I blame the pornographers for the state of the Internet
Just because they created the ad banner doesn't mean the current state of the Internet is their fault. All they did was prove that putting up a notice that said "HEY! NEKKID LADIES OVER HERE!" was effective. It was the clueless mainstream marketers who made the illogical leap that banner ads could pay for everything else.
Re:I don't think that's what it says...
on
High-Speed Greed
·
· Score: 1
Of course customers would complain, but what are they going to do? Switch to a different ISP?
You bet! I'll be more than happy to use my cable modem to build up a shopping list, then use a free dialup to make the actual purchase. And I'll be sure to send a taunting email to AT&T every time I do it.
I guess AT&T must be famished for a new monopoly 16 years after its original business was dismantled.
Telcos wouldn't participate in slamming if they lost money at it.
I'm the last one to defend the telcos, but in this case I think that most of the established companies are getting a bad rap.
Telemarketing is typically contracted out to one or more companies that specialize in bothering people during dinner. These companies are usually less than ethical -- that's no small surprise since telemarketers (the owners, operators, and managers) occupy the lowest spot on the marketing food chain.
These companies can't even be honest to their own employees. One of the local businesses out here does telemarketing work for a number of companies, but primarily MCI. They're so desperate for people they advertise open positions (go figure that there's always an open position at a telemarketing firm) on local television. The commercials don't mention the name of the company -- they just talk about how fun it is "to work for MCI."
Once telcos realize they'll take it in the shorts, they'll drop slamming like the bad habit it is.
Well, in a way they did. Now the fines become Someone Else's Problem.
Last time I got a phone line I explicitly told the operator that I did not want to sign up for a long distance provider...
I tried that with US (Q)West when I had phone service turned on at my new place last month.
I was promptly informed that there would be a monthly charge for not having a long distance company associated with my phone bill.
By the way, Qwest wants state regulators to give them permission to raise local rates without having to get utility comission approval first. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
I spent a year one summer as a TOPS Operator for US West. We certainly did not have access to that sort of information, as we repeatedly told callers. 'twould be an invasion of the caller's privacy: just because you say the last call was harassing doesn't mean that it was. If you had decided to track down that person and do something, it was Us The Phone Company who would be held liable for creating the situation.
This was in the days when Caller ID was still in the test phase. I'm sure the excuse is different now.
That was a fun job, except for those damn callers. I sure did learn a few interesting things that were put to good use in my (cough) later endeavours.
Slashdot Mirror
Just because they created the ad banner doesn't mean the current state of the Internet is their fault. All they did was prove that putting up a notice that said "HEY! NEKKID LADIES OVER HERE!" was effective. It was the clueless mainstream marketers who made the illogical leap that banner ads could pay for everything else.
You bet! I'll be more than happy to use my cable modem to build up a shopping list, then use a free dialup to make the actual purchase. And I'll be sure to send a taunting email to AT&T every time I do it.
I guess AT&T must be famished for a new monopoly 16 years after its original business was dismantled.
Too much work. Just tell the caller that you don't have a phone.
I'm the last one to defend the telcos, but in this case I think that most of the established companies are getting a bad rap.
Telemarketing is typically contracted out to one or more companies that specialize in bothering people during dinner. These companies are usually less than ethical -- that's no small surprise since telemarketers (the owners, operators, and managers) occupy the lowest spot on the marketing food chain.
These companies can't even be honest to their own employees. One of the local businesses out here does telemarketing work for a number of companies, but primarily MCI. They're so desperate for people they advertise open positions (go figure that there's always an open position at a telemarketing firm) on local television. The commercials don't mention the name of the company -- they just talk about how fun it is "to work for MCI."
Once telcos realize they'll take it in the shorts, they'll drop slamming like the bad habit it is.
Well, in a way they did. Now the fines become Someone Else's Problem.
I tried that with US (Q)West when I had phone service turned on at my new place last month.
I was promptly informed that there would be a monthly charge for not having a long distance company associated with my phone bill.
By the way, Qwest wants state regulators to give them permission to raise local rates without having to get utility comission approval first. Be afraid. Be very afraid.
I spent a year one summer as a TOPS Operator for US West. We certainly did not have access to that sort of information, as we repeatedly told callers. 'twould be an invasion of the caller's privacy: just because you say the last call was harassing doesn't mean that it was. If you had decided to track down that person and do something, it was Us The Phone Company who would be held liable for creating the situation.
This was in the days when Caller ID was still in the test phase. I'm sure the excuse is different now.
That was a fun job, except for those damn callers. I sure did learn a few interesting things that were put to good use in my (cough) later endeavours.