Driver to drive?

[Robert Baer]

Sylvia Else wrote:

Robert Baer wrote:
Sylvia Else wrote:
Robert Baer wrote:
Well i tried one of those recordings on
http://www.payphone-directory.org/sounds.html and the marketeers
that constantly call _continued_ to call; i "gave it a try for at
least 2 weeks.
What really pissed me off was that one of them came up with a
"UUU" "no number" ID and so i (finally) used *57, got the message
that the call was traced; after trapping 3 of them i called the
so-called call annoyance bureau and they had *NO* record, meaning
the message was a blatant lie.
The PUC said that *57 was not for tracing marketeers and that i
should not have used it, and that they would not press the issue to
Qwest (my "provider").

Why would they assume it was marketeers?

Sylvia.
Maybe that is one of their parrot answers?

So you didn't say it was marketeers, but you didn't ask them why they
thought it was marketeers?

Have you tried asking to speak to a supervisor?

Sylvia.
No; their attitude every time i called was that they do not care.

After all, they have an infinite source of money from us taxpayers,
so why should they (gasp!) work?
I cannot climb up a vertical cliff.

 

[Robert Baer]

Sylvia Else wrote:

Robert Baer wrote:
Sylvia Else wrote:
Baron wrote:
Sylvia Else Inscribed thus:

Robert Baer wrote:
PeterD wrote:
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 19:38:11 -0800, Robert Baer
robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Fri, 25 Dec 2009 21:15:06 -0800) it happened
Robert Baer
robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote in
1KOdndg809PrBqjWnZ2dnUVZ_rCdnZ2d@posted.localnet>:

Well i tried one of those recordings on
http://www.payphone-directory.org/sounds.html and the marketeers
that constantly call _continued_ to call; i "gave it a try for at
least 2 weeks.
What really pissed me off was that one of them came up with a
"UUU" "no number" ID and so i (finally) used *57, got the message
that the call was traced; after trapping 3 of them i called the
so-called call annoyance bureau and they had *NO* record, meaning
the message was a blatant lie.
The PUC said that *57 was not for tracing marketeers and that i
should not have used it, and that they would not press the issue
to Qwest (my "provider").
Say what? How the hell else can i catch these bastards?
Pissant bureaucrats!
**
It would appear that a TOTAL disconnect of my phone _might_
stop
these calls..
Just pick up the phoe with: 'Department of Homeland Security'.
* IMPOSSIBLE; they hang up immediately on line pick-up.
Most states this is a violation of law... COvered under the
'harrassing and threatening phone calls' statutes...
That "law" is virtually irrelevant, since i cannot find out who it
is
doing this crap.
I would think that finding out who is making harrassing calls would be
a function of the police, who would seek the assistance of the telco.

Sylvia.

The Police are not in the slightest bit interested unless you can hand
the perpetrator to them on a plate.

There are some protocols they're required to follow. If the frontline
people won't act, then escalate it to their superiors. The situation
isn't the same as the scam letter, because there are mechanisms in
place to identify the source of harrassing phone calls.

I found

http://www.qwest.com/wholesale/clecs/features/calltrace.html

Note the manual trace requirements. You need a law-enforcement case
number, etc. You don't require that the police actually to have done
anything about it at that point. Make enough fuss, and demand a case
number, and I'm sure the police will create one just to shut you up.

Sylvia.
Yeh; lies.
I used *57 three times on a "no name no number" call, the recorded
voice said the calls were traced and i would be charged $$$ each time.
*LIE*
I then called the given number, the so-called call annoyance bureau,
and they HAD *NO* RECORD of them.
I even told them the exact date and times - to NO avail.
When i got the bill, i called Qwest office and they
-->immediately<-- and cheerfully dropped the charges!
That attitude makes me believe they know the *57 is a scam.
And the PUC does not give a damn.

Perhaps it just doesn't work very well. Anyway, you need to keep
focussed here. Your concern is not whether *57 works as advertised, but
how to address the annoyance calls. The manual trace sounds like the
appropriate course.

Sylvia.




"Manual trace"???

Just as fictional as *57.

