bonbonbox

The national No Call List.............Yes or No?

Mojo_PeiPei

Yes, and to add to it this was another example of an idiot judge who doesn't interpret the constitution rather he makes policy.

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

JBX

Yes I want it stopped, but why do telemarketer's exsist? Because some bozo is not hanging up and is purchasing the crap they are selling. We have become a bunch of babies that need big brother to hang up the phones for us. For Goodness Sake, HANG UP, Don't Buy and this whole thing stops in it's tracks.

__________________
"Youth and Strength is no match for Age and Treachery"

j8ear

To me the whole 'do not call' list was just a centralized listing of peoples phone numbers.

As soon as I learned that it excluded politicians, charitible organizations, and pollsters, I knew that these loops holes would be enough to render it ineffective....

AND UNCONSTITUTIONAL. Both on free speech and equal protection grounds.

"Hi, I am calling on behalf of Mayor Rotten-Crotch and his wife Mary-Jane. Mrs Rotten-Crotch wanted to know if you'd be interested in her latest vacuum cleaner business which she purchased in an effort to save it from going bankrupt due to global warming and free-trade? Can I put you down for a two hundred dollar donation. As our free gift to you for your generosity to this worthy cause, I would be happy to send you a cordless iron and a tote bag. For a donation of $250.00 we will also send you a free hydrogen power nuclear vacuum cleaner. If you up your donation to $300.00, we will include the optional extender-hose attachment and the shampoo conversion kit."

I don't want the federal government helping me with annoyances...especially since they exempt themselves from the very restrictions they impose on others.

When I was growing up, we weren't even allowed to the answer the telephone while we were eating dinner (that is when we actually had a telephone).

Pahleese,

-bear

BTW...JBX...I like the way you think. The mettle of your moxy, the cut of your jib. Blog on brother...blog on

__________________
It's alot easier to ask for forgiveness then it is to ask for permission.

rogue49

One step at a time.
Start the law and process
And then after it's set, you can close the loopholes.

We need to stop this harassment in our own homes.
And I don't care if the telemarketing industry starves to death.
Find another job where it doesn't include annoying people out of the blue over the phone.
If you DO want to annoy people over the phone,
then join customer service, at least it will be them calling you.

The whole purpose of telemarketing is to scam you,
even in legit companies in the process they are hoping you spontaneously buy and make fast decisions over the phone.
Ones you really wouldn't normally even consider.
There is nothing to read, no time to ponder.
So don't bother us in the first place.

Cynthetiq

no. leave me alone and allow me to eat dinner in peace.

__________________
I don't care if you are black, white, purple, green, Chinese, Japanese, Korean, hippie, cop, bum, admin, user, English, Irish, French, Catholic, Protestant, Jewish, Buddhist, Muslim, indian, cowboy, tall, short, fat, skinny, emo, punk, mod, rocker, straight, gay, lesbian, jock, nerd, geek, Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Independent, driver, pedestrian, or bicyclist, either you're an asshole or you're not.

Nizzle

The judge that voted it down is from Oklahoma, the notorious homeland for most telemarketing headquarters. You do the math.

__________________
Nizzle

j8ear

The judge from Oklahoma was quickly sidelined by one of the swiftest actions ever rushed through Congress. The legislation was written, debated, reconciled, and passed in 24 hours, almost unanimously, by both houses. A sure sign that his ruling (that the FTC did not have the authority to enforce the list) was probably right on the money.

Now, however, it is a judge from Denver (that's in Colorado, the notorious home of fantastic skiing, and some pretty neat 'shall issue' legislation) who deemed the list uncostitutional on 1st ammendment grounds. That is, it restricted only certain types of speech, commercial solicitations, while placing no restrictions on political, charitible, or polling speech.

I agree, that it needs to stop. It will not stop by virtue of ineffective, unconstitutional, loop hole ridden legislation, though. It will stop ONLY when morons stop buying things from telemarketers.

-bear

__________________
It's alot easier to ask for forgiveness then it is to ask for permission.

Sledge

I know almost nothing about the issue, but is it weird to anyone but me that all of Congress is so quick to act about this?

