Contempt is what I have for most of the people on this site. I'll probably get banned for this, but I will attempt to put my point across in a well thought out manner. For the past day since stumbling across this site I have been attempting to play Devil's Advocate (admitedly very badly).

I don't work for Ofcom, or anyone like that, I'm just an ordinary Joe Blow who happens to dislike people who whinge and have no sense of proportion.

I have been disgusted by some of things people have written on here. I'll list some examples:

1) A major earthquake occurs. People are dying, families are devestated. Think about the actual real-life effects of this. Human tragedy of the highest order. And you people still complain because you have to pay a few more pence a minute in order to donate. Pathetic.

2) Children in Need. I really hope I don't have to go into why this charity does such an important job, please I hope you guys can work it out. And still you people whinge about the numbers. Pathetic.

3) July 7th. 56 people were killed and hundreds more maimed in dispicable attacks on London. And still you say things like if it was Ofcom people wouldn't have cared. Now I don't know nyone at Ofcom, but they are regular people like you and me. People with families. You should be ashamed.

4) Somebody complaining because Watchdog don't have a freepost address and have the audacity to charge  for calls!! I mean FFS, if you're that bothered about whinging then pay the fecking postage fee, or pay the 40p it would cost you to make the call. Don't expect organisations to pay so that you can whinge about your pedantry complaints for free.

Honestly, my God. I'm almost (but not quite) speechless. I will be honest and say I know very little about Ofcom, Oftel or any of the other bits and bobs (as NGM to his credit pointed out). I do know about the numbers, but I also have something I don't think you guys have: perspective.

Is it really worth saying some of the disgraceful things you lot have been saying? Honestly, no.

So there, I've said my piece. Ban me if you wish, or try to argue against me. However much I agree with the underlying principle of what you're doing I can't help but feel sad at the pedantry of it all.

Now in all honesty I agree with some of what you guys are saying. But honestly, you have

I am sad that you have contempt for me - such a strong emotion when you know nothing about me, or what I do or what I give to whom.  I can hold my head up when my day of reckoning comes.

My reason for objecting to 0870 so strongly is simply because I hate to see 'freeloaders' making advantage from these calls - especially when human tragedies occur.  If you cannot accept this then you would be advised not to visit this site, which has a very clear title!

To give to charities is commendable and I'm sure I speak for most site contributors when I say we give as much as anyone else, but I won't give by phoning 0870.

A list of organisations was on the TV screen last night and only the DEC had an 0870!!  So my cash goes through the alternatives.

So, MR A, you are not held in contempt by me, life is too short for such overblown predjudices against persons unknown.  Have a good life.

This guy is a classic TROLL.

I suggest we exercise our democratic right to not reply to his  postings!

wow you have contempt for me. Im so Honoured you have time to have feelings like that for me. Im also an "ordinary Joe Blow".

Now I dont have to explain myself to you... but as for July 7th, people from abroad couldnt ring those 0870's.
"regular people like you and me" yep just people being paid 6 figure salaries and who are ex teclo anyway.

wrote on Oct 15^th, 2005 at 12:07pm:

I suggest we exercise our democratic right to not reply to his  postings!

Agree,

juby

[glb]Somebody complaining because Watchdog don't have a freepost address and have the audacity to charge  for calls!! I mean FFS, if you're that bothered about whinging then pay the fecking postage fee, or pay the 40p it would cost you to make the call. Don't expect organisations to pay so that you can whinge about your pedantry complaints for free.[/glb]


I recently had bad service from NTL, and if it wasn't for this site, I would have had to pay 0870 rates for holding on for half an hour.  Instead I called their freephone number.

Why should we have to pay to complain.  I would much rather have had internet access with no problems, but instead I had a message saying that the number cannot be recognised.

However NTL's attitude was that I should be paying 25p per minute to report this to technical support.  So next time you have a problem with bad service, if goods you order don't arrive, if your ISP won't let you connect to the net, if your brand new cooker or washing machine breaks down, I take it you're more than happy to call a premium rate number to make your complaint, and of course be left on hold whilst waiting for the call to be answered.

Or maybe you'd prefer not to whinge, and upset these lovely companies who are so worthy of our hard earned cash, and to show your appreciation, let's order some more goods from these companies, and if they don't arrive, we'll reward them with our custom again!!

Alternatively, if you send some money to my paypal account, I will send you a mystery gift, and if it doesn't arrive, then I take it you won't whinge, but if you do want to whinge, I'm happy to provide an 090 number for you to do so!!

wrote on Oct 15^th, 2005 at 1:45am:

...3) July 7th. 56 people were killed and hundreds more maimed in dispicable attacks on London. And still you say things like if it was Ofcom people wouldn't have cared. Now I don't know nyone at Ofcom, but they are regular people like you and me. People with families. You should be ashamed.

I joined this site after the London Bombing because I was so outraged that an 0870 number was used for the helpline. I was angry that people who were desperate to know what had happened to relatives were being exploited, that people calling from abroad could not use the number and that people calling from pay as you go mobiles would run out of credits very quickly and before they could get through and be sick with worry.

I complained to OFCOM. It was a complete waste of time. I was told it was not their problem and to call the Home Office and that there was nothing they could do. When asked I was alos told that other people had phoned in to complain, although interestingly later we found out this tolta was unbelieveably only 5 I believe. I also found out that my call was almost certainly not registered as a complaint because I hadn't requested  it to be so and I wasn't asked if I wanted it to be so. I would have thought that that my outrage on the call would have made it obvious and like most I would not have known that I  needed to give some 'secret code' to make it obvious - hence the fantastic low total of 5 I presume.