 

[Robert Baer]

Michael wrote:

On Dec 26, 1:25 am, "n...@bid.nes" <alien8...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Dec 25, 9:15 pm, Robert Baer <robertb...@localnet.com> wrote:

Well i tried one of those recordings onhttp://www.payphone-directory.org/sounds.htmlandthe marketeers that
constantly call _continued_ to call; i "gave it a try for at least 2 weeks.
What really pissed me off was that one of them came up with a "UUU"
"no number" ID and so i (finally) used *57, got the message that the
call was traced; after trapping 3 of them i called the so-called call
annoyance bureau and they had *NO* record, meaning the message was a
blatant lie.
The PUC said that *57 was not for tracing marketeers and that i
should not have used it, and that they would not press the issue to
Qwest (my "provider").
Say what? How the hell else can i catch these bastards?
Pissant bureaucrats!
**
It would appear that a TOTAL disconnect of my phone _might_ stop
these calls..
You're doing it wrong. You're assuming Government will help you and
getting pissed off when you should be having fun with them.

Answer the call, listen to the pitch, answer all the questions as if
you want to buy what they're selling right up until you get to where
they want your credit card number or mailing address then say "just a
minute, I have to go to the bathroom; I'll be right back", then lay
the phone down and listen for the BEEP BEEP BEEP letting you know
they've disconnected, then hang up.

When they call back, apologize for the unreliable phone connection
and repeat the above procedure, with variations like interrupting the
caller to discuss your grandson's first tooth, your hernia operation/
kidney stone/colostomy bag, how the Liberals/Conservatives/Communists/
Christians/Muslims/Atheists are ruining the country, or whatever
amuses you. Eventually they'll decide they're not going to be able to
sell you anything and cross your number off their list.

It may take a while, and the bastards may resell your number to
somebody else, but keep at it. AFAIK it's the only sure way to get rid
of them without going completely off-grid.

Mark L. Fergerson

Actually this is what I have been doing for years: I ask if this a
courtesy call, if yes, I apologize, ask them to wait a second please
and follow procedure above. Took less than 30 seconds of my time (I
dropped my land line some time ago, they do not call cell
phones.....yet). If everybody followed this procedure, phone
telemarketing would die out
Well, you are _damn_ lucky they did not hang up the instant you answered.

These idiots always hang up like that.

 

[Robert Baer]

JosephKK wrote:

On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 19:42:19 -0800, Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

Baron wrote:
Robert Baer Inscribed thus:

Well i tried one of those recordings on
http://www.payphone-directory.org/sounds.html and the marketeers that
constantly call _continued_ to call; i "gave it a try for at least 2
weeks.
What really pissed me off was that one of them came up with a "UUU"
"no number" ID and so i (finally) used *57, got the message that the
call was traced; after trapping 3 of them i called the so-called call
annoyance bureau and they had *NO* record, meaning the message was a
blatant lie.
The PUC said that *57 was not for tracing marketeers and that i
should not have used it, and that they would not press the issue to
Qwest (my "provider").
Say what? How the hell else can i catch these bastards?
Pissant bureaucrats!
**
It would appear that a TOTAL disconnect of my phone _might_ stop
these calls..
I ended up with having to give up my number and was issued with a new
one that it permanently withheld and registered with TPS.

Even that didn't stop all the unwanted calls. Apparently they use an
incrementing count dialer to find the hidden numbers. So if you answer
the phone they log the fact and record it.

Been there, done that; does NO good.

Try this: Warn friends and selected relatives, unplug all phones and
anything else that might "pick-up" for a week.
Have not tried a weeks worth, only a daze worth.

Will keep it in mind.
So far, it has been quiet after getting extra services (Call
Rejection Enhanced, No solicitation, and 3rd Party Call Block).

 

[Robert Baer]

Jim Thompson wrote:

On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 00:15:38 -0800, Robert Baer
robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

PeterD wrote:
On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 21:55:22 -0800, Robert Baer
robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:


They say that they cannot do anything, because....i have zero info on
the callers.
Robert, where are you located?
In Portland Oregon; what difference does it make?

Somebody doesn't like you ?

...Jim Thompson
I have been able to identify at lease two of the callers, one of

which uses phone numbers scattered over the US, and a local one that
uses a fraudulent name.
If i catch either one, i will borrow a few thousand dollars and get a
lawyer involved to collect that $500 per call plus whatever else will stick.