I won't believe it's because they hate telemarketers, too. Someone has something to gain and I've no idea what. Any ideas?

spectre

I don't even understand how he could consider it a first amendment issue. Commercial speech is not protected under the first ammendment as it isn't free speech. This was already proven when spam faxes were made illegal. I just don't understand the way some judges think sometimes.

__________________
"Fuck these chains
No goddamn slave
I will be different" ~ Machine Head

j8ear

Not sure about the spam fax ruling, but solicitations for any ~money~...whether a politician, or a charity is commericial speech also. It's not so much that you can't regulate commercial speech it's that you can't favor one over the other. That is what is unconstitutional, and rightly so, imho...

I don't want to leave the impression that I'm for telemarketers. They are the scum of the earth. Why ANYONE would want to be a telemarketer is beyond me. That's not my issue. My issue is that if you say vacuum cleaner and long distance companies can't telemarket then neither can charities or politicians.

-bear

Lebell

I agree with Rogue and don't understand how this can be a First Amendment issue when spam faxes have been outlawed.

The concept is the same: I pay for my phone for my own use and that use does NOT include being an unasked for advertising conduit.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

j8ear

It's time to put the spam fax comparisons to bed. They are irrelevant to this discussion for two reasons:

1. The recipient of a spam fax incurs a cost.
2. There are no excpetions nor is there a preferred group of faxers which are permitted to continue spam faxing. In fact the fax ruling is not even restricted to commercial faxes.

ANYONE is the wording used in this FTC opinion:

http://www.ftc.gov/bcp/conline/audio...ited_faxes.htm

Extrapolate all you want and wish it weren't so, but the fact remains, we have rules and this one violates them. Plain and simple. Remove the exceptions and bingo, no more problem.

-bear

__________________
It's alot easier to ask for forgiveness then it is to ask for permission.

Lebell

So by that logic, since calls to my cell phone DO incur a cost to me, then I should be able to ban them?

But I agree, I also do not like the fact that there are exceptions to the list.

But I also agree with rogue that this is a good step in the right direction.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

rogue49

Personally, I consider it trespassing.
This is my private home line, and I don't want anyone calling it
except for those I invited to.

j8ear

Not neccasarily by that logic, but yes you should....ALL of them, without exception. Unfortunately the 'do not call' list does not provide for this capability.

Peace, goodwill, and happiness to all,

-bear

rodgerd

The people who call you don't generally want to be telemarketers. I'm sure many of the would be more than happy to get something better.

Phaenx

No

2 minutes of my time during dinner is not as important as someones job. If I don't want to talk, then I won't answer the phone.

__________________
"I went shopping last night at like 1am. The place was empty and this old woman just making polite conversation said to me, 'where is everyone??' I replied, 'In bed, same place you and I should be!' Took me ten minutes to figure out why she gave me a dirty look." --Some guy

Lebell

May I point out that if YOU want to be bothered, simply don't put your name on the list.

But please don't take away MY desire to not be bothered by what I consider an annoying waste of my time.

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

spectre

I agree. One day last week I got 5 calls in less than an hour from telemarketers, and I never just give out my number to any companies. It's really annoying considering I get at least 2-3 calls per day from them.

__________________
"Fuck these chains
No goddamn slave
I will be different" ~ Machine Head

seretogis

The "National Do Not Call List" is an example of what the government should, but often doesn't, do for it's citizens -- give them a choice. It is simply unfortunate that the choice we make to be put on the list does not extend to the telemarketers employed by the politicians as well.

__________________
seretogis - sieg heil
perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most, forgot how it feels well almost
no one to blame always the same, open my eyes wake up in flames

seretogis

As a sidenote, I wonder how many hundreds of thousands of dollars that the government managed to spend merely to compile a list of phone numbers.

__________________
seretogis - sieg heil
perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most, forgot how it feels well almost
no one to blame always the same, open my eyes wake up in flames

Phaenx

I don't know Lebell, your desire to be left alone is going to cost some people their job, and we're short on those as it is.

