Private numbers

machiavellianme · 18-04-2021 12:38pm

cdeb wrote: »

So contact IT and ask them. Or log a call with the helpdesk. It doesn't matter how long it takes them to reply; you've done what you can. There's no point pleading unfamiliarity with the system you work in, or not even bothering trying to improve things. If everyone takes your approach and has "better things to do", nothing will change. If a few people start using existing structures to suggest improvements, things will change.

So a hospital should replace/upgrade their IT system because a few millenials are afraid to answer the phone? It is likely an intentional policy introduced to stop folk tormenting extremely busy doctors, consultants and nurses with trivial, mundane things at inopportune times. I doubt they will consider a change, especially when many organisations have KPIs against calls answered, feedback given by certain time frames, etc. Why bother having a phone if you don't answer it or use its primary function?

18-04-2021 12:52pm

machiavellianme wrote: »

If you answered in the first place, you wouldn't need to call back.

The one that hang up - should I call them back?

Do people answer every call from ever number they get? I’m surprised anybody is defending that position frankly.

machiavellianme · 18-04-2021 12:53pm

Deleted User wrote: »

The one that hang up - should I call them back?

Do people answer every call from ever number they get? I’m surprised anybody is defending that position frankly.

Use common sense. If someone rings you and they hang-up, wwhy would you call them back?

cdeb · 18-04-2021 12:54pm

machiavellianme wrote: »

So a hospital should replace/upgrade their IT system because a few millenials are afraid to answer the phone?

It should certainly be considered/evaluated if it's causing a problem communicating with patients.

It's a strange habit for sure - I think ignoring voicemails is far worse though and there's much less you can do about that. Though I've noticed since covid hit and my work phone was diverted to my mobile that I'm now answering all calls because I don't know if a call is work-related or not. Of the calls that weren't work/someone in my address book, I think almost every other call I answered was spam. So there is some reason behind the trend for not answering calls unless you know who it is, unfortunately.

18-04-2021 12:56pm

machiavellianme wrote: »

So a hospital should replace/upgrade their IT system because a few millenials are afraid to answer the phone? It is likely an intentional policy introduced to stop folk tormenting extremely busy doctors, consultants and nurses with trivial, mundane things at inopportune times. I doubt they will consider a change, especially when many organisations have KPIs against calls answered, feedback given by certain time frames, etc. Why bother having a phone if you don't answer it or use its primary function?

Who says it’s millennials. Surely the most likely people to get phone calls from hospitals are older.

The whole attitude here stinks and does say a lot about the health service, and it’s defenders, that the problem is assumed to be the clients of the health service and not the health service itself. This is an essential industry and it has customers who act in a certain way which the industry can’t change. The reaction is to continue to blame the users rather than fix the problem.

18-04-2021 1:01pm

machiavellianme wrote: »

Use common sense. If someone rings you and they hang-up, wwhy would you call them back?

Why would I answer every call to begin with? I mean I don’t even answer calls of people I know when I’m busy.

So I am using common sense. If I don’t know you I don’t answer. Leave a voicemail. The only exception is if I am expecting a delivery. This has caused me exactly no problems.

machiavellianme · 18-04-2021 1:06pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Who says it’s millennials. Surely the most likely people to get phone calls from hospitals are older.

The whole attitude here stinks and does say a lot about the health service, and it’s defenders, that the problem is assumed to be the clients of the health service and not the health service itself. This is an essential industry and it has customers who act in a certain way which the industry can’t change. The reaction is to continue to blame the users rather than fix the problem.

In my experience, its the younger generations. They're far too comfortable sending messages and emails that often get overlooked than actually talk to someone and confirm that they have the information they require. Most of the older generations will answer (unless previously subjected to harassment) because that's how they always used telephony and because they enjoy conversation more than most. They are also more likely to answer if they expect a call because they aren't as "busy".

