On Friday, January 15, 2016 at 11:55:40 AM UTC-7, cibola de oro wrote:
> notbob wrote:
> > Apparently, there's a new wave of Winblows computer scammers washing
> > ashore.
> >
> > For the very first time, I gotta Indian support droid calling me on
> > my phone to tell me their organization has been receiving security
> > alerts from my desktop computer.
> >
> > Oh really!? And "jes what operating system am I currently using", I
> > smirkingly enquired. "Windows", was his reply. I gleefully informed
> > this escapee from the Short Circuit voice-over casting stable, I
> > haven't even owned a Windows computer in over a decade.
> >
> > He hung up w/o uttering another word.
> >
> > Please, do not fall for this ruse. You computer will NOT send
> > security alerts to a third party, no matter which operating system
> > (OS) you use.
> >
> > nb
> >
> I DO hope you trapped the number on caller ID!

The caller ID number is fake and is changed regularly. It has nothing to do with where they are calling from.

DaleP

On 1/15/2016 7:24 PM, dalep wrote:
>
> The caller ID number is fake and is changed regularly. It has nothing to do with where they are calling from.
>
> DaleP
>
I often get phone calls from myself. I have only one phone number so I
know I'm not calling myself. Yet it happens. And people wonder why I
don't answer the phone. Heh.

Jill

On 2016-01-15 9:18 PM, jmcquown wrote:
> On 1/15/2016 7:24 PM, dalep wrote:
>>
>> The caller ID number is fake and is changed regularly. It has nothing
>> to do with where they are calling from.
>>
>> DaleP
>>
> I often get phone calls from myself. I have only one phone number so I
> know I'm not calling myself. Yet it happens. And people wonder why I
> don't answer the phone. Heh.
>
>

For the last couple of months I have been getting calls with fake
numbers They look like local numbers but they turn out to be telemarketers.

dalep wrote:
> On Friday, January 15, 2016 at 11:55:40 AM UTC-7, cibola de oro wrote:
>> notbob wrote:
>>> Apparently, there's a new wave of Winblows computer scammers washing
>>> ashore.
>>>
>>> For the very first time, I gotta Indian support droid calling me on
>>> my phone to tell me their organization has been receiving security
>>> alerts from my desktop computer.
>>>
>>> Oh really!? And "jes what operating system am I currently using", I
>>> smirkingly enquired. "Windows", was his reply. I gleefully informed
>>> this escapee from the Short Circuit voice-over casting stable, I
>>> haven't even owned a Windows computer in over a decade.
>>>
>>> He hung up w/o uttering another word.
>>>
>>> Please, do not fall for this ruse. You computer will NOT send
>>> security alerts to a third party, no matter which operating system
>>> (OS) you use.
>>>
>>> nb
>>>
>> I DO hope you trapped the number on caller ID!
>
> The caller ID number is fake and is changed regularly.

I realize tat.

> It has nothing to do with where they are calling from.
>
> DaleP

It's the only way to try and trace back, period.

Dave Smith wrote:
> For the last couple of months I have been getting calls with fake
> numbers They look like local numbers but they turn out to be telemarketers.
>


Retirement is exciting, innit?

jmcquown wrote:
>
> I often get phone calls from myself. I have only one phone number so I
> know I'm not calling myself. Yet it happens. And people wonder why I
> don't answer the phone. Heh.

hmmm. I'd be tempted to answer calls from myself. Might be handy to
hear what you have to say to yourself.

On Saturday, January 16, 2016 at 9:08:26 AM UTC-6, Gary wrote:
> jmcquown wrote:
> >
> > I often get phone calls from myself. I have only one phone number so I
> > know I'm not calling myself. Yet it happens. And people wonder why I
> > don't answer the phone. Heh.
>
> hmmm. I'd be tempted to answer calls from myself. Might be handy to
> hear what you have to say to yourself.

With all the folks using Bluetooth it is far more difficult to identify
crazy people in public.

--Bryan

On 1/16/2016 9:29 AM, MisterDiddyWahDiddy wrote:
> With all the folks using Bluetooth it is far more difficult to identify
> crazy people in public.
>
> --Bryan


People ave you made instantly.

On 1/16/2016 11:51 AM, Sqwertz wrote:
> There used to be a crazy lady
No one cares.

