Velocity Reviews - Computer Hardware Reviews

Velocity Reviews > Newsgroups > Computing > Computer Support > Re: Am I being 'watched'?!

Reply
Thread Tools

Re: Am I being 'watched'?!

 
 
nemo
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-16-2003

NoOne <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:dnc%a.531$(E-Mail Removed)...
> Here's a weird one! I have DialUp connection and have long (very long)
> sessions on the internet mainly due to downloading huge files like videos
> from Kazaa etc., so I could be online for literally days (and nights) at a
> time. I only have a single phone connection so when I'm online no-one can
> phone me (like the mother-in-law)....
> But....'every time I disconnect from the internet, the phone rings right
> away....'and I DO mean right away! Within a second!
> It never fails! It's always some assole from a computer magazine or

similar
> wanting to know if I would like to subscribe to their mag, or fill in a
> 'survey' over the phone! Now, I'm all for believing in co-incedence when
> something like this happens once or twice, but when it happens every time

I
> disconnect over a period of a month....'I really have to ask myself just
> what the hell is going on.
> I'm convinced that they 'know' when I'm offline and my phone is not

engaged.
> Does anyone know how they do this, and more to the point, is it illegal?!
> And...'is there anything I can do about it?
> Geo.
>


They've probably got automatic equipment that keeps dialling busy numbers
repeatedly and puts them through to an operator the instant they become
free. It's unlikely they're monitoring the use of your computer. Leave the
phone off the hook for a time when you shut down the PC and I think you'll
find they'll ring as soon as you put the receiver back.

I loathe salesmen of any description . . . hence:

Tell the caller very firmly to cut the sales spiel right there and demand
the full name of the company and the address of their Registered Office or
US equivalent. You'll probably have to repeat this a number of times.
They're like horrible little robots. You'll get "Yes but . . ." and then
they'll start their spiel again unless you're very firm.

When the guy finally says "Why?" tell 'im its because you charge £50 or $50
or so for each time anyone uses your telephone for their own commercial
purposes and you want to know where to send the invoice and the County Court
Summons if they don't cough up.

Its all perfectly legal and it worked wonders when I used it once. I get
nothing now.

I believe the guy in the US who first thought of the idea actually did get
some money out of the sods who were calling him.

Another good idea - not so legal but more fun - is to knock up an oscillator
and amplifier that will put a horrifically deafening noise on the line at
the touch of a button! I used this when I started getting silent calls a few
years ago. I said "Hello. Sorry - I can't hear you," repeatedly while moving
the receiver slowly away from my mouth so that my words became quieter. This
makes the person at the other end clasp the receiver to their ear more
firmly. Then I let them have it!! Those calls stopped too!

The operators calling you will be wearing headsets and will have to reach
for a key to cut the call off. That leaves plenty of time for serious
hearing damage!

Using a recording of fingernails being scraped down a blackboard might be an
idea - if you can stand it yourself that is!

Ain't I a horrible little sadist?!! (

Nemo


 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
NoOne
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-16-2003

"nemo" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:K7x%a.209463$B%(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> NoOne <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:dnc%a.531$(E-Mail Removed)...
> > Here's a weird one! I have DialUp connection and have long (very long)
> > sessions on the internet mainly due to downloading huge files like

videos
> > from Kazaa etc., so I could be online for literally days (and nights) at

a
> > time. I only have a single phone connection so when I'm online no-one

can
> > phone me (like the mother-in-law)....
> > But....'every time I disconnect from the internet, the phone rings right
> > away....'and I DO mean right away! Within a second!
> > It never fails! It's always some assole from a computer magazine or

> similar
> > wanting to know if I would like to subscribe to their mag, or fill in a
> > 'survey' over the phone! Now, I'm all for believing in co-incedence when
> > something like this happens once or twice, but when it happens every

time
> I
> > disconnect over a period of a month....'I really have to ask myself just
> > what the hell is going on.
> > I'm convinced that they 'know' when I'm offline and my phone is not

