On 11/9/2013 6:07 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:
> "Cheryl" > wrote in message
> eb.com...
>> Hi guys. We've had several conversations about this, and I just found a
>> way that is supposed to block robocalls. I just signed up so can't tell
>> yet how well it works. If you want more info, look he
>>
>> http://www.nomorobo.com/dashboard
>
>
> I have a private number but somehow they got it and my name.

Anyone you shared that information with could and probably did sell
it. But most of the time, the telemarketers are using dialing software
that simply dials phone numbers in sequence. If you're not blocking
it, your name will then come up on caller ID. Anyhow, sequential
dialing is fast and easy when done by automated equipment, and it's
why there's that telltale pause after you answer the phone, before a
human voice (or recording) comes on the line. They're dialing multiple
numbers at once; the first to answer gets the spiel. The next in line
will get a pause, followed either by a spiel or a disconnect
(depending on how long it takes with the first respondent). Numbers
farther down that answered will get a pause followed by a disconnect.

Rule to live by: if you answer and no one speaks immediately, it's
from a robodialler, most likely from a telemarketer, so you can just
hang up. Exception: if you receive automated phone reminders for
things like appointments or prescriptions, it might be one of those.
But most of the time it's a huckster.

Signed up with Norobo about three weeks ago and my robo call have been
reduced about 90%. I still get a lot of one ring calls and then "poof"
the call is gone. I have Verizon and live in southeastern PA.
--
For email reply remove MYHAT

"Moe DeLoughan" > wrote in message
...
> On 11/9/2013 6:07 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>> "Cheryl" > wrote in message
>> eb.com...
>>> Hi guys. We've had several conversations about this, and I just found a
>>> way that is supposed to block robocalls. I just signed up so can't tell
>>> yet how well it works. If you want more info, look he
>>>
>>> http://www.nomorobo.com/dashboard
>>
>>
>> I have a private number but somehow they got it and my name.
>
> Anyone you shared that information with could and probably did sell it.
> But most of the time, the telemarketers are using dialing software that
> simply dials phone numbers in sequence. If you're not blocking it, your
> name will then come up on caller ID. Anyhow, sequential dialing is fast
> and easy when done by automated equipment, and it's why there's that
> telltale pause after you answer the phone, before a human voice (or
> recording) comes on the line. They're dialing multiple numbers at once;
> the first to answer gets the spiel. The next in line will get a pause,
> followed either by a spiel or a disconnect (depending on how long it takes
> with the first respondent). Numbers farther down that answered will get a
> pause followed by a disconnect.
>
> Rule to live by: if you answer and no one speaks immediately, it's from a
> robodialler, most likely from a telemarketer, so you can just hang up.
> Exception: if you receive automated phone reminders for things like
> appointments or prescriptions, it might be one of those. But most of the
> time it's a huckster.

I just got an automated call from FedEx saying I have a delivery tomorrow
that requires a signature. This started out just like a huckster's call
since the technology is the same.

On Monday, November 11, 2013 1:40:31 PM UTC-5, Moe DeLoughan wrote:

> Rule to live by:

I'd insert he If I don't recog the caller id, then I walk away. I think it's the best 9 bucks a month I spend. If I REALLY want some peace and quiet, then I just pull the whole @$#% cord from the connecting block. End of story.

If you answer and no one speaks immediately, it's
>
> from a robodialler, most likely from a telemarketer, so you can just
>
> hang up.

On Monday, November 11, 2013 1:52:35 PM UTC-5, Bob S wrote:
> Signed up with Norobo about three weeks ago and my robo call have been
>
> reduced about 90%. I still get a lot of one ring calls and then "poof"
>
> the call is gone. I have Verizon and live in southeastern PA.
>
>
So, I take it there is NO way to eliminate that one ring?