You criminally STALK and ABUSE women, you sick little dwarfy man!

Here's what you did when you went all over the Usenet impersonating the
well-liked regular named "sf" and posting all her personal data on the
net against her will, including her:

* home address
* age
* cell phone number
* husband's name

etc.

YOU did that, you evil *******!

And then you had the hubris to actually GLOAT about in public saying:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ost
>
Wed, 25 Nov 2015 21:18:00 -0600
MicroPlanet-Gravity/3.0.4



She should call the cops. I've already publicly admitted it is me so
a conviction should be a piece of cake and then forging would stop.
So what's stopping her? I think she suffers from Bovism - she just
loves the attention and drama and screw the rest of the group.

-sw

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------


And before that you literally stalked poor Omelet, a local Auustin
favorite, right off the Usenet!

In your worst moment ever you actually begged her to KILL you:

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ost
>
3/18/2011 3:49 PM
Microsoft Internet News 4.70.1162
readnews.com - News for Geeks and ISPs
fa35d278.newsreader.readnews.com


Sorry I don't fit either of your Ideal Psycho Pal Profiles.

-sw
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I'd prefer you use a sniper rifle on me from a few hundred yards away.
There you go - a reason for you to buy yet another gun and ammo.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Then after having your nose rubbed in your filthy criminal stalking you
came back with, not an apology, nor the slightest remorse, just this:


"The facebook group is much more pleasant."


But we all know that's only because you cower over there in mortal fear
of being booted by the FB admins.

You're _so done_ here virus, I mean really ****ing done.

I'm making you a project like no other, expect a lot more of your evil
abuse and hatred to be aired for all to see here.

And we both know there's a google archive full of your hatred of women
just waiting to be hung out on the virtual clothesline to dry.

Enjoy then, you rotten, worthless misogynistic *******!

On 17/1/2016 02:06 Gary wrote:

> jmcquown wrote:
>>
>> I often get phone calls from myself. I have only one phone number so I
>> know I'm not calling myself. Yet it happens. And people wonder why I
>> don't answer the phone. Heh.
>
> hmmm. I'd be tempted to answer calls from myself. Might be handy to
> hear what you have to say to yourself.

Yeah, sometimes it's nice to talk to an intelligent person.

--
Bruce

Bruce wrote:
> On 17/1/2016 02:06 Gary wrote:
>
>> jmcquown wrote:
>>>
>>> I often get phone calls from myself. I have only one phone number so I
>>> know I'm not calling myself. Yet it happens. And people wonder why I
>>> don't answer the phone. Heh.
>>
>> hmmm. I'd be tempted to answer calls from myself. Might be handy to
>> hear what you have to say to yourself.
>
> Yeah, sometimes it's nice to talk to an intelligent person.
>

Lets you out.

On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 10:06:44 -0500, Gary > wrote:

>jmcquown wrote:
>>
>> I often get phone calls from myself. I have only one phone number so I
>> know I'm not calling myself. Yet it happens. And people wonder why I
>> don't answer the phone. Heh.
>
>hmmm. I'd be tempted to answer calls from myself. Might be handy to
>hear what you have to say to yourself.

The real worry would be if you got into an argument.

On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 20:26:10 -0000 (UTC), Bruce >
wrote:

>On 17/1/2016 02:06 Gary wrote:
>
>> jmcquown wrote:
>>>
>>> I often get phone calls from myself. I have only one phone number so I
>>> know I'm not calling myself. Yet it happens. And people wonder why I
>>> don't answer the phone. Heh.
>>
>> hmmm. I'd be tempted to answer calls from myself. Might be handy to
>> hear what you have to say to yourself.
>
>Yeah, sometimes it's nice to talk to an intelligent person.

And so stunningly attractive, too. But one would need Skype for that.

On 1/16/2016 6:59 PM, Je�us wrote:
> On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 10:06:44 -0500, Gary > wrote:
>
>> jmcquown wrote:
>>>
>>> I often get phone calls from myself. I have only one phone number so I
>>> know I'm not calling myself. Yet it happens. And people wonder why I
>>> don't answer the phone. Heh.
>>
>> hmmm. I'd be tempted to answer calls from myself. Might be handy to
>> hear what you have to say to yourself.
>
> The real worry would be if you got into an argument.
>
I'd win!