 

[Robert Baer]

Jim Thompson wrote:

On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 00:17:43 -0800, Robert Baer
robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 21:56:53 -0800, Robert Baer
robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 19:49:58 -0800, Robert Baer
robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 21:15:06 -0800, Robert Baer
robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

Well i tried one of those recordings on
http://www.payphone-directory.org/sounds.html and the marketeers that
constantly call _continued_ to call; i "gave it a try for at least 2 weeks.
What really pissed me off was that one of them came up with a "UUU"
"no number" ID and so i (finally) used *57, got the message that the
call was traced; after trapping 3 of them i called the so-called call
annoyance bureau and they had *NO* record, meaning the message was a
blatant lie.
The PUC said that *57 was not for tracing marketeers and that i
should not have used it, and that they would not press the issue to
Qwest (my "provider").
Say what? How the hell else can i catch these bastards?
Pissant bureaucrats!
**
It would appear that a TOTAL disconnect of my phone _might_ stop
these calls..
After the holidays I plan to buy...

http://jfteck.com/

And make some additional modifications.

...Jim Thompson
..well, they lie in saying no extra monthly charges,as caller ID service
is an extra monthly charge.
It's not my problem that you are so cheap that you don't have
caller-ID.

And stop whining... is there anyone who really needs to call you
anyway ?

...Jim Thompson
I _have_ caller ID and it is useless for most of the callers (zero info).
Is "Reject on No Info" difficult for you?

...Jim Thompson
I do not pick up the phone unless i (1) hear a voice, (2) recognize
the voice, and (3) they say something relevant.
Translation: one of 50 pass.

Aha! So you are having an answering machine automatically answer?

Why don't you just build a box that prevents ringing if it doesn't
recognize a "valid" CID?

...Jim Thompson
Isn't that what i had been asking for?

 

[John Devereux]

Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> writes:

Sylvia Else wrote:
Robert Baer wrote:
Sylvia Else wrote:
Robert Baer wrote:
Well i tried one of those recordings on
http://www.payphone-directory.org/sounds.html and the marketeers
that constantly call _continued_ to call; i "gave it a try for at
least 2 weeks.
What really pissed me off was that one of them came up with a
"UUU" "no number" ID and so i (finally) used *57, got the message
that the call was traced; after trapping 3 of them i called the
so-called call annoyance bureau and they had *NO* record, meaning
the message was a blatant lie.
The PUC said that *57 was not for tracing marketeers and that i
should not have used it, and that they would not press the issue
to Qwest (my "provider").

Why would they assume it was marketeers?

Sylvia.
Maybe that is one of their parrot answers?

So you didn't say it was marketeers, but you didn't ask them why
they thought it was marketeers?

Have you tried asking to speak to a supervisor?

Sylvia.
No; their attitude every time i called was that they do not care.
After all, they have an infinite source of money from us taxpayers,
so why should they (gasp!) work?
I cannot climb up a vertical cliff.

Can't remember if this has been suggested, but how about switching to a
cellphone? (Lots of people are doing this anyway).

--

John Devereux

 

[Sylvia Else]

John Devereux wrote:

Can't remember if this has been suggested, but how about switching to a
cellphone? (Lots of people are doing this anyway).

They tend to be expensive to use by comparison with a land-line, and
there are unresolved health concerns.

Sylvia.

 

[Jan Panteltje]

On a sunny day (Wed, 30 Dec 2009 23:20:29 +1100) it happened Sylvia Else
<sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in
<00b713ea$0$17161$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>:

John Devereux wrote:

Can't remember if this has been suggested, but how about switching to a
cellphone? (Lots of people are doing this anyway).


They tend to be expensive to use by comparison with a land-line, and
there are unresolved health concerns.

Sylvia.

The solution is:
Use landline to call out for long conversations from home,
only connect phone when making a call.
Use cellphone for incoming calls, and also outgoing calls when not home.

 

[John Devereux]

Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> writes:

On a sunny day (Wed, 30 Dec 2009 23:20:29 +1100) it happened Sylvia Else
sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in
00b713ea$0$17161$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>:

John Devereux wrote:

Can't remember if this has been suggested, but how about switching to a
cellphone? (Lots of people are doing this anyway).


They tend to be expensive to use by comparison with a land-line, and
there are unresolved health concerns.

Sylvia.

The solution is:
Use landline to call out for long conversations from home,
only connect phone when making a call.
Use cellphone for incoming calls, and also outgoing calls when not home.

Problem solved!

