Re: ITW/P: freecati
On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 11:22:11PM -0500, Chris Lawrence wrote: > For the unfamiliar, CATI programs are used to to conduct surveys over > the telephone (although they can also be used in other contexts). > Think of an "installation wizard" with a modem dialer and database > backend, and you've got the idea. The concept here is basically to > make it possible to turn mothballed 486es (or eMachines ;-) into > interviewing stations running Linux for the cost of a network card, a > good USR modem and a noise-cancelling headset (i.e. well under $200). IMO, this is morally akin to writing free software specifically to make spamming cheaper and easier. if you must write such obnoxious and evil software then please make sure that it maintains a list of phone numbers NOT to call, so that those who are sick and tired of market research jerks calling them just as they get home from work or sit down to dinner can say "PUT ME ON YOUR DO-NOT-CALL LIST IMMEDIATELY!". write the software so that it is trivially easy for the telemarketer to add numbers to that list. craig -- craig sanders
Re: ITW/P: freecati
On Oct 03, Craig Sanders wrote: > On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 11:22:11PM -0500, Chris Lawrence wrote: > > > For the unfamiliar, CATI programs are used to to conduct surveys over > > the telephone (although they can also be used in other contexts). > > Think of an "installation wizard" with a modem dialer and database > > backend, and you've got the idea. The concept here is basically to > > make it possible to turn mothballed 486es (or eMachines ;-) into > > interviewing stations running Linux for the cost of a network card, a > > good USR modem and a noise-cancelling headset (i.e. well under $200). > > IMO, this is morally akin to writing free software specifically to make > spamming cheaper and easier. No, it isn't. Survey research is an important part of the social sciences. By your logic, I shouldn't write an MTA because that makes it possible to transmit spam, or a fax program because it makes it easier for people to spam fax machines. > if you must write such obnoxious and evil software then please make > sure that it maintains a list of phone numbers NOT to call, so that > those who are sick and tired of market research jerks calling them > just as they get home from work or sit down to dinner can say "PUT > ME ON YOUR DO-NOT-CALL LIST IMMEDIATELY!". write the software so > that it is trivially easy for the telemarketer to add numbers to > that list. 1. Market research is only one use of computer assisted interviewing. The purpose of this project is to make it possible for a survey lab to be established cheaply by a university; existing solutions are overpriced, especially considering the fact that taxpayers tend to get hit with the startup costs for these things. 2. Ethical researchers do not call back people who, having been informed of the nature of a survey, choose not to participate. The software will include this "refusal" marking capability. 3. Telemarketers and market researchers participate in a joint do-not-call list; they screen the number pool against that list. Note that non-profit concerns (educational institutions, for one) do not follow that list, for a variety of reasons I won't spam the list with. 4. Software is a tool, it is neither evil nor good. Like any other technology, it is a matter of responsible use. 5. I could discriminate against certain fields of endevour in the license (telemarketing? what else?), but I think it's fairer (and DFSG-compliant) to ask that people behave responsibly and ethically. In any event, I have no plans to "market" Debian as a "telemarketing solution"; the only thing I'd like to do is make it financially feasible for me to start a survey research business so I can raise money to pay for a survey or two in support of my eventual dissertation. I have no plans to sell anything over the telephone, internet, or any other medium (beyond the Debian CDs I sell at a miniscule profit now... and all I have for them is a web page). I'd be happy to discuss some of the positive aspects (or even the negative ones) of ethical survey research with you via private mail. Chris, who guesses he should have kept his mouth shut, made the software proprietary, and saved everyone a world of grief. -- = | Chris Lawrence | Visit my home page! | |<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> | http://www.lordsutch.com/chris/ | | | | | Political Scientist Wanna-be | Join the party that opposed the CDA | |University of Mississippi|http://www.lp.org/ | =
Re: ITW/P: freecati
