On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 15:14:37 +1100, "Jac Brown"
wrote:



"Scott" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 22:36:40 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 22/03/2019 15:37, Scott wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 15:17:21 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 22/03/2019 12:06, Scott wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:52:09 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:42, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:40:19 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:26, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:07:42 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over
say, the last
month or so.
some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to
sell stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt out number to hit, and having
checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to
opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated,
80 year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".


UK law doesn't apply to other countries so they can still phone
you.

UK law should apply to companies that do business in the UK.


How are you going to enforce UK laws on overseas companies?

If the company does business here then they must have a UK presence,
yes?

No. What kind of business presence does a scammer require in the UK
to
carry out scams by phone here?

Therefore fines could be imposed for breaching UK laws.

I can sure a scam outfit in Kolkata will be quaking in its boots.
Lets
just hope they are not the kind of naughty people who would not pay a
fine! (assuming you can identify who they are)

One form of direct action you can take here, is to identify the VoIP
operator that is providing call termination services in the UK and
get
them to remove or block their accounts. This is something that they
tend
to do fairly regularly anyway, since the scammers quite often avoid
paying them, and they are also quite responsive to fraud reports.

However there are hundreds of providers to choose from and the
scammers
will just rotate through new ones every so often, making sure they
always have a handful of working services available to use.

I still can't understand why the same principles cannot be applied
that are used for spam filtering. Apart from a blacklist, what about
algorithms to spot suspicious patterns? If CLI number is invalid,
block. If overseas call carries UK CLI, block. If more that 20 calls
are generated in one minute divert the next call to the operator. If
number of dropped calls exceeds a threshhold, block. There must be
other warning signs.


You want to censor phone calls now?
What happens when you start blocking legitimate calls by mistake?
If you want to block them then use a call blocker.

Yes, in exactly the same way as I expect my ISP to filter junk at the
server end. What about vulnerable people? Do they not deserve
protection?

So how do you differentiate between a legit call centre and a scammer?
Both would so a similar pattern of calls.

I'd leave that to the experts

It isnt possible.

You could start with numbers in the
wrong format (wrong number of digits, non-existent code), incoming
overseas calls with a UK number, large number of dropped calls - there
must be tell-tale signs for those that know.

There isnt.

Okay then, I was just throwing about ideas.

On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 03:39:04 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 22/03/2019 23:41, Scott wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 22:43:50 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 22/03/2019 15:06, Mark wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:55:07 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 17:21, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/03/2019 16:44, Scott wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:26:52 +0000, Mark
wrote:

On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:07:42 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say,
the last
month or so.
*** some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell
stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt out* number to hit, and having
checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to
opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated, 80
year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".


UK law doesn't apply to other countries so they can still phone you.

UK law should apply to companies that do business in the UK.

Depends what you mean by 'do business'.* If they have a branch or
office in the UK, I agree with you but if they are based abroad and
phoning UK numbers, I don't see how that would work.* You can't get
somebody extradited for an alleged crime that took place outside the
jurisdiction.* By that logic, if someone used a clone of my credit
card in Hong Kong, they could be brought to court and prosecuted in
the UK.* How would that work?* Extraordinary rendition?

How many nuisance calls have you received where the services or goods
being offered are being advertised for a company that does not have a UK
presence? I've not had one. They have all been for double glazing, new
boilers, new kitchens, accident compensation, etc., where there is a
clear UK presence that is simply using overseas call centres to get
around the UK laws.

Registering with the telephone preference service will knock out the
majority of legit uk based cold callers.

I don't believe there are any "legit" UK based cold callers.

If you have not registered on the TPS then any UK firm is free to call
you, or indeed a random phone number if its unregistered.

Depends how they obtained your number. If you supplied the number and
did not consent to marketing calls (that means opt-in) this would be a
breach of the GDPR.

GDPR is a relatively new kid on the block. Again scammers are unlikely
to care.

