bloody CTC



I

Ian Smith

Guest
I've been trying to receive newsnet (five attempts and counting, over
the last two months or so). Today I got an email from them -
containing text to the effect of 'from Julie Rand' and a .doc file.

Firstly, I don't have any microsoft software on the machine I read
email on, secondly I mostly use it in a text console so even
openoffice won't help, and thirdly I'm not going to open arbitrary
binary files appearing without any covering description. Is this
their normal way of using email?

I've emailed them back telling them so.

I don't recall when I last thought positively about the CTC - it just
seems to go from bad to worse.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|
 
"Ian Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> I've been trying to receive newsnet (five attempts and counting, over
> the last two months or so). Today I got an email from them -
> containing text to the effect of 'from Julie Rand' and a .doc file.

I get newsnet as an HTML email, no mention of Julie Rand.

I'm guessing it's a manual thing to be added to the list, since to subscribe
you send an email to a real person quoting your membership number. Have you
just had no reply from them?

cheers,
clive
 
On Mon Jun 4 2007 at 13:08:45 GMT, Ian Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
> Firstly, I don't have any microsoft software on the machine I read
> email on, secondly I mostly use it in a text console so even
> openoffice won't help, and thirdly I'm not going to open arbitrary
> binary files appearing without any covering description.

You may want to try antiword; it does a fairly decent job converting
Word files to plain text. See http://www.winfield.demon.nl/

Tom
 
On Mon, 4 Jun 2007, Clive George <[email protected]> wrote:
> "Ian Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
> > I've been trying to receive newsnet (five attempts and counting, over
> > the last two months or so). Today I got an email from them -
> > containing text to the effect of 'from Julie Rand' and a .doc file.
>
> I get newsnet as an HTML email, no mention of Julie Rand.
>
> I'm guessing it's a manual thing to be added to the list, since to subscribe
> you send an email to a real person quoting your membership number. Have you
> just had no reply from them?

No reply (and no newsnet) to the first four emails, this reply (ie
empty message and an attached doc file) to my most recent attempt.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|
 
"Ian Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 4 Jun 2007, Clive George <[email protected]> wrote:
> > "Ian Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> >
> > > I've been trying to receive newsnet (five attempts and counting, over
> > > the last two months or so). Today I got an email from them -
> > > containing text to the effect of 'from Julie Rand' and a .doc file.
> >
> > I get newsnet as an HTML email, no mention of Julie Rand.
> >
> > I'm guessing it's a manual thing to be added to the list, since to
subscribe
> > you send an email to a real person quoting your membership number. Have
you
> > just had no reply from them?
>
> No reply (and no newsnet) to the first four emails, this reply (ie
> empty message and an attached doc file) to my most recent attempt.
>
> regards, Ian SMith
> --
> |\ /| no .sig
> |o o|
> |/ \|
Copied from last weeks `Newsnet` (if you have tried this one ... ignore me)


SUBSCRIBE: If you have been sent this newsletter by a friend and would like
to receive it directly, simply send your membership number (or post code)
and email address to [email protected]

____________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________



--
Colin N.

Lincolnshire is mostly flat ... But the wind is mostly in your face
 
in message <[email protected]>, Ian Smith
('[email protected]') wrote:

> I've been trying to receive newsnet (five attempts and counting, over
> the last two months or so). Today I got an email from them -
> containing text to the effect of 'from Julie Rand' and a .doc file.
>
> Firstly, I don't have any microsoft software on the machine I read
> email on, secondly I mostly use it in a text console so even
> openoffice won't help, and thirdly I'm not going to open arbitrary
> binary files appearing without any covering description. Is this
> their normal way of using email?
>
> I've emailed them back telling them so.

Don't blame the CTC for one computer-illiterate employee. It doesn't,
actually, seem very sensible to blame the CTC for being a
computer-illiterate organisation - computer literacy is not and should not
be its raison d'etre. Many people do not understand the technology that
they use. Many people assume that Microsoft Windows is the only operating
system, and that all computers work the same way, and that a 120Kb road
file is an efficient way of transmitting ten words of text.

Yes, it's incompetence, but it's depressingly widespread incompetence.

