From: slug@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Wowbagger The Infinitely Prolonged)
Newsgroups: austin.general
Subject: Re: PUC: Caller ID illegal
Date: 17 Nov 92 23:09:22 GMT
Distribution: austin
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX

In article <83759@ut-emx.uucp> shoroff@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Srihari Shoroff) writes:
>In article <1992Nov12.171104.9358@oakhill.sps.mot.com> brucel@oakhill.sps.mot.com writes:
>>Making Caller ID illegal is good news to me.  I was very concerned about
>>the invasion of privacy involved.  So concerned, in fact, that I asked to
>
>different from the peephole you have on your front door. You should have the
>right to know who is standing there before you open the door for him. If the
>guy outside doesnt want to let his identity be known he's within his rights
>to block the peephole by placing his thumb on it, but you're perfectly within
>your rights to refuse to open the door for him. Would you consider this an
>invasion of privacy of the person who's knocking on the door? CallerID 
>limits its "resolution" to just identifying the number and not the person
>*actually* on the phone but I dont see why it should give privacy advocates
>nightmares. I've seen some discussion on this topic in some other groups,
>but I never seem to understand why privacy advocates are so reluctant to
>forfeit their right to call people anonymously.
> 

What about the rights of the people receiving the call?  I feel I have the 
right to know who is calling me, since they are disturbing me.  Sure, you
say I do not have to answer the phone, but I frequently get calls in the 
middle of the night where they hang up as soon as I pick up the phone.  These
types of calls would stop rather instantly if caller ID were avaible to me.

You should not have the right to keep make anonymous calls to my house!  THe
phone ringing disturbs me, but I do not want to turn of the ringer because 
then I may miss an important call.

Simple solution:

DO NOT CALL ANYONE THAT YOU DO NOT WANT THEM TO HAVE YOUR PHONE NUMBER!

This is a 2-way street.  If you dial *my* number then I should know who you
are.

I am tempted to get call-return just so I can call back those who hang up on
me, but why should I have to pay extra to try to protect myself and still not
know who is disturbing me?

I would like to see caller ID legal.  If you want the option to turn it off, 
then give me the option of having my phone AUTOMATICALLY REFUSE any call from
a "blocked" caller ID.  If you do not want to tell me who you are, then I do 
NOT want to talk to you.  You should have nothing to hide from me.

>
>Per-call-blocking is absolutely essential,  

Why?  Are you engaged in something illegal that you should *have* to disguise
who you are?

>If you dont want to let
>callerID give out your identity, more power to you, just dont believe the 
>recepient is obligated to pick it up!
>
But I do not want to talk to anyone who wishes to hide their identity from me!
I would like to block "anonymous" calls.  It is my right as well!


-- 
slug@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu                             *****  Glen A. Graham  *****
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You can't make anything foolproof, |   "I have something to say... it is better 
 Because fools are so ingenious!   |    to burn out than to fade away!" - Kurgen
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------