The health services are broken for a lot of reasons but pinning it on private phone numbers or a switchboard is not sensible at all. In fact, it's the least of its problems. The current process likely was derived from necessity than legacy arrangements, for reasons discussed above. I'm more astonished that you seem to think it'd be better for organisations to upgrade expensive IT equipment so that a few sensitive people can ignore them anyway for some other nonsensical reason than spend their money on useful equipment or services. Let's face it, the folk who don't answer private numbers probably aren't in a rush to answer numbers they don't recognise either and no one has access to every number worldwide to tell them of the legitimacy of same.

tjhook · 18-04-2021 1:12pm

Deleted User wrote: »

The whole attitude here stinks and does say a lot about the health service, and it’s defenders, that the problem is assumed to be the clients of the health service and not the health service itself.

The phone network doesn't require a source number to be provided to the destination for display purposes. That's not a problem, it's how it's meant to work.

If a person is providing a mechanism on which they want to be contacted (phone number/email address/whatever), they should really indicate if there are additional restrictions on whether/how they're willing to accept the communication. For example if I provide my phone number for a specific purpose, I would indicate that I won't be able to answer it between 5pm and 6pm.

If a person doesn't want to answer their door when they don't have a pre-approved appointment, or answer their phone to private/unrecognised numbers, that's fine - their choice. Just live with the consequences and don't blame the rest of the world.

10pennymixup · 18-04-2021 1:16pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Why would I answer every call to begin with? I mean I don’t even answer calls of people I know when I’m busy.

So I am using common sense. If I don’t know you I don’t answer. Leave a voicemail. The only exception is if I am expecting a delivery. This has caused me exactly no problems.

Because you gave your phone number as the method you wished to be contacted by.

It's a phone, an internationally recognized instrument of communication and up to the advent of smart phones that communication was always verbal. It's not the callers fault that you're too important or busy to answer.

Hotblack Desiato · 18-04-2021 1:28pm

machiavellianme wrote: »

I'm more astonished that you seem to think it'd be better for organisations to upgrade expensive IT equipment

:rolleyes: nobody suggested upgrading anything. It's just a matter of configuring the existing switchboard correctly, the outgoing caller ID should be the switchboard number. Any other organisation could manage this, especially if their customers were being significantly inconvenienced by it, but in the health service somehow it's a Herculean task to do anything to improve the experience of patients at a stressful time in their lives.

Hyperbollix · 18-04-2021 1:29pm

Hate private numbers. Reminds me of something similar....

I have a relative who did well for herself in England. Swapped bleak 1970's Ireland for the English upper middleclass by climbing the greasy social status pole and marrying well. It's like a foreign land when it comes to the class of time wasting that was once at Olympic levels in Ireland, and still is in rural Ireland; that of the unannounced caller to the door and even worse, the unannounced caller who stays for hours and just won't leave. Even the most mundane Sunday morning coffee meeting is scheduled a week before hand and there's an unspoken time limit that people observe without even thinking about it. Everything is pre-planned, people arrive on time and go on time. It's fantastic.

Official/business calls aside, the whole thing of people purposely hiding their number so they can a) catch you on the hop with some BS you don't want to deal with b) waste your time for no reason when in the modern age a simple text or whatsapp would do, is infuriating.
Some people love their phone and it thrills their heart when it's beeping ceaselessly with more possibilities for "chats". Some of us wish we could drop the thing in the toilet for at least one day a week and get a bit of peace.

Hotblack Desiato · 18-04-2021 1:30pm

10pennymixup wrote: »

Because you gave your phone number as the method you wished to be contacted by.

So you've never got a cold call or scam call?

Ger Roe · 18-04-2021 1:49pm

notsoyoungwan wrote: »

It’s not about secrecy, it’s about filtering access to the doctors. If the public had a direct line to a doctor, the doctor would spend more time dealing with calls and less time seeing/treating patients. All calls to a doctor should go through a switchboard or a secretary.

My secretary was off on leave during the midterm recently and her phone was diverted to another secretary who was new to the department and didn’t really know the running of things and specifically didn’t know anything about my service, which is a sub-specialty within the department and run quite differently to the other teams. Neither did she know any of the patients/their relatives, and with the nature of my job there are a few regulars we hear from frequently. My normal secretary filters most stuff so that about 5% of calls she takes come to me. The week she was off, about 80% of the calls came my way, usually by means of an email from the new secretary asking me what to do about something or to phone someone. I’m not being arrogant when I say I simply don’t have time for that and neither does any other doctor.

