john@bovine.ati.com (John Higdon) (10/04/90)
It has been many weeks since the telemarketing firm for the {San Jose
Mercury News} has invaded my privacy. When I raised a big enough stink,
the president of the firm removed my entire prefix (723) from the
calling base.
UPDATE:
A friend in the 370 exchange (Campbell) finally received the call that
broke the camel's back. He told them that he wanted no further calls
on any of his lines (he has two). "Walking the organization" he
finally spoke with someone who told him that the only way he could be
assured of not receiving any further calls was to have them remove
(you guessed it) the 370 prefix from the calling base. He said, "Fine,
go for it."
Then he was treated to the same reasoning that I got a taste of. "But,
sir, if we remove that prefix then we will lose a lot of marketing
contacts." In other words, the San Jose Mercury's right-to-telemarket
supercedes an individual's right-to-privacy.
Frankly, I'm getting tired of these people and am open to suggestions
on how to shut them down permanently and legally. Anyone agree and
have suggestions?
John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395
john@bovine.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !
[Moderator's Note: Admittedly, this problem may call for a special
remedy. Generally, a taste of their own medicine works pretty well.
You might try obtaining the home telephone numbers of various people
in the organization for starters. Let us know how things work out. PAT]jyoull@cis.ohio-state.edu (Jim Youll) (10/05/90)
>It has been many weeks since the telemarketing firm for the {San Jose >Mercury News} has invaded my privacy. When I raised a big enough stink, >the president of the firm removed my entire prefix (723) from the >calling base. >Frankly, I'm getting tired of these people and am open to suggestions >on how to shut them down permanently and legally. Anyone agree and >have suggestions? Frankly, I am tired of these idiots calling me at work, too. Yesterday my secretary got hit with a call that went something like this: (caller) "Hi. This is Mary from Western Supply. How many toner cartridges did you want this week?" (sec'y) "Toner cartridges? Western Supply? What is this pertaining to?" (caller) (louder) I'm calling about the re-order of toner for your copier. How many cartridges did you want?" (sec'y) (after asking me) "We don't normally buy toner from you." (caller) "Are you stupid? Just GO OVER TO YOUR COPIER AND TELL ME WHAT MODEL IT IS SO WE CAN COMPLETE YOUR ORDER" (sec'y) "We don't HAVE a copier." (caller) --click-- (We really DON'T have a copier here)... This is incredibly annoying, and the bastards don't even give you a chance to find out who they are. No idents given, even if you ask. We absolutely do not accept calls like this for more than the minute it takes to figure out that it's an idiot and okay to hang up on them. You might tell people to watch out for this ruse. We have had two or three calls like this in the past couple months (that I know about).
haynes@ucscc.ucsc.edu (99700000) (10/08/90)
In article <13068@accuvax.nwu.edu> bgsuvax!jyoull@cis.ohio-state.edu (Jim Youll) writes: > (caller) "Hi. This is Mary from Western Supply. How many toner > cartridges did you want this week?" I've read in the local paper that the D.A.'s office has had a lot of complaints about some copier-supplies firms that market this way. They go beyond being "merely" annoying by fooling people into ordering things they didn't intend to order, at prices higher than their regular suppliers charge. Wonder why these sleazoid outfits happen to pick copier supplies as their merchandise of choice? haynes@ucscc.ucsc.edu haynes@ucscc.bitnet ..ucbvax!ucscc!haynes [Moderator's Note: They are also into selling FAX paper, printer paper and other office supplies in the same way. It is a scam. PAT]
macy@uunet.uucp (Macy Hallock) (10/08/90)
In article <13131@accuvax.nwu.edu> >haynes@ucscc.ucsc.edu writes: [Discussion of sleazy copier/toner/paper telemarketing practices...] >Wonder why these sleazoid outfits happen to >pick copier supplies as their merchandise of choice? Because it works and they get away with it ... and they sell other things, too. I've seen other common items sold the same way. Sometimes its sold COD, other times they just render a big invoice that looks legit and it gets paid. An awful lot of small and large companies will pay damn near any credible looking invoice...remember telex directories? If the receptionist is given explicit instructions on how to handle telemarketing salescritters, then its easier to control ... most employees are trained to respond to authority over the phone with action, not questions. This is not always in your best interest, and is a sign of poor employee training. Here, all calls where questions are asked about equipment info, etc. are sent to the person who handles our purchasing. Invoices are never ever paid unless a P.O. was issued, with prices on it, so the bookkeeper knows the invoice is OK. COD's must have a P.O. number on the address label or back they go. This is occasionally inconvienient (like the time they sent back a tech manual I ordered and paid for by credit card, but had no PO