Re: "the jammers revenge on mobile prattlers" in the Times
"Chris Tolley" <cjt.7@supanet.com> wrote in message
news:c1yp3sdhtlzy$.152j3nqxvakou$.dlg@40tude.net
: : Alasdair wrote:
: :
: : : The jammers are illegal but whether for good reason
: : : is another matter.
: :
: : Under article 12 of the human rights charter, there
: : appears to be a right not to have one's correspondence
: : interefered with. Whether that right extends to email I
: : dunno, likewise whether it extends to one's telephonic
: : communications.
What about the human rights of the rest of the bus/train not to have their
journey interfered with by indiscriminate phone use..?
: : However, ISTM that the minor annoyance some people
: : experience due to their inability to tolerate possibly
: : only one other person using a mobile phone isn't
: : sufficient justification for indiscriminately and
: : anonymously terminating other people's connections with
: : the outside world.
: :
: : The appropriate response if someone is really being
: : annoying when they are using a mobile phone is to ask
: : them politely to be more considerate. --
And get a smack in the mouth for your trouble..? I don't think so somehow.
Re: "the jammers revenge on mobile prattlers" in the Times
On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 09:09:38 GMT, Chris Tolley <cjt.7@supanet.com>
wrote:
>The appropriate response if someone is really being annoying when they
>are using a mobile phone is to ask them politely to be more considerate.
Have you ever tried doing that? These oiks ignore you... if you're
lucky.
A while back, I was sitting in the quiet coach of the Liverpool -
London Pendolino. I was there for the whole run from Lime Street to
Euston. There was a very loud Liverpudlian sitting across the aisle
from me. After about half an hour of his yacking, I tried doing as you
suggest. I was then subjected to loud abuse and physical threats...
and still had to endure his noise for the rest of the journey as well.
Re: "the jammers revenge on mobile prattlers" in the Times
David Hansen <SENDdavidNOhSPAM@spidacom.co.uk> wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 09:09:38 GMT someone who may be Chris Tolley
> <cjt.7@supanet.com> wrote this:-
>
> >The appropriate response if someone is really being annoying when they
> >are using a mobile phone is to ask them politely to be more considerate.
>
> Perhaps those who have taken to these jammers have tried this
> approach in the past and concluded that a more robust approach is
> needed.
Re: "the jammers revenge on mobile prattlers" in the Times
Ivor Jones wrote:
> "Chris Tolley" <cjt.7@supanet.com> wrote in message
> news:c1yp3sdhtlzy$.152j3nqxvakou$.dlg@40tude.net
>:: Alasdair wrote:
>::
>:: : The jammers are illegal but whether for good reason
>:: : is another matter.
>::
>:: Under article 12 of the human rights charter, there
>:: appears to be a right not to have one's correspondence
>:: interefered with. Whether that right extends to email I
>:: dunno, likewise whether it extends to one's telephonic
>:: communications.
>
> What about the human rights of the rest of the bus/train not to have their
> journey interfered with by indiscriminate phone use..?
Such a right does not appear to be defined in the charter. Have you
looked at it?
>:: The appropriate response if someone is really being
>:: annoying when they are using a mobile phone is to ask
>:: them politely to be more considerate. --
>
> And get a smack in the mouth for your trouble..? I don't think so somehow.
Do you have evidence that there is a high correlation between mobile
phone use and violence?
Re: "the jammers revenge on mobile prattlers" in the Times
Peter wrote:
> On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 09:09:38 GMT, Chris Tolley <cjt.7@supanet.com>
> wrote:
>
>>The appropriate response if someone is really being annoying when they
>>are using a mobile phone is to ask them politely to be more considerate.
>
> Have you ever tried doing that? These oiks ignore you... if you're
> lucky.
Every time (though there haven't been more than half a dozen such
occasions, as I'm not *usually* so easily distracted by what others are
doing) I've asked someone to desist from something of that nature, they
have complied without resorting either to violence or verbal abuse.
> A while back, I was sitting in the quiet coach of the Liverpool -
> London Pendolino. I was there for the whole run from Lime Street to
> Euston. There was a very loud Liverpudlian sitting across the aisle
> from me. After about half an hour of his yacking, I tried doing as you
> suggest. I was then subjected to loud abuse and physical threats...