I understand the issue of a doctor not revealing a direct line, but there is zero reason why a switch/admin contact number can't be displayed so that the patient has some hope of calling back - patient care is a two way process, communication has to be effective from both sides.

As an aside, in a recent related case, I eventually managed to return a private number medical call to a hospital department, after several days of contacting various other departments to track the source down. The number I was eventually given to call back on, played out a voicemail announcement with no option to leave a message, this happened for a week of calling daily. In the end I managed to get through to a switch operator on another number that placed my call straight away.

There is obviously the common people number that answers on a pot luck basis and the internal hotline that always answers. That's not a very patient focused approach.

18-04-2021 1:53pm

tjhook wrote: »

The phone network doesn't require a source number to be provided to the destination for display purposes. That's not a problem, it's how it's meant to work.

If a person is providing a mechanism on which they want to be contacted (phone number/email address/whatever), they should really indicate if there are additional restrictions on whether/how they're willing to accept the communication. For example if I provide my phone number for a specific purpose, I would indicate that I won't be able to answer it between 5pm and 6pm.

If a person doesn't want to answer their door when they don't have a pre-approved appointment, or answer their phone to private/unrecognised numbers, that's fine - their choice. Just live with the consequences and don't blame the rest of the world.

No. The health service should send a text or some kind of communication the say that their number is private. Or let the text be the communication itself.

If it is millennials not answering then use WhatsApp or the ancient technology of email.

This is literally how every other organisation seems to works in 2021.

EmmetSpiceland · 18-04-2021 1:58pm

tjhook wrote: »

For people who don't answer calls from private numbers - do you answer calls from numbers you don't recognise? If you do, isn't it the same thing? And if you don't, do you find you miss a lot of calls from your bank/hospital/online vendors/etc?

(I know there are apps for a phone to do a reverse lookup on any incoming number, but I doubt people are generally willing to forego their privacy for the data dredging that those apps inevitably do).

Nope. Leave a message and I might get back to you. I’ve wasted enough time in my life on “time sinks” trying to sell me something I don’t need.

My time is too important to be wasted being polite and letting someone blather on about something I don’t need.

As for phone calls in work, that’s all well and good but the caller will, inevitably, ask me to send them an email to “confirm” what I’ve told them. If they’re smart, that is. Always CYA.

I’ll usually instruct them to just email me in future, as a lot of the time it’s something that can wait and doesn’t warrant me “sorting” it straight away.

Work smarter, not harder, folks.

tjhook · 18-04-2021 1:59pm

Deleted User wrote: »

No. The health service should send a text or some kind of communication the say that their number is private. Or let the text be the communication itself.

If it is millennials not answering then use WhatsApp or the ancient technology of email.

This is literally how every other organisation seems to works in 2021.

No organisation has ever contacted me over Whatsapp (I'd be worried if an organisation was to contact me about anything personal via Whatsapp). Or sent me an SMS to indicate that their number is private. I'm not saying no organisation does so, but I very much doubt it's common.

An organisation will use whatever communication mechanism you've provided to them. They won't look up "Mick Brennan" in the phone book and assume that's you. When you're providing your contact details, tell them if you have special requirements.

beauf · 18-04-2021 2:01pm

tjhook wrote: »

The phone network doesn't require a source number to be provided to the destination for display purposes. That's not a problem, it's how it's meant to work.

If a person is providing a mechanism on which they want to be contacted (phone number/email address/whatever), they should really indicate if there are additional restrictions on whether/how they're willing to accept the communication. For example if I provide my phone number for a specific purpose, I would indicate that I won't be able to answer it between 5pm and 6pm.

If a person doesn't want to answer their door when they don't have a pre-approved appointment, or answer their phone to private/unrecognised numbers, that's fine - their choice. Just live with the consequences and don't blame the rest of the world.

Phones are often busy or out of range. It's not 100% reliable. If you ring and can't get someone, you should have a backup means of communication. Not be a jobsworth and give up saying I've done my bit.

