"David E. Bernholdt" <bernhold@red8.qtp.ufl.edu> (04/03/91)
I received a rather strange series of phone calls at my home last night. I answered the phone and a synthesized female voice says "Please hold the line, I have a call for this number." After several seconds of silence, it says "I am trying to connect your call, please hold." (Or something to that effect.) This was repeated about four times, then it said "Are you still holding?" and I mechanically answered "Yes". The voice said "I'm sorry, but I have not been able to connect the call. I will try again later," and hangs up. It called again, perhaps 20 minutes later. Same drill, except this time I didn't answer the "Are you still holding?" question. It said nothing more, and held the line until I hung up. The third time it called, I hung up after the first "I am trying to connect your call ..." It didn't call back after that. I've never heard of anything like this before. Does anybody recognize what it might be, besides a failure (at least in this case)? David Bernholdt bernhold@qtp.ufl.edu Quantum Theory Project bernhold@ufpine.bitnet University of Florida Gainesville, FL 32611 904/392 6365
tep@ucsd.edu> (04/05/91)
In article <telecom11.266.4@eecs.nwu.edu> bernhold@red8.qtp.ufl.edu (David E. Bernholdt) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 266, Message 4 of 16 > I received a rather strange series of phone calls at my home last > night. I answered the phone and a synthesized female voice says > "Please hold the line, I have a call for this number." > After several seconds of silence, it says "I am trying to connect your > call, please hold." (Or something to that effect.) > This was repeated about four times, then it said "Are you still > holding?" and I mechanically answered "Yes". The voice said "I'm > sorry, but I have not been able to connect the call. I will try again > later," and hangs up. > It called again, perhaps 20 minutes later. Same drill, except this > time I didn't answer the "Are you still holding?" question. It said > nothing more, and held the line until I hung up. > The third time it called, I hung up after the first "I am trying to > connect your call ..." It didn't call back after that. > I've never heard of anything like this before. Does anybody recognize > what it might be, besides a failure (at least in this case)? I believe this is the latest in boiler-room technology. Instead of the incredible expense of making a real-live person (at minimum wage, no less!) make each and every annoying, unwanted call, they have a machine make the calls. This machine sequentially walks the phone-numbers for any set of prefixes. When it gets an answer, it *then* tries to connect you to a real (?) sales-thug. It saves the incredibly valuable time of the sales-thugs, at only a major annoyance to the victim. In your case, (un?)fortunately, all the sales-thugs were busy annoying other people. Tom Perrine (tep) Internet: tep@tots.Logicon.COM Logicon - T&TSD UUCP: sun!suntan!tots!tep P.O. Box 85158 GENIE: T.PERRINE San Diego CA 92138 Voice: +1 619 455 1330 FAX: +1 619 552 0729 [Moderator's Note: As he explained it in his message in the last issue, it turns out the calls were from a collection office somewhere trying to reach him regarding his student loan. I think it really takes a lot of brass for those outfits to use a device like that to waste *my time* on hold until *they* get someone free to talk to me. When I've received automated voice calls before, I always just hang up, and everyone should take that approach, to end this latest phone nuisance once and for all. PAT]
tad@ssc.UUCP (Tad Cook) (04/05/91)
In article <telecom11.266.4@eecs.nwu.edu>, bernhold@red8.qtp.ufl.edu (David E. Bernholdt) writes: > I received a rather strange series of phone calls at my home last > night. I answered the phone and a synthesized female voice says > "Please hold the line, I have a call for this number." > After several seconds of silence, it says "I am trying to connect your > call, please hold." (Or something to that effect.) > I've never heard of anything like this before. Does anybody recognize > what it might be, besides a failure (at least in this case)? This is an automatic dialing system used by phone solicitors. The idea is to increase the productivity of phone solicitors by having a machine call people and que them up for the next available solicitor ... kind of like when you call the airline, and get a recording saying "ALL OUR AGENTS ARE BUSY NOW...PLEASE HOLD FOR THE NEXT AVAILABLE AGENT"... only in reverse. These things are supposed to be set up for minimum or no waiting time, based upon statistics and a large number of agents. Tad Cook Seattle, WA Packet: KT7H @ N7ENT.#WWA.WA.USA.NA Phone: 206/527-4089 MCI Mail: 3288544 Telex: 6503288544 MCI UW USENET:...uw-beaver!sumax!amc-gw!ssc!tad or, tad@ssc.UUCP
"Paul S. Sawyer" <paul@unhtel.unh.edu> (04/08/91)
In article <telecom11.271.12@eecs.nwu.edu> Our Moderator comments: > When I've received automated voice calls before, I always just hang > up, and everyone should take that approach, to end this latest phone > nuisance once and for all. PAT] I usually put them on hold, so as to waste THEIR time and money; sometimes (when things are REAL dull ...) I put them on the speaker, with the transmitter muted, with varying amusing results ... once during a party someone called and asked for the "head of the house" (whatever that is ... B-) so I said "I'll get him", and put the speakerphone on while we all told anecdotes about companies that use telemarketing while the speaker kept yelling for attention. Come to think of it, that's the only good use I've found for the speakerphone! Paul S. Sawyer {uunet,attmail}!unhtel!paul paul@unhtel.unh.edu UNH CIS - - Telecommunications and Network Services VOX: +1 603 862 3262 Durham, New Hampshire 03824-3523 FAX: +1 603 862 2030
walsh@uunet.uu.net> (04/10/91)
From article <telecom11.276.9@eecs.nwu.edu>, by paul@unhtel.unh.edu (Paul S. Sawyer): > sometimes (when things are REAL dull ...) I put them on the speaker, > with the transmitter muted, with varying amusing results ... once > during a party someone called and asked for the "head of the house" > (whatever that is ... B-) so I said "I'll get him", and put the > speakerphone on while we all told anecdotes about companies that use > telemarketing while the speaker kept yelling for attention. Which brings up an interesting question that I have had. Yes, I too find these most annoying. When the automated solicitors prompt you to leave information on their machine, I leave a message consisting of an incoherent diatribe of grotesque words and concepts. (The last one had something to do with sexual activity.) Anyway, I know that obscene phone calls are illegal, but what if you are not the originator of the phone call? Mark Walsh, KC6RKZ
Tony Harminc <TONY@mcgill1.bitnet> (04/11/91)
In TELECOM Digest V11 #279, Mark Walsh <optilink!marks350!walsh@uunet. uu.net> writes: > Which brings up an interesting question that I have had. Yes, I too > find these most annoying. When the automated solicitors prompt you to > leave information on their machine, I leave a message consisting of an > incoherent diatribe of grotesque words and concepts. (The last one > had something to do with sexual activity.) Anyway, I know that > obscene phone calls are illegal, but what if you are not the > originator of the phone call? When I get an machine calling to ask 'survey' questions (like am I interested in aluminum storm windows) I usually use my 3-way calling to add a local religious recording to the connection (+1 416 483-4321). The preacher then bible-thumps to his heart's content and the caller's machine either records pieces of the Bible to fill in the blanks or - if it has a VOX - records the entire message (usually a couple of minutes). On a couple of occasions the Bible text has fitted the survey questions really well, and once the prompt asking for my name was filled perfectly by the preacher saying his name and church affiliation. Of course they have *my* phone number (since the machine knows what it dialled to reach me), but they have never called back to sell storm windows to the Reverend. I've given the ethics of this some thought, and I don't think I'm doing anything wrong. Disagreements ?