I don’t believe that this is true. What countries have laws against unsolicited email? There are a number of laws against some of the more egregious methods of sending spam but not sending unsolicited email.
Say what now? Since when?
Great, so spam involves an economy of assholes, as compared to telemarketing. How does this invalidate BubbaDog’s analogy?
Before I got on the DNC, at least 75% of the calls I received in my home were telemarketers. At least. I regularly had days where I’d get a dozen or more telemarketers.
True enough. I haven’t had a genuine commercial telemarketer call me in over a year. If this keeps up, I figure sometime around 2009 I’ll have finally spent all the accumulated anger and frustration that have been built up over close to three decades of constant pestering by telemarketers, and I may be able to address the subject calmly and rationally.
On second thought, better make that 2012.
I favor a two-pronged attack. Work to make it illegal, sure, but in the meantime, I can also work to make it unprofitable. Which is why I signed up for the DNC, and verily, the lamentations of bankrupt telemarketing firms are as hossanahs unto my ears. Back when I didn’t have that option, though, I had to settle for making the jobs of telemarketers as unpleasant as possible, thus increasing employee turnover and forcing their employers to waste even more time recruiting and training replacements. I doubt my actions ever did anything to hurt one of these firms, but there are a lot of people out there who feel the way I do, and it starts to add up after a while.
Okay, I agree with you about the seal clubber comparison. Because, at the end of the day, at least the seal clubbers have helped to make some really nice fur coats. Telemarketers can only dream of being so useful.
Yep. Calling me at home to sell me something is being an asshole. I don’t care how much you need the money. That’s why we have welfare. Or, failing that, pimps. And anyone who acts like an asshole to me, gets treated like an asshole themselves. Don’t like it? Don’t fucking call me.
I dunno, after twenty-eight years, I’m feeling pretty good about myself. Give me another thirty, I should be so happy I’ll be down right insufferable. Tell ya what, gimme a call in 2034, and I’ll let you know exactly how I feel.
Don’t the telemarketers try to keep a track record on their victims? I mean, if every time a telemarketer called my house, and I said no, do they register that anywhere (Mr. Loopy: Declined purchase of in-the-peel tomato juicer; desire for hydraulic garlic press unlikely)? I mean, do they figure out after a while it’s a waste of time to call me? And if I could somehow get myself blacklisted by pretending I’m being dismembered, or perhaps always bringing the conversation back to the fact I’m not wearing any underpants, isn’t that a goal worth pursuing?
Well, I think so; but only if the blacklist exists.
Funniest thing I’ve read on this thread. 
Seriously, though.
I doubt it. Dig up my previous rants against Popular Science Magazine. When you tell the schmoe to take you off their list, it will miracously reappear the next week and the person you talked to will seem to have never existed.
Because a telemarketer has to do more than just push a button to offend people. If spammers had to type up each and every spam individually, then BubbaDog might have a valid comparison. Since they don’t, he’s just a common-or-garden asshole.
So, your argument is that the more effort I put into annoying someone, the more excusable that annoyance becomes?
On a slightly related note, I’d been getting newspaper solicitations every three weeks for a year or so, including one awesome conversation that went something like:
SVEN: Sorry, I don’t read the paper.
THE PHONE: Well, how do you get your news?
SVEN: The Internet.
THE PHONE: Well, what if the power was out in your area and you couldn’t read the Internet?
SVEN: For the power to be out in my area for enough time that it would meaningfully affect my ability to get news, it would have to be some sort of serious emergency or calamity. Given this, getting the paper wouldn’t be my highest priority, besides which, in such a situation, it probably wouldn’t get delivered anyway.
THE PHONE: uh…
Finally, I got sick of it, and just told the guy who was calling that I couldn’t read and thus had no use for a newspaper.
They never called again.
The next time somebody calls to ask about my long-distance plan, I’m going to tell them I don’t have a phone.
Just thought I’d pop in to admit that, as gazpacho pointed out, I did misspeak earlier on one of my points.