> and still had to endure his noise for the rest of the journey as well.
In the quiet coach, I would have drawn it to his attention immediately.
If you've let him get away with it for 30 minutes, then I'm not
surprised he reacted as you indicated. Similarly, in a non-smoker, back
in the day, I wouldn't thing there was much point letting someone get
through ten fags before passing the relevant comment.
Re: "the jammers revenge on mobile prattlers" in the Times
"Chris Tolley" <cjt.7@supanet.com> wrote in message
news:1eu1lgbtar11z.10ditzmbazvfa$.dlg@40tude.net
: : Ivor Jones wrote:
: :
: : : "Chris Tolley" <cjt.7@supanet.com> wrote in message
: : : news:c1yp3sdhtlzy$.152j3nqxvakou$.dlg@40tude.net
: : : : : Alasdair wrote:
: : : : :
: : : : : : The jammers are illegal but whether for good
: : : : : : reason is another matter.
: : : : :
: : : : : Under article 12 of the human rights charter,
: : : : : there appears to be a right not to have one's
: : : : : correspondence interefered with. Whether that
: : : : : right extends to email I dunno, likewise whether
: : : : : it extends to one's telephonic communications.
: : :
: : : What about the human rights of the rest of the
: : : bus/train not to have their journey interfered with
: : : by indiscriminate phone use..?
: :
: : Such a right does not appear to be defined in the
: : charter.
Hmm, a pity. Perhaps it should be.
: : Have you looked at it?
: :
: : : : : The appropriate response if someone is really
: : : : : being annoying when they are using a mobile phone
: : : : : is to ask them politely to be more considerate. --
: : :
: : : And get a smack in the mouth for your trouble..? I
: : : don't think so somehow.
: :
: : Do you have evidence that there is a high correlation
: : between mobile phone use and violence?
Re: "the jammers revenge on mobile prattlers" in the Times
Ivor Jones and I were having this conversation:
>:: : : : The appropriate response if someone is really
>:: : : : being annoying when they are using a mobile phone
>:: : : : is to ask them politely to be more considerate. --
>:: :
>:: : And get a smack in the mouth for your trouble..? I
>:: : don't think so somehow.
>::
>:: Do you have evidence that there is a high correlation
>:: between mobile phone use and violence?
>
> Yes, I work for a bus company and see it daily.
I'd have thought there was little to contest about the suggestion that
the proportion of the population who regularly use mobile phones is
considerably higher (thank goodness) than the proportion who indulge in
violent antisocial behaviour. Perhaps your observations imply something
rather more significant about the sector of the population who use buses
than it does about the sector who use mobile phones.
Re: "the jammers revenge on mobile prattlers" in the Times
Chris Tolley <cjt.7@supanet.com> wrote:
> Ivor Jones and I were having this conversation:
>
> >:: : : : The appropriate response if someone is really
> >:: : : : being annoying when they are using a mobile phone
> >:: : : : is to ask them politely to be more considerate. --
> >:: :
> >:: : And get a smack in the mouth for your trouble..? I
> >:: : don't think so somehow.
> >::
> >:: Do you have evidence that there is a high correlation
> >:: between mobile phone use and violence?
> >
> > Yes, I work for a bus company and see it daily.
>
> I'd have thought there was little to contest about the suggestion that
> the proportion of the population who regularly use mobile phones is
> considerably higher (thank goodness) than the proportion who indulge in
> violent antisocial behaviour. Perhaps your observations imply something
> rather more significant about the sector of the population who use buses
> than it does about the sector who use mobile phones.
Snobbery?
Perhaps Ivor should have said there is a correlation between
*annoying* mobile phone use and a tendency to violence. People
who use their phones with consideration for others in public
don't get noticed.
Re: "the jammers revenge on mobile prattlers" in the Times
"Chris Tolley" <cjt.7@supanet.com> wrote in message
news:c1yp3sdhtlzy$.152j3nqxvakou$.dlg@40tude.net.. .
> Alasdair wrote:
>
>> The jammers are illegal but whether for good reason is another matter.
>
> Under article 12 of the human rights charter, there appears to be a
> right not to have one's correspondence interefered with. Whether that
> right extends to email I dunno, likewise whether it extends to one's
> telephonic communications.