(note also that consent is only one of several justifications for
"processing" personal data, so the fact that you have not consented, doe
not make the act necessarily a GDPR fail).

Fair enough, GDPR is not perfect. The point I was making is that it's
not quite right to say that any UK firm is free to call you. There
are other routes than TPS to opt out. Whether the caller complies is
another matter.

On 22/03/2019 23:35, Scott wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 22:36:40 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 22/03/2019 15:37, Scott wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 15:17:21 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 22/03/2019 12:06, Scott wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:52:09 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:42, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:40:19 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:26, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:07:42 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say, the last
month or so.
some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt out number to hit, and having checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated, 80 year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".


UK law doesn't apply to other countries so they can still phone you.

UK law should apply to companies that do business in the UK.


How are you going to enforce UK laws on overseas companies?

If the company does business here then they must have a UK presence,
yes?

No. What kind of business presence does a scammer require in the UK to
carry out scams by phone here?

Therefore fines could be imposed for breaching UK laws.

I can sure a scam outfit in Kolkata will be quaking in its boots. Lets
just hope they are not the kind of naughty people who would not pay a
fine! (assuming you can identify who they are)

One form of direct action you can take here, is to identify the VoIP
operator that is providing call termination services in the UK and get
them to remove or block their accounts. This is something that they tend
to do fairly regularly anyway, since the scammers quite often avoid
paying them, and they are also quite responsive to fraud reports.

However there are hundreds of providers to choose from and the scammers
will just rotate through new ones every so often, making sure they
always have a handful of working services available to use.

I still can't understand why the same principles cannot be applied
that are used for spam filtering. Apart from a blacklist, what about
algorithms to spot suspicious patterns? If CLI number is invalid,
block. If overseas call carries UK CLI, block. If more that 20 calls
are generated in one minute divert the next call to the operator. If
number of dropped calls exceeds a threshhold, block. There must be
other warning signs.


You want to censor phone calls now?
What happens when you start blocking legitimate calls by mistake?
If you want to block them then use a call blocker.

Yes, in exactly the same way as I expect my ISP to filter junk at the
server end. What about vulnerable people? Do they not deserve
protection?

So how do you differentiate between a legit call centre and a scammer?
Both would so a similar pattern of calls.

I'd leave that to the experts You could start with numbers in the
wrong format (wrong number of digits, non-existent code), incoming
overseas calls with a UK number, large number of dropped calls - there
must be tell-tale signs for those that know.


That would block my local NHS hospital for a start.
Some companies have short code dialling so only the first few numbers
need to be dialled to connect to the switch board and a complete set
will connect to an extension so the pattern would be very odd.

On 22/03/2019 23:41, Scott wrote:

Depends how they obtained your number. If you supplied the number and
did not consent to marketing calls (that means opt-in) this would be a
breach of the GDPR. If company A sold your number to company B
without your consent, this would be a breach of the GDPR. Granted, if
your number is in the public directory there is nothing to stop them
calling you.


Or just random dialling.

I have had cases where I missdialled a number and got connected to
someone who is exdirectory.. they were livid that I had been given their
number and couldn't understand that exdirectory doesn't mean people
can't dial your number.

On 23/03/2019 10:57, dennis@home wrote:
On 22/03/2019 23:41, Scott wrote:

Depends how they obtained your number.Â* If you supplied the number and
did not consent to marketing calls (that means opt-in) this would be a
breach of the GDPR.Â* If company A sold your number to company B
without your consent, this would be a breach of the GDPR.Â* Granted, if
your number is in the public directory there is nothing to stop them
calling you.


Or just random dialling.

Survey companies do that. (In the Slough area they seem to be about
Heathrow Airport expansion, though they won't admit who they are working
for and don't ask straightforward questions, like, "Do you want twice as
many night-time flights over your house.")

