The Ghost of General Lee wrote:
> On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 23:51:56 GMT, "Freedom Fighter" <liberty@once.net>
> wrote:
>
>> "The Ghost of General Lee" <ghost@general.lee> wrote in message
>> news:713is21mpobu205qmjl7hcb0rhghn8nn59@4ax.com...
>>> On Tue, 06 Feb 2007 22:52:50 GMT, "Freedom Fighter" <liberty@once.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Approximately 3 years ago I had a problem with what appeared to be
>>>> deliberate harassment hang-up calls to my home (landline) phone number.
>>>>
>>>> The calls were found to be from Verizon, and were being made for
>>>> telemarketing purposes. I received these calls even though I was, and
>>>> still
>>>> am, on the state telemarketing "do not call" list. I am a Verizon
>>>> customer,
>>> Yet, you posted this to a Verizon *Wireless* group.
>> There is no land-line newsgroup on which to post it.
>> If Verizon commits these harassive/abusive practices with landline
>> customers, do you really believe they are not behaving similarly with ALL
>> customers and the public in general? People should be warned.
>
> As a former VZW customer of 10+ years, I never had an issue with them
> calling me for anything.
>
>> Why are you defending them?
>
> I'm not. You're just one of those types who will call anyone a
> "SHILL" who finds holes in your argument. You ought to be thanking us
> for educating you.
>
>>>> so they may have been entitled to call me for business purposes. When
>>>> contacted, Verizon told me that their computer makes the calls and then
>>>> hangs up under certain circumstances, thus causing my answering machine to
>>>> record no message. This was happening a few times a day, and clearly
>>>> constituted HARASSMENT. I told them this, and that they should change
>>>> their
>>>> calling methods.
>>> Just because you think it is harassment doesn't make it so. What
>>> matters is your state's laws. Did you bother to research what
>>> constitutes harassment in your state?
>> Deliberate, repeated hangup calls are clearly annoying. Repeatedly annoying
>> someone constitutes harassment. Wouldn't YOU think so if YOU received
>> anonymous hangup calls?
>
> Again I say, it doesn't matter what you or I think. All that matters
> is your state's laws.
>
>>>> I demanded that the calls stop, and was told I would be placed on
>>>> Verizon's
>>>> "do not call" list, but that it would take a few weeks to do this.
>>>> Finally,
>>>> the hang-up calls stopped. However, THESE CALLS RECENTLY BEGAN AGAIN, the
>>>> same as the last time, despite my supposedly being on their list of
>>>> customers NOT to be called. Today I used the *69 service to discover that
>>>> Verizon (309-820-9933) was again the source of these unwanted calls. I
>>>> called this source number, and again was told I would be placed on their
>>>> "do
>>>> not call" list and it would take some time for this to be in effect.
>>>>
>>>> I HAVE FILED A COMPLAINT WITH THE FCC for the purposes of:
>>>> 1) Punishing this arrogant corperation for its repeated harassment and
>>>> disregard for and invasion of my privacy.
>>>> 2) Assuring I will NOT be charged for my call to *69 and any other
>>>> expenses
>>>> incurred as a result of Verizon's actions.
>>>> 3) Assuring that I will NEVER receive another telemarketing call from
>>>> Verizon under any circumstances.
>>> You didn't read the Federal DNC law very well, did you?
>> It doesn't matter - people have the right to freedom from unwanted,
>> harassing calls.
>
> What? The law that was written to control unwanted telemarketing
> calls "doesn't matter"? You really ought to do your research before
> you post silly rants.
>
>> WHY ARE YOU DEFENDING VERIZON? An employee? - more likely an executive, I
>> suspect?
>>
>
> Please point out one instance where I "defended" anyone. All I did
> was point out:
>
> 1. You posted your rant to an unrelated group (again).
> 2. You have to prove harassment in accordance with applicable law.
> 3. You obviously didn't read the "existing business relationship"
> clause of the Federal DNC law.
>
> And it would seem you are the same douchebag that posted a bitch rant
> here in July about getting charged for a 411 call (which you never
> paid for anyways). Perhaps you should just drop your telephone
> service. It seems a bit too complicated for you to understand.
>
> Ref. http://tinyurl.com/ytetvw
>
Why have this law when there is no one to enforce it ?
I have a un-listed number, on the do not call list, and get calls all
the time. Voice and fax calls. Faxes happen at early am hours. I called
SBC about it. They told me there is no way to get them to stop. All they
can do is change my number. Nice law.

Just another law that someone made millions on.

What about the spam law ? Same thing. Give us your email address. We
will make a data base of all these email address and then compile them
onto mega amounts of media. You then pay for this of course. But you
still get spam.

Or the best one yet. You get spam, At the bottom it tells you that if
you want off the list reply to the listed email below. Remove@xyz.com
They then have your good email address that they sell as a good working
email address.