Posts filed under 'Bizarreness'
KFC have me concerned with their latest television advertisement (mirrored locally here for archival purposes as I’m sure KFC will remove it from their site in a matter of weeks).
The commercial talks about how all of their chicken is fresh, not frozen, when delivered and cooked on-site. However the fine print about five seconds in contains the disclaimer:
Excludes emergency stock.
It’s probably a very prudent practice to store some frozen chickens for the next time the chickens get visited by Rocky Rhodes and build a giant aeroplane in order to escape from captivity…but seriously, emergency chicken stocks? Maybe it’s perfectly safe, but it just doesn’t sound right…I wonder what the rotation rate is for these frozen chickens (eg. how long do they keep them frozen before discarding them)? And more importantly, I hope that they are discarding of near end-of-life emergency stock and not slipping it in with the daily fresh chicken batch.
I suppose that, ultimately, it’s just as the chefs say: if you knew what happened in the kitchen, you wouldn’t eat there.
Samuel
July 21st, 2008 at 08:06pm
That’s what Eugene Williams, Mayor of Lynwood, Chicago would have you believe.
Village leaders have passed an ordinance that would levy $US25 ($A25.72) fines against anyone showing three inches (7.62cm) or more of their underwear in public.
Eugene Williams is the mayor of Lynwood. He says young men walk around town half-dressed, keeping major retailers and economic development away.
It’s not the first time such laws have been considered in the US, but this is the first time that I’ve heard anyone try to blame visible underwear for a lack of urban development. Usually such laws are considered either for reasons of personal taste (eg. the mayor or a lobby group don’t like looking at underwear) or “safety” (although I’m not sure how that argument works…and I’m pretty sure it’s a cover for the personal taste reasoning).
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) have trotted out their usual line about the ban having to do with racial profiling and being an attempt to discriminate against young black males (oddly referred to as “young men of colour” by ACLU)…it’s entirely possible that the media contact number for ACLU diverts to an answering service on weekends as their argument doesn’t seem to address the reasoning provided by the Lynwood council and sounds more like a recorded response to “press four if your town has just banned visible underwear”.
I think that 21-year-old Lynwood resident Joe Klomes hit the nail on the head when he suggested that, instead of banning visible underwear, the council should “spend money on making the area look nicer”, an idea which might just spark that urban development which Mayor Williams seems to be so concerned about.
Samuel
July 21st, 2008 at 10:41am
Yesterday I mentioned that I had coffee at a coffee shop a few metres away from the Civic bus interchange. The coffee shop in question was Coffee At Helen’s which seems to have had a minor refurbishment since the last time I was there. Unfortunately the refurbishment seems to have brought with it a rather peculiar drop in the level of service.
Me: Could I get a flat white and a custard tart to have here please?
Shop Attendant (in an almost thick accent): Yes, would you like the cuppy mug please?
Unfortunately my brain, due to the accent of the shop attendant, heard one of the Cs as a P, which meant that what I heard was:
Shop Attendant (in an almost thick accent): Yes, would you like the puppy mug please?
Needless to say, I was perplexed.
Me: I’m sorry, what?
Shop Attendant (in an almost thick accent): Cuppy mug, cuppy mug please?
I thought about it for a moment and decided that the question must be whether I wanted the coffee in a cup or a mug.
Me (with some hesitation): A cup please?
(Awkward pause)
Shop Attendant (in an almost thick accent): Ahhh…..cup?
Me: Yes please.
Shop Attendant (somewhat confused): Yes yes, um OK yes.
(Shop attendant walks over to cash register and battles with it for a few moments)
Shop Attendant (in a not so thick accent): The forty-five please…err zero…um four fifty
Surprisingly after that exchange, the coffee and custard tart were quite good…and I didn’t have to drink out of a cuppy mug, which I can only assume is a dog’s bowl with a handle attached. I was almost expecting to end up with coffee on a plate and a custard tart in a cup, especially when the shop attendant took a plate to the coffee machine.