>
> However, ISTM that the minor annoyance some people experience due to
> their inability to tolerate possibly only one other person using a
> mobile phone isn't sufficient justification for indiscriminately and
> anonymously terminating other people's connections with the outside
> world.
>
> The appropriate response if someone is really being annoying when they
> are using a mobile phone is to ask them politely to be more considerate.
Victim: "That looks like a nice phone..... is it the latest model??"
Perp: "Yup.... cost me 200 quid..."
V: "Really....... what does it do, then, apart from phone calls?"
P : "Well.... you can take pictures with its camera"
V "Well I never.... can you show me?"
P "Of course.... here, smile...." (perp taks piccie of victim and shows him)
V "That's marvellous... whatever will they think of next...."
P "... And you can do videos..." (shows victim)
V "Thats really good.... 200 quid, you say? Thats a lot of money..."
P "It's OK, it's fully insured, you know..."
V "The insurance must be good, as well...."
P"Ooooh, it's first rate!"
V" Lets see how that works then..."(chucks phone out of bus window)
Re: "the jammers revenge on mobile prattlers" in the Times
"Andrey Yarnwood" <ay@example.com> wrote in message
news:4de87a4b98f4659cfb06170a49901c36@remailer.met acolo.com
[snip]
: : Perhaps Ivor should have said there is a correlation
: : between *annoying* mobile phone use and a tendency to
: : violence. People who use their phones with
: : consideration for others in public don't get noticed.
Re: "the jammers revenge on mobile prattlers" in the Times
On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 16:25:06 +0000, Andrey Yarnwood wrote
>
> Perhaps Ivor should have said there is a correlation between
> *annoying* mobile phone use and a tendency to violence.
But what's *annoying* phone use? One man's annoying waffle might be someone
else's enjoyable conversation.
Re: "the jammers revenge on mobile prattlers" in the Times
"Stimpy" <stimpy1997uk@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:0001HW.C38871540013C846F0407648@news.eclipse. co.uk
: : On Thu, 13 Dec 2007 16:25:06 +0000, Andrey Yarnwood
: : wrote
: : :
: : : Perhaps Ivor should have said there is a correlation
: : : between *annoying* mobile phone use and a tendency to
: : : violence.
: :
: : But what's *annoying* phone use? One man's annoying
: : waffle might be someone else's enjoyable conversation.
It's annoying if I can hear it. I don't want to listen to half of someone
else's inane chatter.
I once had the dubious "pleasure" of listening, from the driving cab of a
bus, to a girl going through her entire social calendar for the next
month. She was sitting on the back seat and didn't stop talking from the
moment she got on to the moment she got off some 45 minutes later. I don't
know who she was talking to, but I could have told you everything she had
planned for some weeks afterwards.
Re: "the jammers revenge on mobile prattlers" in the Times
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 18:14:00 +0000, Ivor Jones wrote
>
>>>> Perhaps Ivor should have said there is a correlation
>>>> between *annoying* mobile phone use and a tendency to
>>>> violence.
>>>
>>> But what's *annoying* phone use? One man's annoying
>>> waffle might be someone else's enjoyable conversation.
>
> It's annoying if I can hear it. I don't want to listen to half of someone
> else's inane chatter.
Ah, ok... So you find people using mobiles within earshot of you annoying
rather than what they might be saying. Thanks
Re: "the jammers revenge on mobile prattlers" in the Times
"Stimpy" <stimpy1997uk@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:0001HW.C388A26C001F49FDF0407648@news.eclipse. co.uk
: : On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 18:14:00 +0000, Ivor Jones wrote
: : :
: : : : : : Perhaps Ivor should have said there is a
: : : : : : correlation between *annoying* mobile phone use
: : : : : : and a tendency to violence.
: : : : :
: : : : : But what's *annoying* phone use? One man's
: : : : : annoying waffle might be someone else's enjoyable
: : : : : conversation.
: : :
: : : It's annoying if I can hear it. I don't want to
: : : listen to half of someone else's inane chatter.
: :
: : Ah, ok... So you find people using mobiles within
: : earshot of you annoying rather than what they might be
: : saying. Thanks
You find that strange..? I was trying to do a job which involves
concentration and all I could hear was this penetratingly loud voice going
on about who she was seeing that night, which pub she was going to get
plastered at that weekend, and so on.