Jill

On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 19:12:43 -0500, jmcquown >
wrote:

>On 1/16/2016 6:59 PM, Je?us wrote:
>> On Sat, 16 Jan 2016 10:06:44 -0500, Gary > wrote:
>>
>>> jmcquown wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I often get phone calls from myself. I have only one phone number so I
>>>> know I'm not calling myself. Yet it happens. And people wonder why I
>>>> don't answer the phone. Heh.
>>>
>>> hmmm. I'd be tempted to answer calls from myself. Might be handy to
>>> hear what you have to say to yourself.
>>
>> The real worry would be if you got into an argument.
>>
>I'd win!

I would certainly hope so

Jill, I also get calls from myself! What a strange world! Lol.

N.

Gary, you're funny....in my case, I rarely say anything of import, so answering
those calls from myself would just be a waste of time.

N.

On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 11:45:04 -0800 (PST), Nancy2 >
wrote:

>Jill, I also get calls from myself! What a strange world! Lol.

One of the major flaws for the DoNotCall list is calls from the same area
code are effectively excluded from the list.

So spammers have figured that out, and use their equipment to sort their
lists and use fake local numbers to deflect complaints, and there is
not ONE damned thing anyone can do about it.

On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 12:26:56 -0800, The New Other Guy
> wrote:

>On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 11:45:04 -0800 (PST), Nancy2 >
>wrote:
>
>>Jill, I also get calls from myself! What a strange world! Lol.
>
>One of the major flaws for the DoNotCall list is calls from the same area
>code are effectively excluded from the list.
>
>So spammers have figured that out, and use their equipment to sort their
>lists and use fake local numbers to deflect complaints, and there is
>not ONE damned thing anyone can do about it.

Yep. The technology available is well ahead of the laws and telco
companies existing equipment's ability to stop it.

On 2016-01-17 3:26 PM, The New Other Guy wrote:

> One of the major flaws for the DoNotCall list is calls from the same area
> code are effectively excluded from the list.
>
> So spammers have figured that out, and use their equipment to sort their
> lists and use fake local numbers to deflect complaints, and there is
> not ONE damned thing anyone can do about it.


That's why I take the time to have some fun with them and see how long I
can keep them on the line. If I have nothing important to do I keep them
busy for as long as I can, or as long as I can do it without laughing.
If I am wasting their time they can't be bothering other people.

"Nancy2" > wrote in message
...
> Jill, I also get calls from myself! What a strange world! Lol.
>
> N.

I got one to my cell phone yesterday. Was a Bothell number. Did not
recognize but also did not come up as any known scam. I called it back.
Older, foreign sounding man answered and said that I must have dialed the
wrong number as he hadn't called anyone.

"The New Other Guy" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 11:45:04 -0800 (PST), Nancy2 >
> wrote:
>
>>Jill, I also get calls from myself! What a strange world! Lol.
>
> One of the major flaws for the DoNotCall list is calls from the same area
> code are effectively excluded from the list.
>
> So spammers have figured that out, and use their equipment to sort their
> lists and use fake local numbers to deflect complaints, and there is
> not ONE damned thing anyone can do about it.

Aha! That explains things.

On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 15:39:21 -0500, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>On 2016-01-17 3:26 PM, The New Other Guy wrote:
>
>> One of the major flaws for the DoNotCall list is calls from the same area
>> code are effectively excluded from the list.
>>
>> So spammers have figured that out, and use their equipment to sort their
>> lists and use fake local numbers to deflect complaints, and there is
>> not ONE damned thing anyone can do about it.
>
>
>That's why I take the time to have some fun with them and see how long I
>can keep them on the line. If I have nothing important to do I keep them
>busy for as long as I can, or as long as I can do it without laughing.
>If I am wasting their time they can't be bothering other people.

Wasting their time is the only defence we have really.
Pity more people don't do it.

On 1/17/2016 3:48 PM, Je�us wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 15:39:21 -0500, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
>> That's why I take the time to have some fun with them and see how long I
>> can keep them on the line. If I have nothing important to do I keep them
>> busy for as long as I can, or as long as I can do it without laughing.
>> If I am wasting their time they can't be bothering other people.
> Wasting their time is the only defence we have really.
> Pity more people don't do it.
>
I can't be bothered to waste _my_ time on them.
We have caller ID, and an answerphone. If the number isn't one I
recognise, I don't answer. If it's important, they'll leave a message.