Samuel
July 16th, 2008 at 06:24am
That was odd, I missed a call on my mobile around 12:20pm today, and it went through to my voicemail. What followed was quite extraordinary.
[audio:https://samuelgordonstewart.com/wp-content/YesImTony.mp3]
Download MP3
If you listen to the sound file you will note that my voicemail greeting contains my full name, so why the caller (by the name of Matt) decided that leaving a message on my voicemail would be the best way to ensure that their message got through to “Tony” is beyond me.
When I fist heard the message, my phone cut out during the word “Tony”, so I called Matt to ensure that the call wasn’t actually meant for me, which he confirmed…in fact he seemed to be able to work that out simply from my voice, perhaps he remember leaving the erroneous message on my voicemail, in which case I have to wonder why he didn’t hang up without leaving a message, did he really feel such a strong urge to make the flagfall on the call seem worthwhile?
Samuel
July 15th, 2008 at 02:20pm
Stories like this one make me about as sure as I can be that I don’t ever want to work in a petrol station or convenience store, especially overnight.
Police are searching for a man who robbed a Brisbane service station armed with a fluorescent light bulb.
The offender, who’s been described as chubby, walked into the Shell service station at Breakfast Creek in Brisbane’s north about 4.45am (AEST) today [Monday] and demanded money, police said.
He used the fluorescent light tube to threaten a female worker, before fleeing the scene on foot with a sum of cash.
He is described by police as caucasian, about 180cm tall with a chubby build and blue eyes.
He was wearing a singlet with white stripes down the sides, shorts, white sports shoes and a dark balaclava at the time of the robbery.
I would imagine that getting whacked over the head with a fluorescent lightbulb would be quite painful and I can see why it would be an effective “scary weapon” for use in an armed robbery…but it really leads to the question of what can’t be used for that purpose?
If I was working in a petrol station overnight, I think I’d have a nervous breakdown within a week as I would end up looking at everyone who entered the store with some suspicion…not just because the bag that they’re carrying might be filled with lead and could be used to injure me, but because they might be concealing almost anything potentially painful under their clothing.
Of course, they don’t even have to conceal a weapon, let alone have one:
Police are appealing for public assistance in relation to an armed robbery at Campsie overnight.
About 7pm the victim, a 26-year-old Campsie man was walking along South Parade talking on his mobile phone when he was approached from behind by two youths.
One of the youths punched the victim to the head area and he dropped his phone and a sum of cash which one of the youths picked up.
Perhaps I’m just naturally paranoid…a number of people have told me so over the years. All I can say is that with lunatics roaming the streets wielding fluorescent lightbulbs and sums of money from petrol stations, and more lunatics punching people in the head, why wouldn’t you be paranoid?
Samuel
July 15th, 2008 at 08:23am
I don’t know if any of you remember PodZinger as it came and went from the public spotlight very very quickly a few years ago, but basically it was a semi-promising new search engine which aimed to automatically index and transcribe podcasts. If it worked, it would have been a good way to find information in what is otherwise an awful medium to search.
But of course, it was doomed from the beginning as anybody who has ever used voice recognition software would have known. To get a computer to recognise a voice with any amount of accuracy, you have to train it. Usually this involves two steps, the initial preset “read these sentences” training exercises where the computer gets to hear you say things that is asks you to say, and then the ongoing “no, I said “cat” not “hat”, the hat is not in the hat, the cat is in the hat…no, the cat is not in the cat either” intermittent corrections which also help the computer to learn how to understand your voice.
The reason we need to teach the computer how to do recognise an individual’s voice is that everyone has a slightly different voice and a slightly different speech pattern…and if humans who are predisposed to understanding the speech of other humans have difficulty understanding people with accents, what hope does an untrained computer have?
As far as I can tell, PodZinger had no form of quality control…the robot listened to the audio, produced a mangled transcript of it, and nobody bothered to check the accuracy of it. A system where corrections could be submitted by listeners could have worked better, but I don’t think PodZinger were ever interested in having masses of voice samples floating around in their system, nor do I think that having masses of voice samples from different people would have helped with individual transcriptions.