On 11/11/2013 3:06 PM, Kalmia wrote:
> On Monday, November 11, 2013 1:52:35 PM UTC-5, Bob S wrote:
>> Signed up with Norobo about three weeks ago and my robo call have been
>>
>> reduced about 90%. I still get a lot of one ring calls and then "poof"
>>
>> the call is gone. I have Verizon and live in southeastern PA.
>>
>>
> So, I take it there is NO way to eliminate that one ring?
>

Don't believe so....

--
For email reply remove MYHAT

On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 12:04:44 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
> wrote:

>On Monday, November 11, 2013 1:40:31 PM UTC-5, Moe DeLoughan wrote:
>
>> Rule to live by:
>
>I'd insert he If I don't recog the caller id, then I walk away. I think it's the best 9 bucks a month I spend.

$9? Wow, that seems awfully expensive for just that service.

>If I REALLY want some peace and quiet, then I just pull the whole @$#% cord from the connecting block.
>End of story.

Often the best way

In article >, says...
>
> On 11/9/2013 6:07 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:
> > "Cheryl" > wrote in message
> > eb.com...
> >> Hi guys. We've had several conversations about this, and I just found a
> >> way that is supposed to block robocalls. I just signed up so can't tell
> >> yet how well it works. If you want more info, look he
> >>
> >> http://www.nomorobo.com/dashboard
> >
> >
> > I have a private number but somehow they got it and my name.
>
> Anyone you shared that information with could and probably did sell
> it. But most of the time, the telemarketers are using dialing software
> that simply dials phone numbers in sequence. If you're not blocking
> it, your name will then come up on caller ID. Anyhow, sequential
> dialing is fast and easy when done by automated equipment, and it's
> why there's that telltale pause after you answer the phone, before a
> human voice (or recording) comes on the line. They're dialing multiple
> numbers at once; the first to answer gets the spiel. The next in line
> will get a pause, followed either by a spiel or a disconnect
> (depending on how long it takes with the first respondent). Numbers
> farther down that answered will get a pause followed by a disconnect.
>
> Rule to live by: if you answer and no one speaks immediately, it's
> from a robodialler, most likely from a telemarketer, so you can just
> hang up. Exception: if you receive automated phone reminders for
> things like appointments or prescriptions, it might be one of those.
> But most of the time it's a huckster.

I got a google voice number specifically for that purpose. I give it
when required and then give the entity I gave it to hell for selling it.

On 11/11/2013 11:09 PM, T wrote:
> In article >, says...
>>
>> On 11/9/2013 6:07 PM, Paul M. Cook wrote:
>>> "Cheryl" > wrote in message
>>> eb.com...
>>>> Hi guys. We've had several conversations about this, and I just found a
>>>> way that is supposed to block robocalls. I just signed up so can't tell
>>>> yet how well it works. If you want more info, look he
>>>>
>>>> http://www.nomorobo.com/dashboard
>>>
>>>
>>> I have a private number but somehow they got it and my name.
>>
>> Anyone you shared that information with could and probably did sell
>> it. But most of the time, the telemarketers are using dialing software
>> that simply dials phone numbers in sequence.

Exactly. It's auto-dialer software.

>> Rule to live by: if you answer and no one speaks immediately, it's
>> from a robodialler,

Rule to live by: if you don't recognize the name or number just don't
answer the phone.
>
> I got a google voice number specifically for that purpose. I give it
> when required and then give the entity I gave it to hell for selling it.
>
I'm so glad you think you accomplished something. By giving them hell,
I mean. I'm sure it stopped their nefarious activities in their tracks!
ROFL

Jill

On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 12:06:10 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
> wrote:

> On Monday, November 11, 2013 1:52:35 PM UTC-5, Bob S wrote:
> > Signed up with Norobo about three weeks ago and my robo call have been
> >
> > reduced about 90%. I still get a lot of one ring calls and then "poof"
> >
> > the call is gone. I have Verizon and live in southeastern PA.
> >
> >
> So, I take it there is NO way to eliminate that one ring?

Why would one matter?

