50.000+ spam mails, been served 50.000+ pop-up windows and 200.000+ banner ads since I went online and yesterday for the first time ever I actually used the service one of the pop up ads offered. It was a $25 rebate on subscribtion on the second best news paper here.
I guess the hours and hours of deleting spam mail and clicking the red traffic light on my browser finally paid of.
Originally posted by NaplesX
Oh, and also, there is no law stating you have to answer the phone every time it rings. And there is no law that you have to be nice to people interupting your supper. You simply hang up. Simple really. No need to tie up congress any further.
Hopefully there will soon be a law disallowing the phone calls. Also, it's much more satisfying to tell the idiot who called you just exactly what you think about him/her.
Tele-marketing is intrusive, and should be stopped.
Originally posted by Anders
So suddenly having the opportunity to keep your home commercial free is "socialist"? Whats with all the rights of the individual? Are the collective rights of the corporations more importent than than yours? freedom for what? persons or money?
I have recieved 50.000+ spam mails, been served 50.000+ pop-up windows and 200.000+ banner ads since I went online and yesterday for the first time ever I actually used the service one of the pop up ads offered. It was a $25 rebate on subscribtion on the second best news paper here.
I guess the hours and hours of deleting spam mail and clicking the red traffic light on my browser finally paid of.
Solution:
#1 - buy a caller ID box, not only does it come in handy it will help you identify marketeers. = approx. $5.00
Grow a spine. this will help you with confrontation. = Free
#2 - Buy an apple computer, the mail.app will block almost all spam. (from experience about 98-99 percent) Apple's Safari browser blocks all pop ups. (I admit that this is the most expensive option, but you will have a great computer with less problems, so that may free enough time for you to get out and enjoy the world more and avoid those telemarketers.) = aprox. $799 for a great eMac.
#3 - This one is a must IMHO. Stop your whining. What ever happened to the personal resolve, independant rugedness that this country was built on. Whiners are everywhere and everyone seems to be crying "victim" and pointing at themselves. It is making me sick.
My to pennies
Originally posted by Hassan i Sabbah
Jesus ****ing Christ. You're so opposed to the very principle of socialism that you're prepared to abrogate your basic ****ing human right to privacy and a life without harassment just so that a complete ****ing stranger CAN TRY AND SELL YOU SOMETHING.
Privacy is a private matter. By paying taxes and getting a social security number I'm selling part of my soul to the United States. Since the phone companies receive public subsidies still, the local phone grid is a public resource. I don't believe that government should be involved in local phone grids in the first place, but to add extra layers of control adds red tape, slows things down, and costs me more money.
Beyond that trivial extent, there are lists of phone numbers publically available; being a part of one is part of the agreement you make when you get a phone line. You can get an unlisted number. Posting your email to a public space also makes that public domain. Private technologies have been developed to block most cold calls and junk email. The only real avenue for junk advertising is the one most public -- the mail service.
Anyway, I get no cold calls on my cell. I know some folks who don't even have a land line. They get no cold calls either.
Originally posted by Splinemodel
Anyway, I get no cold calls on my cell. I know some folks who don't even have a land line. They get no cold calls either.
You don't get cold calls on your cell because you pay for those incoming calls.
Telemarketing calls to cell phones used to be common until complaints (and, I believe, the law) stopped them. Now the handy-dandy telephone dialling machines exclude the cell phone exchanges.
The telemarketers can f*ck off and crawl back into the same hole inhabited by their fellow businessmen: spammers, deposed Nigerian gov't officials, etc.
Push marketing on the web is the most annoying part of the experience. (eMode pop-up ads most definitely included.) The same can be said about push marketing into my home.
The Bill of Rights: Amendment I
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
The government should not be able to curtail communication between the citizens of the USA. It does not mater if someone wants to save your soul, get you to vote for a political party, a sell you an encyclopedia, or chat about the weather. Freedom of speech, is so important, so intrinsic to the success of a free and democratic society, yet it is always under attack, frequently from its own short sighted citizens who do not want to hear opposing views, or wish to do away with a minor annoyance.
It angers and saddens me at the same time...
Originally posted by Res
The do not call list is just plain un-American. The Bill of Rights has really been taking a beating in recent years, and once again we have fools begging the govenment to whittle away at our freedoms.
The Bill of Rights: Amendment I
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
The Bill of Rights doesn't give anyone the right into my home. They can't peaceably assemble in my living room, even if I leave my front door open. Limiting that is not abridging the freedom of speech.
Originally posted by bunge
The Bill of Rights doesn't give anyone the right into my home. They can't peaceably assemble in my living room, even if I leave my front door open. Limiting that is not abridging the freedom of speech.
They can send mail to your home, they can ring your doorbell and speak to you face to face. It is your choice to have a phone, opening a line of communication that is no difference from those above. The do-not-call list is certainly infringing on the right to free speech, and I hope that the supreme court will will find it unconstitutional.
I must admit that I do find tele-marketers annoying, but I am not willing to lessen civil liberties to do away with them. Use caller ID or an answering machine to screen your phone calls, don't lobby congress to take away our rights.
Originally posted by Res
They can send mail to your home, they can ring your doorbell and speak to you face to face. It is your choice to have a phone, opening a line of communication that is no difference from those above. The do-not-call list is certainly infringing on the right to free speech, and I hope that the supreme court will will find it unconstitutional.
I must admit that I do find tele-marketers annoying, but I am not willing to lessen civil liberties to do away with them. Use caller ID or an answering machine to screen your phone calls, don't lobby congress to take away our rights.
