|Received:||12/2/2004 1:35:45 PM|
|Subject:||Trade Regulation Rule on Telemarketing Sales|
|Title:||Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, Request for Comment|
|CFR Citation:||16 CFR Part 310|
Comments:After moving recently, I was unexpectedly reminded of what life was like before the Do Not Call list. With a change in phone number, I've had to endure 3 months of calls interrupting cooking, interrupting dinner, interrupting conversations, and interrupting sleep. I do not wish to see this regulation weakened in any way. It is no more acceptable to have my sleep interrupted by a recording than by a real person. And I genuinely feel that the telemarketers should continue to be monitored on a daily basis rather than once a month. If a telemarketer is only being monitored once every 30 days, then that is 12 checks per year, versus 365. I'm sure they feel that to be an unreasonable burden, but clearly not so much that it's an unprofitable model for advertising. If it was unprofitable, they would stop using telemarketing as a tool, and that would serve the same end as having a strong Do Not Call list. Phone calls are far more disruptive than television advertising, email spam, and billboards combined. The only people calling my home should be friends and family who wish to talk to me. I do not rent a phone line so that I can be summoned to attention at the ring of a bell from an advertiser.