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 09:09:29 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:

> On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 12:04:44 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
> > wrote:
>
> >On Monday, November 11, 2013 1:40:31 PM UTC-5, Moe DeLoughan wrote:
> >
> >> Rule to live by:
> >
> >I'd insert he If I don't recog the caller id, then I walk away. I think it's the best 9 bucks a month I spend.
>
> $9? Wow, that seems awfully expensive for just that service.

Well, that's disappointing! I thought it was free.
>
> >If I REALLY want some peace and quiet, then I just pull the whole @$#% cord from the connecting block.
> >End of story.
>
> Often the best way


--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 23:19:50 -0500, jmcquown >
wrote:

> I'm so glad you think you accomplished something. By giving them hell,
> I mean. I'm sure it stopped their nefarious activities in their tracks!
> ROFL

I like Google Voice. Don't use it very often, but it comes in handy
every now and then.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 23:19:50 -0500, jmcquown >
wrote:



>
>>> Rule to live by: if you answer and no one speaks immediately, it's
>>> from a robodialler,
>
>Rule to live by: if you don't recognize the name or number just don't
>answer the phone.

Not so easy sometimes. Caller ID seems to be getting worse instead of
better. Most cell phones come up with no name these days.

Some calls are easy to spot. Card Services, or if it just says New
York or Florida are junk calls. Others, now so easy.

I've received important call that I wanted to get that showed up with
things like "toll free call" and an 877 number that I did not
recognize. I've had calls from a doctor that said Private Number.

On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 12:59:15 AM UTC-5, sf wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 12:06:10 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
>
> > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Monday, November 11, 2013 1:52:35 PM UTC-5, Bob S wrote:
>
> > > Signed up with Norobo about three weeks ago and my robo call have been
>
> > >
>
> > > reduced about 90%. I still get a lot of one ring calls and then "poof"
>
> > >
>
> > > the call is gone. I have Verizon and live in southeastern PA.
>
> > >
>
> > >
>
> > So, I take it there is NO way to eliminate that one ring?
>
>
>
> Why would one matter?

Cuz it's one more noise intrusion, esp. if I'm trying to nap, read, anything which makes ya stop a second and wait for the second ring or decide to walk over to the caller id.

On Monday, November 11, 2013 5:09:29 PM UTC-5, Jeßus wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 12:04:44 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
>
> > wrote:
>
>
>
> >On Monday, November 11, 2013 1:40:31 PM UTC-5, Moe DeLoughan wrote:
>
> >
>
> >> Rule to live by:
>
> >
>
> >I'd insert he If I don't recog the caller id, then I walk away. I think it's the best 9 bucks a month I spend.
>
>
>
> $9? Wow, that seems awfully expensive for just that service.
>
Some calls are worth 9 bucks a PIECE to avoid. You must not have any pesky relatives, coworkers, or ppl asking favors all the time.

On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 06:05:03 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
> wrote:

> On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 12:59:15 AM UTC-5, sf wrote:
> > On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 12:06:10 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
> >
> > > wrote:
> >
> >
> > > So, I take it there is NO way to eliminate that one ring?
> >
> >
> >
> > Why would one matter?
>
> Cuz it's one more noise intrusion, esp. if I'm trying to nap, read, anything which makes ya stop a second and wait for the second ring or decide to walk over to the caller id.

I suppose you could always turn the sound down when you don't want to
be bothered, if one ring is a problem.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 1:00:09 AM UTC-5, sf wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 09:09:29 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 12:04:44 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
>
> > > wrote:
>
> >
>
> > >On Monday, November 11, 2013 1:40:31 PM UTC-5, Moe DeLoughan wrote:
>
> > >
>
> > >> Rule to live by:
>
> > >
>
> > >I'd insert he If I don't recog the caller id, then I walk away. I think it's the best 9 bucks a month I spend.
>
> >
>
> > $9? Wow, that seems awfully expensive for just that service.
>
>
>
> Well, that's disappointing! I thought it was free.

