On 1/17/06, C F <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Thanks again for the responses. > > On 1/17/06, Matt Florell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I am in agreement with you about AMD, we don't use it because we were > > loosing calls on our old predictive dialer because it took 1-3 seconds > > longer to connect a customer to an agent, removing AMD takes away this > > delay and you do not loose those customers. Also, it takes a great > > deal of CPU time to process AMD across a lot of lines, and raising > > machine load on purpose is something I try to avoid. I am planning on > > testing a couple of AMD methods that could be easily added on to > > VICIDIAL for a future release, possibly using app_amd and > > AnsweringMachineDetect. > > Isn't it an FCC/FTC requirement to answer at least %97 of calls to > humans within 2 seconds? If so how can one use an AMD that takes 1-3 > seconds?
Good point, most dialers do not fully comply with the 2second rule although I have heard the 2 second rule interpreted to be 2 seconds after the first hello, in which there is enough time to complete the AMD. Another point to mention, not a single company has been fined in the USA for breaking the 2 second rule. The only fines(and they are big ones) have been issues for Do-Not-Call list violations. MATT--- _______________________________________________ --Bandwidth and Colocation provided by Easynews.com -- Asterisk-Users mailing list To UNSUBSCRIBE or update options visit: http://lists.digium.com/mailman/listinfo/asterisk-users