> engaged.
> > Does anyone know how they do this, and more to the point, is it

illegal?!
> > And...'is there anything I can do about it?
> > Geo.
> >

>
> They've probably got automatic equipment that keeps dialling busy numbers
> repeatedly and puts them through to an operator the instant they become
> free. It's unlikely they're monitoring the use of your computer. Leave the
> phone off the hook for a time when you shut down the PC and I think you'll
> find they'll ring as soon as you put the receiver back.
>
> I loathe salesmen of any description . . . hence:
>
> Tell the caller very firmly to cut the sales spiel right there and demand
> the full name of the company and the address of their Registered Office or
> US equivalent. You'll probably have to repeat this a number of times.
> They're like horrible little robots. You'll get "Yes but . . ." and then
> they'll start their spiel again unless you're very firm.
>
> When the guy finally says "Why?" tell 'im its because you charge £50 or

$50
> or so for each time anyone uses your telephone for their own commercial
> purposes and you want to know where to send the invoice and the County

Court
> Summons if they don't cough up.
>
> Its all perfectly legal and it worked wonders when I used it once. I get
> nothing now.
>
> I believe the guy in the US who first thought of the idea actually did get
> some money out of the sods who were calling him.
>
> Another good idea - not so legal but more fun - is to knock up an

oscillator
> and amplifier that will put a horrifically deafening noise on the line at
> the touch of a button! I used this when I started getting silent calls a

few
> years ago. I said "Hello. Sorry - I can't hear you," repeatedly while

moving
> the receiver slowly away from my mouth so that my words became quieter.

This
> makes the person at the other end clasp the receiver to their ear more
> firmly. Then I let them have it!! Those calls stopped too!
>
> The operators calling you will be wearing headsets and will have to reach
> for a key to cut the call off. That leaves plenty of time for serious
> hearing damage!
>
> Using a recording of fingernails being scraped down a blackboard might be

an
> idea - if you can stand it yourself that is!
>
> Ain't I a horrible little sadist?!! (
>
> Nemo
>
>

Man, you have a wicked sense of humour there! But I like it!! Thanks for the
tips....'I'm sure I'll use them too!
Geo.




 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
 
Bill Schowengerdt
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-17-2003
On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 04:28:26 -0000, While I was using pressure to stop
the bleeding, Jimchip <(E-Mail Removed)> posted:
..
>On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 22:50:38 -0500, Bill Schowengerdt wrote:
>> On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 21:13:14 GMT, While I was using pressure to stop the
>> bleeding, "nemo" <(E-Mail Removed)> posted:
>> .
>>> You'll probably have to repeat this a number of times.
>>>They're like horrible little robots

>>
>> Don't be such a jerk. Give them a ****ing break. Do you think anyone
>> does outbound telemarketing because they want to? Good Lord.,.... Do you
>> think it is fun?

>
>Telemarketers are the scum of the earth and just a minute step above
>spammers.


As long sa youmean the companies and not the people people on the
phones, I agree except I think telemarketing in below spamming.

But if you are reffering to the workers, you are a stupid jerk and I can
only hope some downfall drives you to doing it.

The U.S. National Do Not Call list will be a great help in
>putting them in their place.
>
>[snippo]


 
Reply With Quote
 
Jimchip
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-17-2003
On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 03:12:10 -0700, Auric__ wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 04:28:26 -0000, Jimchip
><(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 22:50:38 -0500, Bill Schowengerdt wrote:
>>> On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 21:13:14 GMT, While I was using pressure to stop the
>>> bleeding, "nemo" <(E-Mail Removed)> posted:
>>> .
>>>> You'll probably have to repeat this a number of times.
>>>>They're like horrible little robots
>>>
>>> Don't be such a jerk. Give them a ****ing break. Do you think anyone
>>> does outbound telemarketing because they want to? Good Lord.,.... Do you
>>> think it is fun?

>>
>>Telemarketers are the scum of the earth and just a minute step above
>>spammers. The U.S. National Do Not Call list will be a great help in
>>putting them in their place.