Not from MY phone company. I doubt any of them offer if as a freebie. I know very few people who have it, but I consider it money well spent.

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 06:05:03 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
> > wrote:
>
>> On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 12:59:15 AM UTC-5, sf wrote:
>> > On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 12:06:10 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
>> >
>> > > wrote:
>> >
>> >
>> > > So, I take it there is NO way to eliminate that one ring?
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > Why would one matter?
>>
>> Cuz it's one more noise intrusion, esp. if I'm trying to nap, read,
>> anything which makes ya stop a second and wait for the second ring or
>> decide to walk over to the caller id.
>
> I suppose you could always turn the sound down when you don't want to
> be bothered, if one ring is a problem.

he wants to be able to hear the second + rings if it is a legit call. duh.

On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 06:36:49 -0800, "Pico Rico"
> wrote:

>
> "sf" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 06:05:03 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
> > > wrote:
> >
> >> On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 12:59:15 AM UTC-5, sf wrote:
> >> > On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 12:06:10 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
> >> >
> >> > > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > > So, I take it there is NO way to eliminate that one ring?
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Why would one matter?
> >>
> >> Cuz it's one more noise intrusion, esp. if I'm trying to nap, read,
> >> anything which makes ya stop a second and wait for the second ring or
> >> decide to walk over to the caller id.
> >
> > I suppose you could always turn the sound down when you don't want to
> > be bothered, if one ring is a problem.
>
> he wants to be able to hear the second + rings if it is a legit call. duh.
>
Let it go to voice mail.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

"Kalmia" > wrote in message
...
On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 1:00:09 AM UTC-5, sf wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 09:09:29 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 12:04:44 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
>
> > > wrote:
>
> >
>
> > >On Monday, November 11, 2013 1:40:31 PM UTC-5, Moe DeLoughan wrote:
>
> > >
>
> > >> Rule to live by:
>
> > >
>
> > >I'd insert he If I don't recog the caller id, then I walk away. I
> > >think it's the best 9 bucks a month I spend.
>
> >
>
> > $9? Wow, that seems awfully expensive for just that service.
>
>
>
> Well, that's disappointing! I thought it was free.

Not from MY phone company. I doubt any of them offer if as a freebie. I
know very few people who have it, but I consider it money well spent.

=====

AT&T charges 8.99 for it. I don't know anyone who doesn't have it but
they're older people all with landlines.

Cheri

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 06:36:49 -0800, "Pico Rico"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>> "sf" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 06:05:03 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
>> > > wrote:
>> >
>> >> On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 12:59:15 AM UTC-5, sf wrote:
>> >> > On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 12:06:10 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
>> >> >
>> >> > > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > > So, I take it there is NO way to eliminate that one ring?
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> > Why would one matter?
>> >>
>> >> Cuz it's one more noise intrusion, esp. if I'm trying to nap, read,
>> >> anything which makes ya stop a second and wait for the second ring or
>> >> decide to walk over to the caller id.
>> >
>> > I suppose you could always turn the sound down when you don't want to
>> > be bothered, if one ring is a problem.
>>
>> he wants to be able to hear the second + rings if it is a legit call.
>> duh.
>>
> Let it go to voice mail.


what if that is not his choice?

In article >, Cheri > wrote:
>
>AT&T charges 8.99 for it. I don't know anyone who doesn't have it but
>they're older people all with landlines.

Who you calling old?

I myself have never seen the need for caller Id. But DH gets so
worked up over robocalls or scammers or even live politicians,
I've been thinking of adding it. Then we'd have to get something
to display the Id. Maybe a new answering machine would do the job.

We've thought about dumping the landline, but haven't quite gotten
there yet. I'd definitely have to get a more reliable cell phone.
The stupid thing can't even get a signal in our backyard. His
iPhone has no problem.

