Driver to drive?

[Don Klipstein]

In article <gg1gj51qqupdi1rskr6g7cq0j5n1p2stb5@4ax.com>, John Larkin wrote:

On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 23:37:08 +0000 (UTC), don@manx.misty.com (Don
Klipstein) wrote:

In article <en5fj5hee89bihqoqcnt28vd1e0qh6rnac@4ax.com>, John Larkin wrote
in part:

I've done a little reading up on radiosondes... I used to buy surplus
ones when I was a kid, so they interest me. There's some interesting
stuff about the IR absorption of the "white" thermistor capsules that
are generally used these days. They tend to - surprise, surprise -
read high.

What sort of IR absorbtion do these have, then?

Google does not turn up anything on:

radiosonde "thermistor capsule"
radiosonde "thermistor capsules"

And if they read high, would they not also read high in the levels of
the atmosphere *cooled* by greenhouse gases?

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)

I posted on that before:

Message-ID: <if23j5h87ul9lfsr97m0n6ue1ck3giijl2@4ax.com

but goodling radiosonde thermistor accuracy

works better.

Apparently radiosonde temperature measurement gear has changed a lot
in recent years, and the dreaded "corrections" are still under debate.

Radiosonde data is one of the confirmations often cited to justify
other (corrected) AGW temperature-rise data. It would be remarkable if
it turned out that radiosonde data is incorrect or improperly adjusted
such as to agree with other incorrect measurements. Stranger things
have happened.

Measuring air temperature turns out to be non-trivial. I'm currently
waiting for the epoxy to set on a thin-film 1K platinum RTD, at the
end of a spool of RG-174, potted into a piece of soda straw. That will
go into a niche on the north side of the cabin.

I think I found your earlier posting on radiosondes with that message-ID
-

I did not see anything there on infrared spectral properties of
thermistor-based sensors, or anything leading to any reading material on
such.

You did provide two links. One was a powerpoint presentation on
radiosondes, that I consider practically a smallish book on radiosondes -
but I saw nothing on IR spectral properties.

The other resolves somehow to or fails to work:

http://www.wmo.int/pages/prog/www/IMOP/meetings/Upper-Air/
Systems-Intercomp/Doc3-1(1)UKMetO.ppt

One thing that did say was that "solar heating introduces significant
systemic errors, difficult to correct, at pressures lower than 100 hPa.

If that is hectopascals, that is about 1/1000 of sea level atmospheric
pressure, or roughly 1 millibar. That is upper stratosphere.

Next several pages show a variety of deviations, including a calibration
problem good for reading half a degree high for most units from 1989-1991.
Another problem was a correction factor failing to adjust downward due to
cloud cover, causing output to be erroneously high.

There was a recurring "theme" of infrared problem being a thermal IR
one, where the sensor radiates thermal infrared - generally cooling it.
One page mentioned error caused by IR emission and absorption at the
specific pressure of 10 hPa (approx. 10 millibars, middle to upper
stratosphere) - the sensor was cooled by its IR properties in air warmer
than -66 degrees C, warmed (I guess by receiving thermal radiation) if it
was in air colder than -66 C. At 32 hPa (middle stratopshere), the
sensor's "equilibrium temperature" was -62 C. At 200 hPa (roughly
tropopause), the "equilibrium temperature" was -56 C, and error due to
IR radiation was much smaller.

If/where the same type of radiosondes were used throughout a large time
stretch, say from 1991 to 2005, then warming they show in the lower
troposphere is real.

Meanwhile, I do suspect that the UAH and RSS crews are aware of these
factors when they do whatever calibration/recalibration to radiosonde data
they do, especially considering UAH would prefer to not have to report a
warming trend.

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)

 

[Jon Kirwan]

On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 19:09:07 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

snip
I design all sorts of stuff that can't usefully be simulated,
especially with Spice. That's a lot more fun than siccing LT SPice on
opamps and 555's.

I don't recall suggesting otherwise.

Jon

 

[Jon Kirwan]

On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 19:09:07 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

JonK:
Of course, we are on about a different subject. Which is the usual
fare with you.

Are you accusing me of straying off topic because I discuss
electronics in s.e.d.?

Hardly. The issue is about you as an unrepentent, ignorant "climate
flogger" writing in sed who likes to pretend taking the high ground
when the opposite is true. That straying _off_ the topic of your
ignorance may cause you to try and stray _onto_ an electronics topic
as a distraction from that point is just one of those wonderful
ironies.

Jon

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 20:15:36 -0800, Jon Kirwan
<jonk@infinitefactors.org> wrote:

On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 19:09:07 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

JonK:
Of course, we are on about a different subject. Which is the usual
fare with you.

Are you accusing me of straying off topic because I discuss
electronics in s.e.d.?

Hardly. The issue is about you as an unrepentent, ignorant "climate
flogger" writing in sed who likes to pretend taking the high ground
when the opposite is true. That straying _off_ the topic of your
ignorance may cause you to try and stray _onto_ an electronics topic
as a distraction from that point is just one of those wonderful
ironies.

Jon

Ah, you are a hobbyist in psychology, too.