On Oct 02, Chris Lawrence wrote: > On Oct 03, Craig Sanders wrote: > > On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 11:22:11PM -0500, Chris Lawrence wrote: > > > > > For the unfamiliar, CATI programs are used to to conduct surveys over > > > the telephone (although they can also be used in other contexts). > > > Think of an "installation wizard" with a modem dialer and database > > > backend, and you've got the idea. The concept here is basically to > > > make it possible to turn mothballed 486es (or eMachines ;-) into > > > interviewing stations running Linux for the cost of a network card, a > > > good USR modem and a noise-cancelling headset (i.e. well under $200). > > > > IMO, this is morally akin to writing free software specifically to make > > spamming cheaper and easier. One more thing: in fairness to Craig, I didn't make my intended use of the software all that clear in my original message. The possibility of its use by telemarketers wasn't exactly at the forefront of my mind at the time I posted originally. However, I suspect "off-the-shelf" products would be much more suited to their use; my intended package will probably require at least enough knowledge to install and administer a Debian (or other Un*x)-based LAN, which is more than most "make money fast" types are willing to pay for. I will now shut up and code. Chris -- = | Chris Lawrence | Get your Debian 2.1 CD-ROMs | | <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>|http://www.lordsutch.com/| | | | | Grad Student, Pol. Sci. | Visit the Amiga Web Directory | |University of Mississippi| http://www.cucug.org/amiga.html | =
Re: ITW/P: freecati
On Sat, Oct 02, 1999 at 10:50:06PM -0500, Chris Lawrence wrote: > On Oct 03, Craig Sanders wrote: > > IMO, this is morally akin to writing free software specifically to make > > spamming cheaper and easier. > > No, it isn't. Survey research is an important part of the social > sciences. it may be an important tool, but that doesn't give you or anyone else the right to pester people in their own homes. it really does no good to apologise or even to promise not to call back - by that time, the damage has been done...the interruption/disturbance has been made, the invasion of peace, solitude and privacy has already been perpetrated. even opt-out lists are the wrong solution...because they don't work very well (especially when usage of them is optional). telephone pests should be limited to calling ONLY an opt-in list, people who are willing to receive unsolicited calls. > 1. Market research is only one use of computer assisted interviewing. >The purpose of this project is to make it possible for a survey lab >to be established cheaply by a university; existing solutions are >overpriced, especially considering the fact that taxpayers tend to >get hit with the startup costs for these things. cold calls are annoying regardless of their purpose. sales calls are especially annoying, but that doesn't excuse academic or market research surveys. i personally don't have a problem with existing solutions being overpriced - this is one area where an artificially high barrier to entry is unquestionably a Good Thing. the right to peace and quiet in your own home is far more important than the desire of universities to conduct surveys. > 2. Ethical researchers do not call back people who, having been >informed of the nature of a survey, choose not to participate. The >software will include this "refusal" marking capability. good. that was the main reason i replied to your message. if you are going to write software that makes it easier or cheaper to pester people in their own homes then that software should make it trivially easy to add new numbers to the do-not-call list, and it should be do-able by the operator who makes the call at the time that the victim complains. > 4. Software is a tool, it is neither evil nor good. Like any other >technology, it is a matter of responsible use. some technologies have little or no 'good' usage. some technologies have negative effects which greatly outweigh any positive ones. > Chris, who guesses he should have kept his mouth shut, made the > software proprietary, and saved everyone a world of grief. look, it's your software, your project. nobody can stop you from writing it, or packaging it for debian. the point of my message was to inform you that your work will have certain negative consequences and will end up being used to harass and pester people. little/startup telemarketing companies WILL use your software whether you market it as a "telemarketing solution" or not - this WILL increase the number of annoyance sources in the world. like it or not, you have to accept some of the moral responsibility for that. craig -- craig sanders
Re: ITW/P: freecati
On Mon, Oct 04, 1999 at 08:13:02AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote: > even opt-out lists are the wrong solution...because they don't work very > well (especially when usage of them is optional). telephone pests should > be limited to calling ONLY an opt-in list, people who are willing to > receive unsolicited calls. opt-in lists will not lead to usable results, because the statistics will be skewed, and you know that. Nevertheless, I agree that calling random people is rude. > cold calls are annoying regardless of their purpose. sales calls are > especially annoying, but that doesn't excuse academic or market research > surveys. Yes. What I find acceptable are snail mail surveys. Those can be easily ignored, and are paid by the sender. (Note that I find mail advertisement highly offensive, but surveys are not at all comparable in mass). Thanks, Marcus -- `Rhubarb is no Egyptian god.' Debian http://www.debian.org Check Key server Marcus Brinkmann GNUhttp://www.gnu.orgfor public PGP Key [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]PGP Key ID 36E7CD09 http://homepage.ruhr-uni-bochum.de/Marcus.Brinkmann/ [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITW/P: freecati