Low and behold a few days later when the sh*t hits the fan' OFCOM take credit for raising this issue with the authorities.

A rather different message than what they put out a few days before when any idiot could see it was an immoral thing to be doing.

I'm sure individually OFCOM people cared, but I would have liked to see them being a hell of a lot more proactive. Although I'm sure that nobody actually thought 'Lets use an 0870 to make money of a tradegy' the crass incompetence and lack of immediate action on this was appalling.

I work from home and saw the number displayed on the TV screen very early on in the tradegy. I registered for this site immediately. I was however beaten to my outrage by many others. Why weren't OFCOM for whom this is their business still not on the ball even days later.

I like to think of myself as having an open mind.

Now I, like everyone else, agree that the london bombing was terrible but why should the government, C&W and the mobile companies that charged upto 40ppm make a profit from such tragedy?  And they must have done.  In my opinion, no one should have profited from this tragedy whatsoever.

Due to forum members on this site (and maybe others) the government announced they would use a freephone and a geographical god forbid it should be needed again.  Now I personally don't expect the government to have to fund the 0800 number as this would actually cost the government money which in turn means more tax for us so a geographical is all that I was expecting but the use of an expensive 0870 number was not needed/necessary.

C&W who supplied the number for the london bombing offered cheaper alternatives first but the government chose the 0870 instead.  Why when it didn't need to?

I believe it also shows the lack of knowledge that the government has because as soon as they were aware of the high costs involved they released a geographical number.

And only after it was aware of the excessive call charges did MP Hazel Blears, after investigating it, asked the networks if they would kindly donate the profit they made from those calls for which I believe they did.

My problem is I hate to see people being ripped off and being unaware of it.

Do you watch rogue traders, watchdog, etc?  Specifically those companies that go into houses and claim things are broke when they're not and purposely taking longer than necessary just to rip off people.  They do this because most joe public are unaware.

A similar thing exists about NGN's (especially 087x).  Most people are not aware of the costs involved (ofcom admit this) and this is likely because they are still described as local or national rate which obviously they not.  Now some companies using them are purposely using them to gain revenue without the customer knowing about it.

As mentioned on another thread, Ofcom have been aware of this for ages and their last consultation confirmed the dislike of the public because they had over 100 respondents and took over 9months for a result which turned out to be another consultation.  Basically it is being dragged on and on and on.

Not to go too much off-topic I can see where Ofcom are coming from on some of their points and I don't personally expect them to immediately announce that revenue sharing will end.  I believe this is unfair and for those companies that want to continue to ripping us off then a time scale is appropriate.  I think 1 year is over the top and would say about 6months is fair to allow all those companies time to consider what they want to do and make the necessary amendments like letterheads, business cards, etc.

Now going back on-topic, look at the following scenario:-

You have 2 companies that are in direct competition with each other.  Both operate tel support but one operates an 0870 that unfortunately is generally known as national rate and the other one operates a 09x number but this 09x number is charged at exactly the same rates as that of the 0870.

Which one is going to get more business?  Obviously the 0870 company because people aren't aware of the costs involved in ringing and are definitely not aware that the company they are calling is actually gaining revenue from the call (ofcom admit this).  Whereas most people are aware that an 09x number is premium rate.

Now if 0870 was described as premium rate same as this 09x number then people would be aware that they are paying over the odds for the call and that the company gets a cut of the call charge in return (as happens now).

There is no difference between either the 0870 or the 09x except certain 09x numbers cost more.  The problem is that most consumers are unaware of the real costs involved in these NGN's.

Another example is AOL's decision to use an 0870 number.  AOL aren't cheap compared  to some of the other ISPs and AOL must get more money that most other ISPs simply because their 'content' has adverts all over it.  I know someone who has uses AOL and these adverts are all plastered all over the place when you log-on.

Why didn't AOL use a 09x number that costs the same amount as the 0870?

Same reasons as above and that is everyone would know that 09x is a premium rate number and avoid them whereas using the 0870 number then most people aren't aware of the costs involved and more importingly that AOL gain revenue from the calls they receive.

In fact if I had no choice but to call AOL on their 09x number that costs the same as a 0870 or their 0870 then it would actually be cheaper for us to call the 09x simply because call charging whilst in a queue are not allowed therefore holding for 30mins on an 09x number then I wouldn't get charged until they answered and I spoke with a human being.  Completely different for 0870 and AOL would actually get more money using an 0870 due to the lack of ofcom to admit that they are premium rate numbers albeit not as high as some of the 09x numbers.

bbb_uk. What can I say other than I agree with every single word.

I still stick to my original theory that Mr Asaboa is a senior employee of Ofcom, even though he now attempts to cover his tracks by pretending he is not.

The attitude that we are over excited about something that costs only a few pence per minute (when these calls are in fact worth £1.5 billion per year and constitute 25% of all uk calls by value) and is trivial is one I have persistently encountered from certain senior ex telco Ofcom and especially Oftel senior personnel.  It is also to be found throughout their consultation documents.

Mr Asaboa says he simply stumbled across this site but he then went out of his way to attack the integrity and impartiality of several active forum contributors.  He spends long hours studying all the posts.  Comeon pull the other one.  This person is either a senior call centre scamming person, a telco person or an Ofcom person.  And some of the attitudes expressed are a virtual dead ringer for the Mr Angry face of a senior Ofcom employee who tries to play Mr Niceguy until he realises he is not going to ever ensnare you in the Ofcom way of thinking. The vitriolic critcism of us for daring to talk about 0870 when there has been a major earthquake is exactly how that person thinks.  I have already had that person under his own name suggesting that we have a disproportionate interest in what is merely a telecoms tariff and that everything going on in Iraq etc is far more important.