--

John Devereux

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 21:59:40 -0800, Robert Baer
<robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 00:17:43 -0800, Robert Baer
robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 21:56:53 -0800, Robert Baer
robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 19:49:58 -0800, Robert Baer
robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 21:15:06 -0800, Robert Baer
robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

Well i tried one of those recordings on
http://www.payphone-directory.org/sounds.html and the marketeers that
constantly call _continued_ to call; i "gave it a try for at least 2 weeks.
What really pissed me off was that one of them came up with a "UUU"
"no number" ID and so i (finally) used *57, got the message that the
call was traced; after trapping 3 of them i called the so-called call
annoyance bureau and they had *NO* record, meaning the message was a
blatant lie.
The PUC said that *57 was not for tracing marketeers and that i
should not have used it, and that they would not press the issue to
Qwest (my "provider").
Say what? How the hell else can i catch these bastards?
Pissant bureaucrats!
**
It would appear that a TOTAL disconnect of my phone _might_ stop
these calls..
After the holidays I plan to buy...

http://jfteck.com/

And make some additional modifications.

...Jim Thompson
..well, they lie in saying no extra monthly charges,as caller ID service
is an extra monthly charge.
It's not my problem that you are so cheap that you don't have
caller-ID.

And stop whining... is there anyone who really needs to call you
anyway ?

...Jim Thompson
I _have_ caller ID and it is useless for most of the callers (zero info).
Is "Reject on No Info" difficult for you?

...Jim Thompson
I do not pick up the phone unless i (1) hear a voice, (2) recognize
the voice, and (3) they say something relevant.
Translation: one of 50 pass.

Aha! So you are having an answering machine automatically answer?

Why don't you just build a box that prevents ringing if it doesn't
recognize a "valid" CID?

...Jim Thompson
Isn't that what i had been asking for?

Buy the one I cited.

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

Help save the environment!
Please dispose of socialism responsibly!

 

[Martin Brown]

Jim Thompson wrote:

On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 00:20:44 -0800, Robert Baer
robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

Martin Brown wrote:

Change to ex-directory and select no inclusion in any public catalogues.
This will make you invisible to all but the most determined random
number phone spammer systems. It stops friends finding you too.

* Does not work; being unlisted makes zero difference, changing phone
numbers gives peace for a few weeks.
I do pass on new phone number to friends only and they do not blab.
I use the standard 555-1212 on web forms.

[snip]

Sounds to me that one of your "friends" is not a friend ;-)

More likely he fills in sucker forms with all his personal details to
get $10 vouchers.

No wonder, if you whine to your friends like you whine here ;-)

...Jim Thompson

I don't often agree entirely with JT but on this occasion I will make an
exception.

If you are ex-directory and you get cold called ask to speak to the
supervisor and tear a suitably wide strip off them. If I get cold called
and am in a bad mood I play them for as long as possible by putting them
on hold for a few minutes while I "look" for my credit card. YMMV

Alternatively if your telco allows it reject all anonymous calls without
CLID. My boiler service engineer does this and I have to remember to use
the right escape codes as my home phone by default does not send CLID.

If you have the right sort of black box I cannot see why you are
whining. RTFM !!!!! Or as a cheapskate you bought the wrong one.

Happy New Year everybody else.

Regards,
Martin Brown

 

[krw]

On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 23:20:29 +1100, Sylvia Else
<sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote:

John Devereux wrote:

Can't remember if this has been suggested, but how about switching to a
cellphone? (Lots of people are doing this anyway).


They tend to be expensive to use by comparison with a land-line, and
there are unresolved health concerns.

Not everywhere. It was cheaper for me to have two Verizon cell phones
with the 750Min/Mo deal than one Verizon POTs line (note that Verizon
<> Verizon). The cell phones came with "free" LD, too, saving a *lot*
more. Prepaid can be a lot cheaper than that (as low as $.06/min).

POTS tariffs are controlled by PUCs and they often have an outdated,
Robinhood, bent.