John

 

[Jon Kirwan]

On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 20:38:20 -0800, John Larkin
<jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 20:15:36 -0800, Jon Kirwan
jonk@infinitefactors.org> wrote:

On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 19:09:07 -0800, John Larkin
jjlarkin@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:

JonK:
Of course, we are on about a different subject. Which is the usual
fare with you.

Are you accusing me of straying off topic because I discuss
electronics in s.e.d.?

Hardly. The issue is about you as an unrepentent, ignorant "climate
flogger" writing in sed who likes to pretend taking the high ground
when the opposite is true. That straying _off_ the topic of your
ignorance may cause you to try and stray _onto_ an electronics topic
as a distraction from that point is just one of those wonderful
ironies.

Jon

Ah, you are a hobbyist in psychology, too.

Even a modest reader may find irony in the written word.

Jon

 

[Robert Baer]

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.

 

[Robert Baer]

PeterD wrote:

On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 19:41:29 -0800, Robert Baer
robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

PeterD 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..
Get caller id
Look at caller id
Recognize name, answer.
Don't recognize name: pickup/hangup.
Repeat as necessary.
Get on the federal Do Not Call list.
* I have been on the so-called "Do Not Call" list for years, and use it
to file complaints where i have a number or name (or on rare occasion,
both).
DOES NOT WORK; useless.

WOrks well for most of us. You may have pissed someone off and that's
what is happening.


Best thing is to get a live person on the phone. Then string them
along as much as possible. If you get a man, tell him you'd rather
speak to a woman. If he puts a female on, string her along, then start
getting 'sexy' with her. Tell her you're glad she called, you are
horny. If the man says "No woman available" waste as much time of his
as you can, then tell him you are 12 years old, and lonly. Then thank
him for asking to have sex with you, but you'll have to ask your
parents.

The trick is to waste as much time of theirs as you can. Try to keep
them online for at least 15 minutes with a live person. Don't waste
time with recordings/electronic systems, get a live person on the
line. Then waste, waste time, and always end up with "I'm 12 years
old, thanks for asking me to have sex with you..."
* They immediately hang up; communications are impossible.

Well, in that case no black box will work. Period.

I'd strongly suggest you involve local law enforcement...
They say that they cannot do anything, because....i have zero info on

the callers.

 

[Robert Baer]

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).

 

[Robert Baer]

Baron wrote:

Robert Baer Inscribed thus:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:
"nuny@bid.nes" 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.htmland 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..
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.

Or ask them how hard it is to set up a phone scam like theirs,
since
you're out of work.


* IMPOSSIBLE; they hang up immediately on line pick-up.

So their just number collecting !

*TEN* times a _day_, every day???????????????????????????????

 

[Sylvia Else]

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.

 

[Sylvia Else]

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.

 

[Baron]

Robert Baer Inscribed thus:

Baron wrote:
Robert Baer Inscribed thus:

Michael A. Terrell wrote:
"nuny@bid.nes" 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.htmland 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..
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.

Or ask them how hard it is to set up a phone scam like theirs,
since
you're out of work.


* IMPOSSIBLE; they hang up immediately on line pick-up.

So their just number collecting !

*TEN* times a _day_, every day???????????????????????????????

Yup ! I also have caller ID, and I look at it before I answer. If I
see no number "Number Withheld" or "Out of Area" I just let it ring.

BT (UK) will put an internal trace on these numbers if you can get to
the right department to do it.

Unfortunately I've discovered that some of these are basically "Skype"
over the Internet, type calls injected into some internal company PBX,
and have nothing to do with the company that owns the PBX. The PBX is
used as an open relay.

--
Best Regards:
Baron.

 

[Baron]

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.

Its the same with the "I have $25 million your relative has left you"
scam letter !

You can take the letter to them, its evidence, but they don't even
bother to look at the letter other than to have a laugh ! Even though
the letter has a return address on it.

--
Best Regards:
Baron.

 

[PeterD]

On Sun, 27 Dec 2009 21:53:43 -0800, Robert Baer
<robertbaer@localnet.com> wrote:

PeterD wrote:

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.

The telephone company has facilities to trace these calls. Absolutely,
it's required. They ONLY release the information to law enforcement.
Call your phone company and ask that a trap be put on your line. Then
contact local law enforcement and inform them of the situation. When
the event happens, tell the local law enforcement, they will then
contact the telephone company and the information will be in their
hands.

 

[PeterD]

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?

 

[PeterD]

On Mon, 28 Dec 2009 22:28:27 +1100, Sylvia Else
<sylvia@not.at.this.address> 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.

I suspect that it may not be...

 

[Jim Thompson]

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
--
| 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]

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..

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.

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.

If you are getting a high proportion of dead air calls then take it to
whoever regulates telecoms in the USA. There must be some standards of
telecom provider performance even in the land of the free spammer.

Dead air calls count as harassment in many jurisdictions.

Regards,
Martin Brown

 

[Sylvia Else]

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.

 

[Baron]

Sylvia Else Inscribed thus:

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.

Thanks for the info. I'm in the UK.
BT (British Telecom) are the primary provider here.

--
Best Regards:
Baron.