On Mon, Oct 04, 1999 at 08:13:02AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote: > it may be an important tool, but that doesn't give you or anyone else > the right to pester people in their own homes. it really does no good > to apologise or even to promise not to call back - by that time, the > damage has been done...the interruption/disturbance has been made, the > invasion of peace, solitude and privacy has already been perpetrated. Huh? I'd rate such (genuine survey) phone calls as more pleasant to deal with than any of your recent emails. I've gotten phone calls from telemarketers, and I've gotten phone calls from survey folks. The survey folks are incomparably more polite. On the other hand, I've got a decent sized buffer (voice mail) on my phone and don't feel compelled to answer it if I'm in the middle of something else (which is most of the time). -- Raul
Re: ITW/P: freecati
On Mon, Oct 04, 1999 at 01:02:55AM +0200, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > On Mon, Oct 04, 1999 at 08:13:02AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote: > > even opt-out lists are the wrong solution...because they don't work very > > well (especially when usage of them is optional). telephone pests should > > be limited to calling ONLY an opt-in list, people who are willing to > > receive unsolicited calls. > > opt-in lists will not lead to usable results, because the statistics > will be skewed, and you know that. yep. there's an inherent conflict between those who want to run surveys and those who don't want to be pestered. i happen to believe that an individual's right to privacy, right to not be pestered supercedes a researcher's desire to survey. so, it's a shame that stats might be skewed but that doesn't justify bothering people who don't want to be pestered. btw, if the opt-in list were large enough then there wouldn't be any skewing of results. most telesales, telemarketing, and tele-survey people don't want to use opt-in lists because they KNOW that most people don't want to be pestered by them...opt-in highlights the fact that what they are doing IS rude, and most people resent it. OTOH, many people don't mind being surveyed or called by salesdroids. i find that bizarre, but i guess it's horses for courses. > Nevertheless, I agree that calling random people is rude. that's it precisely. craig PS: all this is getting even further from relevance to debian-devel, so i guess we better stop here. -- craig sanders
Re: ITW/P: freecati
On Sun, Oct 03, 1999 at 07:29:15PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 04, 1999 at 08:13:02AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote:
> > it may be an important tool, but that doesn't give you or anyone else
> > the right to pester people in their own homes. it really does no good
> > to apologise or even to promise not to call back - by that time, the
> > damage has been done...the interruption/disturbance has been made, the
> > invasion of peace, solitude and privacy has already been perpetrated.
>
> Huh? I'd rate such (genuine survey) phone calls as more pleasant to
> deal with than any of your recent emails.
there is a huge difference in the nature of public spaces and private
spaces, and a huge difference in the acceptable uses of each.
debian-devel is a public forum, i.e. public space. an individual's phone
number is private space, for personal communication.
if you enter a public forum you have to expect to occasionally hear (or
read) things you'd rather not hear/see. e.g. i have a right to say what
i like in a public space...if you don't like what i say, then killfile
me or find another public forum more to your tastes. if what i say is
objectionable to enough other people then it is i who will have to find a
forum which tolerates me.
a person has the right to expect that they will not be pestered in their
private 'space'. e.g. i don't have any right at all to invade your
private space. if you don't want me there, i have to go. if i have no
reason to believe that i would be welcome then i shouldn't attempt to
enter it in the first place.
> I've gotten phone calls from telemarketers, and I've gotten phone
> calls from survey folks. The survey folks are incomparably more
> polite.
relative politeness is not relevant. what matters is that it is
unforgivably rude to invade someone's private space without invitation
or without reasonable belief that you will be welcome. it is not
reasonable for a tele-{marketing,sales,survey} caller to believe that a
complete stranger will welcome them without invitation.
tele-{marketing,sales,surveying} is organised and automated rudeness,
scheduled invasion of private space. it's a numbers game: call enough
people and you're bound to find a few who aren't annoyed. cold-callers
don't give a damn about the majority who are annoyed...they aren't any
use to them anyway. that callous disregard for people's private space is
highly objectionable.