--
[email protected] (Simon Brooke) http://www.jasmine.org.uk/~simon/

Hobbit ringleader gives Sauron One in the Eye.
 
> But it's better than nothing. It's just not as miraculous as you
> claim.

Works for me, guess the world's just got it in for you. Tip: next time you
get a call, ask to speak to their supervisor then get them to take you off
the list. Works better than swearing.
 
On 4 Jun 2007, Mark Thompson <> wrote:

> > But it's better than nothing. It's just not as miraculous as you
> > claim.
>
> Works for me, guess the world's just got it in for you. Tip: next
> time you get a call, ask to speak to their supervisor then get them
> to take you off the list.

Yes, and when you've done that, what, ten times? What 'tip' do you
suggest then?

To be honest, your 'tip' sounds like condescending **** from someone
that's never had any problems with computers phoning your number and
consequently refuses to believe anyone has such problems. Do you
really think I didn't try asking for a supervisor? Asking for teh
supervisor's superior, asking for anyone that would take
responsibility for their call list? Do you realkly think I didn't try
everythjing possible when being phoned repeatedly for months on end?

> Works better than swearing.

No, the only thing that worked better than anything else was serious
threats of legal action. Swearing was useless, rational discussion
was useless (to anyone at the opffending company), phoning teh company
myself was useless, telphone preference service was useless, 'silent
call blockers' were useless and most of BT was useless.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|
 
> To be honest, your 'tip' sounds like condescending **** from someone
> that's never had any problems with computers phoning your number and
> consequently refuses to believe anyone has such problems.

No, I do believe that the world (or at the very least, that company) has it
in for you. Not taking your number off their list was almost certainly
deliberate, rather than incompetance. I speak as someone who has worked in
a call centre.
 
Roos Eisma wrote:
> And there are the numpties who still call and respond surprised when you
> mention the TPS. I got some of the local double glazing ones to hang up on
> me when I started firing back questions about their company name, address,
> etcetera.

a) No need to mention the TPS, just ask for their details. Merely a
company name and phone number will do.

I've only received share spams recently on the phone, but it's by far
the pleasantest and simplest way to make them hang up.
--
A
 
Simon Brooke wrote:

>
> Don't blame the CTC for one computer-illiterate employee. It doesn't,
> actually, seem very sensible to blame the CTC for being a
> computer-illiterate organisation - computer literacy is not and should not
> be its raison d'etre. Many people do not understand the technology that
> they use. Many people assume that Microsoft Windows is the only operating
> system, and that all computers work the same way, and that a 120Kb road
> file is an efficient way of transmitting ten words of text.
>
> Yes, it's incompetence, but it's depressingly widespread incompetence.

I have some sympathy with this, but only because tehy are cyclists ;-)

However, members pay good money for a service that all too often now seems to
be lacking.

John B
Member of 37 years and starting to question it.
 
"Mark Thompson"
<pleasegivegenerously@warmmail*_turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com> wrote in
message news:[email protected]...
>> But it's better than nothing. It's just not as miraculous as you
>> claim.
>
> Works for me, guess the world's just got it in for you. Tip: next time
> you
> get a call, ask to speak to their supervisor then get them to take you off
> the list. Works better than swearing.

Except there isn't necessarily a list, most calls are computer generated.
 
On 04 Jun 2007 19:23:44 GMT, Roos Eisma <[email protected]> wrote:


>And there are the numpties who still call and respond surprised when you
>mention the TPS. I got some of the local double glazing ones to hang up on
>me when I started firing back questions about their company name, address,
>etcetera.
>
>Roos
Your mention of double glazing reminds me of my brother-in-law getting
a cold call from a conservatory company. Much edited paraphrasing of
the call goes like:
Would you like a conservatory?
No.
They're very good and the quote is free. Are you sure?
Absolutely.
(continues in this vein for some time)
Can we make an appointment for a saleman to call?
OK, if you insist.
(Salesman arrives)
But it's a first floor flat!
Told you I didn't want one.

Pete.
 