>
> Yes, but do you seriously expect a telemarketing giant to stop calling
> just because you're on a list? They'll just find new ways to make
> unidentifiable, untraceable calls.


It won't be perfect but yes, if it's "a telemarketing giant" or not.
Phone is a highly enforceable medium in the U.S.

--
Symptom: Drinking fails to give taste and satisfaction,
beer is unusually pale and clear.

Diagnosis: Glass empty.
 
Reply With Quote
 
Jimchip
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-17-2003
On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 06:58:59 -0500, Bill Schowengerdt wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 04:28:26 -0000, While I was using pressure to stop
> the bleeding, Jimchip <(E-Mail Removed)> posted:
> .
>>On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 22:50:38 -0500, Bill Schowengerdt wrote:
>>> On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 21:13:14 GMT, While I was using pressure to stop the
>>> bleeding, "nemo" <(E-Mail Removed)> posted:
>>> .
>>>> You'll probably have to repeat this a number of times.
>>>>They're like horrible little robots
>>>
>>> Don't be such a jerk. Give them a ****ing break. Do you think anyone
>>> does outbound telemarketing because they want to? Good Lord.,.... Do you
>>> think it is fun?

>>
>>Telemarketers are the scum of the earth and just a minute step above
>>spammers.

>
> As long sa youmean the companies and not the people people on the
> phones, I agree except I think telemarketing in below spamming.


The "people people on the phones" [sic] are "the companies".

>
> But if you are reffering to the workers, you are a stupid jerk and I can
> only hope some downfall drives you to doing it.


There are other options for "the workers" and you're obviously one of
them (at least formerly), scumbag. "drives you to doing it" is a cop out
and typical of the thinking that justifies the worst abuses.

>
> The U.S. National Do Not Call list will be a great help in
>>putting them in their place.
>>
>>[snippo]


--
"The Devil made me do it"
 
Reply With Quote
 
Jimchip
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-17-2003
On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 11:24:59 -0500, Bill Schowengerdt wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 15:37:55 -0000, While I was using pressure to stop
> the bleeding, Jimchip <(E-Mail Removed)> posted:
> .
>>On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 06:58:59 -0500, Bill Schowengerdt wrote:
>>> On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 04:28:26 -0000, While I was using pressure to stop
>>> the bleeding, Jimchip <(E-Mail Removed)> posted:
>>> .
>>>>On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 22:50:38 -0500, Bill Schowengerdt wrote:
>>>>> On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 21:13:14 GMT, While I was using pressure to stop the
>>>>> bleeding, "nemo" <(E-Mail Removed)> posted:
>>>>> .
>>>>>> You'll probably have to repeat this a number of times.
>>>>>>They're like horrible little robots
>>>>>
>>>>> Don't be such a jerk. Give them a ****ing break. Do you think anyone
>>>>> does outbound telemarketing because they want to? Good Lord.,.... Do you
>>>>> think it is fun?
>>>>
>>>>Telemarketers are the scum of the earth and just a minute step above
>>>>spammers.
>>>
>>> As long sa youmean the companies and not the people on the
>>> phones, I agree except I think telemarketing in below spamming.

>>
>>The "people on the ohones are "the companies".


You post-edited what I wrote...typical asshole behavior.

> Wrong. Not only are they not the companies, but also they are not in a
> position to have any influence over the companies.


I see, if the workers weren't there, the "companies" still would be
cranking out millions of intrusive calls per day.

>>> But if you are reffering to the workers, you are a stupid jerk and I can
>>> only hope some downfall drives you to doing it.

>>
>>There are other options for "the workers"

>
> Hundreds of thousands of call center workers would be grateful for your
> wisdom. Please share it.


Hopefully, they'll be unemployed come October.

>>and you're obviously one of
>>them (at least formerly),

>
> Close but no cigar. Not only have I never been one, but also I have never
> worked for a company that does outbound.
>
> However, before my illness I worked in Quality Assurance for Verizon
> Wireless in a call center of about 700 customer care workers.