--
Max Demian

On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 10:52:35 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 22/03/2019 23:35, Scott wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 22:36:40 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 22/03/2019 15:37, Scott wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 15:17:21 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 22/03/2019 12:06, Scott wrote:
On Fri, 22 Mar 2019 10:52:09 +0000, John Rumm
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:42, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:40:19 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 16:26, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:07:42 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say, the last
month or so.
some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt out number to hit, and having checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated, 80 year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".


UK law doesn't apply to other countries so they can still phone you.

UK law should apply to companies that do business in the UK.


How are you going to enforce UK laws on overseas companies?

If the company does business here then they must have a UK presence,
yes?

No. What kind of business presence does a scammer require in the UK to
carry out scams by phone here?

Therefore fines could be imposed for breaching UK laws.

I can sure a scam outfit in Kolkata will be quaking in its boots. Lets
just hope they are not the kind of naughty people who would not pay a
fine! (assuming you can identify who they are)

One form of direct action you can take here, is to identify the VoIP
operator that is providing call termination services in the UK and get
them to remove or block their accounts. This is something that they tend
to do fairly regularly anyway, since the scammers quite often avoid
paying them, and they are also quite responsive to fraud reports.

However there are hundreds of providers to choose from and the scammers
will just rotate through new ones every so often, making sure they
always have a handful of working services available to use.

I still can't understand why the same principles cannot be applied
that are used for spam filtering. Apart from a blacklist, what about
algorithms to spot suspicious patterns? If CLI number is invalid,
block. If overseas call carries UK CLI, block. If more that 20 calls
are generated in one minute divert the next call to the operator. If
number of dropped calls exceeds a threshhold, block. There must be
other warning signs.


You want to censor phone calls now?
What happens when you start blocking legitimate calls by mistake?
If you want to block them then use a call blocker.

Yes, in exactly the same way as I expect my ISP to filter junk at the
server end. What about vulnerable people? Do they not deserve
protection?

So how do you differentiate between a legit call centre and a scammer?
Both would so a similar pattern of calls.

I'd leave that to the experts You could start with numbers in the
wrong format (wrong number of digits, non-existent code), incoming
overseas calls with a UK number, large number of dropped calls - there
must be tell-tale signs for those that know.


That would block my local NHS hospital for a start.
Some companies have short code dialling so only the first few numbers
need to be dialled to connect to the switch board and a complete set
will connect to an extension so the pattern would be very odd.

Would it? When I worked for a central government department, we had
to have a valid 'presentation number' which was the number for the
national enquiry point. We did not show numbers for individual staff
extensions.

It was regarded as a breach of privacy to disclose numbers for
individuals.

Internal routing plays no part in the CLI number presented.

On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 10:57:13 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 22/03/2019 23:41, Scott wrote:

Depends how they obtained your number. If you supplied the number and
did not consent to marketing calls (that means opt-in) this would be a
breach of the GDPR. If company A sold your number to company B
without your consent, this would be a breach of the GDPR. Granted, if
your number is in the public directory there is nothing to stop them
calling you.


Or just random dialling.

True.

I have had cases where I missdialled a number and got connected to
someone who is exdirectory.. they were livid that I had been given their
number and couldn't understand that exdirectory doesn't mean people
can't dial your number.

My brother had a problem and got the wrong number. The second time it
happened the bloke said my brother was ruining his sex life as it was
just getting to the best bit when the phone rang !!!

On 23/03/2019 03:41, John Rumm wrote:
On 23/03/2019 00:01, Steve Walker wrote:
On 22/03/2019 10:55, John Rumm wrote:
On 21/03/2019 17:21, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/03/2019 16:44, Scott wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:26:52 +0000, Mark
wrote:

On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 16:07:42 +0000, "dennis@home"
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over
say, the last
month or so.
Â*Â*Â* some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell
stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt outÂ* number to hit, and having
checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to
opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated,
80 year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".


UK law doesn't apply to other countries so they can still phone you.

