| Author |
Do Not Call list for telemarketers...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Agent_C 2006-04-04, 11:48 pm |
| On Tue, 04 Apr 2006 10:24:51 -0700, Dave Rudisill <denali@alaska.net>
wrote:
>Then look at
>http://www.snopes.com/politics/business/cell411.asp
"The Wireless 411 information will not be included in printed phone
directories, distributed in other printed form, made available via the
Internet, or sold to telemarketers. It will be made available only to
operator service centers performing the 411 directory assistance
service."
BULLSHIT!
A_C
| |
| Dave Rudisill 2006-04-05, 5:48 pm |
| >Agent_C <Agent-C-hates-spam@nyc.rr.com> wrote:
>On Tue, 04 Apr 2006 10:24:51 -0700, Dave Rudisill <denali@alaska.net>
>wrote:
>
>
>"The Wireless 411 information will not be included in printed phone
>directories, distributed in other printed form, made available via the
>Internet, or sold to telemarketers. It will be made available only to
>operator service centers performing the 411 directory assistance
>service."
>
>BULLSHIT!
>
>A_C
Thank you for your thoughtful and insightful analysis.
| |
| Agent_C 2006-04-05, 11:48 pm |
| On Wed, 05 Apr 2006 07:56:38 -0700, Dave Rudisill <denali@alaska.net>
wrote:
>Thank you for your thoughtful and insightful analysis.
You're quite welcomed... Sometimes things aren't nearly as complicated
as one might be led to believe.
A_C
| |
| Lou@UnReal.invalid 2006-04-06, 5:48 pm |
| Agent_C wrote:
> On Wed, 05 Apr 2006 07:56:38 -0700, Dave Rudisill <denali@alaska.net>
> wrote:
>
>
> You're quite welcomed... Sometimes things aren't nearly as complicated
> as one might be led to believe.
>
> A_C
LOL
Lou
| |
| Dave Rudisill 2006-04-06, 5:48 pm |
| >Agent_C <Agent-C-hates-spam@nyc.rr.com> wrote:
>On Wed, 05 Apr 2006 07:56:38 -0700, Dave Rudisill <denali@alaska.net>
>wrote:
>
>
>You're quite welcomed... Sometimes things aren't nearly as complicated
>as one might be led to believe.
>
>A_C
Good one!
--
Dave
| |
|
| "Dan Koerner" <dan@spam.is.bad> wrote in news:ZdOdnT0mNtdhPq_
ZRVn-
iA@comcast.com:
>
> https://www.donotcall.gov/default.aspx
The "do not call" list is no longer effective. I wondered how long it
would take the telemarketers to get around the law, it wasn't long at
all. Now they call and tell you they're taking a survey, would you
care to participate? If you do so, at the end of the short "survey"
(usually one or two questions) you'll be pressured to buy something.
Since the call is represented as a survey it's immune to the do not
call law.
Isn't that cute?
There's still one effective way to avoid all telemarketers, install an
answering machine, set it to answer on the least number of rings and
keep your message VERY short. Than tell all your friends and business
associates the you will no longer answer the phone EVER for any reason
and do it! I haven't answered my phone for 10 years or more, it does
annoy my friends (business associates don't seem to mind?) but I notice
most of them have gone to the exact same system.
| |
| Bert Hyman 2006-04-29, 5:48 pm |
| In news:Xns97B4653606C8
4xs11eyahoocom@70.169.32.36 XS11E
<xs11eNO@SPAMyahoo.com> wrote:
> Now they call and tell you they're taking a survey, would you
> care to participate?
Assuming you don't simply hang up at the outset, the correct answer to
that question is always "NO".
--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert@iphouse.com
| |
|
| Bert Hyman <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in
news:Xns97B47A937CC2
9VeebleFetzer@216.250.184.7:
> In news:Xns97B4653606C8
4xs11eyahoocom@70.169.32.36 XS11E
> <xs11eNO@SPAMyahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> Assuming you don't simply hang up at the outset, the correct
> answer to that question is always "NO".
Correct but since my answering machine intercepts the call, they hang
up when they hear the announcement or, if it's a machine calling, it
hangs up after waiting for a response from me and not getting it.
I learned all about these "surveys" from a friend who will not use her
answering machine to screen calls and seems mentally incapable of
hanging up on anyone (but she has no problem saying "no" to their
offers!)
| |
|
| Bert Hyman wrote:
>
> In news:Xns97B4653606C8
4xs11eyahoocom@70.169.32.36 XS11E
> <xs11eNO@SPAMyahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
> Assuming you don't simply hang up at the outset, the correct answer to
> that question is always "NO".
That one's always worked for me.
"Thanks, but no thanks."
Hang up.
Notan
|
|
|
|