Cindy Hamilton
--

On 11/12/2013 06:05 AM, Kalmia wrote:
> On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 12:59:15 AM UTC-5, sf wrote:
>> On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 12:06:10 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
>>
>> > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>> On Monday, November 11, 2013 1:52:35 PM UTC-5, Bob S wrote:
>>
>>>> Signed up with Norobo about three weeks ago and my robo call have been
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> reduced about 90%. I still get a lot of one ring calls and then "poof"
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>> the call is gone. I have Verizon and live in southeastern PA.
>>
>>>>
>>
>>>>
>>
>>> So, I take it there is NO way to eliminate that one ring?
>>
>>
>>
>> Why would one matter?
>
> Cuz it's one more noise intrusion, esp. if I'm trying to nap, read, anything which makes ya stop a second and wait for the second ring or decide to walk over to the caller id.
>

Caller ID is set up to transmit the information between the first and
second rings. Sounds like a goofy choice to me, but that's the way it
was set up originally. So yeah, the single ring is unavoidable.

There is a tech solution that looks pretty good to me. Look up the free
and open software package called NCID (network caller ID). You set up a
whitelist and a blacklist. If NCID matches a number on the whitelist, it
does nothing and you can pick it up or let the answering machine take
it. If it matches a number on the blacklist, it will hang up after a 0.4
second delay. You can abbreviate the numbers on either list, so you
could whitelist all numbers in your local area code or even whitelist
just the area code+exchange(s) in your city. You could whitelist only
your out-of-town friends and family.

There are no pre-existing limits on the length of either list. You can
also install a third-party module to record (in a simple database) all
the caller ID information of the numbers you hung up on, time-stamped.

NCID requires minimal hardwa Pentium II, 256M, cheap USB modem with
caller ID capabilities, a small hard disk or thumb drive and some kind
of Linux. You will need to install from sources.

On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 07:45:59 -0800, "Pico Rico"
> wrote:

>
> "sf" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 06:36:49 -0800, "Pico Rico"
> > > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> "sf" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 06:05:03 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
> >> > > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 12:59:15 AM UTC-5, sf wrote:
> >> >> > On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 12:06:10 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > > So, I take it there is NO way to eliminate that one ring?
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Why would one matter?
> >> >>
> >> >> Cuz it's one more noise intrusion, esp. if I'm trying to nap, read,
> >> >> anything which makes ya stop a second and wait for the second ring or
> >> >> decide to walk over to the caller id.
> >> >
> >> > I suppose you could always turn the sound down when you don't want to
> >> > be bothered, if one ring is a problem.
> >>
> >> he wants to be able to hear the second + rings if it is a legit call.
> >> duh.
> >>
> > Let it go to voice mail.
>
>
> what if that is not his choice?
>
Then he has no business complaining about a single ring.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 07:45:59 -0800, "Pico Rico"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>> "sf" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 06:36:49 -0800, "Pico Rico"
>> > > wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> "sf" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> > On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 06:05:03 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
>> >> > > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 12:59:15 AM UTC-5, sf wrote:
>> >> >> > On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 12:06:10 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > > So, I take it there is NO way to eliminate that one ring?
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > Why would one matter?
>> >> >>
>> >> >> Cuz it's one more noise intrusion, esp. if I'm trying to nap, read,
>> >> >> anything which makes ya stop a second and wait for the second ring
>> >> >> or
>> >> >> decide to walk over to the caller id.
>> >> >
>> >> > I suppose you could always turn the sound down when you don't want
>> >> > to
>> >> > be bothered, if one ring is a problem.
>> >>
>> >> he wants to be able to hear the second + rings if it is a legit call.
>> >> duh.
>> >>
>> > Let it go to voice mail.
>>
>>
>> what if that is not his choice?
>>
> Then he has no business complaining about a single ring.

you make no sense at all.