UK law should apply to companies that do business in the UK.

Depends what you mean by 'do business'.Â* If they have a branch or
office in the UK, I agree with you but if they are based abroad and
phoning UK numbers, I don't see how that would work.Â* You can't get
somebody extradited for an alleged crime that took place outside the
jurisdiction.Â* By that logic, if someone used a clone of my credit
card in Hong Kong, they could be brought to court and prosecuted in
the UK.Â* How would that work?Â* Extraordinary rendition?

How many nuisance calls have you received where the services or
goods being offered are being advertised for a company that does not
have a UK presence? I've not had one. They have all been for double
glazing, new boilers, new kitchens, accident compensation, etc.,
where there is a clear UK presence that is simply using overseas
call centres to get around the UK laws.

Registering with the telephone preference service will knock out the
majority of legit uk based cold callers. For the few that still ring,
simply mentioning they are ringing a TPS listed number makes them
vanish very quickly.

Yes TPS does work well for UK companies making their own calls or
using UK call centres. It seems to be a loophole though that a company
can use an overseas call centre to make their calls, but the company
are not held liable for those calls and the call centre is out of UK
jurisdiction.

Even if they were liable, they would likely claim to be the victim of a
deception... "honest gov, they claimed to be a legit marketing company
that would only call proper bona fide opt in targets - how were we to
know?" Its hard to make anything stick.

Not really. Companies are held liable for many things, including the
operations of subcontractors all the time. Lack of knowledge of the
operations of their subcontractors is not considered a mitigating
circumstance - indeed it is often viewed as a lack of oversight and
diligence and therefore an agravating factor!

SteveW

On 23/03/2019 03:35, John Rumm wrote:
On 22/03/2019 23:46, Steve Walker wrote:
On 22/03/2019 10:58, John Rumm wrote:
On 21/03/2019 16:41, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say,
the last
month or so.
Â*Â* some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell
stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt outÂ* number to hit, and having
checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to
opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated, 80
year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".

The law may say that, but the phone calls, still say something like,
"Press 8 to be removed from our database" and when over a period of
6 or 7 weeks, you have received 10 phonecalls from the same company
and don't have a tone dial on the phone you are answering with, it
gets damned annoying!

Would it be less annoying if you had a tone dial phone, still got the
same 10 calls, even though you pressed 8 every time?

Once I actually got to answer the call with a tone-dial phone, I
pressed 8 and received no more calls from them. If the calls simply
said "press 8 to remain on our database", I'd have received no more
than the first one!

And how many would you have received without pushing 8?

When I actually could push 8, the calls stopped immediately. So if
they'd been arranged that you had to push 8 to remain on the database,
I'd presumably have not received more than the first call when I was
unable to press 8.

(or more likely got more than 10 calls since you have now verified
that the number they are calling is actually being answered and
listened to by a human, and so is actually more valuable to a cold
caller than an unverified number!)

They know it is a valid number because it has rung. How many valid
lines are not to humans? Even then, the simple act of picking up and
saying "Hello" shows a human has answered. No need for any button
presses.

Yeah, but if a robo-dialler is placing the calls it can't tell unless
the "person" answering also interacts with them. An answer machine would
say something, as would a BT message saying this number has been
replaces, please redial etc.

Do you think that computer systems can't determine rapidly the
difference between the start of a recorded message and the rising tone
of a questioning hello followed by waiting for a reply?

Why waste time re-calling people who have already shown a desire to be
removed from databases and not receive such calls anyway? They are
surely less valuable to a cold caller, as they are LESS likely than
most to turn into a financially rewarding sale!

A "good" salesman will not take no for an answer! One day they catch the
mark off guard, or when circumstances conspire to make a scam call seem
plausible.

Repeated calling is just like to make the "mark" boycott the company
entirely and tell their friends and family who may do likewise.