number ... now we use a personal name, not a company name on those orders) Even the yellow pages bills, advertising bills and long distance invoices are checked for contract compliance before payment. This sometimes slows things up a bit, but you'd be amazed at the errors (accidental and intentional) that have been caught here. Double invoices from some suppliers are often caught... I find my wife often responds to telemarketing people who call her at home. Why? Well, she's a medical lab tech (can you say histotechnologist?) and often answers questions on the phone at the lab. If she asks someone calling who they are or why they need the info, she usually gets yelled at by a rude and impatient doctor. (So much for patient confidentiality)...... I've finally trained her (with her cooperation, of course) to tell the telemarketing types "We do not discuss {financial, real estate, sales} transactions on the phone and hang up. She hang up on Sears the other night. We have found this will work with stockbrokers if used properly, too. (I still haven't got our local newspaper to quit calling, yet.) I'm waiting for her to hang up on a doctor at work by accident one of these days. Macy M. Hallock, Jr. macy@NCoast.ORG uunet!aablue!fmsystm!macy
tad@ssc.UUCP (Tad Cook) (10/10/90)
In article <13068@accuvax.nwu.edu>, bgsuvax!jyoull@cis.ohio-state.edu (Jim Youll) writes: > Yesterday my secretary got hit with a call that went something like > this: > (caller) "Hi. This is Mary from Western Supply. How many toner > cartridges did you want this week?" > (sec'y) "Toner cartridges? Western Supply? What is this pertaining to?" > This is incredibly annoying, and the bastards don't even give you a > chance to find out who they are. No idents given, even if you ask. We > absolutely do not accept calls like this for more than the minute it > takes to figure out that it's an idiot and okay to hang up on them. > You might tell people to watch out for this ruse. We have had two or > three calls like this in the past couple months (that I know about). These are getting quite common. Our receptionist routes all calls like this to me, even though handling office supplies has nothing to do with my job description. They usually call and right off want to know the model number of our fax machine or copier. Then they act like they are our "regular supplier." The scam is, they want to find someone new or naive who will accept a delivery of this stuff, and they will tell you that they have a "fantastic deal" for you. I have fun trying to get these folks to give me some kind of basic information about who they are, where they are, etc. I rarely get them to tell me a last name, and the company names are always generic sounding (National Data Supply, etc). They never will give me an address, and rarely anything but an 800 number. Once I ask a couple of fundamental questions that people would normally ask before doing business, they hang up. One guy actually stayed on the phone a whole minute and a half. I joked with him that I was getting two or three calls a week like this, and "they always hang up on me." I got him to promise not to hang up, got a first and last name, a company name, but then he had trouble telling me where he was calling from. "California", he said. "Where in California?", said I. "Uh ... L.A.". I tried to get him to give me an address, and he choked. I asked again for "the actual physical address where you are now". He hung up! These guys must be working under a horrendous quota. Tad Cook Seattle, WA Packet: KT7H @ N7HFZ.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
julian@bongo.uucp (Julian Macassey) (10/11/90)
In article <13221@accuvax.nwu.edu>, tad@ssc.UUCP (Tad Cook) writes: Mucho stuff about dealing with toner conmen deleted - but worth a read. > One guy actually stayed on the phone a whole minute and a half. I > joked with him that I was getting two or three calls a week like this, > and "they always hang up on me." I got him to promise not to hang up, > got a first and last name, a company name, but then he had trouble > telling me where he was calling from. "California", he said. "Where > in California?", said I. "Uh ... L.A.". I tried to get him to give > me an address, and he choked. I asked again for "the actual physical > address where you are now". So now you know what all the out of work actors do in LA. When they are not working on their hair, they work in boiler rooms. I am ashamed to say that the capital of telephone con men is LA. The "office supplies", charities, long distance service and such stuff are worked mostly from Los Angeles. The securities cons are worked mostly from Newport Beach in nearby Orange County. So if it's diamonds and oil wells, it should be Newport Beach, Irvine and Costa Mesa. If it's ball point pens and Toner, it should be West LA, Mid Wilshire. There are exceptions. I know of one Oil and Coins boiler room in Century City (Adjacent to Beverly Hills), but the owner lives in Costa Mesa. They like to use actors for several reasons. They are usually desperate for a temporary job so they can whizz away for auditions. They can assume personnas - I knew one that played a devout Jew for the Jewish community and it worked