On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 09:04:35 -0800, "Pico Rico"
> wrote:

>
> "sf" > wrote in message
> ...
> > On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 07:45:59 -0800, "Pico Rico"
> > > wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> "sf" > wrote in message
> >> ...
> >> > On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 06:36:49 -0800, "Pico Rico"
> >> > > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >> "sf" > wrote in message
> >> >> ...
> >> >> > On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 06:05:03 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
> >> >> > > wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 12:59:15 AM UTC-5, sf wrote:
> >> >> >> > On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 12:06:10 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > > wrote:
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > > So, I take it there is NO way to eliminate that one ring?
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > Why would one matter?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Cuz it's one more noise intrusion, esp. if I'm trying to nap, read,
> >> >> >> anything which makes ya stop a second and wait for the second ring
> >> >> >> or
> >> >> >> decide to walk over to the caller id.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I suppose you could always turn the sound down when you don't want
> >> >> > to
> >> >> > be bothered, if one ring is a problem.
> >> >>
> >> >> he wants to be able to hear the second + rings if it is a legit call.
> >> >> duh.
> >> >>
> >> > Let it go to voice mail.
> >>
> >>
> >> what if that is not his choice?
> >>
> > Then he has no business complaining about a single ring.
>
> you make no sense at all.
>

I was thinking the same about you.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

"sf" > wrote in message
...
> On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 09:04:35 -0800, "Pico Rico"
> > wrote:
>
>>
>> "sf" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 07:45:59 -0800, "Pico Rico"
>> > > wrote:
>> >
>> >>
>> >> "sf" > wrote in message
>> >> ...
>> >> > On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 06:36:49 -0800, "Pico Rico"
>> >> > > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >> "sf" > wrote in message
>> >> >> ...
>> >> >> > On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 06:05:03 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
>> >> >> > > wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 12:59:15 AM UTC-5, sf wrote:
>> >> >> >> > On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 12:06:10 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > > wrote:
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > > So, I take it there is NO way to eliminate that one ring?
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> > Why would one matter?
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> Cuz it's one more noise intrusion, esp. if I'm trying to nap,
>> >> >> >> read,
>> >> >> >> anything which makes ya stop a second and wait for the second
>> >> >> >> ring
>> >> >> >> or
>> >> >> >> decide to walk over to the caller id.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> > I suppose you could always turn the sound down when you don't
>> >> >> > want
>> >> >> > to
>> >> >> > be bothered, if one ring is a problem.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> he wants to be able to hear the second + rings if it is a legit
>> >> >> call.
>> >> >> duh.
>> >> >>
>> >> > Let it go to voice mail.
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> what if that is not his choice?
>> >>
>> > Then he has no business complaining about a single ring.
>>
>> you make no sense at all.
>>
>
> I was thinking the same about you.

That proves it!

On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 22:00:09 -0800, sf > wrote:

>On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 09:09:29 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>
>> On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 12:04:44 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
>> > wrote:
>>
>> >On Monday, November 11, 2013 1:40:31 PM UTC-5, Moe DeLoughan wrote:
>> >
>> >> Rule to live by:
>> >
>> >I'd insert he If I don't recog the caller id, then I walk away. I think it's the best 9 bucks a month I spend.
>>
>> $9? Wow, that seems awfully expensive for just that service.
>
>Well, that's disappointing! I thought it was free.

Over here it's about $5, from memory... possibly free with some
deals/companies.

On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 06:06:54 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
> wrote:

>On Monday, November 11, 2013 5:09:29 PM UTC-5, Jeßus wrote:
>> On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 12:04:44 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
>>
>> > wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> >On Monday, November 11, 2013 1:40:31 PM UTC-5, Moe DeLoughan wrote:
>>
>> >
>>
>> >> Rule to live by:
>>
>> >
>>
>> >I'd insert he If I don't recog the caller id, then I walk away. I think it's the best 9 bucks a month I spend.
>>
>>
>>
>> $9? Wow, that seems awfully expensive for just that service.
>>
>Some calls are worth 9 bucks a PIECE to avoid.

LOL, true. There are times I wished I had the service myself.