So, why am I babbling about an ultimately failed search engine of little-to-know consequence? Because they’re still around under a different name (EveryZing) doing much the same thing, albeit with expansions in to the more profitable and sane market of search engine optimisation, and expecting people to pay them for it. Maybe the transcription software is better today than it was in 2007, but I wouldn’t be willing to pay them in order to test the theory.
I noticed that they are still around on the weekend when I was wondering if they are still around and was shocked to find that they are. They also have all of their old archives…and if you search for my name, you can be informed about my Chinese communist leanings by their transcription robot.
It has transcribed the Feedback segment from Samuel’s Persiflage #13, specifically the section from 47 minutes and 58 seconds. According to their robot, in that segment I said:
can go to get sort of course if you concentrate back podcasted Samuel Gordon Stewart — Communists the email address or you can leave comments in the China nights or irritants Samuels who supplies were sought to
Maybe the robot’s ears are blocked, because when I listen to that segment, I hear:
feedback to get through and of course if you’ve got some feedback, podcast@samuelgordonstewart.com is the email address or you could uh leave the comments in the show notes or go to the samuel’s persiflage website and
That said, I have been (jokingly) accused of encoding secret messages in Samuel’s Persiflage…maybe they were on to something…I would have to be among the last people on Earth that anybody would consider as a possible communist, so I would have to be the perfect vessel for hiding and broadcasting such messages.
It leaves me pondering the question: “Why am I giving the conspiracy nuts something to work with?”
Samuel
June 30th, 2008 at 06:10am
Nick sent in a picture of this morning’s rather unusual discount at the Caltex Woolworths pertol station in Weston Creek:
Maybe they forgot to change one side of a sign…
Nope, looks like we can rule out that theory.
So, if the normal price is 165.9 cents per litre and a four cents per litre discount brings the price down to 163.9 cents per litre, that probably makes for one very happy accountant. It would certainly help with that profit outlook Caltex were so worried about yesterday.
I wonder if the “half of the discount is to be paid for by the purchaser” clause is in those “in-store terms and conditions” that the big green sign mentions?
Samuel
June 28th, 2008 at 09:44am
From my spam folder:
From: Sid Is
Subject: Why you should never hire a receptionist
Before you hire an expensive professional receptionist . . .
Try our Remote Receptionist™ Service
for seven days, absolutely FREE!
CLICK (URL removed) for a free trial
CLICK (URL removed) for more information
or CALL (phone number removed)
Who says that the best professional receptionists have to cost a fortune?
When you use TelAssistants’ Remote Receptionist Service, we’ll put our team of top-flight, highly-trained professional receptionists to work for you. And at an extremely low cost that your small or mid-sized business can easily afford.
How do we it? Easy. Our super-qualified receptionists work remotely from our suite of offices . . . but your clients will think that they’re right outside your door. We answer the phone using your firm’s name, announce and transfer callers, and take messages or place calls in voicemail upon request.
But don’t take our word for it. Put Remote Receptionist Service to the test right now. Click (link removed) and give us a try for seven days, absolutely free, with no risk or obligation of any kind. Use your own phone number or ours. All we ask is the chance to prove that TelAssistants’ Remote Receptionist Service is the perfect answer you’ve been looking for.
________________________________________________________
IMPORTANT: Remote Receptionist Service is NOT an impersonal answering service or a anonymous call center. Our mission is to provide highly personalized receptionist services to clients who require the highest standards of professionalism no matter where they’re working. (link removed) and put us to the test, risk free.
________________________________________________________
Today, it doesn’t matter where your receptionist sits – in your office or in ours. All that counts is that you get exceptional service and professionalism at an extremely affordable price. Our Remote Receptionist Service delivers this and more!
According to answers.com, “receptionist” is a noun meaning “An office worker employed chiefly to receive visitors and answer the telephone.”
It could just be me, but I don’t think having a receptionist greeting guests via video link is going to look very professional. Perhaps they will have a budget non-video-link version where they put a phone at reception with a sign pointing to it saying “To talk to receptionist, lift handset”.