Now that Mr Asaboa (obviously some clever intellectual play name worthy of a Times crossword man and standing for something else when decoded) has been rumbled he strangely seems to have lost his enthusiasm for posting any further.

[glb]Now that Mr Asaboa (obviously some clever intellectual play name worthy of a Times crossword man and standing for something else when decoded) has been rumbled he strangely seems to have lost his enthusiasm for posting any further.[/glb]

He's probably not in his office at the moment.  Whereas genuine contributors to this site are unpaid, and post on the net in our spare time, when not working, Mr Asaboa is carrying out his visits to this site as part of his job, and therefore like any working person is enjoying his weekend break, and probably doesn't want to think about work until Monday morning.

wrote on Oct 15^th, 2005 at 11:00pm:

He's probably not in his office at the moment.  Whereas genuine contributors to this site are unpaid, and post on the net in our spare time, when not working, Mr Asaboa is carrying out his visits to this site as part of his job, and therefore like any working person is enjoying his weekend break, and probably doesn't want to think about work until Monday morning.

Good point Shiggaddi.  I think you have hit the nail on the head.

Even more reason to believe Mr Asaboa works at senior level for Ofcom, a telco or a major uk call centre.  He did seem strangely angry and upset that we spend so much time pursuing an issue which he still wants us to see as being only a few pence per minute extra on each call instead of a multi billion pound ripoff industry.

Yes NGM I think you must be correct. In reality, if "Mr. Asaboa" does not think that NGNs scams are anything we should be complaining about and that the regulator is doing a good job, then what is he doing on this forum at all?

He clearly would not want to use saynoto0870 to find an alternative geographic number for any NGN; according to his stated viewpoint he clearly would pay the extortion rate on an NGN call and feel that was great. He clearly does not want to join the campaign against NGN scams. So he has no reason to be on this web site at all  -  unless ...... he is a spy. So I think NGM you must be correct, and he clearly must think we are totally dumb if we cannot see through his motivation!

wrote on Oct 15^th, 2005 at 10:39pm:

I still stick to my original theory that Mr Asaboa is a senior employee of Ofcom, even though he now attempts to cover his tracks by pretending he is not. The attitude that we are over excited about something that costs only a few pence per minute (when these calls are in fact worth £1.5 billion per year and constitute 25% of all uk calls by value) and is trivial is one I have persistently encountered from certain senior ex telco Ofcom and especially Oftel senior personnel.  It is also to be found throughout their consultation documents. Mr Asaboa says he simply stumbled across this site but he then went out of his way to attack the integrity and impartiality of several active forum contributors.  He spends long hours studying all the posts.  Comeon pull the other one.  This person is either a senior call centre scamming person, a telco person or an Ofcom person.  And some of the attitudes expressed are a virtual dead ringer for the Mr Angry face of a senior Ofcom employee who tries to play Mr Niceguy until he realises he is not going to ever ensnare you in the Ofcom way of thinking. The vitriolic critcism of us for daring to talk about 0870 when there has been a major earthquake is exactly how that person thinks.  I have already had that person under his own name suggesting that we have a disproportionate interest in what is merely a telecoms tariff and that everything going on in Iraq etc is far more important. Now that Mr Asaboa (obviously some clever intellectual play name worthy of a Times crossword man and standing for something else when decoded) has been rumbled he strangely seems to have lost his enthusiasm for posting any further.

How wrong can you be?! I'll start by telling the origin of my user name. I'm a Millwall fan and we recently signed a striker called Carl Asaba. But one of my mates thought we'd signed "some bloke called Asaboa", which I thought was funny, hence the user name.

I actually agreed with the principle of your argument, ironically enough until I came on this site and saw the things listed above which p1ssed me off (eg, saying you words to the effect of you wish Ofcom had been blown up in the 7/7 attacks).

Honestly, I'm proud you think that I'm the CEO of Ofcom, but truth be told, I'm 19. So if I can hit CEO level at 19 then I've done pretty well.

Tbh, I think your conspiracy theories are quite hilarious. You are not that important. You are just the sort of people who are never happy unless you are whinging.

So what if you have to pay 40p a minute to donate. So what? It only takes a minute to donate money over one of those helplines.

I'm a barman, and all day I have to put up with people whinging and complaining, and it really makes me laugh to think that some people are never happy unless they're whinging.

But anyway, I'm too busy for this. I've got a regulatory body to run.  ;)

wrote on Oct 16^th, 2005 at 12:27am:

So what if you have to pay 40p a minute to donate. So what? It only takes a minute to donate money over one of those helplines.

That 40ppm wasn't the donation line. It was the cost that people were paying to ring the helpline because the government chose that number over a geographical even though they didn't really need to. You should not have been expected to pay upto 40ppm to call the helpline (remember there was a queue for obvious reasons and people were on hold in excess of 30mins as reported in the press).  At such time you would ring the helpline regardless of where you were so if you were out and about and not in front of a landline then you were looking at about 40ppm which meant a bill of £12 from a payphone/mobile assuming you were on contract.  Those on PAYG would have easily have run out of credit.  It wouldn't have been that bad had it been a donation line because then people would know that the proceeds were going towards it and like you said it would have only been a very quick call.  

It was only after the government received the complaints did it realise it made a mistake in using a geographical and hence why they will now use a geographical for those ringing from a payphone/mobile or from abroad.