Verizon! Spambags.
http://groups.google.com/groups?as_q...et-abuse.email
You sounded like a spammer.

> Almost half of those people were single mothers, many of whom's only
> other choice to provide support for their children, was to be on welfare.


BooHoo, Verizon as a social agency, providing "provide support for their
children"...what a crock.

> This because Verizon pays a bit more that other non-skilled employers in
> this area, and at their wages expensive child care makes working barely
> practical. Also a factor is the fact that there are simply not enough
> jobs available even at the lower pay.
>
>>scumbag. "drives you to doing it" is a cop out
>>and typical of the thinking that justifies the worst abuses.

>
> Although your "arguments" thus far fail to be rational and lack support,
> I ask you for another try. Please explain your position if you have one
> that makes sense.
>
> BTW... I am on both my state's and federal government's no-call list and
> that has cut the number of calls vastly. Most that I still get are those
> allowed by the law from certain organizations such as the police.
>
> Those calls are made by cops who have well paying jobs and do not care if
> they are intruding on people's lives. They are the scumbags.


Now, that's rational [not].

You're on too many drugs, Bill. Didn't you morph out of my killfile,
too? I'll have to look that up.

--
****wit
 
Reply With Quote
 
thund3rstruck_n0i
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-17-2003

"Jimchip" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:(E-Mail Removed)...
> Now, that's rational [not].
>
> You're on too many drugs, Bill. Didn't you morph out of my killfile,
> too? I'll have to look that up.


On an interesting side note, 2 days ago, Bill's messages quit appearing
here. Rumor has it, the news admin wanders thru several dozen of the groups,
and deletes locally anything he considers spam. <G>

NOI


 
Reply With Quote
 
Bill Schowengerdt
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-17-2003
On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 16:45:18 -0000, While I was using pressure to stop
the bleeding, Jimchip <(E-Mail Removed)> posted:
..
>On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 11:24:59 -0500, Bill Schowengerdt wrote:
>> On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 15:37:55 -0000, While I was using pressure to stop
>> the bleeding, Jimchip <(E-Mail Removed)> posted:
>> .
>>>On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 06:58:59 -0500, Bill Schowengerdt wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 04:28:26 -0000, While I was using pressure to stop
>>>> the bleeding, Jimchip <(E-Mail Removed)> posted:
>>>> .
>>>>>On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 22:50:38 -0500, Bill Schowengerdt wrote:
>>>>>> On Sat, 16 Aug 2003 21:13:14 GMT, While I was using pressure to stop the
>>>>>> bleeding, "nemo" <(E-Mail Removed)> posted:
>>>>>> .
>>>>>>> You'll probably have to repeat this a number of times.
>>>>>>>They're like horrible little robots
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Don't be such a jerk. Give them a ****ing break. Do you think anyone
>>>>>> does outbound telemarketing because they want to? Good Lord.,.... Do you
>>>>>> think it is fun?
>>>>>
>>>>>Telemarketers are the scum of the earth and just a minute step above
>>>>>spammers.
>>>>
>>>> As long sa you mean the companies and not the people on the
>>>> phones, I agree except I think telemarketing in below spamming.
>>>
>>>The "people on the phones are "the companies".

>
>You post-edited what I wrote...typical asshole behavior.


Little did I know I was breaking any guidelines. by making things more
readable.

>> Wrong. Not only are they not the companies, but also they are not in a
>> position to have any influence over the companies.

>
>I see, if the workers weren't there, the "companies" still would be
>cranking out millions of intrusive calls per day.


Probably not since the companies depend on the fact that workers have
little choice but to work for them. Have you ever noticed the locations
the companies chose to build new call centers? Do you think it might have
something to do with a desperate workforce?

>>>> But if you are reffering to the workers, you are a stupid jerk and I can
>>>> only hope some downfall drives you to doing it.
>>>
>>>There are other options for "the workers"

>>
>> Hundreds of thousands of call center workers would be grateful for your
>> wisdom. Please share it.

