I Just Got a call From "The Children's Cancer Coalition"!

[PapSett]

@SCSimmons

Ditto. When the collections agent from Big Vito’s EZ-Cash comes to break your kneecaps, and says, “Nothin’ personal, PapSett, I just gotta take the jobs I can find in this 'conomy,” will you tell him, “Yeah, I understand, Bubba. I’ve had to work a few questionable jobs myself,” or will you bust out the scattergun? When telemarketers call me, I metaphorically bust out the scattergun, and I really don’t want to hear their sad stories about how much they hate the job but are stuck with it. I’ve worked for a telemarketing company too, doing an inbound customer service job (they were trying to branch out). When they lost that contract & tried to shift me to a telemarketing campaign, I walked and never looked back.

There’s a BIG fucking difference between working an honest job and breaking someone’s kneecaps. Don’t judge me until you have walked a mile in my shoes, um kay? When you are semi-handicapped and can’t work standing on your feet all day you are limited in what you can do.

If someone is too rude and lazy to say 8 simple words- PUT ME ON YOUR DO NOT CALL LIST and would rather give someone trying to do a job a hard time, well, they’re a pretty patheic person, is all I have to say.

[Wheelz]

I’m so glad I don’t have a land line anymore!
I am pretty sure even charities aren’t allowed to call cell numbers, but I simply don’t answer any calls from numbers I don’t recognize. If it’s something legit, they can leave me a message.

My prior method of handling phone solicitors was equally simple: A politely-toned “I’m sorry, but no.” click

[Textual_Intercourse]

@PapSett

Anyway… I know all about how these call centers that call for charities work. Whatever money you send… the actual charity gets 2-12%… The rest goes to the ‘overhead’ for the call center.

This is just ridiculous. Seems like there would be much less overhead if they used snail mail as mentioned above. Do the call centers generate that much more in donations than a mailing that a 88-98% take is justifiable?

[Tim_T-Bonham.net]

@Textual_Intercourse

This is just ridiculous. Seems like there would be much less overhead if they used snail mail as mentioned above. Do the call centers generate that much more in donations than a mailing that a 88-98% take is justifiable?

Because it’s mostly a scam to make money for the call center!

They originate the idea, and sell it to the charity. Any money (even only 2-12%) is just extra income to the charity, and no extra work – the call center company is doing the work. So the charity has an incentive to agree to this.

[Textual_Intercourse]

@t-bonham@scc.net

Because it’s mostly a scam to make money for the call center!

They originate the idea, and sell it to the charity. Any money (even only 2-12%) is just extra income to the charity, and no extra work – the call center company is doing the work. So the charity has an incentive to agree to this.

I see. Crafty sob’s.

[lost4life]

@Lord_Ashtar

So are they for cancer in children or against it?

Ooh I use this all the time. If they happen to say they’re collecting donations for children’s cancer research, I’ll say something like “That’s obscene! There’s already enough children’s cancer. You should be trying to stop it!”
It makes no sense, but it’s fun to hear them explain that the research is to stop cancer.

I have told “charities” that I’m on the Do Not Call list. They explain that charities are exempt. I then question their business practice of calling someone for a donation who has signed up on a list specifically for the purpose of NOT BEING CALLED! Whether they’re exempt or not, why would they expect a warm response from someone who already expressed elsewhere that they do not wish to be called!