well for him. In the want ads in this town there are constant ads for "telemarketing" jobs. Some claim in the ads that the locations have windows. The average boiler room is a cheap location filled with folding tables and single line phones fed with POTS business lines. Some have Centrex. The better places put Confidencer noise cancelling transmitters on the handsets. Some boiler rooms only handle one or two scams, often the scam of the owner, some are renta-voice places and play the scam that someone is hiring them for. There are many exceptions to the above rules, I have been in some very well furnished boiler rooms. The better places are doing something more lucrative than copier supplies. The top of the line places make millions on oil. diamonds, coins, precious metals, whisky futures etc. All of these places change their names and sometimes their locations with great regularity. How long have these slimeballs been operating? Well, some of them used to sell carbon paper over the phone. Having seen boiler rooms from the other side, I would say a good rule of thumb is: Never buy anything over the phone. Never agree to anything on the phone. The cute girl who tells you she is working her way through college could be a 40 year old mother of three still waiting for a good movie part. Julian Macassey, n6are julian@bongo.info.com ucla-an!denwa!bongo!julian N6ARE@K6IYK (Packet Radio) n6are.ampr.org [44.16.0.81] voice (213) 653-4495
John_David_Galt@uunet.uu.net (10/13/90)
I have also gotten some annoying sales calls from the Mercury, though not lately. At least they seem to obey the law against having a computer initiate the call, without a human being talking to you first. There are several companies, including one in San Jose, which are still flouting this law and appear to be getting away with it. It occurs to me that many of us could creatively define our terminating equipment as "computers," and sue these people under the Electronic Communications Privacy Act (a law which deals with the unauthorized use of other people's computers, among other things). I'm not a lawyer but would like to see this notion tested in front of a jury.
das@cs.ucla.edu (David A Smallberg) (10/14/90)
In article <13495@accuvax.nwu.edu> portal!cup.portal.com! John_David_Galt writes: >I have also gotten some annoying sales calls from the Mercury, though >not lately. At least they seem to obey the law against having a >computer initiate the call, without a human being talking to you >first. ... I understood this to be California law, also, but I found no reference to it at the UCLA Law Library. Any Californian have the section number? In any event, does the law cover non-sales, informational messages? Our local high school has a computer that apparently calls all the parents of students every Saturday afternoon and plays a recording of school-related information about the upcoming week. (Of course, the first part of the message talks through answering machines' outgoing messages.) Is this legal in California? While perusing the code books, I did spot the law that explicitly makes it illegal in California to use the toll-avoidance signalling methods discussed in this forum last month (You know, "I'd to make a collect call for <code-name>" that means "Hey, mom! Call me at my dorm room right now.") David Smallberg, das@cs.ucla.edu, ...!{uunet,ucbvax,rutgers}!cs.ucla.edu!das [Moderator's Note: The government never has to follow the rules the rest of us have to follow, didn't you know that? PAT]
forrette@cory.berkeley.edu (Steve Forrette) (10/16/90)
>>I have also gotten some annoying sales calls from the Mercury, though >>not lately. At least they seem to obey the law against having a >>computer initiate the call, without a human being talking to you >>first. ... >I understood this to be California law, also, but I found no reference >to it at the UCLA Law Library. Any Californian have the section >number? Many of the "laws" regulating telephone usage are administrative laws, not statutory laws. They are in the form of tariffs on file with the PUC. Although not "laws" as most people think of them, since they weren't passed by the legislature, they have the same force and effect (ever heard of the Internal Revenue Code?)
orgren@rtc.reston.unisys.com (Paul Orgren) (10/17/90)
Something just occurred to me -- does the S.J. Mercury bother their own subscribers with the telemarketing calls? If they do, it seems they would have a lot of annoyed customers getting monthly calls though they already subscribe. If they do not, then they *do* have a way of blocking specific numbers (contrary to their claims of not being able to do that). On a related topic: when I moved to Houston in 1980, within hours of my phone being connected, I received a call from the Houston Post inviting me to subscribe. It seemed that Southwestern Bell must be giving them lists of newly connected numbers. Paul Orgren (orgren@rtc.reston.unisys.com)
bill@eedsp.gatech.edu (bill) (10/17/90)
I don't know for sure how the Merc does it, but the local papers here
do it something like this: "Hello, this is Mrs. So-and-so with the
Gotham Observer. I'm just calling to see if you are getting your
paper/Gotham Observer okay?"