From this site.
What I should have said was “unsolicited email that is obviously a scam”. However, since I run a number of websites, I end up getting massive amounts of truly ridiculous v1@gra spam, which is what this bill targets, and what I immediately thought of when I read BubbaDog’s post.
In addition, the pledge of a national do-not-email registry is mentioned, but I’d like to see how they manage to make it effective.
My specific quote (cite here) was:
While I did follow up by saying that I doubt anyone gets that equivalent in phone calls each day (and I still think yours is an extreme case, considering the average American gets 2 to 3 ), a more apt comparison to this statistic would be “telemarketers do not account for 60% of the total phone calls made each day.” Unfortunately, from what I’ve been able to find, there is no concrete data on how many calls are made each day, at least according to the FCC:
So there’s a moot point to go over with a fine tooth comb.
The purpose of my response to BubbaDog was to point out how the analogy he used was a poor one, which I still believe. And for the record, statements like this one:
sound like some standard tough-guy posturing to me. I’d rather hang up on a telemarketer than have them clog up welfare. As for the pimp comment…that’s classy. I realize you (hopefully) said it in jest to ram home that fuck 'em all attitude, and you don’t truly, seriously feel that way.
Again, I say: if that’s the way you want to spend your time. Sounds pretty jerky to me, but that’s just my opinion, and who am I, the Morality Police? Just seems like less trouble and stress all around if you just hang up the phone. Or put the phone down and watch TV. Or pull a loopydude and scream randomly. Or anything except make someone that probably already feels shitty about their job and lot in life feel even worse, for no reason besides you feel you can.
MoveOn called me this morn at 8:40.
I told them I was taking my son to school and hung up.
Usually I can tell a telemarketer; they get my parents name wrong.
May I speak to Mr. Soandso?
He can’t talk, he has no voice(true)
Okay, I’ll call another time.
Don’t! He still won’t be able to talk!
:rolleyes:
puts on flame-retardant hat and coat
Hello, my name is brianjedi, and I am a telephone survey researcher.
First off, don’t even try to lump me in with those scuzzy bastards hawking the latest piece o’ crap or ripoff phone deal. 90% of the work I’ve done has been contacting people for customer attitude surveys on behalf of utility companies (I’m limited in what I can share here, due to a confidentiality agreement I signed as a condition of employment.)
I don’t have an auto-dialer, I’m not calling 90 people at once. Hell, I don’t even have a computer. It’s me, a phone with a headset, a phone list, a survey script and an answer form. I dial every number myself, I write the answers down with a pencil on the answer form and I apologize when I interrupt something.
So don’t go spouting off about how telephone surveys are just as bad as telemarketing. If you’re not happy that you’ve been called for a survey, understand that most times it’s because a company you use wants to make sure you’re happy. Other times it’s about a serious issue facing your community.
And the money’s not even that good. But if you’d like to buy me groceries, pay my rent and light bill so I can just worry about school, go right ahead.
This is a serious, not snotty, question. For the telemarketers out there, does it really pay that much?
More than say waitressing, bartending, receptionist, temp assignments, babysitting, that sort of thing?
That’s great cite. Real beaut. What the fuck is it supposed to prove?
Better that than my phone line.
Oh, yes, I do, truly, seriously, feel that way. I can respect a whore. It’s an ancient profession, with a rich history, and a vital role in society. Telemarketers are just parasites.
Of course it’s jerky. So’s telemarketing. They want to engage me on that level, I’m more than willing to sink to it.
Oh, it’s a great stress reliever. Nothing relaxes like abusing a telemarketer. Speaking of which:
I would classify loopydude’s story as classical telemarketer abuse. Just yelling obscenities is fun, but lacks imagination. The ideal form of telemarketer abuse is the mind-fuck. Back when I still got telemarketing calls, that was my standard approach.
If it weren’t for people like me, they wouldn’t have any reason to feel shitty about their job. And then where would we be?
