:rolleyes:
Then why did you bring it up? Emotional rhetoric to imply that telemarketers were exploited to the same degree that children in third world countries are exploited?
I just use:
“Sorry, but we’re not interested. Have a nice day!”
I know how much verbal abuse these people get, and after reading enough of these threads and reading some doper telemarketers/former telemarketers, I’ve decided that being extra nice definately isn’t a bad thing. It’s kind of funny, though- it often actually takes them a minute to pause and process the fact that I actually said “have a nice day.” I guess they just never hear it and are therefore suprised.
When I get solicitation calls from legitimate charity organizations, I usually say something to the effect of:
“Wow, that sounds like a great cause, but unfortunately I will not donate to any organization that uses telephone solicitation. Quite a shame, really, because it sounds like you could really use the funding. Anyway, have a nice day!”
…then I often go out and make a donation to a charity of my choice.
With telemarketers, I have to agree that the only way to bring an end to the practice is to make it unprofitable. If I am really busy, I have no choice but to hang up, but if I have time to kill, I will usually let the caller run through the script, act interested in the product, even asking a few relevant questions along the way - in truth, stretching out the transaction as long as possible without being obviously manipulative, until the moment that I need to supply personal information or a credit card number, at which point I say:
“Okay, the credit card number is… oh, wait a minute… Forgive my absent-mindedness, but I just remembered that I don’t deal with any company that uses telephone solicitation. Please put me on your do-not-call list, and have a great day!”
I’ll go with Muffin on this one. Why bring it up at all?
Aside from your almost total intellectual bankruptcy, of course.
No, it’s kinda like saying “Why don’t you hate the people responsible for the problem instead of the people you’re currently hating?” So long as telemarketing is legal, there will always be people who will work for the shitty wages despite the abuse because they have to. The root of the problem is the bastards who employ them. Unfortunately, you’re all too busy hugging your hate for a bunch of people who really don’t deserve it close to your breast to listen to another point of view.
And Miller? Before you start talking about “total intellectual bankruptcy”, just remember that you’re the guy who had to completely reverse what I said before you could make an argument.
Yeah, right, sorry about that. Somehow I missed that you were just making shit up to support your argument, instead of, y’know, using facts or actual events or anything. I can’t imagine what I was thinking.
Incidentally, you do know telemarketers are all cannibals, right? I mean, sure, no one’s ever been caught feasting on human flesh while trying to convince homeowners to refinance, but they could do it, and that makes it an entirely relevent point in this argument.
Hey, why you’re here, maybe you can explain something that I’ve never been able to understand. You say people shouldn’t be rude to telemarketers, because they’re so poor and desperate that they “have to” take this job. They’ve got no choice. It’s telemarketing, or living in a cardboard box. So, when they call me in my home and act like a jerk, it behooves me to respond politely, because these are destitute people being cruelly manipulated by the evil telemarketing firms.
However, you’re okay with the idea of driving the companies that employ these people out of business.
How does that work, exactly? If they’re so totally incapable of finding any other job, how exactly is it moral to destroy the one source of employment for which they are not terminally underqualified? I’m rude to telemarketers, because I believe that they can find another job that maybe doesn’t pay as well, but doesn’t require them to be assholes. You’re nice to telemarketers because you think they’ve got no other options, but are a-okay with putting them out on the street by destroying the only means of support for which they could ever possibly qualify.
How, precisely, does this not make you a gigantic hypocrite?
I’ll repeat myself once more. Maybe if I write in slightly larger letters so as to match the ones in the Dick and Jane books that comprise your normal reading schedule, perhaps you will understand this time. At the very least, it will make what I’m saying visible enough that the next time you completely ignore it or reverse what I’m saying, everyone will know you for the festering boil on the buttocks of the SDMB that you are.
Telemarketers have moved their call centres to India and other countries where labour is cheap. They did this to reduce their costs and increase their profits. These are what we call facts. Remember that word, as it may come in useful later on.
Now, since telemarketers are willing to move heaven and earth to save a few pennies, and since you’re already of the opinion that they are the lowest of the low who will do anything for money, it makes sense to draw the conclusion that if telemarketers could viably employ children to save even more money, they would do so. When we take facts and extrapolate reasonable conclusions from them it is called logic, and it is nature’s gift to sentient lifeforms.