They call everyone. They don't call just the subscribers. If you say
"Well no, I don't subscribe," then they launch into a sales pitch and
afterward they'll put your number on a list for intensive grilling and
telemarketing. If you say, "Usually, but not today," then they'll
arrange some sort of compensation (a manager will even bring you a
paper, supposedly). If you say, "yes, getting it just fine," then
they thank you for your time and go on to the next number. Seems like
the safe way out (if you detest telemarketers) is to say "everything
is just fine," or something like that.
Is this the practice used in anyone else's community?
Bill Berbenich Georgia Tech, Atlanta Georgia, 30332
uucp: ...!{backbones}!gatech!eedsp!bill Internet: bill@eedsp.gatech.edu
[Moderator's Note: Your scenario matches the Chicago Tribune almost
exactly. PAT]john@bovine.ati.com (John Higdon) (10/18/90)
On Oct 17 at 2:46, Paul Orgren <orgren@rtc.reston.unisys.com> writes: > Something just occurred to me -- does the S.J. Mercury bother their > own subscribers with the telemarketing calls? Oh, yes, they certainly do. I have been a subscriber at this residence since 1968. Most of my friends and associates are also subscribers and are also plagued with the calls. The line goes like this: "This is Jim from the San Jose Mercury News. Are you receiving the paper OK?" In essence, they are trying to come off as a QC call. Presumably, if you don't take the paper you would so state and then be subject to the sales pitch. I actually fell for this line the first several times. Then it occurred to me that NOBODY follows up on service satisfaction two or three times a week, week after week. And do so calling every line in the house. Of the many e-mail suggestions that I have had, one of them was "Subscribe to the damn paper and then they will stop." Unfortunately, I'm sure there have been non-subscribers who have been beaten into submission. They subscribed to the paper just to stop the calls, and then found to their dismay that it brought no relief. Truth in Advertising would suggest that the Merc solicitor would give the disclaimer, "Consent to this subscription offer will not stop the solicitation calls." John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@bovine.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !
amb@ai.mit.edu (Andrew M. Boardman) (10/18/90)
>Something just occurred to me -- does the S.J. Mercury bother their >own subscribers with the telemarketing calls? They quite possibly do. As long as the first thing they ask is "Do you currently receive the S. J. Mercury" they can continue with "Do you find you service satisfactory? Good. Bye." leaving the customer with the warm feeling that the Mercury cared enough to call.
tn07+@andrew.cmu.edu (Thomas Neudecker) (10/18/90)
I don't know about the Mercury Marketing program but in Pittsburgh the local scam is to say "Hi I am AAAAA with the Pittsburgh Press, I am calling to see if you recieved your paper today?" A "yes response branches to a thank you and hope we can continue to serve you." A "I don't subscribe" response then brings up "do you want to?", with what ever is the current special new price. When directly asked, the operator states that they work for the newspaper but a response of "I didn't receive tonight's paper, can you have one sent out?" always blows them away. They would then hangup or say this or that but never would they provide a replacement paper or a return phone number. I have a couple of lines in and more than one listing name on the line so I would these calls about once a month on each line/listing. Tom Neudecker Pittsburgh, Pa.
