On Thu, 02 Oct 2008 13:28:26 +0100, Chris Dent
 wrote:

[-- snip --]

>I can't say I am surprised to find a large body of apparently macho 
>anti-spam types outbragging each other about how much they hate *any* 
>invasion of their privacy.  NGs attract this demographic and I know some 
>of the more moderate feel at risk of being flamed and so prefer silence. 
>  You're welcome to your view but should have some appreciation that it 
>is not the mainstream one.  I am sorry, a baby is occasionally going to 
>get woken up and sometimes your favourite TV program may be irritatingly 
>interrupted.  Most people, however, perceive that the advantages 
>outweigh the disadvantages and at least you get to have fun and games 
>being gratuitously rude to interviewers and/or feeding them with your 
>amusing misinformation.

I think you are sadly out of touch with normal social rules if you
think that waking a baby is acceptable in order to carry out your
"research".  I doubt that anyone would say "I've had almost no sleep
for days and baby and me have just be woken up by a tele-marketer but
it's worth it!".

-- 
(\__/)  M.
(='.'=) Owing to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there.  If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
See http://improve-usenet.org

Mark wrote:
> I think you are sadly out of touch with normal social rules if you
> think that waking a baby is acceptable in order to carry out your
> "research".  I doubt that anyone would say "I've had almost no sleep
> for days and baby and me have just be woken up by a tele-marketer but
> it's worth it!".

?!?  Personally, I would have unplugged the phone if I had had no sleep 
for days.  I'm glad it wasn't your Uncle Pete that accidentally 
committed the grievous faux pas or the family might take years to 
reconcile.  But if you are on TPS and it was a telemarketer, please 
complain about it to someone who can actually do something about it: 
www.tpsonline.org.uk.

In article <qu4Fk.9766$%l1.3110@newsfe03.ams2>,
 Chris Dent  writes:
> Mark wrote:
> > I think you are sadly out of touch with normal social rules if you
> > think that waking a baby is acceptable in order to carry out your
> > "research".  I doubt that anyone would say "I've had almost no sleep
> > for days and baby and me have just be woken up by a tele-marketer but
> > it's worth it!".
> 
> ?!?  Personally, I would have unplugged the phone if I had had no sleep 
> for days.  I'm glad it wasn't your Uncle Pete that accidentally 
> committed the grievous faux pas or the family might take years to 
> reconcile.  But if you are on TPS and it was a telemarketer, please 
> complain about it to someone who can actually do something about it: 
> www.tpsonline.org.uk.

Just last night, a member of my household took a call from someone that when
challenged said `oh, the TPS is down at the moment'---which I'd have to admit
is a fascinating new tactic.
-- 
SAm.

In article <qu4Fk.9766$%l1.3110@newsfe03.ams2>,
 Chris Dent  writes:
> Mark wrote:
> > I think you are sadly out of touch with normal social rules if you
> > think that waking a baby is acceptable in order to carry out your
> > "research".  I doubt that anyone would say "I've had almost no sleep
> > for days and baby and me have just be woken up by a tele-marketer but
> > it's worth it!".
> 
> ?!?  Personally, I would have unplugged the phone if I had had no sleep 
> for days.

But then you couldn't get calls from people you really wanted to speak to,
people who, when they wake your sleeping baby can be told what they've done
so that they choose when to call you more carefully in future.  Considerate
people, people that care about you, will apologise and do that.  Are you so
separated from real life that this state of affairs makes no sense to you?

I, for example, have Archers fans for parents, and phoning them between 1900
and 1915 almost any evening is an absolute no-no.  On the other hand, a
phone call at 1916 will almost always catch them in.

> But if you are on TPS and it was a telemarketer, please 
> complain about it to someone who can actually do something about it: 
> www.tpsonline.org.uk.

You have to know who it was that called, first.  What's the cold-caller's
excuse for failing to present proper CLID?  Starting at the top from the
TPS end is almost always going to get Joe Public nowhere at all.  How could
it possibly achieve anything?
-- 
SAm.

On Thu, 2 Oct 2008 15:43:39 +0100, sam@ssrl.org.uk (Sam Nelson) wrote:

>In article <qu4Fk.9766$%l1.3110@newsfe03.ams2>,
> Chris Dent  writes:
>> Mark wrote:
>> > I think you are sadly out of touch with normal social rules if you
>> > think that waking a baby is acceptable in order to carry out your
>> > "research".  I doubt that anyone would say "I've had almost no sleep
>> > for days and baby and me have just be woken up by a tele-marketer but
>> > it's worth it!".
>> 
>> ?!?  Personally, I would have unplugged the phone if I had had no sleep 
>> for days.
>
>But then you couldn't get calls from people you really wanted to speak to,
>people who, when they wake your sleeping baby can be told what they've done
>so that they choose when to call you more carefully in future.  Considerate
>people, people that care about you, will apologise and do that.  Are you so
>separated from real life that this state of affairs makes no sense to you?

Absolutely ... And the call may be from a friend or relative offering
to look after baby for a few hours.

>I, for example, have Archers fans for parents, and phoning them between 1900
>and 1915 almost any evening is an absolute no-no.  On the other hand, a
>phone call at 1916 will almost always catch them in.

;-)

>> But if you are on TPS and it was a telemarketer, please 
>> complain about it to someone who can actually do something about it: 
>> www.tpsonline.org.uk.
>
>You have to know who it was that called, first.  What's the cold-caller's
>excuse for failing to present proper CLID?  Starting at the top from the
>TPS end is almost always going to get Joe Public nowhere at all.  How could
>it possibly achieve anything?

Most cold calls we get are from abroad or number withheld/unavailable.
The TPS can/will do nothing about these.

Indeed when I have complained in the past to the TPS about UK
companies calling me they did nothing.  The TPS has no real power and
is just a poor attempt at appeasing people who hate cold calls.

The ICO is equally ineffective IMHO.  I have several outstanding
complaints with them for email spam and automated telephone calls.
None have been dealt with AFAIK.  One complaint was nearly a year ago.

-- 
(\__/)  M.
(='.'=) Owing to the amount of spam posted via googlegroups and
(")_(") their inaction to the problem. I am blocking most articles
posted from there.  If you wish your postings to be seen by
everyone you will need use a different method of posting.
See http://improve-usenet.org