I suggest you read my post again.

wrote on Oct 16^th, 2005 at 12:27am:

I'm a barman, and all day I have to put up with people whinging and complaining, and it really makes me laugh to think that some people are never happy unless they're whinging.

What you call whingeing the rest of us call intelligent analysis and comment.  But obviously I realise that is something that a Millwall supporter would find it rather hard to understand.

When you guys are unhappy rather than making intelligent and perceptive remarks (what you call whingeing) a Millwall supporter simply punches the person he is unhappy with in the face.

Perhaps if we can summarise by saying that this forum is a place for intelligent, analytical and numerate people and not for Milwall fans then you will see why you have to resort to insulting the forum's members in order to cope.

wrote on Oct 16^th, 2005 at 12:27am:

Honestly, I'm proud you think that I'm the CEO of Ofcom, but truth be told, I'm 19. So if I can hit CEO level at 19 then I've done pretty well. Tbh, I think your conspiracy theories are quite hilarious. You are not that important. You are just the sort of people who are never happy unless you are whinging. So what if you have to pay 40p a minute to donate. So what? It only takes a minute to donate money over one of those helplines. I'm a barman, and all day I have to put up with people whinging and complaining, and it really makes me laugh to think that some people are never happy unless they're whinging. But anyway, I'm too busy for this. I've got a regulatory body to run.  ;)

You are wrong; forum members have managed to change the number that the government issues - is this not significant?  And as such it is not whinging.  If it was whinging then why would the government have taken notice of us?  

Your shallow mind fails to see the shame in operating a charity donation line costing 40ppm from a mobile - would you be happy to phone that number, hold in a queue for 10 mins and then a further 3-4 mins while your credit card details are taken?  This would cost well over £5 at least, none of which would go towards the charity.  Is this justifiable?  Use your common sense before answering that one, if you have any at all.  The fact that you're a barman shows that you can't be worth much more than pulling levers and handing drinks and packets of crisps over the counter.  Do you seriously think that someone of your calibre can just waltz on here and completely upheave our entire campaign?

The fact that you laugh at other peoples' misfortunes when they have the impression that you are there to talk to is absolutely disgusting.  And you think you have the authority to tell this forum's members what is and isn't right.  

May I ask if you regularly phone 0870 and 0845 numbers?  If so, do you have any qualms about the excessive costs involved?

NGM and Smasher you have done yourselves great discredit by generalising to such a degree that you have shown what utter arses you are being to me.

Firstly yes I'm a Millwall supporter. I can honestly say I've never punched anyone in the face. To say that all Millwall supporters are violent shows how much you buy into media bullsh1t.

Also to say that as a barman all I'm good for is pulling levers and selling crisps equally is ludacrous. I'm doing my degree at the moment and this is my part time job. Even if it was my full time job, so what? What's my job got to do with my intelligence? Nothing.

There is some evidence of "intelligent analysis and comment" but there is too much of what I call "whinging". Like I say you have become so obsessed with the 0850 0870 numbers that even when watching news about disasters you notice the number more than the news itself. Which is tragic.

Smasher, you talk about my calibre, and yet you're the one stooping low to insult me because I have a part time job.

I was never tyring to upheave this campaign. More, I was trying to provoke some discussion, which I have done in part. This is a forum, I disagree with some of what you were saying so I posted it. Is this not what this forum is for? Discussion? Or is for mutual back-slapping and agreement. You've posted this on the world wide web. If you did not want regular people coming on who may disagree with some of what you are saying you should perhaps not have it here. Capiche?

wrote on Oct 16^th, 2005 at 10:54am:

Like I say you have become so obsessed with the 0850 0870 numbers that even when watching news about disasters you notice the number more than the news itself. Which is tragic.

Well you don't even know that its 0844, 0845, 0870 and 0871 and not 0850, that surely says it all about your shallow knowledge of this topic.

And your comments about us not showing concern about the earthquake are utterly ridiculous as this is not a general news forum so we stick to discussing the use of these numbers here at any time.  It may well be that forum members here are also involved in news forums or donate to charities to deal with disasters like this as a separate matter.  But our only relevant discussion of the disaster here is whether the telephone number used is making mobile phone companies rich instead of ensuring that all the money from the person calling is going to the disaster.

By the way I assume by whinging you meant whingeing or wining but I clearly wouldn't expect someone like you to know how to spell more complicated words.

wrote on Oct 16^th, 2005 at 10:54am:

NGM and Smasher you have done yourselves great discredit by generalising to such a degree that you have shown what utter arses you are being to me.

We have done no discredit, but simply stated the obvious about you.  You haven't exactly been supportive of this campaign so what do you expect from the members?


wrote on Oct 16^th, 2005 at 10:54am:

Firstly yes I'm a Millwall supporter. I can honestly say I've never punched anyone in the face. To say that all Millwall supporters are violent shows how much you buy into media bullsh1t.

If as you claim it wasn't true then the relevant paper/news agency would have been in court for libel charges.  This hasn't happened as yet, therefore, their claims shall be assumed as correct.  I would point out that some of your languauge is inappropriate for this forum.


wrote on Oct 16^th, 2005 at 10:54am:

Also to say that as a barman all I'm good for is pulling levers and selling crisps equally is ludacrous. I'm doing my degree at the moment and this is my part time job. Even if it was my full time job, so what? What's my job got to do with my intelligence? Nothing.

If you could even spell ludicrous I may have had an ounce of sympathy for you, but I don't.  The fact you're doing a degree at the moment means nothing - you could be studying 'Golf' or 'Turf Studies' for all we know.  