__________________
"I went shopping last night at like 1am. The place was empty and this old woman just making polite conversation said to me, 'where is everyone??' I replied, 'In bed, same place you and I should be!' Took me ten minutes to figure out why she gave me a dirty look." --Some guy

MuadDib

While, personally, I say yes. I have to admit that it is unconstitutional. The Supreme Court has always upheld that commercial speech is protected as free speech. We can't simply target one aspect of telephone calls (like telemarketing) and leave out other calls (like canvassing, fundraising, etc). Commericial rights have always been held up by the courts and to rule against commercial free speech would rule against a lot of Supreme Court decisions from the ability to air certain commercials to business donations on campaigns. I think this issue may go to the Supreme Court, but it will die. If you don't want calls during dinner unplug your phone or simply have yourself added to each groups "do no call" list. All you have to do is get the callers name and business (which they have to tell you within the first 30 seconds) then tell them to add you to the "do not call" list and you will sue if they call back then hang up. Each individual organization has its own list and by law if you tell them you want to be added to their list then they can not call.

__________________
"The courts that first rode the warhorse of virtual representation into battle on the res judicata front invested their steed with near-magical properties." ~27 F.3d 751

Lebell

So I should let you decide to sacrifice my privacy for someone else's job?

Who is John Galt?

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

m5man

Free speech means you can stand on the town square and say anything you want. My telephone, fax, cell phone and computer are my personal property. Don't bother me!

Phaenx

Yes.

Never heard of him.

__________________
"I went shopping last night at like 1am. The place was empty and this old woman just making polite conversation said to me, 'where is everyone??' I replied, 'In bed, same place you and I should be!' Took me ten minutes to figure out why she gave me a dirty look." --Some guy

123dsa

Nice quote.

I know who he is.

debaser

The irritated citizen in me screams for the no call list, but the strict constitutionalist realizes that it violates the equal protection clause, at the very least, and quite possibly the First Amendment.

Therefore I must come out against the no call ist. Sometimes liberties are a burden as well...

__________________

santafe5000

It may cost some of these people a job, but they are calling me on my cell phone, wasting my minutes, so that is what I want stopped.

__________________
When all else fails, QUIT.

rogue49

The First Amendment is a statement saying that citizens have a right to speak their thoughts in a safe manner in public.

As it does NOT give you the right to yell "fire" in a crowded theater,
it also does NOT give salespeople the "right" to call my private line to make a pitch to me.

This is a warping of the original intent of the Amendment.

And I'm sorry, if these people cannot find other jobs other than annoying people constantly
then they need to develop other skills.
Or call OTHER countries.

I have very good friends who are telemarketers, and you know what?
I wish they would lose these job and find better ones.
The hours are stressful, they aren't paid well, and people scream at them constantly.
This is not a life, no matter the job stablity.
Besides, if they are good on the phone then they can easily get jobs in customer service,
which is MUCH better because we are calling them,
and they are assisting us with our issues at the time.

Thank god, my friend finally realized this, and switch to customer service (in the SAME company)
her stress levels went down dramatically,
and her job skills went up significantly.

And no, I do NOT want charities, political orgs or otherwise given the loopholes to call me either.
But I believe this act will get the initiative started, and then we will tackle the loopholes.
And if anything it will cut down on 75% of the unwanted calls.

This activity is a negative on all levels, let's not rationalize this.

MuadDib

Unfortunately, yelling fire presents something called clear and present danger. On the other hand calling to sign you up for a credit card does not. The first amendment not only protects my ability to speak my thoughts in a safe manner in public, it also protects a businessman or workers right to speak about their product to you over a phone. You can have your number privately listed or tell each business to add you to their do not call list, but not giving them the ability to say what they have to say(especially non-profit or political groups) restricts the freedom of speech greatly. Your phone number is public information and a means of communication.