Alan Holmes wrote:
> "Mark Thompson"
> <pleasegivegenerously@warmmail*_turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com> wrote in
> message news:[email protected]...
>>> But it's better than nothing. It's just not as miraculous as you
>>> claim.
>> Works for me, guess the world's just got it in for you. Tip: next time
>> you
>> get a call, ask to speak to their supervisor then get them to take you off
>> the list. Works better than swearing.
>
> Except there isn't necessarily a list, most calls are computer generated.

And the computer takes them from where? A list, perhaps?

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net [email protected] http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
 
Peter Clinch <[email protected]> wrote:

> Alan Holmes wrote:
> > "Mark Thompson"
> > <pleasegivegenerously@warmmail*_turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com> wrote in
> > message news:[email protected]...
> >>> But it's better than nothing. It's just not as miraculous as you
> >>> claim.
> >> Works for me, guess the world's just got it in for you. Tip: next time
> >> you
> >> get a call, ask to speak to their supervisor then get them to take you off
> >> the list. Works better than swearing.
> >
> > Except there isn't necessarily a list, most calls are computer generated.
>
> And the computer takes them from where? A list, perhaps?

I believe that some use random number generators. This could be urban
myth however.

Cheers,
Luke


--
Red Rose Ramblings, the diary of an Essex boy in
exile in Lancashire <http://www.shrimper.org.uk>
 
Ekul Namsob wrote:
> Peter Clinch <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Alan Holmes wrote:
>>> "Mark Thompson"
>>> <pleasegivegenerously@warmmail*_turn_up_the_heat_to_reply*.com> wrote in
>>> message news:[email protected]...
>>>>> But it's better than nothing. It's just not as miraculous as you
>>>>> claim.
>>>> Works for me, guess the world's just got it in for you. Tip: next time
>>>> you
>>>> get a call, ask to speak to their supervisor then get them to take you off
>>>> the list. Works better than swearing.
>>> Except there isn't necessarily a list, most calls are computer generated.
>> And the computer takes them from where? A list, perhaps?
>
> I believe that some use random number generators. This could be urban
> myth however.

Well, if they do (and some do), they're breaking the law.
--
A
 
"David Hansen" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Mon, 04 Jun 2007 21:42:37 GMT someone who may be "Alan Holmes"
> <[email protected]> wrote this:-
>
>>If it is a female who is calling you, asking her what colour knickers she
>>has on is very effective!
>
> I must try that sometime.
>

I find the TPS works well here. But on the off-chance an unwanted sales'
call gets through to Chateau Unfit Family and it's a bloke at the end of the
line, will putting on my best Fenella Fielding voice and asking about the
callers undergarments have the same effect I wonder...

http://www.thewhippitinn.com/film/screaming/images/lobby5.jpg
 
On 04 Jun 2007 13:08:45 GMT, Ian Smith <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> I don't recall when I last thought positively about the CTC - it just
> seems to go from bad to worse.


I am happy to report I have now received an email from them in text.

Apparently I was not receiving the newsnet emails because some time in
the past I said I did not want to receive emails and they were
honouring that request rather than the repeated subsequent
requests that I receive newsnet.

I guess that's also why they are still using the direct debit I set up
first and have ignored the two subsequent attempts to get it changed
to my 'new' (only 18 months old now) bank account.

regards, Ian SMith
--
|\ /| no .sig
|o o|
|/ \|
 
In article <[email protected]>, Clive
George <[email protected]> writes

>I get newsnet as an HTML email, no mention of Julie Rand.

Mine used to come from someone called Yannick, but he was unable to help
when I stated a preference to receive CTC emails as text rather than
HTML.
--
congokid
Eating out in London? Read my tips...
http://congokid.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
Re: Oops, bloody cyclists ...
Replies
14
Views
489
UK and Europe
Wicked Uncle Nigel
W
N
Re: Oops, bloody cyclists ...
Replies
1
Views
348
UK and Europe
Paul - xxx (Mobile)
P
T
Re: Oops, bloody cyclists ...
Replies
15
Views
592
UK and Europe
Pete M
P
P
Re: Oops, bloody cyclists ...
Replies
36
Views
988
UK and Europe
The Older Gentleman
T
P
Re: Oops, bloody cyclists ...
Replies
0
Views
388
UK and Europe
Paul - xxx
P
Top Bottom Back