>You must not have any pesky relatives, coworkers, or ppl asking favors all the time.

Oh I get those calls sometimes... there are times when I'm in no mood
for the phone *at all* and will let the answering machine deal with
it.

On Wed, 13 Nov 2013 05:51:35 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:

> On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 22:00:09 -0800, sf > wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 09:09:29 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
> >
> >> On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 12:04:44 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
> >> > wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Monday, November 11, 2013 1:40:31 PM UTC-5, Moe DeLoughan wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> Rule to live by:
> >> >
> >> >I'd insert he If I don't recog the caller id, then I walk away. I think it's the best 9 bucks a month I spend.
> >>
> >> $9? Wow, that seems awfully expensive for just that service.
> >
> >Well, that's disappointing! I thought it was free.
>
> Over here it's about $5, from memory... possibly free with some
> deals/companies.

It's been so long since I've had a landline, I've forgotten all the
nickel & dime add-ons and why we decided to go wireless. If the
caller is in my telephone's directory, they are automatically ID'd.
Otherwise, I don't need to talk to them. If they want to talk to me,
they can leave a message and maybe I'll get back to them.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

"Cindy Hamilton" > wrote in message
.. .
> In article >, Cheri >
> wrote:
>>
>>AT&T charges 8.99 for it. I don't know anyone who doesn't have it but
>>they're older people all with landlines.
>
> Who you calling old?
>
> I myself have never seen the need for caller Id. But DH gets so
> worked up over robocalls or scammers or even live politicians,
> I've been thinking of adding it. Then we'd have to get something
> to display the Id. Maybe a new answering machine would do the job.
>
> We've thought about dumping the landline, but haven't quite gotten
> there yet. I'd definitely have to get a more reliable cell phone.
> The stupid thing can't even get a signal in our backyard. His
> iPhone has no problem.
>
> Cindy Hamilton

I will never dump my landline. My phones have caller ID capability built in,
most of them do these days and I wouldn't answer the phone anymore unless I
know who's calling. I always let it go to the answering machine if not.
You're not old, but I am getting there.

Cheri

On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 11:48:35 AM UTC-5, sf wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 07:45:59 -0800, "Pico Rico"
>
> > wrote:
>
>
>
> >
>
> > "sf" > wrote in message
>
> > ...
>
> > > On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 06:36:49 -0800, "Pico Rico"
>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > >
>
> > >>
>
> > >> "sf" > wrote in message
>
> > >> ...
>
> > >> > On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 06:05:03 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
>
> > >> > > wrote:
>
> > >> >
>
> > >> >> On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 12:59:15 AM UTC-5, sf wrote:
>
> > >> >> > On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 12:06:10 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
>
> > >> >> >
>
> > >> >> > > wrote:
>
> > >> >> >
>
> > >> >> >
>
> > >> >> > > So, I take it there is NO way to eliminate that one ring?
>
> > >> >> >
>
> > >> >> >
>
> > >> >> >
>
> > >> >> > Why would one matter?
>
> > >> >>
>
> > >> >> Cuz it's one more noise intrusion, esp. if I'm trying to nap, read,
>
> > >> >> anything which makes ya stop a second and wait for the second ring or
>
> > >> >> decide to walk over to the caller id.
>
> > >> >
>
> > >> > I suppose you could always turn the sound down when you don't want to
>
> > >> > be bothered, if one ring is a problem.
>
> > >>
>
> > >> he wants to be able to hear the second + rings if it is a legit call.
>
> > >> duh.
>
> > >>
>
> > > Let it go to voice mail.
>
> >
>
> >
>
> > what if that is not his choice?
>
> >
>
> Then he has no business complaining about a single ring.

My phone won't GO to voicemail without at least one ring. I guess my only option is to unplug from the connecting block if I want no interruption at all.