Are you just afraid you'll lose your job?
Originally posted by Res
They can send mail to your home, they can ring your doorbell and speak to you face to face. It is your choice to have a phone, opening a line of communication that is no difference from those above.
Right. And you can 1) Refuse the mail (return 2 sender) and 2) post no tresspassing signs which they must respect on private property or face prosecution.
And you are correct, a phone is no different. You should be able to protect your privacy exactly as you may for any other median. This means at the very least MANDATORY caller ID info for all calls coming into the home. Is this available? No. So instead a DNC list is *one* way of dealing with it. I'm sure their are others but until they are put forth I appreciate congress and the president giving me the ability to CONTINUE to protect my own privacy as you can do with mail and in person solicitation.
Originally posted by audiopollution
Are you just afraid you'll lose your job?
Heh, I did work as a tele-marketer for 2 weeks about a decade ago, worse job I ever had (and I've had some pretty bad ones).
Originally posted by Res
They can send mail to your home, they can ring your doorbell and speak to you face to face. It is your choice to have a phone, opening a line of communication that is no difference from those above. The do-not-call list is certainly infringing on the right to free speech, and I hope that the supreme court will will find it unconstitutional.
I must admit that I do find tele-marketers annoying, but I am not willing to lessen civil liberties to do away with them. Use caller ID or an answering machine to screen your phone calls, don't lobby congress to take away our rights.
Of course, I could also shoot someone coming up to my door if I say I thought they were going to rob me. Or I could get a dog that could take a chunk out of their leg.
Originally posted by Not Unlike Myself
Right. And you can 1) Refuse the mail (return 2 sender) and 2) post no tresspassing signs which they must respect on private property or face prosecution.
And you are correct, a phone is no different. You should be able to protect your privacy exactly as you may for any other median. This means at the very least MANDATORY caller ID info for all calls coming into the home. Is this available? No. So instead a DNC list is *one* way of dealing with it. I'm sure their are others but until they are put forth I appreciate congress and the president giving me the ability to CONTINUE to protect my own privacy as you can do with mail and in person solicitation.
Returning your mail is your prerogative as is screening a call or hanging up your phone -- there is no law stopping people from sending you mail in the first place and there should not be one for phone calls -- restrictions like that are a bad idea and should be unconstitutional.
You agree that phone is no different from the mail -- I receive pieces of mail that have no hint at the contents, so why would you require a mandatory caller ID?
Free speech can be annoying, that is why it needs to be protected. I just can't believe how many people want to do away with it.
Originally posted by Res
I must admit that I do find tele-marketers annoying, but I am not willing to lessen civil liberties to do away with them. Use caller ID or an answering machine to screen your phone calls, don't lobby congress to take away our rights.
Your right as an individual citizen is not infringed upon by this decision. Only national companies are effected.
Originally posted by Res
Free speech can be annoying, that is why it needs to be protected. I just can't believe how many people want to do away with it.
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the US Constitution afford greater protections to non-commercial free speech?
The issue at hand is not individual free speech, but rather corporate/commercial speech.
Originally posted by audiopollution
Please correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't the US Constitution afford greater protections to non-commercial free speech?
The issue at hand is not individual free speech, but rather corporate/commercial speech.
Think about it. How can you seperate the two? You can't and shouldn't. Just hang up the phone, or go without. When you buy the service from the Phone Company you create a portal for people to enter your house.
I personally have killed my land line and have a cell phone and reciev no sales calles unless I ask for them. Problem solved and I didn't even trample on any of the rights to free speech.
Oh and it is cheaper too.
Originally posted by NaplesX
Think about it. How can you seperate the two? You can't and shouldn't. Just hang up the phone, or go without. When you buy the service from the Phone Company you create a portal for people to enter your house.
I personally have killed my land line and have a cell phone and reciev no sales calles unless I ask for them. Problem solved and I didn't even trample on any of the rights to free speech.
Oh and it is cheaper too.
A window is a portal to my house. Try to enter my house that way, to sell me something (or steal something), and you won't be walking for a while.
I buy service from the phone company so I can make calls to people I know and receive calls from people I have given my number to. At no time have I given implicit consent to any commercial entity to contact me through that number, except for those companies with whom I do business. It boggles my mind that there would be an objection to an implicit request that I receive no unsolicited commercial phone calls.
I still haven't read a decent counter-argument from anyone that explains why the DMA is concerned about lost sales when the 50,000,000 numbers on the list are obviously not going to result in any sales to begin with.
Originally posted by audiopollution
A window is a portal to my house. Try to enter my house that way, to sell me something (or steal something), and you won't be walking for a while.
I buy service from the phone company so I can make calls to people I know and receive calls from people I have given my number to. At no time have I given implicit consent to any commercial entity to contact me through that number, except for those companies with whom I do business. It boggles my mind that there would be an objection to an implicit request that I receive no commercial phone calls.
I still haven't read a decent counter-argument from anyone that explains why the DMA is concerned about lost sales when the 50,000,000 numbers on the list are obviously not going to result in any sales to begin with.
Please don't tell me that you are that short sighted. This has to do with the greater good or evil, depending on how you look at it:
To push to have rights of free speech, commercial or personal, revoked to any degree, opens the door for some other person or entity to exploit that law and add addition restrictions. Not to mention, if you expect the government to enforce this kind of law, it will cost every taxpayer more.
There are so many of these type things taking up congress' time. It is insane really.
People just don't think these things through. While some form of liable and truth in advertising laws are necessary, in general laws that infringe on communication are very, very dangerous, and should avoided as much as possible.