Do you not realise what a job has to do with intelligence, i.e. if you're thick you work in a blue collar job (or a bar :D) and if you're brainy, you have a better-paid managerial/research post)?  I don't think I'll bother to explain as you clearly can't and won't see this logically.  



wrote on Oct 16^th, 2005 at 10:54am:

There is some evidence of "intelligent analysis and comment" but there is too much of what I call "whinging". Like I say you have become so obsessed with the 0850 0870 numbers that even when watching news about disasters you notice the number more than the news itself. Which is tragic.

Like NGM has pointed out, there is no such thing as an 0850 number ::) and as for the news coverage, we were interested in stopping C&W making money from this terrible tragedy and stopping the public paying extortionate rates from their mobiles.  Is this right or wrong?  Because of our work the next time (God forbid) there is some sort of incident in this country, a freephone and geo number will be issued.  Is that action something you approve of? ???  



wrote on Oct 16^th, 2005 at 10:54am:

Smasher, you talk about my calibre, and yet you're the one stooping low to insult me because I have a part time job.

I didn't remark at the sole fact that you had a job because that alone is simply shocking.  I commented that as a bartender, you couldn't be expected to comprehend the level of discussion on this forum.


wrote on Oct 16^th, 2005 at 10:54am:

I was never tyring to upheave this campaign. More, I was trying to provoke some discussion, which I have done in part. This is a forum, I disagree with some of what you were saying so I posted it. Is this not what this forum is for? Discussion? Or is for mutual back-slapping and agreement. You've posted this on the world wide web. If you did not want regular people coming on who may disagree with some of what you are saying you should perhaps not have it here. Capiche?

You were never trying to upheave this campaign?? See below ::)


wrote on Oct 14^th, 2005 at 8:14am:

What's your problem with Ofcom?! Basically, they're here to help people like you and they're the ones who first suggested a consultation into the misuse of 087 and 084 numbers. You need to stop being so demanding, be a little more reasonable and stop expecting the Earth. Serial complainers like you need to have a little think about how the system is likely to work. Have alittle think about it.

I think you'll find that this comment was aimed at the forum members who were remarking about OfCOM's complacency at sorting out this NGN scam.  How is this called 'being supportive'?? ??? ::)

OK - to answer some points:

Firstly, there was never any news coverage that said ALL Millwall supporters were hooligans. You or NGM just assumed that I was some kind of thug just because I am to support Millwall. We have a bad element, but that doesn't mean we are all thugs.

Secondly, whilst I am not going to go into what sort of degree I'm doing (frankly it's none of your business and you couldn't care less) I was merely illustrating that I'm not "just" a barman. I think that your generalisations of people's intelligence based on their jobs is a bit wide of the mark tbh.

I do apologise for some of my language, that's a fair point tbh.

True, I haven't been supportive of this campaign. Also, I did knowthat it was 084 or and 087 numbers, typing 0850 was just a silly mistake. And yes, you can pick me up on my spelling. Well done. My spelling is generally decent (unlike your member who couldn't even spell Ofcom) but I don't tend to take the time to think about my spelling when frequenting message forums. Sorry. :(

To be fair, I can now see the point you guys were making about the emergency helpline/donation line thing. I still wholly disagree with comments about wishing was Ofcom, I think that sort of sentiment is pathetic. But to be fair now that you've explained it a bit more I can see how/why you were angry about the use of 0870 numbers during the appeals.

I can comprehend the level of discussion by the way. Not agreeing 100% with what you say does not mean I don't understand.

Finally, I really wasn't trying to upheave this campaign. I'm not so foolish as to think that I could come up with anything so porfound as to make people change their minds. I just disagree with *some* of things people have said. I do see your points (or some of them at least) but some of things you've said I disagreed with. Like I say, particularly the Ofcom July 7th comments.

wrote on Oct 16^th, 2005 at 1:16pm:

OK - to answer some points: To be fair, I can now see the point you guys were making about the emergency helpline/donation line thing. I still wholly disagree with comments about wishing was Ofcom, I think that sort of sentiment is pathetic. But to be fair now that you've explained it a bit more I can see how/why you were angry about the use of 0870 numbers during the appeals.

I messed that up a bit, it's meant to read:

To be fair, I can now see the point you guys were making about the emergency helpline/donation line thing. I still wholly disagree with comments about wishing the July 7th attacks were on Ofcom, I think that sort of sentiment is pathetic. But to be fair now that you've explained it a bit more I can see how/why you were angry about the use of 0870 numbers during the appeals.

Sorry.

wrote on Oct 16^th, 2005 at 1:17pm:

I messed that up a bit, it's meant to read: To be fair, I can now see the point you guys were making about the emergency helpline/donation line thing. I still wholly disagree with comments about wishing the July 7th attacks were on Ofcom, I think that sort of sentiment is pathetic. But to be fair now that you've explained it a bit more I can see how/why you were angry about the use of 0870 numbers during the appeals.

Mr Asaboa you can use the Modify button to correct errors in what you have already posted in the forum.  As there is no spell check we all make such errors.

I think Smasher was out of order suggesting all Blue Collar workers were idiots who effectively couldn't understand the 087and 084 call issues.  These issues are pretty basic really if anyone cares to understand them and do not require one to be Mastermind.