Swertz wrote:
> Spammers forge the area codes

Says the subhuman scum who publicly CONFESSED to the crime of
cyberstalking "sf":


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ost
>
Wed, 25 Nov 2015 21:18:00 -0600
MicroPlanet-Gravity/3.0.4



She should call the cops. I've already publicly admitted it is me so
a conviction should be a piece of cake and then forging would stop.
So what's stopping her? I think she suffers from Bovism - she just
loves the attention and drama and screw the rest of the group.

-sw

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sqwertz wrote:
> Spammers use local area codes to make you more
> likely to answer the phone, plain and simple.
>
> -sw


Says the subhuman scum who publicly CONFESSED to the crime of
cyberstalking "sf":


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ost
>
Wed, 25 Nov 2015 21:18:00 -0600
MicroPlanet-Gravity/3.0.4



She should call the cops. I've already publicly admitted it is me so
a conviction should be a piece of cake and then forging would stop.
So what's stopping her? I think she suffers from Bovism - she just
loves the attention and drama and screw the rest of the group.

-sw

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 16:34:43 -0500, S Viemeister
> wrote:

> I can't be bothered to waste _my_ time on them.
> We have caller ID, and an answerphone. If the number isn't one I
> recognise, I don't answer. If it's important, they'll leave a message.

This is the method I use on my mobile line.

--
Bob
The joint that time is out of
www.kanyak.com

On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 06:09:00 +0200, Opinicus
> wrote:

>On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 16:34:43 -0500, S Viemeister
> wrote:
>
>> I can't be bothered to waste _my_ time on them.
>> We have caller ID, and an answerphone. If the number isn't one I
>> recognise, I don't answer. If it's important, they'll leave a message.
>
>This is the method I use on my mobile line.

As do I, only trouble is I have two friends whose numbers come up as
'private', which a small percentage of scammers also have. But number
display is a great filter regardless.

On 2016-01-17 11:09 PM, Opinicus wrote:
> On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 16:34:43 -0500, S Viemeister
> > wrote:
>
>> I can't be bothered to waste _my_ time on them.
>> We have caller ID, and an answerphone. If the number isn't one I
>> recognise, I don't answer. If it's important, they'll leave a message.
>
> This is the method I use on my mobile line.

One small snag there. I have caller ID and have noticed a lot of times
lately that numbers are not always being displayed. There have been a
few times recently that I did not have time to play games with the
telemarketers so I checked the display and it said only incoming call,
and it was the single ring of a local call. It has always been a
legitimate local call. One of the most frequent for this is my brother,
and his number is in our directly. Sometimes it shows up as him and
other times it does not.

On 1/18/2016 1:23 AM, Je�us wrote:
> On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 06:09:00 +0200, Opinicus
> > wrote:
>
>> On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 16:34:43 -0500, S Viemeister
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> I can't be bothered to waste _my_ time on them.
>>> We have caller ID, and an answerphone. If the number isn't one I
>>> recognise, I don't answer. If it's important, they'll leave a message.
>>
>> This is the method I use on my mobile line.
>
> As do I, only trouble is I have two friends whose numbers come up as
> 'private', which a small percentage of scammers also have. But number
> display is a great filter regardless.
>
If they give you their number, can you put it in your address book
and give it a name?

Anyway, I do the same, I do not pick up if I don't know the number.

And, thanks to modern technology, I don't know anyone's number, once
I get it, it goes into the phone, never to be typed in again. Guess I
should back up my list somehow.

nancy

On 18/01/2016 6:35 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2016-01-17 11:09 PM, Opinicus wrote:
>> On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 16:34:43 -0500, S Viemeister
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> I can't be bothered to waste _my_ time on them.
>>> We have caller ID, and an answerphone. If the number isn't one I
>>> recognise, I don't answer. If it's important, they'll leave a message.
>>
>> This is the method I use on my mobile line.
>
> One small snag there. I have caller ID and have noticed a lot of times
> lately that numbers are not always being displayed. There have been a
> few times recently that I did not have time to play games with the
> telemarketers so I checked the display and it said only incoming call,
> and it was the single ring of a local call. It has always been a
> legitimate local call. One of the most frequent for this is my brother,
> and his number is in our directly. Sometimes it shows up as him and
> other times it does not.
>
There's generally "dead air" with scammers so you have time to put down
the phone.