I suppose it could be worse, they could have all of their “receptionists” in an Indian call centre: “Welcome and pleased be us for calling office the Mr. Andrew. Do having tell of what for you call and hold?”
Such strange offers make their way around the planet in spam emails.
Samuel
June 25th, 2008 at 05:23am
If, in the list of charges, the following appeared, what would you think was the person’s original (alleged) offence?
The man was arrested and taken to Liverpool Police Station where he has been charged with [..] assault police, resist arrest, fail to supply details to police, give false details to police and [..].
You would probably expect that sort of thing to appear in the list of charges for somebody who was drunk and got in to a fight, or perhaps somebody who was on drugs and was caught trying to rob a chemist. So, did the person in this case fit those or any similar categories? The New South Wales police don’t think so:
About 12:40am, a police vehicle patrolling as part of ‘Operation Taipan’ allegedly detected the man’s Toyota Corolla hatchback travelling west at 133km/h as it passed through a 70km/h zone at the toll point on the M5.
The Corolla was intercepted in Heathcote Road at Moorebank, where police discovered the 30-year-old driver had two passengers, a 7-year-old boy and a 4-year-old girl who was apparently not properly restrained.
It’s a perfect alleged example of “how to make things much worse for yourself”. Adding assault police, resist arrest, fail to supply details to police and give false details to police to a rap sheet which already contained exceeding the speed limit by more than 45km/h and having a passenger under the age of 16 not properly restrained is definitely not the way to, should you happen to be found guilty, successfully request a reduced sentence…it certainly didn’t help this person to get bail.
Samuel
June 24th, 2008 at 12:08pm
I usually take a look through the press releases from the New South Wales Police and the Australian Federal Police’s ACT division every day or two as they often make for interesting reading, and I usually get at least one “there are some really dumb people on this planet” story in the mix…but for all of the strange antics I get to read about, I’m often more bewildered by the names given to the various taskforces and operations. Names like “Operation Southroads” are perfectly understandable and even manage to convey the purpose of the operation…sadly the taskforce named in this press release from yesterday afternoon does not make as much sense:
Windsor shooting – Strike Force Tracksuit
Wednesday, 18 Jun 2008 01:15pm
Police are appealing for information from the public following a shooting at Windsor on Monday.
About 5:40pm a 31-year-old man became involved in an argument with another man outside a tattoo parlour in George Street.
A firearm was produced and the 31-year-old was shot in the leg.
The victim was taken to Hawkesbury Hospital where he remains in a stable condition.
Strike Force Tracksuit, comprising of detectives from the Hawkesbury Local Area Command and State Crime Command’s Gangs Squad, are investigating the shooting.
Police are investigating whether the incident may be related to internal tensions involving an outlaw motorcycle gang or external tensions involving a rival gang.
Anyone with information that can assist investigators is urged to contact Windsor detectives on 4560 6999 or Crime Stoppers on 1800 333 000.
Why do I get the feeling that somebody wearing a blindfold picked this name out of a dictionary?
Samuel
June 19th, 2008 at 01:36am
I’m not entirely sure how this train of thought started, but I think it was a couple nights ago when I was thinking about the benefits and disadvantages of the AM radio frequency stepping in Australia and the US from a marketing perspective. For those of you that aren’t aware, Australia uses a 9kHz stepping system whereas the US uses a 10kHz stepping system, so in the US radio stations on the AM band have frequencies which are divisible by 10kHz such as 1040, 920 and 730, whilst in Australia they are divisible by 9kHz, so you have frequencies like 873, 954, 1206 and 1494 (first three stations are obvious, if anybody wants to guess the fourth I’d be quite obliged…as far as I can tell there is only one station in Australia on that frequency, but ACMA keep changing the layout of their website so I can’t be sure).