On Tuesday, November 12, 2013 10:57:01 AM UTC-5, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> In article >, Cheri > wrote:
>
> >
>
> >AT&T charges 8.99 for it. I don't know anyone who doesn't have it but
>
> >they're older people all with landlines.
>
>
>
> Who you calling old?
>
>
>
> I myself have never seen the need for caller Id. But DH gets so
>
> worked up over robocalls or scammers or even live politicians,
>
> I've been thinking of adding it. Then we'd have to get something
>
> to display the Id. Maybe a new answering machine would do the job.
>
>
>
> We've thought about dumping the landline, but haven't quite gotten
>
> there yet. I'd definitely have to get a more reliable cell phone.
>
> The stupid thing can't even get a signal in our backyard. His
>
> iPhone has no problem.
>
>
>
> Cindy Hamilton
>
> --

I DO have some cordless sets which displays the caller id, but ya STILL have to subscribe for the extra bucks for that to work.

In article >, Cheri > wrote:
>>
>> We've thought about dumping the landline, but haven't quite gotten
>> there yet. I'd definitely have to get a more reliable cell phone.
>> The stupid thing can't even get a signal in our backyard. His
>> iPhone has no problem.
>>
>> Cindy Hamilton
>
>I will never dump my landline. My phones have caller ID capability built in,
>most of them do these days and I wouldn't answer the phone anymore unless I
>know who's calling. I always let it go to the answering machine if not.
>You're not old, but I am getting there.

DH has a favorite phone. I don't think I could separate him from it
with a crowbar. (Well, maybe if I smashed it.) I might not be old,
but he is definitely a curmudgeon. (Gets it from his father.)
Still, he's MY curmudgeon.

Thanks for saying I'm not old, BTW. As a grey-haired person living
in a college town, it's sometimes difficult to keep a sense of
perspective.

Cindy
--

"Cindy Hamilton" > wrote in message
news
> Thanks for saying I'm not old, BTW. As a grey-haired person living
> in a college town, it's sometimes difficult to keep a sense of
> perspective.
>
> Cindy

You're only as old as you feel, I really believe that.

Cheri

On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 12:26:43 -0800 (PST), Kalmia
> wrote:

> My phone won't GO to voicemail without at least one ring. I guess my only option is to unplug from the connecting block if I want no interruption at all.

That's a good option. Back when I had a landline, only one phone in
the entire house rang and it was placed in a room I rarely used.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On 11/12/2013 1:54 PM, Jeßus wrote:

> Oh I get those calls sometimes... there are times when I'm in no mood
> for the phone*at all* and will let the answering machine deal with
> it.

DITTO! Then I get a text. *sigh*

--
CAPSLOCK–Preventing Login Since 1980.

On 11/12/2013 10:57 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> In article >, Cheri > wrote:
>>
>> AT&T charges 8.99 for it. I don't know anyone who doesn't have it but
>> they're older people all with landlines.
>
> Who you calling old?
>
> I myself have never seen the need for caller Id. But DH gets so
> worked up over robocalls or scammers or even live politicians,
> I've been thinking of adding it. Then we'd have to get something
> to display the Id. Maybe a new answering machine would do the job.
>
> We've thought about dumping the landline, but haven't quite gotten
> there yet. I'd definitely have to get a more reliable cell phone.
> The stupid thing can't even get a signal in our backyard. His
> iPhone has no problem.
>
> Cindy Hamilton
>
I could drop my landline now and am thinking about it. I used to have to
keep it for my security system, but I recently had it replaced with
cellular.

--
CAPSLOCK–Preventing Login Since 1980.

On Tue, 12 Nov 2013 22:03:08 -0500, Cheryl >
wrote:

> On 11/12/2013 1:54 PM, Jeßus wrote:
>
> > Oh I get those calls sometimes... there are times when I'm in no mood
> > for the phone*at all* and will let the answering machine deal with
> > it.
>
> DITTO! Then I get a text. *sigh*

Change the notification sound, so it doesn't bother you. Mine is
barely a beep.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.