 

[Robert Baer]

Sylvia Else wrote:

Jan Panteltje wrote:
On a sunny day (Tue, 29 Dec 2009 19:46:00 +1100) it happened Sylvia Else
sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in
00f2da7b$0$6697$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>:

Robert Baer wrote:
Sylvia Else wrote:
Robert Baer wrote:
Well i tried one of those recordings on
http://www.payphone-directory.org/sounds.html and the marketeers
that constantly call _continued_ to call; i "gave it a try for at
least 2 weeks.
What really pissed me off was that one of them came up with a
"UUU" "no number" ID and so i (finally) used *57, got the message
that the call was traced; after trapping 3 of them i called the
so-called call annoyance bureau and they had *NO* record, meaning
the message was a blatant lie.
The PUC said that *57 was not for tracing marketeers and that i
should not have used it, and that they would not press the issue
to Qwest (my "provider").
Why would they assume it was marketeers?

Sylvia.
Maybe that is one of their parrot answers?
So you didn't say it was marketeers, but you didn't ask them why they
thought it was marketeers?

Have you tried asking to speak to a supervisor?

Sylvia.

Personally I think he should talk to a shrink first

I confess that the thought had crossed my mind. The level of
indifference he claims to have received from those whose responsbility
it is to deal with the issue beggars belief.

Sylvia.
In an un-related incident, i got dunned for a bill that i had paid

within 2 business days after receipt.
Two months later i received the un-cashed check and more dunning letters.
It took me 6 months and a high-powered lawyer to straighten that out.
That was a long time ago when i had a few nickels to rub
together..now i pick up pennies off the sidewalk.

 

[Robert Baer]

John Devereux wrote:

Robert Baer <robertbaer@localnet.com> writes:

Sylvia Else wrote:
Robert Baer wrote:
Sylvia Else wrote:
Robert Baer wrote:
Well i tried one of those recordings on
http://www.payphone-directory.org/sounds.html and the marketeers
that constantly call _continued_ to call; i "gave it a try for at
least 2 weeks.
What really pissed me off was that one of them came up with a
"UUU" "no number" ID and so i (finally) used *57, got the message
that the call was traced; after trapping 3 of them i called the
so-called call annoyance bureau and they had *NO* record, meaning
the message was a blatant lie.
The PUC said that *57 was not for tracing marketeers and that i
should not have used it, and that they would not press the issue
to Qwest (my "provider").
Why would they assume it was marketeers?

Sylvia.
Maybe that is one of their parrot answers?
So you didn't say it was marketeers, but you didn't ask them why
they thought it was marketeers?

Have you tried asking to speak to a supervisor?

Sylvia.
No; their attitude every time i called was that they do not care.
After all, they have an infinite source of money from us taxpayers,
so why should they (gasp!) work?
I cannot climb up a vertical cliff.


Can't remember if this has been suggested, but how about switching to a
cellphone? (Lots of people are doing this anyway).

Pray tell, (1) how does one use a cell phone for dial-up; (2) how

does one get to use it at less than $30/month?

 

[Robert Baer]

Jan Panteltje wrote:

On a sunny day (Wed, 30 Dec 2009 23:20:29 +1100) it happened Sylvia Else
sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in
00b713ea$0$17161$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>:

John Devereux wrote:
Can't remember if this has been suggested, but how about switching to a
cellphone? (Lots of people are doing this anyway).

They tend to be expensive to use by comparison with a land-line, and
there are unresolved health concerns.

Sylvia.

The solution is:
Use landline to call out for long conversations from home,
only connect phone when making a call.
Use cellphone for incoming calls, and also outgoing calls when not home.

That costs a _lot_ more money than a simple land line.

 

[Robert Baer]

John Devereux wrote:

Jan Panteltje <pNaonStpealmtje@yahoo.com> writes:

On a sunny day (Wed, 30 Dec 2009 23:20:29 +1100) it happened Sylvia Else
sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote in
00b713ea$0$17161$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>:

John Devereux wrote:
Can't remember if this has been suggested, but how about switching to a
cellphone? (Lots of people are doing this anyway).

They tend to be expensive to use by comparison with a land-line, and
there are unresolved health concerns.

Sylvia.
The solution is:
Use landline to call out for long conversations from home,
only connect phone when making a call.
Use cellphone for incoming calls, and also outgoing calls when not home.

Problem solved!

Meaning you are going to pay me my cell phone costs?