tnixon@uunet.uu.net (Toby Nixon) (10/18/90)
In article <13624@accuvax.nwu.edu>, orgren@rtc.reston.unisys.com (Paul Orgren) writes: > Something just occurred to me -- does the S.J. Mercury bother their > own subscribers with the telemarketing calls? If they do, it seems > they would have a lot of annoyed customers getting monthly calls > though they already subscribe. I subscribe to both the {Gwinnett Daily News} and {Atlanta Journal} here. I nevertheless get telemarketing calls from both roughly every other month. Once we explain that we already subscribe, they politely ask if our service is satisfactory. It's not just a blow-off, either; I have on a couple of occassions mentioned to these telemarketing folks that I've had problems with lost or wet papers, and subsequently received follow-up calls from supervisors in the circulation and customer service departments. I think I'd prefer not to get called at all, but at least they don't just hang up. Toby Nixon, Principal Engineer | Voice: +1-404-449-8791 AT&T: !tnixon Hayes Microcomputer Products Inc.| Fax: +1-404-447-0178 CIS: 70271,404 P.O. Box 105203 | UUCP: uunet!hayes!tnixon MCI: 267-0805 Atlanta, Georgia 30348 USA | Internet: hayes!tnixon@uunet.uu.net
gadbois@cs.utexas.edu (David Gadbois) (10/19/90)
orgren@rtc.reston.unisys.com (Paul Orgren) writes: >On a related topic: when I moved to Houston in 1980, within hours of >my phone being connected, I received a call from the Houston Post >inviting me to subscribe. It seemed that Southwestern Bell must be >giving them lists of newly connected numbers. I actually worked in the Post subscription department in late 1980. (I was only 15 at the time, and I only lasted a week on the job -- even then I realized how sleazy it was.) We got $0.50 per subscription we sold. There was one guy there whose mother was a real estate agent. She would give him lists of new rentals and sales in town. He was probably the one who called you. He made a killing since at the time an ungodly number of people were moving to Houston every week. I recall that he went to great pains not to let the Post find out about his inside source -- they thought he was just an unbelievably good salesman. The rest of us were stuck with going through entire prefixes, one number at a time. David Gadbois
riddle@hoss.unl.edu (Michael H. Riddle) (10/20/90)
In <13623@accuvax.nwu.edu> Steve Forrette <forrette@cory.berkeley.edu> writes: >>>I have also gotten some annoying sales calls from the Mercury, though >>>not lately. At least they seem to obey the law against having a >>>computer initiate the call, without a human being talking to you >>>first. ... >>I understood this to be California law, also, but I found no reference >>to it at the UCLA Law Library. Any Californian have the section >>number? >Many of the "laws" regulating telephone usage are administrative laws, >not statutory laws. They are in the form of tariffs on file with the >PUC. Although not "laws" as most people think of them, since they >weren't passed by the legislature, they have the same force and effect >(ever heard of the Internal Revenue Code?) A little research time at the University of Nebraska College of Law library revealed the following, which I think answers the followup to the original question (note this is California law. As the earlier post notes, each state is different). ANNOTATED CALIFORNIA CODES PUBLIC UTILITIES CODE ARTICLE 1. AUTOMATIC DIALING-ANNOUNCING DEVICES s 2871. Definitions As used in this article, "automatic dialing-announcing device" means any automatic equipment which incorporates a storage capability of telephone numbers to be called or a random or sequential number generator capable of producing numbers to be called and the capability, working alone or in conjunction with other equipment, to disseminate a prerecorded message to the telephone number called. s 2874. Operation of device (a) Whenever telephone calls are placed through the use of an automatic dialing-announcing device, the device may be operated only after an unrecorded, natural voice announcement has been made to the person called by the person calling. The announcement shall do all of the following: (1) State the nature of the call and the name, address, and telephone number of the business or organization being represented, if any. (2) Inquire as to whether the person called consents to hear the prerecorded message of the person calling. (b) The calling person described in subdivision (a) shall disconnect the automatic dialing-announcing device from the telephone line upon the termination of the call by either the person calling or the person called. s 2876. Penalties Any person violating this article is guilty of a civil offense and is subject to either or both of the following penalties: (a) A fine of not to exceed five hundred dollars ($500) for each violation, levied and enforced by the commission, on complaint or on its own motion, pursuant to Chapter 11 (commencing with Section 2100) of Part 1. (b) Disconnection of telephone service to the automatic dialing-announcing device for a period of time which shall be specified by the commission. riddle@hoss.unl.edu riddle@crchpux.unl.edu mike.riddle@f27.n285.z1.fidonet.org Sysop on 1:285/27 @ Fidonet
cowan@marob.masa.com (John Cowan) (10/23/90)