On another issue though is the fact that these annoying calls are a symptom not the problem. The real problem is that fact that your insurance company, your credit card company, your travel agency, your bank, and other can sell your information with their business and they do so for millions of dollars a year. There are little or no restrictions on whom they sell this information to and we all know how trustworthy and accountable large corporations can be. In California legislation was recently past that was the most comprehensive restriction on businesses to date on having to obtain explicit permission to sell/trade/give your information. Now that legislation is threatened because current federal legislation makes it illegal for a state to interfere with information trading between affiliated businesses. Right now General Electric’s financial operation has over 3,000 affiliates, CitiGroup has over 1600 affiliates, and Bank of America has 1400. Federal preemption under the Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA) is scheduled to expire at the end of 2003. California new Financial Privacy Law takes effect in 2004. California’s law gives consumers control over information sharing with a financial institution’s affiliates. The big banks and insurance companies are lobbying Congress to overturn California’s new law. The US House of Representative granted the banks their wish on September 10. If you really want to stop getting calls at dinner you all need to contact your Senators to vote against overturning California's law and put pressure on your state senate and house to adopt similiar measures. Telemarketers do not get their numbers from a phone book, they buy lists from data compilers. They can't afford to call everyone and would be left with their own customer base. We can protect the first amendment and stop these calls.

For santafe5000: It is currently illegal for businesses to call your cell phone for that very reason. Unless you gave it to them and they can prove it then you can sue them for calling. Make them aware that they are calling your cell, you did not give it to them, you do not want them calling, you know the law, and you will sue. The fine for such behavior can be up to $11,000.

__________________
"The courts that first rode the warhorse of virtual representation into battle on the res judicata front invested their steed with near-magical properties." ~27 F.3d 751

bonbonbox

I asked for your opinions on the no call list and have enjoyed reading the responses. Now I will put in my two cents worth.
I see two groups of people. Those that need government to hold their hand, protect them from any uncomfortable scenario and those that don't. Shockingly, I fall into the those that don't category. Our country is all about people selling stuff to other people. We have the freedom to choose from many different options to do this. We have commercials of all forms. Billboards, flyers, TV ads, Radio ads, clothing with ads, internet ads, the list goes on. Why people even walk up to your door and attempt to have a one on one with you to make that sale. Merchants will use any means of advertisement possible that is cost effective to sell you. That telemarketers exist shows that form of advertisement is viable. Made possible by those that choose to purchase from them.
rogue49 writes: The whole purpose of telemarketing is to scam you, even in legit companies in the process they are hoping you spontaneously buy and make fast decisions over the phone.
I am shocked. You mean to tell me that a company might want you to make a spontaneous decision to purchase? Surely that's not why Supermarkets rearrange the entire store every few months so you cant find what you are looking for and make a decision to buy an item you walk by is it? No, they wouldn't do that. Well I for one am extremely put out by having to resist buying those unthought of items and feel that Guvment should pass a law telling them to decide where an item will be and leave it there. I mean really, all that extra walking at my age is a health concern as well. Ridiculous as the no call list is. Much telemarketing is lead generation. No sale at all. How much sale? None. The word scam to me implies an unfair business practice, such as taking funds for products or services not rendered. If I call someone and make an offer, then make good on the offer, how is that a scam?
To answer Sledge: The no call list is sold to telemarketers, and the company that hires the telemarketing firm must also obtain a tracking number. The sold part should answer your question. Plus your going to need more guvment employees to enforce this list.
To answer Spectre: A fax received incurs cost. So far a dollar figure has not been applied to time it takes for someone to decide to pick up a phone or not. It costs nothing monetarily for someone to view an ad, or hear an ad.
In response to rogue49's second post and m5man:
Your phone line is far from private. It's not unlike a road. A person can drive to your house and walk up to the door and knock. You can put a no trespassing , or a no soliciting sign up and prohibit them from walking up your sidewalk and knocking, but the drive over is not restricted. You are free to put an answering machine on your line to screen calls, use caller id, or get the "The person you are calling has decided to not accept calls from numbers that are blocked" feature. Or the old tried and true, hang up. The call should not be restricted.
I hate the constant battery of commercials that I incur everyday. I keep the remote close to me during any commercial TV viewing so that I may kill the sound and ignore commercials. My favorite way to view sporting events is taping the game then fast forward through all ads and timeouts. I hate to receive a telemarketing call, perhaps even more than some of you that have posted their support of the no call list. I choose not to have Guvment hold my hand and restrict someone's ability to make a sale to those that freely choose to purchase from them. Instead I choose to use the answering machine to screen my calls. $20 I got a cordless phone with this feature. I needed a phone, why not get a cordless one that has a machine built in? Simple solution to a simple inconvenience. I echo the MuadDib post, with the exception of the vote for Kucinich part, :O). Stop the flow of info. Telemarketers haven't touched a phone book for years. Computers dial faster and some programs weed out operator intercepted calls and answering machines so that all time spent talking is to a human that might purchase or decide to further the interaction between Bus. firm and potential client. For those of you that paid to have your number unlisted: One practice is to have the dialer call all the numbers in an exchange, 555-000, 555-0001, etc. with the numbers that ARE listed in the book removed from the list. Thus leaving the unlisted. A group of numbers that are called less than others and have a less chance of having a machine connected. It's all about getting your foot in the door, so to speak.
Success in telemarketing is all about percentages. How many people can you pitch in a given time frame. The faster you go thru the no's, the quicker you will get a yes. As you might have suspected by now I have done some telemarketing. I consistently sell or get more leads than others. I avoid anything that might turn you off. Mispronouncing your name: I never say, "Hello is this so and so?" or "Hello So and So". It's "Hi, This is Bonbonbox calling for Sam's widgets. We got widgets at $X. You need any widgets? Yes? Great! No? Great! Thank you." on to the next call. A long drawn out spiel: refer to the last example. I say that to say this, telemarketing firms do not want to spend time calling people that are pissed at being called, they don't purchase or generate a lead. Stop the, "They are out to bother me." nonsense. If the Guvment wanted to serve you they would supply the no call list to telemarketing firm at no charge. The Mng. I have spoke with are tickled pink to get a list of No's, they just don't want to be forced to use it or pay for it. Their clients as well are a bit gun-shy of having to have a tracking number. Once again our Guvment has created a new crime, complete with a horde of new employees to police it. Telephone numbers change everyday. To keep up is not going to happen. I say stop it. Just stop. Those that do not wish to speak to anyone except those they wish to, already have plenty of ways to accomplish that goal. Do not handcuff those businesses that choose to dial to sell, and are making a fair living doing so, from having that choice. Freedom of choice, use it or lose it. With that, I step down. Thank you.