Anyway, it was around 3am when I was thinking about all of this and my mind wandered on to the way numbers which are divisible by nine and ten work in a base 10 numbering system such as the one we use. I’ll take a step back for a moment here to explain the base ten numbering system for people who are not familiar with the term. Basically it means a numbering system with ten distinct characters available for use in any given number, so in the case of our usual numbering system the available characters are 0123456789. Effectively the way it works is that you count up (eg. 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9) and when you run out of characters you increment the leading digit by one character and start again with the following digit(s) (eg, you would carry on with 10, 11, 12 etc). To make it blatantly obvious what I mean by “leading digit”, it would be possible to repeat those original numbers as “00, 01, 02, 03, 04, 05, 06, 07, 08, 09” or even as “000, 001, 002, 003, 004, 005, 006, 007, 008, 009”. The “leading digit” in this case is the one immediately preceding the digit which has run out of characters. In the case of “0099″ the bold zero would be the leading digit as both digits behind it have reached their highest digit and so to continue we must increment the leading digit by one and reset the digits behind it to the lowest available character which in our case is zero.
Other numbering systems also exist, such as base 2 (0, 1, 10, 11, 100, 101, 110, 111, etc) and base 16 (0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, A, B, C, D, E, F, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D, 1E, 1F, 20 etc). It starts to get a tad more confusing if you’re converting between numbering systems but it’s helpful to be able to do so. As an example, the number 91 from the base 10 numbering system would be represented as “1011011” in base 2 and “5B” in base 16. If it still doesn’t make sense to you, perhaps reading the wikipedia article on the subject might be helpful.
Anyway, on with my story (and returning to base 10 for the moment). My thought was specifically about numbers which are divisible by 9 and 10. In base 10 there are certain exclusive rules about these numbers which make them very easy to spot. All numbers which are divisible by ten have a zero as their final digit (eg 10, 50, 730), whilst the sum of the digits in a number which is divisible by nine, is equal to nine or a number which, if you continue the process of adding the digits until you reach a single digit number, will equal nine (eg. 18 (1+8=9), 72 (7+2=9), 99 (9+9=18 1+8=9), 67833 (6+7+8+3+3=27 2+7=9). As implied by the term “exclusive rules”, numbers which are not divisible by nine or ten will not fit these rules.
I was interested in working out whether or not these rules would still apply in numbering systems other than base 10.
It’s quite clear that the rule for numbers which are divisible by ten would not continue to hold true (as 20 in base 9 is “22” and in base 11 is “19”) but I was too tired to work out whether the “divisible by nine rule” would continue to work in other numbering systems. My theory was that, seeing as “divisible by ten” didn’t work, neither would “divisible by nine”, however the rules would work in the form of “divisible by n where “n” is derived from base n” as a substitute for “divisible by ten”, and to the same extent a rule for “divisible by n-1 where “n” is derived from base n” as a substitute for “divisible by nine”. In both cases, if my theory was accurate, the rules I was originally working with would just be the base 10 equivalent of the new rules anyway.
So, to test this, I’m going to work with examples from base 9, base 11, and base 12. For the sake of clarity, the symbols available in the versions of these numbering systems that I’m using for this theory are displayed below (it’s also so that once I confuse myself I will be able to just count along the symbols).
Base 9: 012345678
Base 11: 0123456789A
Base 12: 0123456789AB
In the case of “divisible by n where “n” is derived from base n”, all numbers which are divisible by “n” should end in zero which is the lowest available symbol.
For base 9, we can use the example numbers (as expressed in base 10) 9, 27 and 99, all of which are divisible by nine.
9: 10
27: 30
99: 110
All of these, when expressed in base 9, end in zero, fitting the theory.
For base 11, we can use the example numbers (as expressed in base 10) 11, 55 and 132, all of which are divisible by eleven.
11: 10
55: 50
132: 120
All of these, when expressed in base 11, end in zero, again fitting the theory.
And for base 12, we can use the example numbers (as expressed in base 10) 12, 72 and 240, all of which are divisible by eleven.
12: 10
72: 60
240: 200
All of these, when expressed in base 12, end in zero, again fitting the theory.
The “divisible by n where “n” is derived from base n” rule, where numbers which meet the criteria exclusively end in zero seems to work, although it is a fairly straight-forward rule to prove.
