Good evening. I hope y'all have had a fine day.
I expressed my discomfort with Do-Not-Call back on Pg 1 of this thread (6/29 @ 1:34 pm). I'm not clever enough to forward that quote.
Anyway, I side with you PDiddie (I think).
The issue, it seems to me is not with the concept of being called while y'all are having supper. Rather, who can't and who can call. Judge Nottingham noted that folks selling stuff could not call but others, such as political parties, could.
He seemed to have a problem with giving the "commercial" segment a banishment.
Got to go now. Thunderstorm. It will be interesting to see how this DNC plays out. -rjb-
No time of day is a good time for me to get those calls! It's just not right for people who pay high prices for their phones to not be able to have the right to not be bothered by people they don't know. If they want to try to sell you something, send it in the mail!
Montana, I agree, but it's cheaper for them to call you. I also agree about the phone, and since we're paying the phone bills, we should have a right to say who should and who should not call us.
The telemarketers should pay us for taking their calls.
I agree Misti. Heck, even if they did pay me, I wouldn't want their calls.
A Direct Marketing exec, or maybe a principal in a direct marketing firm ... I dunno, I wasn't listening when he was introduced ... said the key issue was the "thousands of jobs that would be lost". I suppose, by that rationalization, we should establish specific protections for street whores, bootleggers, crack dealers, sail makers, wagon crafters, and muleskinners too.
What's the definition of 'featherbedding', again?
BBB's opinion
I think the do not call list should apply to everyone, no exceptions for politicians, charities, etc. etc.
The flaw I see in the do not call list is that the agency used the old "book of the month" model. In order not to automatically receive a book, you have to mail (at the cost of a stamp) or e-mail a cancellation of the book offered. This creates a lot more book sales than if you had to actually order the book.
The do not call list should have been designed as a list of people who want to receive these calls rather than a list of those who don't. That way, the free speech issued could be avoided and the dingbats who want to buy the predator's stuff could chat away with them to their hearts consent.
This method might also protect the elderly on whom many of these phone predators prey.
If we can't beat the free speech issue, then how about using anti harassment and stalking laws to get them off our telephones?
BumbleBeeBoogie
I agree that the list is a good idea and that the key issue here is that the right to privacy trumps the right to free speech. And I signed up for the list as soon as I could.
Having said that, I must say I found it a bit unnerving when both houses of Congress voted nearly unanimously, and Bush concurred, to legislate the list. Don't know about anyone else, but all the politicians agree, I get a little scared...
50 Million+ people (or numbers at least..) are on the combined lists. That's a number that any/all politicans are going to pay attention to.
Phoenix
Phoenix, the current list is just like having to pay a monthly fee to keep your name and telephone number out of the telephone directory.
It really pisses me off that I have to pay to keep my phone number private (an illusion at best with all the other directories, reverse, etc.) instead of paying a fee to have my phone number listed in the directory.
It is such a money making scam used by so many.
BumbleBeeBoogie
BumbleBeeBoogie- I can't disagree with you. I just wonder about how many people would refuse to pay to have their name listed in a phone book. It would be very interesting if someone would conduct a poll to see how many people would pay to HAVE their name listed in a phone book!
Phoenix
Phoenix, I don't know of any law requiring a telephone company to force customers to have their phone number listed in the directory.
I think the practice started many decades ago when most people wanted their numbers listed. But times have changed and many people don't want their numbers listed, in fact, I think a majority.
But the phone companies have found a way to make huge sums of extra money by not changing their practices with chaning times. Its a rip off!
BumbleBeeBoogie
BBB -- you say you don't know of any law requiring a telephone company to force customers to have their phone number listed in the directory. Tru, but the point is that there is no law against it, either. The phone company's position is that they offer this listing as a "free service" to its customers. And I don't think that a majority of telephone subscribers would rather not have their number listed. I have an unpublished number mainly because I wanted to avoid too many telemarketing calls. But I don't actually keep my phone number a "secret." It's printed on my business card and I'll gladly give it out to anyone who asks me in a social or professional situation.
I don't think anyone should have to pay to have their number listed, but I also don't think you should pay to have it unlisted. I also agree that no one should be excluded from the no call list.
Good news for Yankees
An advance in true democracy, the advance is so lil tho. Cheers for Yankees.
I have my name on the list here and it's been working very well so far :-D
Same here... a marked reduction in annoying calls.