SteveW

On 23/03/2019 04:19, Rod Speed wrote:


"Steve Walker" wrote in message
...
On 22/03/2019 10:58, John Rumm wrote:
On 21/03/2019 16:41, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say,
the last
month or so.
Â*Â* some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell
stuff, usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt outÂ* number to hit, and having
checked this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to
opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated, 80
year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".

The law may say that, but the phone calls, still say something like,
"Press 8 to be removed from our database" and when over a period of
6 or 7 weeks, you have received 10 phonecalls from the same company
and don't have a tone dial on the phone you are answering with, it
gets damned annoying!

Would it be less annoying if you had a tone dial phone, still got the
same 10 calls, even though you pressed 8 every time?

Once I actually got to answer the call with a tone-dial phone, I
pressed 8 and received no more calls from them. If the calls simply
said "press 8 to remain on our database", I'd have received no more
than the first one!

(or more likely got more than 10 calls since you have now verified
that the number they are calling is actually being answered and
listened to by a human, and so is actually more valuable to a cold
caller than an unverified number!)

They know it is a valid number because it has rung. How many valid
lines are not to humans? Even then, the simple act of picking up and
saying "Hello" shows a human has answered. No need for any button
presses.

Why waste time re-calling people who have already shown a desire to be
removed from databases and not receive such calls anyway? They are
surely less valuable to a cold caller, as they are LESS likely than
most to turn into a financially rewarding sale!

Sure, but plenty of cold callers choose to call even less likely numbers.
Particularly when the calls are free and only answered calls need any
person to get involved. The worst of our spammers dont even use
a human for the initial lying. They have their system tell you that
you system has been turned into a bot and that your service will be
disconnected in minutes if you dont press a number on your keypad.

Again, that is scammers, not legitimate businesses after new customers.
Repeated cold calling is likely to result in potential customers
boycotting companies completely.

SteveW

On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 19:55:04 +0000, Steve Walker wrote:

Yeah, but if a robo-dialler is placing the calls it can't tell unless
the "person" answering also interacts with them. An answer machine
would say something, as would a BT message saying this number has been
replaces, please redial etc.

Do you think that computer systems can't determine rapidly the
difference between the start of a recorded message and the rising tone
of a questioning hello followed by waiting for a reply?

The first thing an autodialler hears if it calls us (with number
withheld) is the tri-tone indicating the equipment is out of service!

--
My posts are my copyright and if @diy_forums or Home Owners' Hub
wish to copy them they can pay me £1 a message.
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK: http://www.mirrorservice.org
*lightning surge protection* - a w_tom conductor

"Steve Walker" wrote in message
...
On 23/03/2019 04:19, Rod Speed wrote:


"Steve Walker" wrote in message
...
On 22/03/2019 10:58, John Rumm wrote:
On 21/03/2019 16:41, Steve Walker wrote:
On 21/03/2019 13:49, Mark wrote:
On Thu, 21 Mar 2019 13:08:38 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:

On 21/03/2019 08:19, Brian Gaff wrote:
I've noticed a gradual rise to mobile numbers as well over say, the
last
month or so.
some are not spoofed but genuine chancers trying to sell stuff,
usually
some financial service or crap junk from China.

At least some do have an opt out number to hit, and having checked
this
against charges, it seems to be legitimate and worked.

Those opt-outs should be changed to opt-ins - it's very hard to
opt-out
when you've picked up the landline on an only slightly updated, 80
year
old, rotary dial phone!

IIRC the law says that it must be "opt-in" not "opt-out".

The law may say that, but the phone calls, still say something like,
"Press 8 to be removed from our database" and when over a period of 6
or 7 weeks, you have received 10 phonecalls from the same company and
don't have a tone dial on the phone you are answering with, it gets
damned annoying!

Would it be less annoying if you had a tone dial phone, still got the
same 10 calls, even though you pressed 8 every time?