> On the other hand, I've got a decent sized buffer (voice mail) on my
> phone and don't feel compelled to answer it if I'm in the middle of
> something else (which is most of the time).
part of my job is to be available for emergencies at any hour, i have
to answer calls just in case it is something that requires my immediate
attention.
these anecdotes aren't particularly relevant though. what is relevant is
that these unsolicited calls are an invasion of private space.
craig
--
craig sanders
Re: ITW/P: freecati
On Oct 04, Marcus Brinkmann wrote: > > cold calls are annoying regardless of their purpose. sales calls are > > especially annoying, but that doesn't excuse academic or market research > > surveys. > > Yes. What I find acceptable are snail mail surveys. Those can be easily > ignored, and are paid by the sender. (Note that I find mail advertisement > highly offensive, but surveys are not at all comparable in mass). Snail-mail surveys are also highly skewed (to people who have nothing better to do than fill out survey forms, and to people who have outlier opinions on the survey topic). And unless you physically go door-to-door (or use followup phone calls), the response rates are atrocious. Chris -- = | Chris Lawrence | Get your Debian 2.1 CD-ROMs | |<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |http://www.lordsutch.com/| | | | | Political Scientist Wanna-be | Join the party that opposed the CDA | |University of Mississippi|http://www.lp.org/ | =
Re: ITW/P: freecati
On Mon, Oct 04, 1999 at 10:12:50AM +1000, Craig Sanders wrote: > me or find another public forum more to your tastes. if what i say is > objectionable to enough other people then it is i who will have to find a > forum which tolerates me. Since you offered, and since I am a part of this public forum, please add me to that list of "enough other people". Spirited debate is good, but invective and incivility never are. Curt Daugaard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: ITW/P: freecati
> "CS" == Craig Sanders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: CS> On Fri, Oct 01, 1999 at 11:22:11PM -0500, Chris Lawrence CS> wrote: >> For the unfamiliar, CATI programs are used to to conduct >> surveys over the telephone (although they can also be used in >> other contexts). Think of an "installation wizard" with a >> modem dialer and database backend, and you've got the idea. >> The concept here is basically to make it possible to turn >> mothballed 486es (or eMachines ;-) into interviewing stations >> running Linux for the cost of a network card, a good USR modem >> and a noise-cancelling headset (i.e. well under $200). CS> IMO, this is morally akin to writing free software CS> specifically to make spamming cheaper and easier. CS> if you must write such obnoxious and evil software then please CS> make sure that it maintains a list of phone numbers NOT to CS> call, so that those who are sick and tired of market research CS> jerks calling them just as they get home from work or sit down CS> to dinner can say "PUT ME ON YOUR DO-NOT-CALL LIST CS> IMMEDIATELY!". write the software so that it is trivially easy CS> for the telemarketer to add numbers to that list. Just for the record, some of us use CATI to get information from subjects (voluntary participation) who can not come to a research site for various reasons . This is incredibly different from telemarketing; in fact, one could argue that not using CATI in such a situation is unethical (discrimination in clinical/intervention trials participation against those too sick to travel...). best, -tony -- A.J. RossiniResearch Assistant Professor of Biostatistics Center for AIDS Research/HMCBiostatistics/Univ. of Washington Box 359931 Box 357232 206-731-3647 (3693=fax) 206-543-1044 (3286=fax) [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.biostat.washington.edu/~rossini/
Re: ITW/P: freecati
On Mon, Oct 04, 1999 at 12:08:59PM -0700, A.J. Rossini wrote: > Just for the record, some of us use CATI to get information from > subjects (voluntary participation) who can not come to a research site > for various reasons . i have no problem at all with voluntary participation in surveys or market research or even telesales. if someone wants to volunteer for these activities it's their right to make that choice. i object only to tele-anything which involves making unsolicited calls to complete strangers. > This is incredibly different from telemarketing; yep, it's completely different. not the same thing at all. > in fact, one could argue that not using CATI in such a situation > is unethical (discrimination in clinical/intervention trials > participation against those too sick to travel...). i don't know if i'd go as far as saying that not using it would be unethical, but i certainly agree that this usage IS an ethical and appropriate use of this kind of software. craig -- craig sanders