>
>Hopefully, they'll be unemployed come October.


I doubt if the National list will seriously impact the business, but if
it does, fine. it is unfortunate that some people will be put out of
work, but at least people who are bothered enough to take some meaningful
action to reduce unwanted calls, will not be abusing so many call center
workers.

OTOH.. You can still be a jerk when you call some customer service
worker. No doubt it will help you to feel superior.

>>>and you're obviously one of
>>>them (at least formerly),

>>
>> Close but no cigar. Not only have I never been one, but also I have never
>> worked for a company that does outbound.
>>
>> However, before my illness I worked in Quality Assurance for Verizon
>> Wireless in a call center of about 700 customer care workers.

>
>Verizon! Spambags.
>http://groups.google.com/groups?as_q...et-abuse.email
>You sounded like a spammer.


Hey dipshit., Can you not read? Or is it simply that you do not realize
that Verizon Wireless is a different company from Verizon. And... I do
not recall ever receiving spam from either company. Have you?

>> Almost half of those people were single mothers, many of whom's only
>> other choice to provide support for their children, was to be on welfare.

>
>BooHoo, Verizon as a social agency, providing "provide support for their
>children"...what a crock.


They are in no way a social agency. They are an employer who exchanges
real money for real work. Social agencies are what many of their
employees would depend on if they could not find other employment.

>> This because Verizon pays a bit more that other non-skilled employers in
>> this area, and at their wages expensive child care makes working barely
>> practical. Also a factor is the fact that there are simply not enough
>> jobs available even at the lower pay.
>>
>>>scumbag. "drives you to doing it" is a cop out
>>>and typical of the thinking that justifies the worst abuses.

>>
>> Although your "arguments" thus far fail to be rational and lack support,
>> I ask you for another try. Please explain your position if you have one
>> that makes sense.
>>
>> BTW... I am on both my state's and federal government's no-call list and
>> that has cut the number of calls vastly. Most that I still get are those
>> allowed by the law from certain organizations such as the police.
>>
>> Those calls are made by cops who have well paying jobs and do not care if
>> they are intruding on people's lives. They are the scumbags.

>
>Now, that's rational [not].


Oh really? Why not

>You're on too many drugs, Bill. Didn't you morph out of my killfile,
>too? I'll have to look that up.


What is the matter? Do you usually support yourself by running away?

Ya know..... So far you have provided no rational support for your
positions. Unless you now do so, I will have little choice other than to
assume you are a gutless bag of ignorant hot air. Or simply stupid

So far all I have heard from you are ridiculous sound bites that have
obviously been programmed into you. Are you capable of original thought?.
 
Reply With Quote
 
nemo
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-17-2003

NoOne <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
news:Mrz%a.819$(E-Mail Removed)...
>
> "nemo" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> news:K7x%a.209463$B%(E-Mail Removed)...
> >
> > NoOne <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
> > news:dnc%a.531$(E-Mail Removed)...
> > > Here's a weird one! I have DialUp connection and have long (very long)
> > > sessions on the internet mainly due to downloading huge files like

> videos
> > > from Kazaa etc., so I could be online for literally days (and nights)

at
> a
> > > time. I only have a single phone connection so when I'm online no-one

> can
> > > phone me (like the mother-in-law)....
> > > But....'every time I disconnect from the internet, the phone rings

right
> > > away....'and I DO mean right away! Within a second!
> > > It never fails! It's always some assole from a computer magazine or

> > similar
> > > wanting to know if I would like to subscribe to their mag, or fill in

a
> > > 'survey' over the phone! Now, I'm all for believing in co-incedence

when
> > > something like this happens once or twice, but when it happens every

> time
> > I
> > > disconnect over a period of a month....'I really have to ask myself

just
> > > what the hell is going on.
> > > I'm convinced that they 'know' when I'm offline and my phone is not

> > engaged.
> > > Does anyone know how they do this, and more to the point, is it