Depends how you define politely. Myself, I hang up on them. It wastes the minimum time and energy.
These people work at telemarketing because the jobs are there. Only if those jobs aren’t there will they look for something else. And on the subject of giant hypocrites, you were the first one to bring up making telemarketing illegal. The difference is that while I believe telemarketing should not be legal, I don’t blame telemarketers for trying to earn a living instead of claiming welfare.
You, on the other hand, are an insane troll fuckwit who rants about how these parasites should stop trying to earn their living and instead start claiming handouts from the government. You have still to explain why this makes any kind of sense at all, probably because you can’t - that, or you’re too busy shitting in your hand and throwing it through the bars of your cage.
Thank you for admitting that telemarketers could look for other work if they chose to. 
You are of the opinion that the trigger to look for other work is limited to if the existing work dries up. I am of the opinion that the trigger incluldes this, but also includes individuals deciding for themselves that they should move on to ethical work.
My my, such fuss about telemarketing being legal. Well guess what: hanging up on invasive telephone harassers, or telling them to take a hike, or wasting their time, or just being rude to them, is perfectly legal.
I will have you know that I am a scrotal boil, thank you very much.
Generally speaking, you should probably provide a cite before you go declaring something as a fact, but in this case, I’ll go with it. I’m sure many telemarketing firms have moved overseas, just as companies from virtually every other industry have done. I am not now, nor have I ever, disputed this claim.
Again, not actually a conclusion I have argued against. I’m sure, if they could get five year olds to work the phones on the cheap, that they would do so. Now, if you can get your three isolated brain cells to form a line and complete a cogent argument, would you kindly explain 1) how this makes them different from any other coporation on the planet, and 2) what in the name of Holy Fuck-All this has to do with this thread?
Then what on Earth is wrong with holding them responsible for the choice to work as a telemarketer when they can get other, non-asshole jobs? You’ve been arguing that telemarketers deserve our pity. Why? If they could go get another job doing something that doesn’t involve being a total cock, why aren’t they doing so, except that they don’t care about acting like a total cock if it means earning a higher wage for less work? Why should I give two shits about these people?
You pathetic little moron. I’d only be a hypocrite for advocating the illegalization of the telemarketing industry if I had ever, at any point in my life, expressed the slightest concern for the wellfare of telemarketers. I dare say that has never once happened. You, on the other hand, think it’s somehow less acceptable to call a telemarketer a dirty name than it is to deprive them of their livelyhood. That’s what makes you a hypocrite, and me ethically consistent.
I didn’t bother explaining it, because I figured anyone with a cranium larger than the head of a pin would understand the underlying logic without needing me to hold their hand. But then you started posting in here. So here goes:
The argument that welfare would be superior to telemarketing is dependent on the assumption that people only enter telemarketing because it is impossible for them to otherwise earn a wage. Like you, I also think telemarketing should be illegal. If there’s no way for these people to otherwise earn a living, then they are going to end up on welfare anyway. So, operating under the aforementioned assumption, and supporting the illegalization of telemarketing, it is inevitable that these people will end up on welfare. I say, why wait for our spineless legislators to get off their asses and regulate this sordid industry out of exsistence, when people currently working as telemarketers could just quit their jobs, and in so doing evidence the slightest example of respect for their fellow citizens?
Now, I know a great many very stupid people who classify anyone on welfare as a parasite. Given your performance in this thread, it is entirely possible that you are one of these people. You’re certainly dumb enough. However, there is a difference between a parasite who sucks my time, and a parasite who sucks my money, and how much they suck of each. I would vastly perfer to see an incalcuably small percentage of my taxes go to pay ex-telemarketers to not be telemarketers, rather than waste several minutes of my day answering the phone, ascertaining that I’m talking to a salesman, and then extricating myself from the conversation (either through a simple hang up or something more colorful). Money is just money. I can always get more. My time, however, is irreplacable.