--
"When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag
and carrying a cross."
Sinclair Lewis.

On 2016-01-18 10:35 AM, graham wrote:

>> One small snag there. I have caller ID and have noticed a lot of times
>> lately that numbers are not always being displayed. There have been a
>> few times recently that I did not have time to play games with the
>> telemarketers so I checked the display and it said only incoming call,
>> and it was the single ring of a local call. It has always been a
>> legitimate local call. One of the most frequent for this is my brother,
>> and his number is in our directly. Sometimes it shows up as him and
>> other times it does not.
>>
> There's generally "dead air" with scammers so you have time to put down
> the phone.
>


True enough, though there are the occasional legitimate calls that have
a moment of dead air. I once had a positive experience with what I
thought was a marketing call and it leaves me with a faint hope. The
call turned out to be from my internet provider and they were offering
me tickets to a matinee performance of Pygmallion at the Shaw Theatre in
Niagara on the Lake. I was looking for the catch, like maybe some sort
of sales talk. Nope. They had a block of tickets and were offering them
to some of their long time customers.

Je�us wrote:
> As do I, only trouble is I have


YOU are an Auztarded CRIMINAL.

You should be executed post haste.

Dave Smith wrote:
> One small snag there.


Your dead canuckle-pickled brain.

"Dave Smith" > wrote in message
...
> On 2016-01-17 11:09 PM, Opinicus wrote:
>> On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 16:34:43 -0500, S Viemeister
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> I can't be bothered to waste _my_ time on them.
>>> We have caller ID, and an answerphone. If the number isn't one I
>>> recognise, I don't answer. If it's important, they'll leave a message.
>>
>> This is the method I use on my mobile line.
>
> One small snag there. I have caller ID and have noticed a lot of times
> lately that numbers are not always being displayed. There have been a few
> times recently that I did not have time to play games with the
> telemarketers so I checked the display and it said only incoming call,
> and it was the single ring of a local call. It has always been a
> legitimate local call. One of the most frequent for this is my brother,
> and his number is in our directly. Sometimes it shows up as him and other
> times it does not.

I am glad that I just answered my phone! I can't remember what the display
said but it was BECU security. I went to the grocery store yesterday, used
the ATM then had a funny feeling and remembered to check like they said to
do for a skimmer. I did not find one but seems that there was. Yep, I have
been hacked. This happened once before. Of course the bank is closed
today. I am hoping by tomorrow I will feel up to going in and filling out
all of the paperwork because I am still not functioning well brain wise
today.

On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 09:12:49 -0500, Nancy Young
> wrote:

>On 1/18/2016 1:23 AM, Je?us wrote:
>> On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 06:09:00 +0200, Opinicus
>> > wrote:
>>
>>> On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 16:34:43 -0500, S Viemeister
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> I can't be bothered to waste _my_ time on them.
>>>> We have caller ID, and an answerphone. If the number isn't one I
>>>> recognise, I don't answer. If it's important, they'll leave a message.
>>>
>>> This is the method I use on my mobile line.
>>
>> As do I, only trouble is I have two friends whose numbers come up as
>> 'private', which a small percentage of scammers also have. But number
>> display is a great filter regardless.
>>
>If they give you their number, can you put it in your address book
>and give it a name?

Possibly Nancy, but I'm not in the U.S and our phone systems are
different, so I don't know for sure.

>Anyway, I do the same, I do not pick up if I don't know the number.
>
>And, thanks to modern technology, I don't know anyone's number, once
>I get it, it goes into the phone, never to be typed in again. Guess I
>should back up my list somehow.

I never was much good remembering phone numbers, although I do know
most of my friends numbers because it comes up on the phone display
when they call.

Sqwertz wrote:
> Nah, but that COULND'T be it beacause...
>
> -sw
Says the subhuman scum who publicly CONFESSED to the crime of
cyberstalking "sf":


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ost
>
Wed, 25 Nov 2015 21:18:00 -0600
MicroPlanet-Gravity/3.0.4



She should call the cops. I've already publicly admitted it is me so
a conviction should be a piece of cake and then forging would stop.
So what's stopping her? I think she suffers from Bovism - she just
loves the attention and drama and screw the rest of the group.

