From: gilbert@mdd.comm.mot.com (John Gilbert)
Subject: Re: capturing caller id data
Organization: Motorola, Mobile Data Division - Seattle, WA
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 23:56:54 GMT

In article <f0KJ02SJc1ms00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> jsp@pls.amdahl.com writes:
>gilbert@mdd.comm.mot.com (John Gilbert) writes:
>
>}In article <8bYf02a7c0uY00@amdahl.uts.amdahl.com> jsp@pls.amdahl.com writes:
>}>John, don't you ever get tired of beating your head against this same wall?
>}>I answered the above question for you the last time this went around.  You
>}>didn't really listen to my answer then, and I don't see you really listening
>}>now, either.
>
>}Wellll... I think this is a case of you giving an answer to a slightly
>}different question than I asked, and then assuming your answer was so
>}satisfactory I should just declare you right.
>
>Ah, this then could be the source of our problem.  You see, to me, this
>is simply not an issue of "right" or "wrong".  The question is one of
>personal preference.  When a person wants something, he can't be "right"
>or "wrong" about it, because it's just what he wants.  If what you want
>is different from what I want, neither of us can be "right" or "wrong",
>we are just different.

Then what is the intent of your first paragraph above, or your post at all?
If you think I have an opinion, and you have an opinion, then why do you
claim I am not listening.  I wasn't referring to you, and pretty clearly
I was dealing with an issue which is differnt than the one you attempt to
address.

It seems to me what you are saying is that you simply have an opinion that is
neither right or wrong, just what you "want" (which is great, as I said),
but when you address me, you seem to be questioning why I would
say the things that I do.  Sounds to me like you think what I am saying
has no value... like I should see it your way or something.

>All I've ever tried to do on this subject is to tell you that what I want
>is different from what you want.  I've never expected you to "declare me
>right", I've only asked you to acknowledge that I want something different
>than what you want, and that CID might just possibly fill my needs better
>than answering machines and/or secret codes.  If you have had the attitude 
>that one of us must be "right", then it's no wonder that we just keep going 
>round and round.

But the whole world does not revolve around James Preston.  You are not
the model for everyone's needs.  Nor am I.  I think I am suggesting some
fairly common scenarios, and asking people to take a look at how well
CLID might really address them, because the telco's sales pitch seems
to represent things that it does not really do.

You are willing to lose calls you might want in favor of avoiding
nuisance calls.  Your choice.  What you WANT.  That is great.  I state it
now, clearly, so you won't be confused...

Other people, who think that CLID would be effective in their home might
be a bit surprised if they consider the realities of it.  And they might
be happier with something cheaper and more suited to their needs.
I don't say all folks are like that.  But I bet some fall into that
category.  I just have another point of view on the whole thing.

I don't know why you are saying, in the context of this thread, that I
am telling you what YOU want.  You want what ever it is you want.
Fine by me.  Keep wanting it.

John


-- 
John Gilbert
gilbert@mdd.comm.mot.com
..!uunet!mdisea!gilbert
Newsgroups: misc.consumers