Of course, I don’t buy for a second that telemarketers can’t get another job. And, apparently, neither do you, you disingenuous fuck. So that makes the entire welfare angle of my argument moot, as it was purely based on a scenario in which there is no other alternative to telemarketing. In that case, welfare is not a good option, but merely a less unacceptable option. If that scenario is non-operative for the majority of telemarketers, if they do have other employment options, then fuck 'em. Let 'em get a real job like the rest of us and actually contribute to society, instead of making life in this country that much more unbearable.
Your tactic, when others point out a strawman, appears to be to build it bigger and hit it harder. We weren’t impressed by you beating up an average strawman, we ain’t going to be impressed by you slaughtering an even bigger one. Give it up.
Calling others trolls is (a) the behaviour of a jerk, against board rules and likely to get you banned and (b) the last resort of someone who can’t cope with the debate and so assumes their opponent is just trying to piss them off.
You know, I think we’re in fundamental agreement here but we’ve both oversimplified the case. We’ve heard plenty from ex-telemarketers in this thread, and they seem to have been fairly unified on two points: that they didn’t go into telemarketing knowing what they were getting into except as a last resort, and that when the opportunity arose they left.
Working from that, can we agree that the trigger to look for other work is being able to get other work? The people who can’t do other work will of course keep on doing it unless stopped entirely; they fit my criterion for moving on. The people who can do other work, but for whatever reason do not - lack of vacancies in their field, they’re retraining and need evening work, etc. - eventually get an opportunity to move on and take it; those people fit yours.
Miller - I don’t especially want to respond to you, but you’d only trumpet it as a victory if I didn’t. You haven’t “beaten me”, whatever the fuck that means; I’m simply not bothering to fight you any more. By all means carry on taking pride in the fact that you are a consistently evil moral leper, and I hope you live for many, many years.
The people who want me to be polite to telemarketers claim that it’s because their jobs are hard enough without people being rude.
But if people aren’t rude, their jobs aren’t hard. Say everyone is divinely polite, whether they buy or not. What’s hard about a telemarketer’s job then?
The reason telemarketing jobs pay more is that they suck more. They suck more because more people are impolite. The more impolite we are, the more the job will have to pay to tempt and retain employees. The more the job pays, the less profitable the company will be. The less profitable they are, the less of them there will be. The less of them means fewer calls. Fewer calls means happiness and joy and free booze for everyone.
Ack- the FOP just called me. When I asked “Chris” (or whatever he said, oddly it was garbled) to repeat his name, he hung up on me. I guess they are ready to start a new cycle of harrassment with me.
I find it difficult to believe that telemarketing is “soul destroying” for the same reason I find it difficult to believe that working with power tools might cause me to cut off my tail.
You know, I’ll agree that there are a lot of adjectives that apply to me based on how I treat telemarketers, and a lot of them aren’t pretty. But evil? If talking trash to a stranger over the phone counts as “evil” in your book, you must live the single most sheltered exsistence in the history of mankind.
I’m appalled. Everybody knows that you should use iron filings for that sort of work.
From what I can gather, rude people are just the icing on an already shitty cake. I for one cannot imagine how dull it must be endlessly repeating the same script every five minutes for a four hour shift, but if asked to guess I’d say it’s somewhere between “skullcrushingly dull” and “mindbogglingly dull”. I wouldn’t be surprised to find that telemarketers actually grow to like being abused because it breaks up the monotony of their day.
There’s a small flaw in your logic here - telemarketing jobs do not pay more. In fact, most of the vacancies I just looked up pay very close to minimum wage. It doesn’t look like people being impolite is making the job pay better.
Another reason to favour hanging up as a plan of attack over abuse is that it increases the number of calls they make. The more calls they make without filling their quota, the more demoralised they become.
FWIW, again, I’ve never seen a telemarketing job start at minimum wage. YMMV, of course, but that’s usually why a person takes the job in the first place – the money is better. I checked the local classifieds and came up with these:
No. Way. Just no. While dull, I can’t picture anyone being more pleased with being screamed at, called names, threatened and hung up on [read phone slammed down] than with sitting and talking to calm and kind people for four hours. Sure, the truly hateful people could at times be amusing, but it still never failed to 100% suck that you got up each morning and went to work, knowing what you had in store. I’d much rather have done the bone-crushingly boring task of reading a script to polite people all day. Trust me on that.
This has been noted and forwarded to the right individuals.