-sw

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

On 1/17/2016 4:34 PM, S Viemeister wrote:
> On 1/17/2016 3:48 PM, Je�us wrote:
>> On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 15:39:21 -0500, Dave Smith
>> > wrote:
>>> That's why I take the time to have some fun with them and see how long I
>>> can keep them on the line. If I have nothing important to do I keep them
>>> busy for as long as I can, or as long as I can do it without laughing.
>>> If I am wasting their time they can't be bothering other people.
>> Wasting their time is the only defence we have really.
>> Pity more people don't do it.
>>
> I can't be bothered to waste _my_ time on them.
> We have caller ID, and an answerphone. If the number isn't one I
> recognise, I don't answer. If it's important, they'll leave a message.

My sentiments exactly!

Jill

"Jeßus" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 09:12:49 -0500, Nancy Young
> > wrote:
>
>>On 1/18/2016 1:23 AM, Je?us wrote:
>>> On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 06:09:00 +0200, Opinicus
>>> > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 16:34:43 -0500, S Viemeister
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I can't be bothered to waste _my_ time on them.
>>>>> We have caller ID, and an answerphone. If the number isn't one I
>>>>> recognise, I don't answer. If it's important, they'll leave a message.
>>>>
>>>> This is the method I use on my mobile line.
>>>
>>> As do I, only trouble is I have two friends whose numbers come up as
>>> 'private', which a small percentage of scammers also have. But number
>>> display is a great filter regardless.
>>>
>>If they give you their number, can you put it in your address book
>>and give it a name?
>
> Possibly Nancy, but I'm not in the U.S and our phone systems are
> different, so I don't know for sure.
>
>>Anyway, I do the same, I do not pick up if I don't know the number.
>>
>>And, thanks to modern technology, I don't know anyone's number, once
>>I get it, it goes into the phone, never to be typed in again. Guess I
>>should back up my list somehow.
>
> I never was much good remembering phone numbers, although I do know
> most of my friends numbers because it comes up on the phone display
> when they call.

I try to put in the phone numbers although I don't always remember people's
cell phone numbers. I try not to call cell phones and prefer to use
landlines. My mom got into the speed dial habit so doesn't know anyone's
number.

On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 17:07:41 -0800, "Julie Bove"
> wrote:

>
>"Jeßus" > wrote in message
.. .
>> On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 09:12:49 -0500, Nancy Young
>> > wrote:
>>
>>>On 1/18/2016 1:23 AM, Je?us wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 18 Jan 2016 06:09:00 +0200, Opinicus
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, 17 Jan 2016 16:34:43 -0500, S Viemeister
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I can't be bothered to waste _my_ time on them.
>>>>>> We have caller ID, and an answerphone. If the number isn't one I
>>>>>> recognise, I don't answer. If it's important, they'll leave a message.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is the method I use on my mobile line.
>>>>
>>>> As do I, only trouble is I have two friends whose numbers come up as
>>>> 'private', which a small percentage of scammers also have. But number
>>>> display is a great filter regardless.
>>>>
>>>If they give you their number, can you put it in your address book
>>>and give it a name?
>>
>> Possibly Nancy, but I'm not in the U.S and our phone systems are
>> different, so I don't know for sure.
>>
>>>Anyway, I do the same, I do not pick up if I don't know the number.
>>>
>>>And, thanks to modern technology, I don't know anyone's number, once
>>>I get it, it goes into the phone, never to be typed in again. Guess I
>>>should back up my list somehow.
>>
>> I never was much good remembering phone numbers, although I do know
>> most of my friends numbers because it comes up on the phone display
>> when they call.
>
>I try to put in the phone numbers although I don't always remember people's
>cell phone numbers. I try not to call cell phones and prefer to use
>landlines. My mom got into the speed dial habit so doesn't know anyone's
>number.

Yep. I have it a little easier here with local numbers, since there
aren't all that many In fact, all we need to mention are the last
four digits of a phone number, as the rest of it is always the same.
No cell phone service available locally either.