 

[Robert Baer]

Jim Thompson wrote:

On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 21:59:40 -0800, Robert Baer
robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 00:17:43 -0800, Robert Baer
robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 21:56:53 -0800, Robert Baer
robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 19:49:58 -0800, Robert Baer
robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Fri, 25 Dec 2009 21:15:06 -0800, Robert Baer
robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

Well i tried one of those recordings on
http://www.payphone-directory.org/sounds.html and the marketeers that
constantly call _continued_ to call; i "gave it a try for at least 2 weeks.
What really pissed me off was that one of them came up with a "UUU"
"no number" ID and so i (finally) used *57, got the message that the
call was traced; after trapping 3 of them i called the so-called call
annoyance bureau and they had *NO* record, meaning the message was a
blatant lie.
The PUC said that *57 was not for tracing marketeers and that i
should not have used it, and that they would not press the issue to
Qwest (my "provider").
Say what? How the hell else can i catch these bastards?
Pissant bureaucrats!
**
It would appear that a TOTAL disconnect of my phone _might_ stop
these calls..
After the holidays I plan to buy...

http://jfteck.com/

And make some additional modifications.

...Jim Thompson
..well, they lie in saying no extra monthly charges,as caller ID service
is an extra monthly charge.
It's not my problem that you are so cheap that you don't have
caller-ID.

And stop whining... is there anyone who really needs to call you
anyway ?

...Jim Thompson
I _have_ caller ID and it is useless for most of the callers (zero info).
Is "Reject on No Info" difficult for you?

...Jim Thompson
I do not pick up the phone unless i (1) hear a voice, (2) recognize
the voice, and (3) they say something relevant.
Translation: one of 50 pass.
Aha! So you are having an answering machine automatically answer?

Why don't you just build a box that prevents ringing if it doesn't
recognize a "valid" CID?

...Jim Thompson
Isn't that what i had been asking for?

Buy the one I cited.

...Jim Thompson
1) do not like its kludgy "programming", and 2) it costs too much.

Right now i have been enjoying (shh!) s i l e n c e due to the 3 new
services.

 

[Robert Baer]

Martin Brown wrote:

Jim Thompson wrote:
On Tue, 29 Dec 2009 00:20:44 -0800, Robert Baer
robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

Martin Brown wrote:

Change to ex-directory and select no inclusion in any public
catalogues. This will make you invisible to all but the most
determined random number phone spammer systems. It stops friends
finding you too.

* Does not work; being unlisted makes zero difference, changing phone
numbers gives peace for a few weeks.
I do pass on new phone number to friends only and they do not blab.
I use the standard 555-1212 on web forms.

[snip]

Sounds to me that one of your "friends" is not a friend ;-)

More likely he fills in sucker forms with all his personal details to
get $10 vouchers.

No wonder, if you whine to your friends like you whine here ;-)

...Jim Thompson

I don't often agree entirely with JT but on this occasion I will make an
exception.

If you are ex-directory and you get cold called ask to speak to the
supervisor and tear a suitably wide strip off them. If I get cold called
and am in a bad mood I play them for as long as possible by putting them
on hold for a few minutes while I "look" for my credit card. YMMV
* CANNOT work as they hang up immediately after i pick up.

Alternatively if your telco allows it reject all anonymous calls without
CLID. My boiler service engineer does this and I have to remember to use
the right escape codes as my home phone by default does not send CLID.
* I now have 3 services that do a lot of what has been mentioned, and i

have beem enjoying silence for 2 weeks so far (shh!).

If you have the right sort of black box I cannot see why you are
whining. RTFM !!!!! Or as a cheapskate you bought the wrong one.

Happy New Year everybody else.

Regards,
Martin Brown

 

[Robert Baer]

krw wrote:

On Wed, 30 Dec 2009 23:20:29 +1100, Sylvia Else
sylvia@not.at.this.address> wrote:

John Devereux wrote:
Can't remember if this has been suggested, but how about switching to a
cellphone? (Lots of people are doing this anyway).

They tend to be expensive to use by comparison with a land-line, and
there are unresolved health concerns.

Not everywhere. It was cheaper for me to have two Verizon cell phones
with the 750Min/Mo deal than one Verizon POTs line (note that Verizon
Verizon). The cell phones came with "free" LD, too, saving a *lot*
more. Prepaid can be a lot cheaper than that (as low as $.06/min).

POTS tariffs are controlled by PUCs and they often have an outdated,
Robinhood, bent.
I have unlimited local which is much less than six cents per minute,

and i use a long distance calling card and pay well under two cents per
minute.
And i bet that 750Min/Mo deal required a N-month contract in the $200
range to get it started..am not counting the $$$ per month fees......