Skeptics

[BADad]

Check out this article from today's NY Times:

http://www.nytimes.com/2002/06/19/arts/television/19SKEP.html?todaysheadlines

[Phobos]

Not registered with the New York Time (not demand for it in the UK), could you just sumarise what it says.

Phobos

[SpacedOut]

Its an article about Paul Kurtz (http://www.secularhumanism.org/home/kurtz/)

[David Hall]

On 2002-06-19 07:36, Phobos wrote:
Not registered with the New York Time (not demand for it in the UK), could you just sumarise what it says.

Phobos


NYT articles pop up on this forum a lot, as they have a really good science section. It's one of my favorite sites for news and I access it all the time. It wouldn't hurt anyone to sign up for it. It's free, it's easy, and you don't have to do anything risky. You can use the same screen name and password you use here, for example. No sweat.

And if you set your computer to accept cookies and ask it to remember your password, you don't have to log in all the time.

[Wiley]

I agree with David, the NY Times science section is one of the best. Think of it as the anti-CNN. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif

[beskeptical]

I registered. There were 3 pop up windows immediately on my screen when I tried to close. Including the new stupid advertiser trick (yes it is intended to sound like stupid dog trick) of putting the x to the far right off one's screen. Hopefully that is all the bother I'm going to get.

Not that this surprises me. And, I do want to read the news on the site, though I'd rather pay than have pop ups. Too bad you can't send pop ups back. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif For telephone solicitors I ask them to hold and wait until they hang up. It is very satisfying. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif

For junk faxes I fax back a black page. If they fax me more junk, they get a lot of black pages. Also very satisfying. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: beskeptical on 2002-06-19 22:13 ]</font>

[Jigsaw]

Well, I was already cookied, and I didn't get any popups at all. [shrug]

Still have no real clue who Paul Kurtz is, though. He's CSICOP chairman? Okay. I didn't know they had a chairman, just a website.

http://www.csicop.org/

[Conrad]

<snip>
Not that this surprises me. And, I do want to read the news on the site, though I'd rather pay than have pop ups. Too bad you can't send pop ups back. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif For telephone solicitors I ask them to hold and wait until they hang up. It is very satisfying. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif

For junk faxes I fax back a black page. If they fax me more junk, they get a lot of black pages. Also very satisfying. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif


<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: beskeptical on 2002-06-19 22:13 ]</font>


Ooh! So that's how it's done. Excellent, now I know what to do about the next unsolicited phone call I get at home.
Truly the BABB is the fount of all knowledge.
(Or is that "font"?)

[Phobos]

On 2002-06-19 22:05, beskeptical wrote:
For junk faxes I fax back a black page. If they fax me more junk, they get a lot of black pages. Also very satisfying. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_biggrin.gif
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: beskeptical on 2002-06-19 22:13 ]</font>


Why not just send them back their own junk fax - They may have a use for blank paper but getting back their own rubbish would be very annoying !

Phobos

[DoctorDon]

Why not just send them back their own junk fax?


I imagine a completely black page would use more ink, and thus be more annoying to them than just their own fax (not to mention costly, having to buy more ink).

Don

[Donnie B.]

The best way would be to invert the original fax and return it to them, white-on-black.

On the other hand, junk-fax senders probably have their machines set up to send only, or at least to store any received faxes rather than print them. Darn.

By the way, I have a different approach to the telemarketers. It's not the fault of the poor minimum-wage ex-welfare-mom that's sitting there making the calls, so I don't make them wait on hold or blast an air horn into the mouthpiece. I just interrupt, saying "Sorry, I don't respond to telephone solicitation," then hang up without waiting for a reply.

Maybe if enough people did that, they'd get the message.

[beskeptical]

On 2002-06-20 12:05, Donnie B. wrote:
The best way would be to invert the original fax and return it to them, white-on-black.

On the other hand, junk-fax senders probably have their machines set up to send only, or at least to store any received faxes rather than print them. Darn.