No, my argument is that comparing telemarketers to spammers is like comparing Lee Harvey Oswald to the commandant of Auschwitz, and that anyone who finds that comparison valid - e.g. BubbaDog - is a twitching, dribbling cretin.
Yes, I get annoyed by telemarketers even though we’re on the TPS and have been for years. I get even more annoyed by fax-spammers, especially since we don’t have a fucking fax line and yet they keep calling anyway. But as has been pointed out, cold-call centre staff are desperate to work and they’ll do anything. I’ve been unemployed for long stretches of time, and I can sympathise with that.
Meanwhile, you call them parasites, but then suggest they should claim welfare instead. Either you need a better dictionary or a brain enema, because that’s not logically consistent.
I tried several restaurants, couldn’t get a waitressing job. I was (at the time) inexperienced as a receptionist. It was more stable than temping, paid more than babysitting, and for bartending you need a license.
I got paid a dollar over minimum, plus they had some fancy shmancy bonus system for those who were any good. It was possible to make (at that company) up to 12.00 an hour. This was back in 1994, so 12/hr was pretty decent.
I did it for a month or two while I continued my job search. I never made more than the basic wage.
Because telemarketing consists of annoying the shit out of people, using their resources (time, phone) in a way that they never intended, as telemarketers know.
It is not an honest living. It consists of using a piece of equipment that people instal for other purposes for your own purposes, knowing full well that 99% of the people you are doing this to don’t want you to. And annoying the shit out of them at the same time.
Your line of argument that telemarketing is OK because it is a way to earn money and because the person who does it doesn’t enjoy it can be used to justify bank robbery.
There is no logical connection between the fact someone will pay you to do something and the question of whether it is OK to do it.
When a telemarketer calls me, they annoy me. They know that 99% of the time what they are doing is calling someone who doesn’t want to be called. But I must be polite back. I must not show my true feelings. Why is that? Why should I hide the fact that the telemarketer is annoying the shit out of me and I am not happy?
Please do not be so silly as to say: “to make their life happier”. See the first two sentences of my last paragraph.
What complete and utter drivel. I killed someone with my bare hands but what I did isn’t bad because someone else committed genocide using machine guns, which is much easier. Does that make sense to you? Do you actually have any logical relevant difference between Bubbadog’s analogy and telemarketing?
Well since you asked - I leave this morning for this.
I’ve disliked mosquitoes my whole life too. Not miserable about it in the least
Man, I knew I was stretching with the baby-seal-clubbers comment (they’ll probably kick me out of the union) but I thought using an extreme would refute the statements that you should not hold people libel for the jobs they are forced to take.
I repeat my statement - If somebody is paying you to be an asshole, you should not be surprised if you are treated like an asshole.
Turn the other cheek is golden advice but the reality of life is that when somebody is affronted their first reaction is usually to reply in kind, not have a warm fuzzy excuse session for the affronters behavior.
But I have aspirations to someday be a smug-self-righteous asshole like you
You’re not. You’re calling existing customers. While your calling may sometimes interrupt people I believe that you have a valid reason to call.
Still…the hot babes come a runnin when they see me. Must be the cologne.
Really? Is this in Connecticutt? I’ve worked in restaurants/bars in serveral different States and never heard of such a thing. Seems ridiculously complicated to have to license every individual bartender. I can understand the restaurant/bar needing to have a liquor license, but a bartender’s license? Is this still the case in Connecticutt?
Of course, now I can’t find a cite saying that this still exists in Connecticut; it looks like it may have been repealed (it’s been a long time since I’ve looked for that type of work). But I did find a cite saying that Milwaukee requires one. I believe it’s just to ensure that a bartender is aware of all the laws and regulations regarding drinking; legal age, legal liability regarding cut-off, etc. And looking into it further, I think the statute in Connecticut is that there must be at least one licensed bartender on the premises; many bars might just require its applicants to be licensed so that there are no problems with scheduling. At any rate, I do know that every bartending job I saw available stated that a person had to be licensed and certified, and the courses were not cheap.