...

machiavellianme · 18-04-2021 2:11pm

EmmetSpiceland wrote: »

Nope. Leave a message and I might get back to you. I’ve wasted enough time in my life on “time sinks” trying to sell me something I don’t need.

My time is too important to be wasted being polite and letting someone blather on about something I don’t need.

As for phone calls in work, that’s all well and good but the caller will, inevitably, ask me to send them an email to “confirm” what I’ve told them. If they’re smart, that is. Always CYA.

I’ll usually instruct them to just email me in future, as a lot of the time it’s something that can wait and doesn’t warrant me “sorting” it straight away.

Work smarter, not harder, folks.

You've managed to post almost 6000 messages on an archaic board over the last 2 years, you can't be that busy.

Email can be spoofed, ignored, filtered, or simply fail to get to its destination. Then, it might not even be opened or reviewed in a timely manner. There is no guarantee unless you verbally confirm with someone (and even then they might forget).

tjhook · 18-04-2021 2:13pm

beauf wrote: »

Phones are often busy or out of range. It's not 100% reliable. If you ring and can't get someone, you should have a backup means of communication. Not be a jobsworth and give up saying I've done my bit.

...

That's a good general point - it's good to have multiple ways to contact somebody. Even an email address can be miscommunicated or incorrectly recorded. And unlike with a phone call, the sender might never know. Anyway, presumably when a person provides their contact details, they know whether they've provided one or multiple communication mechanisms, and what those are.

Wibbs · 18-04-2021 2:22pm

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

So you've never got a cold call or scam call?

Yep, followed by "fúck off" and hanging up. Takes seconds. Job done. If someone rings and I'm busy and can't talk, I say "sorry [insert name here], I'm busy at the mo, can't talk, can I ring you back later". Takes seconds. Job done.

18-04-2021 2:24pm

notsoyoungwan wrote: »

.
When you were told she was a recruiter why didn’t you say as you’ve said here “I’m not job hunting anymore, so I’ll let you go. Bye”? Then you wouldn’t have wasted 30 minutes.

Because it was a good job.

I would have liked to have known more about it, perhaps via email, but there is a limit to anyone's time and patience.

Don't just call people at length in the middle of the day and expect them to give (often) an hour or their time, which someone else is paying for. It is the height of rudeness.

EmmetSpiceland · 18-04-2021 2:25pm

machiavellianme wrote: »

You've managed to post almost 6000 messages on an archaic board over the last 2 years, you can't be that busy.

Email can be spoofed, ignored, filtered, or simply fail to get to its destination. Then, it might not even be opened or reviewed in a timely manner. There is no guarantee unless you verbally confirm with someone (and even then they might forget).

Well, I certainly didn’t expect this to be such an “emotive” subject, one that would be getting so personal. I never said I was busy, my time is my own to waste as I see fit and while you might enjoy nothing more than talking about energy supplies or tv providers I don’t feel that I need to be bothering with it.

An email sent is covering your ass. If the recipient doesn’t deal with it in a “prompt” manner you send a reminder. After that it’s on them.

I’ll continue to ignore “time burglars” and charlatans and focus on my own life, family and my, numerous, friends and you can continue to welcome the distraction from whatever it is you have going on in your day. You do you.

tjhook · 18-04-2021 2:30pm

Wibbs wrote: »

Yep, followed by "fúck off" and hanging up. Takes seconds. Job done. If someone rings and I'm busy and can't talk, I say "sorry [insert name here], I'm busy at the mo, can't talk, can I ring you back later". Takes seconds. Job done.

This. I get a semi-regular call from an "investment firm" that claims to be providing me a free seminar or somesuch. I just hang up as soon as they start their spiel.

I can continue to do what I do, or I can block/ignore calls. If I choose to ignore/block calls, I might miss something I'd prefer not to miss. The choice is mine, and so are the consequences. I'm a big boy. I wouldn't blame the HSE, GPs, commercial entities, or anybody else.

Fandymo · 18-04-2021 2:33pm

A Tyrant Named Miltiades! wrote: »

It's so rude.

Sometimes I will play private-number roulette with these jokers, but they're almost always recruitment agencies, other miscreants, or people who just know you don't want to speak to them.

