TELECOM Digest OnLine - Sorted: Re: Cell Phone Numbers and Do Not Call List

Re: Cell Phone Numbers and Do Not Call List
12 Jul 2007 13:00:41 -0700

On Jul 12, 10:05 am, TELECOM Digest Editor noted in response to
Fred Atkinson <> by writing:

> [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note:

> But I included every number over which I have control; cellular,
> VOIP, landline, etc.

Good advice. However, there is no guarantee. Often telemarketers
will violate the lists knowing that 99.999% of the people they bother
won't or can't do a damn thing about it. That is, it is way too much
trouble to get an accurate identifier number and submit a complaint.

Further, the authorities don't act on one or two complaints. They
only react when there are many complaints. The scammers know this*.

Nursing home phones are not supposed to be solicited but that didn't
stop them from bothering my mother. On another line supposedly
illegal to solicit I got a scam call last night (message said I won
$25k and to call in for my prize).

As we've discussed here and in the tech group, there are people with
auto dialers who just let them call every number sequentially and not
give a damn. They're not gonna bother to check any lists or even
whether it's a cell phone or other restricted line.

I think this state of affairs sucks. The #@%$@# lobbyists force us
consumers to accept this crap, they got the legislatures to water down


The national telephone network should not accept any call except duly
registered carriers. Registration would be such to eliminate any fly-
by-night outfits and those with inadequate capital and technical
protection. Corporate officers would have to have a background check
as is done for other professional licensing.

Also, no calls will be accepted without true autheticated caller-ID
information. The network would be rquired to do a test comparing the
provided caller ID against the physical entry (that is, a call
originating in DC must have a DC area code and exchange matched to the
physical line.

If this hurts VOIP or new carriers seeking easy entrance for
"competition", too bad! Protection of consumers comes first.

To put it another way, suppose we want to encourage other restaurants
than McDonald's. Are we willing to suspend health and buidling code
requirements so to give new restaurnats a break on start-up? I don't
think so. So why should new telephone companies get a similar break?

[public replies, please]

*A friend of mine ordered a new $50 book by mail. The author
subsequently decided he would not be able to publish the book, but
refused to refund the advance order money. My friend knew several
other people who were burned as well and contacted the US Postal
Service Inspector unit. Yes, that was a crime they said. No, we're
not going to do anything about it because it was too small.

Post Followup Article Use your browser's quoting feature to quote article into reply
Go to Next message: "Re: Cell Phone Numbers and Do Not Call List"
Go to Previous message: John Levine: "Re: Cell Phone Numbers and Do Not Call List"
May be in reply to: Fred Atkinson: "Cell Phone Numbers and Do Not Call List"
Next in thread: "Re: Cell Phone Numbers and Do Not Call List"
TELECOM Digest: Home Page