It gets a bit more interesting with the “divisible by n-1 where “n” is derived from base n” rule where the sum of the digits in the number need to add up to “n” in base n as the addition needs to be performed in base n, making the whole process so much more confusing.
Working in base 9, where the available symbols are 012345678, and therefore the digits of numbers divisible by 8 need to add up to 8. To make this slightly easier to follow, I’m just going to work up in multiples of 8 (so 8, 16, 24 etc) converted to base 9 (which would be 8, 17, 26 etc, as you will find if you use the example symbol set and count up in groups of 8):
8 (8=8)
17 (1+7=8)
26 (2+6=8)
35 (3+5=8)
44 (4+4=8)
53 (5+3=8)
62 (6+2=8)
71 (7+1=8)
80 (8+0=8)
88 (8+8=17 1+7=8)
etc
With this number set it works. With Base 11:
Available characters: 0123456789A
A (A=A)
19 (1+9=A)
28 (2+8=A)
37 (3+7=A)
46 (4+6=A)
55 (5+5=A)
64 (6+4=A)
73 (7+3=A)
82 (8+2=A)
91 (9+1=A)
A0 (A+0=A)
AA (A+A=19 1+9=A)
Another number set with which the theory works.
Finally Base 12
Available characters 0123456789AB
B (B=B)
1A (1+A=B)
29 (2+9=B)
38 (3+8=B)
47 (4+7=B)
56 (5+6=B)
65 (6+5=B)
74 (7+4=B)
83 (8+3=B)
92 (9+2=B)
A1 (A+1=B)
B0 (B+0=B)
BB (B+B=1A 1+A=B)
I suppose if I stop and think about it, the whole thing makes perfect sense. Unfortunately to convince myself that it made sense, I had to write it down and prove that the theories were correct.
I have another, far less coherent, theory about zero being an even number and the possible erosion of the entire numbering system if it isn’t, but I’ll save that for another day. I can’t see much point in tarnishing a perfectly good theory with a theory which is probably completely nuts…and I’m sure you’ve seen enough numbers for today.
Samuel
June 12th, 2008 at 02:02am
There’s definitely something odd about job advertisements on a Friday. A quick look through the jobs advertised on seek.com.au in the ACT region today has tossed up these:
- A laundromat job which requires a police check
- The Australian Secret Intelligence Service (Australia’s overseas secret intelligence collection agency) looking for a locksmith who can travel interstate and overseas at short notice.
- The federal Department of Education, Training and the Arts listing three identical ads for a physiotherapist job in Queensland as an ACT job in the space of two minutes.
- Frontline Retail (a recruitment agency) posting the majority of their brief job descriptions (the short blurbs which appear in search results) for the day entirely in capital letters with excessive use of exclamation marks and question marks.
At least I’m being entertained by the job advertisements.
Samuel
May 30th, 2008 at 08:17pm
The things people will do in the name of educating children can be quite disturbing. I originally found this with the intent of playing every time Nattie has a bath and seeing how long it takes her to make the connection…the videos was far too amusingly disturbing to subject an innocent dog to though, so I abandoned the experiment and saved the link for the benefit of a slow day on this blog.
Enjoy!
Samuel
May 30th, 2008 at 12:25pm
A spam email:
From: Vern Brewster
Subject: Easy Life
1. Find a girl
2. Invite her to your appartments
3. Use subject product V (or C)
4. Have fun
5. Take her number
6. Profit?
This is followed by a link which I’m not going to repeat here…but on the assumption that the poorly spelled “appartments” is supposed to be plural, and the final step involves profit, I can only assume that this is a strange invitation to show a girl a bunch of apartments, force an illegal substance on her, make her buy the apartments by taking her number (credit card number) and then skip the country with the money before the credit card company initiate a chargeback.
Very odd.
Samuel
May 29th, 2008 at 03:40pm
Apparently Japanese robots can have you arrested for calling them multiple times…
TOKYO (Reuters) – A Japanese man was arrested for calling a food company’s toll-free number 500 times in 16 months because he wanted to hear the woman’s voice on the automated tape, police said on Monday.