The issue is particlarly that many people now have inclusive calling plans with CPS for all calls starting 01 and 02 from people like www.tele2.co.uk at only £7.50 per month but these 087/4 calls are excluded from the allowances and charged at a higher price than even BT charges by people like the Post Office.  So in a family household if you make 20 minutes of calls a day to 0870 fnumbers or 22 working days in the month that's 22 x £1.50 so £33 of calls and in a BT quarterly billing quarter £99.  So that's £396 a year of calls to 087/4 numbers that are just normal landline numbers of customer service departments.  So do you now really think people on pensions and low incomes of only £5,000 to £10,000 can afford this extra cost of these calls when they thought if they paid £7.50 a month that all their uk calls to uk landlines would be covered.  Ditto why does Vodafone not even reveal the price of calls to 0845 and 0870 numbers from Pay as You Go mobile phones on their website.

The reference to Ofcom and the bomb business was unfortunate, intemperate, unwise, irrational etc like some of your own comments.  The person who made the comment did so in a rash moment when they were trying to make another point. That point is that Ofcom cost the taxpayer a load of money but never do anything to protect ordinary uk phone users from being exploited.

Mr Asaboa I think being a 19 year old you may have started off trying to see if you could wind us up but I'm sure if you have some serious points about 084/7 ripoff numbers to make that we will be very happy to continue to discuss them with you.

I'd point out that my comment about the bartenders was a 'heat of the moment' thing and it isn't meant as an insult - but the way that Mr Asaboa seemed to miss the point completely about the whole NGN issue and the emergency helpline/charity donation line, made me a bit frustrated and I suppose I coupled that up with the job and just typed it there and then.  Sorry, no insult intended ;)  As a gesture of good will I have placed a high quality joke about bartenders at the foot of this post (notable sarcasm intended about the high quality).

But I am glad you seem to understand more of the points about the numbers.  If you do dial these numbers, I'd suggest looking at your phone bill and comparing those calls with geograpical calls of equal or greater duration and see how much more it costs.

--

A Hindu, a Jew and a Bishop walk into a bar...
The bartender says, "What is this, a joke?" ;D

I was going to avoid contributing to this thread, but as it seems to have developed into an unnecessary 'slanging match', I thought I'd make a comment or two for what they are worth. I actually believe that Mr Asaboa has been treated somewhat unfairly, although his initial subject choice and subsequent thoughts regarding contempt didn't help his cause. As far as I can tell, Mr A is generally supportive of the campaign to get rid of NGNs but he differs in the sense of proportion and perspective shown by some aspects of the campaign. Although I disagree with him, his point is one that is sometimes made and is an alternative view that should be considered. It is up to those of us that disagree to try to challenge his viewpoint with sensible, rational and moderate argument and not baseless assertions about his employment, education, intelligence or a particular soccer team. Asserting that his particular job has anything to do with his level of understanding of this issue is just nonsense and similar comments will just bring this resource into disrepute. My own belief is that Ofcom, as a body, is incompetent with respect to regulating telephone scams including NGNs and I maintain that its senior executives should be replaced, however unlike some, I do not feel that Ofcom is corrupt in itself, just that it supports a corrupt numbering system. Others believe differently and are entitled to such views. In summary, I believe that Mr A, whatever his job or background, should be encouraged to share his views about NGNs without fear of being abused. Equally, Mr A should also demonstrate the same restraint when criticizing other contributors. Remember most of us, including, I believe Mr A, are on the same side and want to see these numbers consigned to history. How we do it is open to vigorous debate and that should be encouraged.

I agree with idb, in that Mr A has been "set upon", but his views that it's "Pathetic" that we thought about telephone charges after the bombing in his OP and moreso his choice of title are just as bad.

His job has nothing to do with it. The more people that understand the issues, the better.

There appear to be many complacent people, who, when you start talking about the prices of 0870 numbers respond "What are you talking about? What a load of rubbish."

Ok, to conclude, it got a bit silly with some of the comments made, but to be fair I asked for it.

I think that funnily enough during the course of this thread I've actually learnt more than the rest of this forum, and am now slightly embarrased by the Thread title, because I have changed my mind.

Being a 19 year old I probably tend to speak first learn later, something that I'm sure will change with maturity.

As I have always stated I do support he campaign, just some of the comments angered me enough to start this thread title. However, those have now been explained and I do understand why those comment were made in the first place.

I do feel a little foolish now, but having said that I'm pleased in a way because I have learnt a bit more. I am quite interested in this sort of thing, and do read up on it a bit, and as I have always said I think it's something that needs sorting out. Apparetly Ofcom are nowhere near finishing their consultation on the 084 & 085 numbers so yeah, I think they are being pretty inept. Although I do understand that to change these things takes a long time, and any sort of compliance issues I'm sure would be difficult given the magnitude of the task.

I do apologise for some of my behaviour. I don't apologise for not always agreeing 100%, but I think at times I've acted my age, which I think is a shame because I'm usually better than that (despite supporting Millwall and working in a bar!!).

Anyways, in all honesty, keep up the good work. Looking at things in context I WAS wrong, and we DO need people to "make a stand" or at the very least make important issues heard. I wish you all the best.  :)

I'm sure this apology will be accepted by all contributors - we were all young  (and some of us even impetuous!) once , so let's all get along.
Welcome to the site.

wrote on Oct 16^th, 2005 at 3:26pm:

I think that funnily enough during the course of this thread I've actually learnt more than the rest of this forum, and am now slightly embarrased by the Thread title, because I have changed my mind.

Mr A,

If you wish to delete the words Contempt from your original title for this thread this can be done by going back to your first post in the thread and using the Modify button and then changing what is in the Subject.

Believe me I know what it is like to go to a forum on the web as a newbie and make some comment that makes the "in crowd" of the forum pile in against me.  So I know how that can feel but you surely have to concede, as you have done, that using the word Contempt for the thread title was a little intemperate.