I have had enough.

Show yourselves, cowards. Why are people still ringing off private numbers?

I’m guessing you’re under 30 OP? The whingiest generation.

18-04-2021 2:35pm

Wibbs wrote: »

Yep, followed by "fúck off" and hanging up. Takes seconds. Job done. If someone rings and I'm busy and can't talk, I say "sorry [insert name here], I'm busy at the mo, can't talk, can I ring you back later". Takes seconds. Job done.

Why even answer. Why is that less rude?
I would have thought that screening phone calls is so common as to be worthy of no remark. Why would someone answer an unknown call to shoot them down when its easier to ignore and wait for the voicemail.

18-04-2021 2:36pm

Fandymo wrote: »

I’m guessing you’re under 30 OP? The whingiest generation.

There’s surely a cloud to shout at somewhere?

18-04-2021 2:37pm

Fandymo wrote: »

I’m guessing you’re under 30 OP? The whingiest generation.

No, I'm older than 30, and often find that eople who stereotype an entire generation are incredibly whiny. They are usually the very snowflakes they lampoon.

18-04-2021 2:39pm

Great example of how society has moved towards autism, paranoia and anxiety being completely normalised.
OH MY GOD MY PHONE IS RINGING AND I DON'T KNOW WHO IT IS! HOW DARE THEY!?

18-04-2021 2:42pm

tjhook wrote: »

No organisation has ever contacted me over Whatsapp (I'd be worried if an organisation was to contact me about anything personal via Whatsapp). Or sent me an SMS to indicate that their number is private. I'm not saying no organisation does so, but I very much doubt it's common.

An organisation will use whatever communication mechanism you've provided to them. They won't look up "Mick Brennan" in the phone book and assume that's you. When you're providing your contact details, tell them if you have special requirements.

There’s plenty of small vendor communication over WhatsApp and SMS, and in particular Facebook.

You not getting one isn’t the same as everybody not getting one. Nothing stopping the health service getting a general app going as well and making that one of the choices for communication. The covid app does notify people after all.

Hotblack Desiato · 18-04-2021 2:45pm

Wibbs wrote: »

Yep, followed by "fúck off" and hanging up. Takes seconds. Job done. If someone rings and I'm busy and can't talk, I say "sorry [insert name here], I'm busy at the mo, can't talk, can I ring you back later". Takes seconds. Job done.

The post I was replying to said that if someone is ringing you it's because you gave them your number. That's very far from being the case.

Hotblack Desiato · 18-04-2021 2:47pm

machiavellianme wrote: »

You've managed to post almost 6000 messages on an archaic board over the last 2 years, you can't be that busy.

I hate when people do this and smugly think they are making some sort of a point. It's ridiculous and petty. How you choose to spend your time is your own business, same is true for everyone else.

18-04-2021 2:48pm

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Great example of how society has moved towards autism, paranoia and anxiety being completely normalised.
OH MY GOD MY PHONE IS RINGING AND I DON'T KNOW WHO IT IS! HOW DARE THEY!?

Oh FFS. The idea that people answered all calls in the past is a myth. As a child I was often told to lie on the phone about who was in or out. And caller id is ancient. Voice mail is also old technology. All screening mechanisms.

The emotive response here is utterly weird. It’s not normal to answer all calls.

10pennymixup · 18-04-2021 2:49pm

Hotblack Desiato wrote: »

So you've never got a cold call or scam call?

No, no scam calls. One or two cold calls a year. Receive far more scam and spam by email.

My phone number is on my website and many other advertising sites (international) for my business. And so far (15 years) touch wood no problems.

Why do you ask? What dodgy people have gotten hold of your number and how did they get it?

18-04-2021 2:53pm

10pennymixup wrote: »

No, no scam calls. One or two cold calls a year. Receive far more scam and spam by email.

My phone number is on my website and many other advertising sites (international) for my business. And so far (15 years) touch wood no problems.

Why do you ask? What dodgy people have gotten hold of your number and how did they get it?

How would people know where they get it? Some general leak of phone numbers or they are trying out random digits. Ive had three calls from country code 216 in the last few months. Tunisia.