The inversion idea is good if you have the time. The reason I send BLACK pages (not blank) is because I have a fax machine with a roll of ink like a typewriter ribbon. It uses a lot of the ribbon when junk faxes come in and I really resent paying for ads I don't want in the first place.

You can't always get their fax number. I do call 800 numbers if there is no fax, I believe that costs them per call.



It's not the fault of the poor minimum-wage ex-welfare-mom that's sitting there making the calls, so I don't make them wait on hold or blast an air horn into the mouthpiece. I just interrupt, saying "Sorry, I don't respond to telephone solicitation," then hang up without waiting for a reply.


I wouldn't use the air horn either. But to be polite and hang up? Well, I might have done that before automatic dialers. I see you are in the US. Don't you get regular 'hang up' calls? Right in your phone book under what to do for harassing calls it explains that the hang up calls are automatic dialers. The solicitors have a caller on the line for every minute they are on the phone, while you get to answer a hang up call. The auto dialer just dials away. If you answer and the solicitor is busy, the machine hangs up on you and redials you later.



Maybe if enough people did that, they'd get the message.


Don't get your hopes up. There are obviously people buying whatever or they wouldn't be so many callers.

My hope is that the solicitor will get another job. Maybe if no one will work for them, they might get the message.

[Donnie B.]

What I seem to get here are "post-pickup delays". That is, I answer the phone, and nothing happens (because the autodialer is trying to get the solicitor's attention. Said solicitor may be on another call or just slow on the uptake).

I never wait more than about a second for the person on the other end of the line to greet me... and that's when I'm not screening.

I've never had an auto-hangup as you describe, except when the machine takes the call. Somehow the autodialer and/or solicitor knows when there's no human being on this end.

Hmmm, now, how to relate this to astronomy? How's this: funny how I've never gotten a spam phone call trying to get me to join an astronomy club!

(Spellink)

<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Donnie B. on 2002-06-21 16:40 ]</font>

[beskeptical]

On 2002-06-21 16:39, Donnie B. wrote:
What I seem to get here are "post-pickup delays". That is, I answer the phone, and nothing happens (because the autodialer is trying to get the solicitor's attention. Said solicitor may be on another call or just slow on the uptake).

I never wait more than about a second for the person on the other end of the line to greet me... and that's when I'm not screening.

I've never had an auto-hangup as you describe, except when the machine takes the call. Somehow the autodialer and/or solicitor knows when there's no human being on this end.


What you are calling 'post pick up delays' are auto dialer hang ups. When no solicitor is available, the auto dialer does not wait. It just hangs up on you and dials the next number. You usually get called back in about 30-60 minutes or the next day depending on the program.

Anti-phone spammers unite!! Put 'em on hold. That's one less call they can make to someone else. /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_smile.gif

[nebularain]

Has anyone else answered a phone call and got the voice on the other end of the line saying something like, "Your call is very imprtant to us. Please hold." Or "Please hold for an important message." What's with that? /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_eek.gif /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_confused.gif /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_mad.gif

[beskeptical]

On 2002-06-22 11:31, nebularain wrote:
Has anyone else answered a phone call and got the voice on the other end of the line saying something like, "Your call is very imprtant to us. Please hold." Or "Please hold for an important message." What's with that? /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_eek.gif /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_confused.gif /phpBB/images/smiles/icon_mad.gif



Yes. Same line of advertising, automated phone solicitors. I think there is a rule in the US that a person must speak first then they can put on a recording, so it's a way around the rule of course.

There is also supposed to be a rule that if you tell them not to call back they aren't supposed to. But, guess what? If your number is listed as a 'home office' or other business, you cannot ask them to stop calling.

I tell you. Put 'em on hold, it's the only solution.

Maybe we should ask them if they have heard of the book, BA? Tell them to buy it and start in on lunar conspiracies or something. That would be good.