I think the thing with 087/4 is to remember that its a question of it being up to 10p per minute and 4p per minute versus zero a minute with people like Tele2 and TalkTalk if you are on their all geographic (all 01/02 apart from the Channel Islands and Isle of Man)  calls plan.

And as I pointed out if a household calls the 0870 numbers for just 22 minutes a day (not difficult as nearly all customer services departments numbers now begin with 0870) that's over £100 extra a quarter or £400 a year in call charges.  I remember that when I didn't know how to avoid these numbers 5 years ago and there were a lot less of them about then it still used to cost me £20 to £30 a quarter in call charges I shouldn't have had to pay.  That's £120 a year.

Anyhow I hope its possible we can all end up on the same side.  I suspect you started off trying to wind us up for a laugh and then realised the issues involved were more important than that.

wrote on Oct 16^th, 2005 at 3:38pm:

Believe me I know what it is like to go to a forum on the web as a newbie and make some comment that makes the "in crowd" of the forum pile in against me.  So I know how that can feel but you surely have to concede, as you have done, that using the word Contempt for the thread title was a little intemperate.

Was that on the MSE forum by any chance? ;)

wrote on Oct 16^th, 2005 at 4:14pm:

Was that on the MSE forum by any chance? ;)

I also found there were rather a lot of intimidating by the book Policemen and magistrates at this place if one dared to suggest that current speed limits are too low or that there are too many speed cameras scattered about the place.

http://www.5ive-o.org

Haha, shall I go and start disagreeing with everything there?!  ;D Perhaps I better not, seeing as I looked an utter mong when I tried to do the same thing.

BTW - NGM - you said that I was on a wind-up til I saw what an important issue the non-geo numbers were. Well, you're not quite right, but you're certainly closer with that one than the notion that I'm the CEO of Ofcom!  ;)

Speaking of the MSE forum, I recall there was a guy using the handle "Loopytush" on there with a similar posting style to the so-called "Mr. Asaboa". I wonder whether they are one and the same?

wrote on Oct 16^th, 2005 at 6:53pm:

Speaking of the MSE forum, I recall there was a guy using the handle "Loopytush" on there with a similar posting style to the so-called "Mr. Asaboa". I wonder whether they are one and the same?

No, I'm afraid I really am just a bloke who used this moniker only. I've never been on here as any other name. I've no "vested interest" (I read your other post). Sorry to dissapoint, but there really is no "conspiracy" regarding me being here. I don't know about having a similar posting style to anyone else, but there's nothing sinister in it I promise you. And as I said before my spelling is generally half decent when I put my mind to it, but I write pretty quickly in a message forum (too quickly - I tend to post before I've thought) and therefore my spelling goes wrong.

I think Mr Asaboa (hope that's right) has somewhat missed the point (maybe I have though...) which I think is that people are not aware that they are being charged the amount they are for 0870 numbers hence why the efforts here to help in finding alternative geographic numbers.

Its already been proved that any call stats etc, a receiving company need, can be provided from geographic numbers, so the only excuse can be that either the company didn't realise that the reason they're getting such cheap rates from the telco is the telco is keeping the revenue share or if they do that they'd rather have that revenue but keep quiet about it.

To be fair, I do think Mr Asaboa does have a point in that its often difficult to get people to listen if you start bandying about accusations of (for instance) bribery as a reason why Ofcom does not appear to be taking action on this issue. Ofcom isn't solely representing the interests of the consumer, it has to take into account the reasonable commercial expectations of the telco's.

I believe you always win an argument better if you refrain from maligning your opposer, but ensure you have good evidence to defeat their point of view.

Until the "opposer" who has the supposed power to act, continuously pretends to consider the facts and then prevaricates and procrastinates for years and years without end, and continues to preserve the situation of abuse which is illegal under its own original plan.

It seems you have only just come on the scene?

wrote on Oct 17^th, 2005 at 12:30am:

Until the "opposer" who has the supposed power to act, continuously pretends to consider the facts and then prevaricates and procrastinates for years and years without end, and continues to preserve the situation of abuse which is illegal under its own original plan. It seems you have only just come on the scene?

Mr Asaboa would only have been 10 or so when the slippery path of descent into 084/7 ripoff land began so therefore the extent of the current unfairness compared to those of us used to a world where every other customer services number was not a premium rate call will not be quite so obvious to him.

Actually NGM that was specifically a reply to the post by NoNumberTrans, since it was he that has just joined the forum and was making the statement concerning the "opposer"!

wrote on Oct 17^th, 2005 at 6:11am:

Mr Asaboa would only have been 10 or so when the slippery path of descent into 084/7 ripoff land began so therefore the extent of the current unfairness compared to those of us used to a world where every other customer services number was not a premium rate call will not be quite so obvious to him.

That's true, but I would add that the unfairness of these numbers is becoming more and more apparent to me. Yes, I was unaware of the history before I started spouting my mouth off (as I said - a sure sign that I need to mature and learn to think before speaking / posting) but being utterly honest I think I am learning more about the issues.

I must say it's a credit to yourselves that your argument is strong enough to turn a headstrong (and stubborn - and occassionally childish) lad round to agreeing with you.

I doubt I'll ever be an ardent campaigner or anything (too busy studying and handing over packets of crisps at the bar  ;) ) but I can at least appreciate the work people like you guys do.