> illegal?!
> > > And...'is there anything I can do about it?
> > > Geo.
> > >

> >
> > They've probably got automatic equipment that keeps dialling busy

numbers
> > repeatedly and puts them through to an operator the instant they become
> > free. It's unlikely they're monitoring the use of your computer. Leave

the
> > phone off the hook for a time when you shut down the PC and I think

you'll
> > find they'll ring as soon as you put the receiver back.
> >
> > I loathe salesmen of any description . . . hence:
> >
> > Tell the caller very firmly to cut the sales spiel right there and

demand
> > the full name of the company and the address of their Registered Office

or
> > US equivalent. You'll probably have to repeat this a number of times.
> > They're like horrible little robots. You'll get "Yes but . . ." and then
> > they'll start their spiel again unless you're very firm.
> >
> > When the guy finally says "Why?" tell 'im its because you charge £50 or

> $50
> > or so for each time anyone uses your telephone for their own commercial
> > purposes and you want to know where to send the invoice and the County

> Court
> > Summons if they don't cough up.
> >
> > Its all perfectly legal and it worked wonders when I used it once. I get
> > nothing now.
> >
> > I believe the guy in the US who first thought of the idea actually did

get
> > some money out of the sods who were calling him.
> >
> > Another good idea - not so legal but more fun - is to knock up an

> oscillator
> > and amplifier that will put a horrifically deafening noise on the line

at
> > the touch of a button! I used this when I started getting silent calls a

> few
> > years ago. I said "Hello. Sorry - I can't hear you," repeatedly while

> moving
> > the receiver slowly away from my mouth so that my words became quieter.

> This
> > makes the person at the other end clasp the receiver to their ear more
> > firmly. Then I let them have it!! Those calls stopped too!
> >
> > The operators calling you will be wearing headsets and will have to

reach
> > for a key to cut the call off. That leaves plenty of time for serious
> > hearing damage!
> >
> > Using a recording of fingernails being scraped down a blackboard might

be
> an
> > idea - if you can stand it yourself that is!
> >
> > Ain't I a horrible little sadist?!! (
> >
> > Nemo
> >
> >

> Man, you have a wicked sense of humour there! But I like it!! Thanks for

the
> tips....'I'm sure I'll use them too!
> Geo.
>

Good luck!!


 
Reply With Quote
 
Plinque Schowengerdt
Guest
Posts: n/a
 
      08-17-2003
On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 17:56:28 +0100, While I was using pressure to stop
the bleeding, °Mike° <(E-Mail Removed)> posted:
..
>On Sun, 17 Aug 2003 12:51:37 -0400, in
> <3f3fb2a1$0$13099$(E-Mail Removed)>
> thund3rstruck_n0i scrawled:
>
>>
>>"Jimchip" <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote in message
>>news:(E-Mail Removed)...
>>> Now, that's rational [not].
>>>
>>> You're on too many drugs, Bill. Didn't you morph out of my killfile,
>>> too? I'll have to look that up.

>>
>> On an interesting side note, 2 days ago, Bill's messages quit appearing
>>here. Rumor has it, the news admin wanders thru several dozen of the groups,
>>and deletes locally anything he considers spam. <G>
>>
>> NOI

>
>That's interesting, because I don't see Bill's posts either; only Jimchip's
>replies to him.


Hmmm I see my own. on this server as well as freetera's. However, just
to see what happens, I think I will send this one under a different name.

 
Reply With Quote
 
 
 
Reply

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Java & LAMP - being better or being popular ? heather.fraser@gmail.com Java 14 10-17-2007 03:50 AM
Form still being submitted despite being invalid =?Utf-8?B?TWFyayBQYXJ0ZXI=?= ASP .Net 4 07-25-2005 02:46 PM
Being kicked off every 5 min... =?Utf-8?B?dGhlIGJyYWQ=?= Wireless Networking 1 08-08-2004 08:51 PM
Event handler is being detached without being released Moshe Katz Javascript 2 05-02-2004 06:42 AM



Advertisments