10pennymixup · 18-04-2021 2:59pm

Deleted User wrote: »

How would people know where they get it? Some general leak of phone numbers or they are trying out random digits. Ive had three calls from country code 216 in the last few months. Tunisia.

More likely you're on some sucker list.

Fake Scores · 18-04-2021 3:02pm

18-04-2021 3:04pm

Anyway, some research. It's not surprising to learn that most people don't answer all their calls.

Hiya, the industry leader in nuisance and scam call protection, today unveiled insight into how Americans are using their mobile phones given the rise in robocalls. Based on a subset of 11 billion calls analyzed monthly, Hiya found that only 52 percent of all calls Americans receive on their phones are answered, which means that almost half of calls are sent to voicemail. And when the call comes from an unidentified number, the statistic rises with more than three in four (76%) calls going unanswered.

So if you are answering unidentified numbers then you are the weird one.

This is a press release from Hiya itself, but the stats seem robust. They go on to editorialise a bit.

Yet, in a surprising twist, 9 percent of calls that have been identified as spam are picked up, which is a staggering amount considering that, according to Hiya, a total of 26.3 billion robocalls were made to American phones in 2018, up 46% from the previous year's total of 18 billion.[/I]

9% of spam being picked up is 91% not being picked up. Hiya is trying to sell a product to combat nuisance calls so they are emphasising the supposedly high 9% rate, which it isn't really. I don't know how people distinguish spam from general unidentified calls, I assume the area code might be a hint.

18-04-2021 3:05pm

10pennymixup wrote: »

More likely you're on some sucker list.

No I am not on a sucker list penny, because I am not a sucker. I've never been "sucked". Reported for ad hominem.

18-04-2021 3:06pm

Quick question: do people who answer all their calls answer all their emails immediately. If not, why not? Same rules apply.

byhookorbycrook · 18-04-2021 3:11pm

Primary teacher here . We did most of our parent teacher meetings by phone this year, using our own phones . Parents were told the calls were coming from private numbers. We have school email addresses if any parent needs to contact us, giving our own personal numbers out wasn’t something we wanted to do . 98% of parents wouldn’t abuse our numbers , but there might be one or two who could .

Wibbs · 18-04-2021 3:11pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Why even answer. Why is that less rude?
I would have thought that screening phone calls is so common as to be worthy of no remark. Why would someone answer an unknown call to shoot them down when its easier to ignore and wait for the voicemail.

Because I'm a fairly normally socialised human being who crazy notion I know, answers the phone if and when it rings and I'm not actually busy? Same for doorbells. I use texts, whatsapp and emails too of course and respond to them as soon as is possible. Of all the people I know the only ones that screen calls to that degree are on the spectrum. And that's grand, they're otherwise cool people, but their attitudes in that particular area are not normal. There's a sliding scale of course and many would be somewhat in the middle and might screen calls on occasion, but not as a blanket way of living their lives.

endacl · 18-04-2021 3:11pm

Deleted User wrote: »

No I am not on a sucker list penny, because I am not a sucker. I've never been "sucked". Reported for ad hominem.

Jaysus. Can posts be reported for overreaction?

Wibbs · 18-04-2021 3:13pm

Deleted User wrote: »

No I am not on a sucker list penny, because I am not a sucker. I've never been "sucked". Reported for ad hominem.

Ehh... maybe something has been lost in translation but I don't see how anyone would take that as an ad hominem.

18-04-2021 3:18pm

Wibbs wrote: »

Because I'm a fairly normally socialised human being who crazy notion I know, answers the phone if and when it rings and I'm not actually busy? Same for doorbells. I use texts, whatsapp and emails too of course and respond to them as soon as is possible. Of all the people I know the only ones that screen calls to that degree are on the spectrum. And that's grand, they're otherwise cool people, but their attitudes in that particular area are not normal. There's a sliding scale of course and many would be somewhat in the middle and might screen calls on occasion, but not as a blanket way of living their lives.

No you are not normal unless normal is redefined as 20% of the population, which is a mathematical absurdity. Also your spectrum comments seem to be a generalised ad hom against the people not taking your position, not too distinct from a playground taunt.