As has been said elsewhere, if someone uses a mobile with consideration
for those around them, you *don't* get to hear about it, because you don't
hear them.
To be honest, phones only amplify an already existing problem. I have no
problems with people talking to one another, I do it myself when I'm on a
bus with a mate going out for the evening, but you can't hear our
conversation 30 feet away.
Re: "the jammers revenge on mobile prattlers" in the Times
In message m5xjeu2323kk$.12jsn4uu15ps6.dlg@40tude.net,
Chris Tolley <cjt.7@supanet.com> Proclaimed from the tallest tower:
> Peter wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 11 Dec 2007 09:09:38 GMT, Chris Tolley <cjt.7@supanet.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The appropriate response if someone is really being annoying when
>>> they are using a mobile phone is to ask them politely to be more
>>> considerate.
>>
>> Have you ever tried doing that? These oiks ignore you... if you're
>> lucky.
>
> Every time (though there haven't been more than half a dozen such
> occasions, as I'm not *usually* so easily distracted by what others
> are doing) I've asked someone to desist from something of that
> nature, they have complied without resorting either to violence or
> verbal abuse.
>
Are you a physically large/intimidating looking chap? I'd imagine that would
help incouraging somone to desist...
--
Regards,
Chris.
(Remove Elvis's shoes to email me)
Re: "the jammers revenge on mobile prattlers" in the Times
On Wed, 19 Dec 2007 14:05:58 GMT, Chris Tolley <cjt.7@supanet.com>
wrote:
>Nobody's ever told me they find my appearance intimidating.
Is that a 'yes' then!
But seriously, I've done the same occasionally and usually get a
polite response[1].
If it's really loud music then I usually just ask what it is they are
listening to. Tends to confuse... Especially if I hum along with it.
(well, if you can't beat them, join them!)
[1] The most recent negative response I recall was on a bus in Nice
this summer, when I requested "silence, s.v.p." from a couple of lads
playing music through their phone speakers. They, of course, did the
natural thing and turned up the volume. Which got an elderly lady in
front of me very angry. And provoked a shouting match with a very
large man who got annoyed at their treatment of the lady. All in
French by this time, so I wasn't able to follow exactly what was being
said. But they shut up.
Re: "the jammers revenge on mobile prattlers" in the Times
Graeme Wall wrote:
> In message <14mj5pyc5tdv4.jndkeog1s2m9$.dlg@40tude.net>
> Chris Tolley <cjt.7@supanet.com> wrote:
>
>> ChrisM wrote:
>>
>>> Are you a physically large/intimidating looking chap?
>>
>> Nobody's ever told me they find my appearance intimidating.
>>
>
> They're too scared to :-)
Unlikely. There are quite a few people who tell me all sorts of things
about my appearance. Just not that.
Re: "the jammers revenge on mobile prattlers" in the Times
G wrote:
> [1] The most recent negative response I recall was on a bus in Nice
> this summer, when I requested "silence, s.v.p." from a couple of lads
> playing music through their phone speakers. They, of course, did the
> natural thing and turned up the volume. Which got an elderly lady in
> front of me very angry. And provoked a shouting match with a very
> large man who got annoyed at their treatment of the lady. All in
> French by this time, so I wasn't able to follow exactly what was being
> said. But they shut up.
I think I've related here an occasion when I was travelling from Glossop
to Manchester in the fairly recent past, and some youths were doing the
same. It wasn't bothering me, though the music wasn't to my taste.
However, it was bothering a couple of BTP CSOs who were aboard. The CSOs
asked them to turn the music down or off, and got a cheeky response,
which proved to be a very ill-advised move. The CSOs suddenly started to
show that they weren't the sort of people that expected to be treated
like that, and detained one (or perhaps more) of them on the station at
Guide Bridge while their identity was checked against the PNC database.
It was quite impressive, really, a modern equivalent of the "clip round
the ear" people frequently tell me old-fashioned coppers used to give
them when they were kids.
-- http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9633044.html
(47 488 at Kensington Olympia, Apr 1995)
Re: "the jammers revenge on mobile prattlers" in the Times 
Linear Mode
