Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request From: David Tamkin Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Junkmailed! Message-ID: <9298@accuvax.nwu.edu> Date: 26 Jun 90 05:05:09 GMT Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu Organization: TELECOM Digest Lines: 61 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 455, Message 6 of 7 Someone who signed himself John David Galt (I see "John Galt" as a CB handle quite a bit, so it must be the name of some fictional character, and thus might not be the submitter's actual name) wrote in volume 10, issue 452, completely misunderstanding my position: | David Tamkin's piece of 6/18 really bugged me. Here is a guy who | objects to the use of a service (the 900 number to defeat call ID) to ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ?? | keep your name off the lists merchants use to make junk phone calls; | and yet he gets upset at the person who sent him an ad for the ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ?? | service, because it is junk mail! Slow down, Galt (whether that's your real name or not). You've made some very wrong guesses not only about my stand, but also about my emotions. You're the only one who is, per your own word, bugged. I didn't object to the use of 900-STOPPER; I objected that Private Lines, Inc.'s, took my address from my .signature here in Telecom Digest and sent me advertising. I did say that 900-RUNWELL was unneeded at present because there is as yet no Caller-ID on international calls anyway. But if you think I was knocking 900- STOPPER for domestic calls, you were reading with closed eyes. No, I was not upset. I was amused: amused that Private Lines, Inc., who are out to stop telemarketing calls, themselves send out unsolicited mailings. A service and the manner in which it is promoted are not the same thing. In this case, they are not only distinct, they are incompatible! And the emotion was not directed at a "person who sent [me] an ad." The cover letter and the envelope were Private Lines, Inc.'s, own stationery. The amusement was directed at Private Lines itself. Anyone who wishes to use the service is welcome to it, and despite the words that Mr. Galt is struggling with all his might to cram into my mouth, I have no complaints about its existence nor about anyone's use of it. I think you're wasting money if you use the international service right now, since it doesn't do you any good yet, but that's purely a financial consideration, not the moral or religious one Mr. Galt is trying to accuse of me of holding. Note, readers, that Mr. Galt didn't include any of the original text from my submission as it appeared in volume 10, issue 444. He couldn't bear the risk of your seeing that I had in fact said nothing of the kind. Yes, he posted from Portal, and yes, Portal's news software is very restricted, but I'm a Portal customer myself, and it is not at all difficult to include and cite the text to which one is responding. I used to do it all the time when I read news there. Galt went on to detail some differences between junk phone calls and junk mail. Yes, junk mail is much less intrusive and much more easily dismissed and discarded. Galt, this will disappoint you, but I agree fully with the rest of your submission ... starting with the SECOND paragraph. David Tamkin Box 7002 Des Plaines IL 60018-7002 708 518 6769 312 693 0591 MCI Mail:426-1818 GEnie:D.W.TAMKIN CIS:73720,1570 dattier@chinet.chi.il.us