Lebell

bonbonbox,

I'm a bit confused.

In one breath you say you don't want a national no call list, but in the next you say that telemarketers don't want to call people who don't want to be called.

Which is it?

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

bonbonbox

It's not an either or. I do not approve of the present no call list. It is a farce when it comes to assuring that a phone will ring only when convenient, or when it is someone that the phone owner wishes to hear from. Niether of which anyone has a Ptah given right to. It is another way to tax, which is what the industry is opposed to. They routinely remove numbers from call lists. Lot's of them. Everyday. They avoid calling people that don't want to be called. Being forced to pay for a B. S. list whose numbers will change on and off everyday, and applying a new restriction on those who want to hire out for this form of ad is not good. I trust the judicial branch will correct the matter. Hope that helps any confusion.

Lebell

Thanks.

Yes, that did clear up what you meant.

I still don't agree with you, but that is something else

__________________
"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It may be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end, for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." – C. S. Lewis

The ONLY sponsors we have are YOU!

Please Donate!

fishin

I am DEFINITELY for the do not call list. The harassment is intolerable.

__________________
liberals rule. phhtt.

oberon

It's like the Simpsons episode where, if people stopped looking at the monsters, they died and stopped bothering Springfield.

Dibbler

The list is not "the government holding my hand...". Right now if I don't want telemarketers to call I have to:

1) Have them call me at 6:00 pm, right in the middle of dinner.
2) Get them to stop talking long enough for me to request that I be put on their "do not call" list.
3) Argue with them about how I don't have to call a 1-800 number or write a letter.
4) Get the company information so I can keep a record of who I've made the request to.
5) Hang up
6) Answer to phone at 6:10 pm.
7) Repeat steps 1 through 6.

All the list is doing is making my life easier. I can still make a "do no call" request for the few who slipped through. There just wouldn't be as many.

tekaweni

I am soooo tired of being called at home by people trying to sell me their shit. I make a point of being rude to them - why not? Theyre being rude by calling me at home in the first place.

If youre not my buddy...
If nobody's dying...
If nothing's on fire....

Then
Dont
CALL
!!!!!

__________________
If you always do what you've always done, you'll always get what you've always gotten