Once I actually got to answer the call with a tone-dial phone, I pressed
8 and received no more calls from them. If the calls simply said "press
8 to remain on our database", I'd have received no more than the first
one!

(or more likely got more than 10 calls since you have now verified that
the number they are calling is actually being answered and listened to
by a human, and so is actually more valuable to a cold caller than an
unverified number!)

They know it is a valid number because it has rung. How many valid lines
are not to humans? Even then, the simple act of picking up and saying
"Hello" shows a human has answered. No need for any button presses.

Why waste time re-calling people who have already shown a desire to be
removed from databases and not receive such calls anyway? They are
surely less valuable to a cold caller, as they are LESS likely than most
to turn into a financially rewarding sale!

Sure, but plenty of cold callers choose to call even less likely numbers.
Particularly when the calls are free and only answered calls need any
person to get involved. The worst of our spammers dont even use
a human for the initial lying. They have their system tell you that
you system has been turned into a bot and that your service will be
disconnected in minutes if you dont press a number on your keypad.

Again, that is scammers, not legitimate businesses after new customers.

Thats bull****, plenty of legitimate businesses after new customers
do that too.

Repeated cold calling is likely to result in potential customers
boycotting companies completely.

Most arent that mindless.

On Sun, 24 Mar 2019 09:35:09 +1100, cantankerous trolling senile geezer Rot
Speed blabbered, again:

Repeated cold calling is likely to result in potential customers
boycotting companies completely.

Most arent that mindless.

You keep forgetting that most people are NOT mindless admirers of companies
and monopolists that provide you with the electronic gadgets and toys (like
Alexa and your idiotPhone) that you need to cope with your forsaken idiotic
senile "life", you senile cretin!

--
Bill Wright to Rot Speed:
"That confirms my opinion that you are a despicable little ****."
MID:

On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 19:55:04 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:
[snip]

Do you think that computer systems can't determine rapidly the
difference between the start of a recorded message and the rising tone
of a questioning hello followed by waiting for a reply?

Is there an argument for saying nothing and waiting to see if the
caller speaks?

On 24/03/2019 09:24, Scott wrote:
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 19:55:04 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:
[snip]

Do you think that computer systems can't determine rapidly the
difference between the start of a recorded message and the rising tone
of a questioning hello followed by waiting for a reply?

Is there an argument for saying nothing and waiting to see if the
caller speaks?

A legitimate caller might think there's no-one at your end.

--
Max Demian

In article ,
Scott wrote:
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 19:55:04 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:
[snip]

Do you think that computer systems can't determine rapidly the
difference between the start of a recorded message and the rising tone
of a questioning hello followed by waiting for a reply?

Is there an argument for saying nothing and waiting to see if the
caller speaks?

Can be great fun asking the full name of who they are calling. And get
them to give the address too. Which any genuine business caller would have
to hand.

--
*Broken pencils are pointless.*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

"Harry Bloomfield" wrote in message
...
After the number of nuisance calls my phone system was blocking, fell to
almost no calls, there has been a sudden increase in their number in the
past few days. 10 such calls yesterday blocked, all supposedly from
different spoofed numbers.

They do like to waste their time.

me too but I respect private numbers my not answering........

I was stupid enough to advertise a car on gumtree with a phone number
recently and almost immediately got Indian callers trying to sell me
something so I just went on and on about the car for sale and wasn't it a
bit far to come from India to view it...tee hee

On Sun, 24 Mar 2019 10:15:14 +0000, Max Demian
wrote:

On 24/03/2019 09:24, Scott wrote:
On Sat, 23 Mar 2019 19:55:04 +0000, Steve Walker
wrote:
[snip]

Do you think that computer systems can't determine rapidly the
difference between the start of a recorded message and the rising tone
of a questioning hello followed by waiting for a reply?

Is there an argument for saying nothing and waiting to see if the
caller speaks?

A legitimate caller might think there's no-one at your end.

They would usually start shouting hello, hello?