I don't understand what's so difficult about getting rid of telemarketing calls. I've never had more than two of them from an undesired source. Call #1 gets interrupted as soon as I figure out what's going on with "I'm sorry I'm not interested in <whatever> goodbye" *click*, all in one breath. Call #2 gets interrupted with "This call is being recorded and will be reported to the New York City Police Department as an act of telephone harassment do not call again goodbye" *click*. This statement is untrue, but I have never had a callback after that. After all, these people get paid by results, no? The last thing they want is somebody who 1) will not buy and 2) will make trouble. cowan@marob.masa.com (aka ...!hombre!marob!cowan) [Moderator's Note: My sentiments exactly. I've always been amused by the messages both here and elsewhere on the net by folks who apparently are frightened to death that they might actually encounter one on the phone and have to say no ... so frigthened by telemarketers are they that they go to such extremes: published lines where are never answered; non-pub lines which route through an answering machine for screening first, etc. Do like Nancy: Just say no (and hang up). PAT]
dpletche@jarthur.claremont.edu (David Pletcher) (10/25/90)
In article <13946@accuvax.nwu.edu> cowan@marob.masa.com (John Cowan) writes: X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 757, Message 3 of 10 >I don't understand what's so difficult about getting rid of >telemarketing calls. I've never had more than two of them from an >undesired source. >[Moderator's Note: My sentiments exactly. I've always been amused by >the messages both here and elsewhere on the net by folks who >apparently are frightened to death that they might actually encounter >one on the phone and have to say no ... so frigthened by telemarketers >are they that they go to such extremes: published lines where are >never answered; non-pub lines which route through an answering machine >for screening first, etc. Do like Nancy: Just say no (and hang up). PAT] I don't know whether avoiding telemarketers and other unsolicited calls merits some of the extreme measures that other readers use, but I think that the two of you are forgetting the major reason that telemarketers are a nuisance. It is not that it is difficult to disengage one once I pick up the phone, but merely that answering the phone is often a great inconvenience. Many times I have been in the shower, or eating dinner, or doing something else I don't want to have interrupted when the phone rings. So when I pick up the phone after having jumped out of the shower and run down the hallway, dripping everyhere, I am not amused to hear an automated announcement soliciting a piano tuning service (especially since I don't have a piano). When the phone rings, I assume it is because someone has something marginally important, or at least interesting, to say; thus I drop what I am doing to answer the phone. That is why I do not appreciate being interrupted by junk phone calls. David Pletcher dpletche@jarthur.claremont.edu
john@bovine.ati.com (John Higdon) (10/25/90)
John Cowan <cowan@marob.masa.com> writes: > I don't understand what's so difficult about getting rid of > telemarketing calls. I've never had more than two of them from an > undesired source. But your techniques wouldn't work with the Merky News. They pay no attention to whom they call on either a short or long term basis. The numbers are dialed by a machine and then passed to a boiler room operator. Even if you threatened to boil the caller in oil, you could find the same person calling you back the next evening -- and it wouldn't be his fault! The system doesn't care about your response, it doesn't care whether you already subscribe, and it doesn't care if you are a Trailblazer; it will call you back over and over again. > [Moderator's Note: My sentiments exactly. I've always been amused by > the messages both here and elsewhere on the net by folks who > apparently are frightened to death that they might actually encounter > one on the phone and have to say no... I have no trouble telling telemarketers where they can go and what they can do. Where I draw the line is when the same one calls back three and four times a week, week after week, going sequentially down my ten lines EACH TIME. Please do not trivialize the offensiveness of the Merky telemarketing. I regularly turn down the Police Athletic League, the Fund for Homeless Furniture Makers, endless investment "opportunities", MCI LD offers, etc. The list is endless. BUT ... 1) These groups and salespeople take "no" for an answer and don't call back for at least a couple of months, and ... 2) they don't scan down sequentially, turning a minor inconvenience into a major annoyance. The Merky News telemarketing system is possibly the most offensive and irritating abomination ever concocted in the world of telephony (short of GTE and COCOTs, of course). There is no defense against it other than direct legal threats to those in charge. This has worked quite nicely, but for now only those with 723 prefixes are safe :-) John Higdon | P. O. Box 7648 | +1 408 723 1395 john@bovine.ati.com | San Jose, CA 95150 | M o o !
CRW@icf.hrb.com (Craig R. Watkins) (10/25/90)
In article <13946@accuvax.nwu.edu>, Moderator writes: > [Moderator's Note: My sentiments exactly. I have no trouble saying no. In addition, mxy primary line is published. For some reason or another (maybe small town) I don't have a BIG problem with telemarketers. However, I can seriously sympathize with those that do because of at least one problem: sleep. If one doesn't sleep the same hours as telemarketers, "just saying no" can be quite a problem. If I was losing sleep over the problem, you can bet I would start dreaming up gizmos to help me out. Craig R. Watkins Internet: CRW@ICF.HRB.COM HRB Systems, Inc. Bitnet: CRW%HRB@PSUECL.Bitnet +1 814 238-4311 UUCP: ...!psuvax1!hrbicf!crw