I concede that far from "just whinging" you actually do some active campaigning, which I have to say is admirable.

wrote on Oct 16^th, 2005 at 11:25pm:

I think Mr Asaboa (hope that's right) has somewhat missed the point (maybe I have though...) which I think is that people are not aware that they are being charged the amount they are for 0870 numbers hence why the efforts here to help in finding alternative geographic numbers.

The point of this forum (and website) is not only to discuss the issues, but to promote them to people who would have otherwise not been aware.

Which is probably why they have come to this site. They've discovered the cost and would like to find a way round it, ie alternative geographical numbers. Some come on the forums to learn more, which is all well and good.


wrote on Oct 16^th, 2005 at 11:25pm:

I believe you always win an argument better if you refrain from maligning your opposer, but ensure you have good evidence to defeat their point of view.

I would agree. We cannot "force" people to think a certain way, but we can tell them the history, and some whys and wherefores, and the fact that some Ofcom top bosses are ex-telecoms staff. See here.

I hope everyone will be responding to the Ofcom consultations. It can be as long or as short as you want or you have the time for. See responses from the previous consultation.

Congratulations Mr. Asaboa,

It is becoming clear now that you are a reasonable and sensible guy after all. It is probably just that you had been mislead previously by all the propaganda, which is exactly what these scams are about. This is why most people do not seem to understand the point when it is first put to them. They have been so convinced by the propaganda that they genuinely believe that there is no problem and everything to do with the cost of calling these numbers is OK, particularly if they have stayed stubbornly with BT all the time, and not sought to reduce their telephone bills on the supposed basis of "free competition".

Keep reading this forum and soon you will be an expert in these things, then you will understand why we stalwarts get so cross about it all.

Who are you calling a 'stalwart'? ::)

Whomsoever wishes to consider themselves to be in that category of "stalwart", as far as opposition to the NGN scams is concerned.

If the cap fits wear it!. I would not include anyone in my description who does not want to be there.

wrote on Oct 17^th, 2005 at 11:42am:

I would agree. We cannot "force" people to think a certain way, but we can tell them the history, and some whys and wherefores, and the fact that some Ofcom top bosses are ex-telecoms staff. See here.

Do you (or any members of this forum for that matter) think it unreasonable that Ofcom's board has ex-members of Telco's on it?

I think it reasonable that they are aware of the reasoning why some Telco's might pursue one course of action rather than another and experience in the industry is good for that.

I think it unreasonable that they have any conflicts of interest with the industry they regulate, because that means they could be seen to be prejudiced on a particular issue.

I haven't yet seen anybody substantiate the claim that members of Ofcom are doing nothing on this issue because they are being bribed through the back door. Also on what basis do you say that abuse of tthe number scheme that perpetuates this is illegal?

I'm relatively new on this forum, but was aware of the issues before joining. I did use it to look up a geographic alternative number, but I couldn't find it. I eventually found it elsewhere (Why I should pay 7.5p minute to ring the local depot of a parcels firm when they are less than 6 miles away I dont realy know, so that's why I came looking). On a side note, do you have to be a member for some time before any geographic alternatives you post appear on this website because the alternative I posted has yet to appear (as of now, posted 2 weeks ago)?

wrote on Oct 19^th, 2005 at 11:26pm:

On a side note, do you have to be a member for some time before any geographic alternatives you post appear on this website because the alternative I posted has yet to appear (as of now, posted 2 weeks ago)?

Sadly the amount of numbers to be gone through and checked is completely beyond the time and resources of our two moderators Dave and DaveM and althoughs others here have pointed out that if we all did 100 numbers each the problem would be solved in a few days that suggestion hasn't got anywhere.

Essentially if people complain about a NGN alternative not being shown in the Verified list Dave or DaveM then immediately check it and add it to shut the complainer up.  But if no one complains it seems that alternative geographic numbers can sadly languish in the unverified list for months.

I would hope the forum owner Daniel could comment on all this except that he would appear to currently be on a long holiday or something as I haven't seen him post in the forum for ages.

Quote:

Sadly the amount of numbers to be gone through and checked is completely beyond the time and resources of our two moderators Dave and DaveM and althoughs others here have pointed out that if we all did 100 numbers each the problem would be solved in a few days that suggestion hasn't got anywhere.

As someone who has benefited from the use of geo numbers on this site, I'd gladly want to give something back by testing out some unverified numbers.  I suggest smaller batches of, say, 25 numbers at a time.  I'm sure if a new thread was started on the issue, or even some statement on the search screen, you'd get futher favourable replies too.

wrote on Oct 20^th, 2005 at 3:45pm:

As someone who has benefited from the use of geo numbers on this site, I'd gladly want to give something back by testing out some unverified numbers.  I suggest smaller batches of, say, 25 numbers at a time.  I'm sure if a new thread was started on the issue, or even some statement on the search screen, you'd get futher favourable replies too.

But Dave and DaveM can only delegate this work to people they know they can trust so I would suggest that only vetting a few helpers and getting them to do blocks of 100 at a time (which won't be more than 3 or 4 hours work) is more realistic.

Of course the people doing the work really need to have calling plans on which geographic numbers are free however many you call, as otherwise its going to cost them money.  Sadly I am not currently on such a plan but anyone running a business from home or with a family at home will tend to be on one.

Hi NonGeographicalMan,

Take your point about vetting people - think I was being naive to think you could send out an open invitation.

I do have an inclusive call plan - partly why I offered - but I also have 4 children so 3-4 hours sounds slightly budensome!  I'd still like to help though, perhaps by having a go at a trail batch of 25 'ish numbers ?

If you look at my postings, you'll see that I'm serious about the issues, if still a newbie!.  The offer is there, anyway.