This is from Pew research, and is later than the last one I posted..

Americans just aren’t picking up the phone much anymore. Eight-in-ten Americans say they don’t generally answer their cellphone when an unknown number calls, according to newly released findings from a Pew Research Center web survey of U.S. adults conducted July 13-19, 2020.

Only 19% of Americans generally pick up cellphone calls from unknown numbers; women, White adults, older adults, higher-income adults less likely to do so

And...

And though much has been made of younger adults’ distaste for phone conversations, the survey finds that Americans ages 18 to 29 are more likely to take calls from unknown numbers than those in older age groups.

So all the nonsense here about the young is just that. We can discount the "spectrum" argument anyway, the people I have known to ignore most calls when busy, be they from identified or unidentified sources are businessmen.

18-04-2021 3:21pm

Wibbs wrote: »

Ehh... maybe something has been lost in translation but I don't see how anyone would take that as an ad hominem.

It wasn't actually reported.

Very strange emotive response here to fairly normal behaviour though, ie. screening calls. I would have assumed that the response to the OP would be a litany of how people managed to stop their cold callers, or better ways to block calls, or agreement about how to screen more calls, since that is what normal people do.

Wibbs · 18-04-2021 3:24pm

Deleted User wrote: »

No you are not normal unless normal is redefined as 20% of the population, which is a mathematical absurdity. Also your spectrum comments seem to be a generalised ad him against the people not taking your position, not too distinct from a playground taunt.

You do seem to see ad hominem with ease. I was just speaking from personal experience.

This is from Pew research, and is later than the last one I posted..

Americans just aren’t picking up the phone much anymore. Eight-in-ten Americans say they don’t generally answer their cellphone when an unknown number calls, according to newly released findings from a Pew Research Center web survey of U.S. adults conducted July 13-19, 2020.

Only 19% of Americans generally pick up cellphone calls from unknown numbers; women, White adults, older adults, higher-income adults less likely to do so

And...

And though much has been made of younger adults’ distaste for phone conversations, the survey finds that Americans ages 18 to 29 are more likely to take calls from unknown numbers than those in older age groups.

American research. Which doesn't surprise me, as American culture is notably more paranoid than most in the West, so not a shock they might answer their phones less.

So all the nonsense here about the young is just that. We can discount the "spectrum" argument anyway, the people I have known to ignore most calls when busy, be they from identified or unidentified sources are businessmen.

Did you miss the part where I typed: "and I'm not actually busy?" Of course if I'm busy I will let calls go to voicemail. If I'm not, I won't.

Wibbs · 18-04-2021 3:26pm

Deleted User wrote: »

It wasn't actually reported.

Very strange emotive response here to fairly normal behaviour though, ie. screening calls. I would have assumed that the response to the OP would be a litany of how people managed to stop their cold callers, or better ways to block calls, or agreement about how to screen more calls, since that is what normal people do.

Not emotive on my part anyway. I just find it a tad odd how some are so phonecall averse, that's all. It's like when threads come up about answering the door and there will be a cohort of posters who won't answer their door unless they're expecting someone.

PS I don't see it as a generational thing either. I've found the young are less twitchy around this kinda thing.

18-04-2021 3:27pm

byhookorbycrook wrote: »

Primary teacher here . We did most of our parent teacher meetings by phone this year, using our own phones . Parents were told the calls were coming from private numbers. We have school email addresses if any parent needs to contact us, giving our own personal numbers out wasn’t something we wanted to do . 98% of parents wouldn’t abuse our numbers , but there might be one or two who could .

That’s fine because you told them upfront. It doesn’t seem that the health service does that.

Wibbs · 18-04-2021 3:29pm

On the health service aspect Iwould agree they should have some sort of number coming up. Simply because it's clear some people are private number averse and you have to allow for such people.

Minier81 · 18-04-2021 3:37pm

Wibbs wrote: »

On the health service aspect Iwould agree they should have some sort of number coming up. Simply because it's clear some people are private number averse and you have to allow for such people.

Most hospitals actually come up as the switch board number. Personally I wouldn't care if they were all private numbers either though.

Private numbers

Comments