The 38-year-old plumber, who was arrested on Sunday, made 3,100 hours worth of free calls to the company, costing it almost 4 million yen (19,500 pounds) in phone bills, a police spokesman in Takasaki, northwest of Tokyo, said.
“He gets excited by the woman’s voice on the guidance tape,” the spokesman said, adding that the voice sounded normal to the detective who was involved in the investigation.
Source: Reuters
So what is the crime here? A business has a “toll-free” telephone number which effectively means that the business pay for the calls they receive instead of the caller. This is a very common practice, in Australia it is generally used in the form of numbers with a “1800” prefix (usually no cost to the caller) or a “13” prefix (usually at a cost of 25 cents to the caller). These numbers are generally setup to provide some element of convenience to the caller such as an easier to remember number or reduced call cost in the case of a business which expects calls from outside their local area. The cost to the business operating the toll-free number varies depending on factors such as the length of the call and location of the caller.
Most of these numbers are answered by an Interactive Voice Response (IVR) system, probably best described as a robot which directs your call to a particular person or department depending on the button you press or its (often amusingly bad) understanding of your spoken instructions. The automated messages which you hear from these IVR systems are generally professionally recorded by a voice artist which usually means that the message is well-spoken and the voice is at least remotely appealing…after all, you don’t want potential customers to hang up simply because they can’t stand the voice answering the phone.
As far as I can tell, this man was not harassing any of the human staff, in fact I don’t think he ever spoke to them as he was only interested in listening to the voice on the IVR. This leaves me wondering what he could possibly have done that was illegal. Whilst there are laws against harassing people on the phone by calling them multiple times when they don’t want you to, an IVR not only isn’t human, it’s also not going to be annoyed if somebody wants to keep listening to it.
Perhaps it is illegal to call a toll-free number with the intention of costing the other party money if you have no intention of doing business with them. That would be a very difficult law to write as I’m sure most of us have called a bank or telephone company’s toll free number with the intention of challenging a fee or billing error, which if proven would be a call for the sole intention of costing the other party money, although I suppose it could be argued that discussing an “accounts matter” is “doing business”. In that case I’ll expand on my theory. If you were to call a company to cancel business relationship with them immediately and your account balance was zero, it could be argued that this was a call for the purpose of “cancelling business” rather than “doing business” and as the call cost the company an amount, and a reasonable person would know that the call would cost the business an amount, the call was made with the intention of costing the business some amount of money.
It would make for incredibly bad publicity for the company (eg. a headline of “Man jailed for closing account over the phone” with the company named in the article would not be a good look for the company), but the conviction would stand. I think we can probably rule that out as a law in any sane society.
So what’s left? A law against admiring voices? I’m quite partial to the voice on the IVR in my current workplace, a voice which also happens to be used by the ticket system in many St. George Bank branches. Would I be breaking the law if I sat in a St. George Bank branch all day listening to “Ticket B5 to counter seven”? I doubt it.
I just can’t imagine a plausible law against what this man is accused of doing. If he knew that it was costing the business money to place the calls then I believe that he was ethically in the wrong, but it’s not illegal to be ethically wrong. As far as I can see, the only thing which he could possibly face is a civil lawsuit from the company to reclaim the cost of the calls, in which they would need to prove that:
1. He made the calls for a purpose other than the purpose for which the toll-free number was setup, and
2. He knew that it would cost the company money
From a legal perspective, the whole case sounds very flimsy. I’m not a lawyer, but I think they (the business receiving the calls) would be much better off getting their toll-free number provider to block calls from this man, or just reaching an agreement with the man that they will provide him with a copy of the IVR recordings on the condition that he does not call them again. I’m sure that the man would be happy with a copy of the IVR recordings as they would be of a higher quality than what he hears on the phone, and may even include some recordings he might not normally hear on the main menu.
I just hope that the police didn’t spend much time on this investigation. It seems like an amazing waste of police time and taxpayers’ funds to me.
Samuel
May 28th, 2008 at 01:04am
Next Posts
Previous Posts
