people i will not vote for . . .
. . . this election because they have telephone-spammed me:
so far today:
bill de blasio, public advocate
please feel free to add to this list as you get automated, prerecorded phone-spam.
i realize the quixotic nature of this crusade may limit my choices on primary day but i think the only way to stop this annoying harassment is to send a message to politicians that if you spam me, you will lose my vote.
so far today:
bill de blasio, public advocate
please feel free to add to this list as you get automated, prerecorded phone-spam.
i realize the quixotic nature of this crusade may limit my choices on primary day but i think the only way to stop this annoying harassment is to send a message to politicians that if you spam me, you will lose my vote.
Comments
-
Wouldn't it make more sense to call their office and tell them directly?
-
be my guest.
-
I'm not the one with the issue.
-
that would probably be the mature thing to do, if i cared, but the point was i didn't want to be interrupted by spam, and i don't want to compound the annoyance by wasting more time i do not have chasing this down (in order, i have to assume, if i finally get a human being on the phone, to be ignored), but more to the point, this kind of campaigning is just plain rude. candidates know there are millions of people on do-not-call lists precisely because they hate this shit -- i and millions of others do not want to drop whatever i'm doing to answer the phone to get someone's sales pitch -- but political advertising is exempt so they do it anyway without the slightest regard to how the people -- i mean "target audience" -- feel. someone who has no compunction about violating my personal space is not someone i want to vote for, whatever he says his positions may be. just as someone shouldn't just barge into your house, no one should just call you and start talking nonstop without listening. that is not a conversation and, frankly, an abuse of my phone number. this is a calculated decision made by the candidate in consultation with his media advisers in order to get my vote. my role in this equation is limited by the nature of the exchange. but that seems to me to be the appropriate response: he will not get my vote.
-
danielle123 wrote: Wouldn't it make more sense to call their office and tell them directly?
If you call, the office will probably be glad to hear their robocalls are reaching a wide audience.
Robocalls are really annoying, but presumably they are effective. And I'm pretty sure they are legal.
There are a lot of standard campaign practices that are illegal. Putting signs on street polls or any property that you don't know is considered littering. (The only candidate who would never do this is de Blasio's competition, Norman Siegel, who is by far the best candidate for Public Advocate.)
The bigger problem, in my opinion, is that Prospect Heights has no political club. There is almost no way to contact a voter except by annoying, aggressive tactics like robocalls.
Did anyone here even know that there was a Comptroller's candidate forum last night at Union Temple on Eastern Parkway?? -
I will not vote for Tish James. Major dud.
-
Jack Krohn wrote: I will not vote for Tish James. Major dud.
Tish James busts her ass for our community.
What have you done for it?
Nothing but Troll up the boards with crap.
:x -
raulism wrote: And I'm pretty sure they are legal.
perfectly legal. of course the politicians who wrote the law exempted themselves. i'm all for the first amendment and unfettered political speech (the ostensible basis of the exemption) but there are lines of personal space which should not be violated. just as i am not obligated to invite a politician knocking at the door into my home, i should not be subject to forcible intrusion by telephone either.
a politician who had any concern about barging in on voters while they're making dinner, working at home or going to the bathroom (to name just a few of the most common times these calls seem to arrive) could respect the do not call list even though they're not required to.
the other reason for my post of course was to get the word out that at least for some voters robocalls may backfire. -
GOD wrote: [quote=Jack Krohn]I will not vote for Tish James. Major dud.
Tish James busts her ass for our community.
What have you done for it?
Nothing but Troll up the boards with crap.
:x
Tish James busts her ass promoting herself. What have you done for it? -
Someone from the Working Families Party just knocked on my door for Bill de Blasio. I did my best to convince him to vote for Norman Siegel, and to educate him on the difference between the two candidates. He wasn't very informed, but he was quite receptive, which was very satisfying.
-
I've always like Norman Siegel. He's definitely got my vote.
-
Well I definitely will not vote for Tish James. Her ridiculous push to name the Hoyt -Schemerhorn subway station after Michael Jackson is such a waste of time. The district has serious issues -- high unemployment, schools in desperate need of improvement and increasing crime and she's spending her time advocating to change the name of a subway station that isn't even in her council district! I wish for once we could get some real leadership!
-
Tish is nothing but a fist-raiser. She's purely symbolic and has accomplished nothing substantial, despite being in office for years. She's currently being outpaced by her opponent in fundraising, so perhaps she'll face her first real challenger in years. Either way, I won't vote for her.
-
In the last two days, I've called a bunch of city council representatives from Brooklyn. You get a real sense of how different offices work, and I've had some surprises. I may have my problems with Bill de Blasio (I am stomping mad at his opposition to Superfund cleanup of the Gowanus), but his office was quite responsive, as was Sara Gonzalez's office, which was a surprise.
But of all the elected officials I have ever dealt with, not one has ever answered the phone themselves at 6:30 pm- except Tish. Many offices close at 4:30 pm.
I have many criticisms of Tish, and I will gladly admit that she drives me nuts at times. But compared to the lousy bunch that is in City Hall, I can safely say that I am proud to have her as my representative.
I have called Tish's office on issues from rats on Prospect Place to signage at the Walt Whitman library, to public authorities reform. I have relied on her for a bunch of things. She's on the ball, and she has a thousand times more passion than de Blasio, Yassky, Eugene or Mealy.
I have been an advocate of the Duffield Street Abolitionist homes, which are not even in our district. She has often shown up and been more helpful than David Yassky.
I'm not saying a word bad about the other candidates and I'm not saying that she's right 100% (or even 90%) of the time. But I will not only vote for Tish, I have some extra posters to give to anyone who wants. -
In the last two days, I've called a bunch of city council representatives from Brooklyn. You get a real sense of how different offices work, and I've had some surprises. I may have my problems with Bill de Blasio (I am stomping mad at his opposition to Superfund cleanup of the Gowanus), but his office was quite responsive, as was Sara Gonzalez's office, which was a surprise.
But of all the elected officials I have ever dealt with, not one has ever answered the phone themselves at 6:30 pm- except Tish. Many offices close at 4:30 pm.
I have many criticisms of Tish, and I will gladly admit that she drives me nuts at times. But compared to the lousy bunch that is in City Hall, I can safely say that I am proud to have her as my representative.
I have called Tish's office on issues from rats on Prospect Place to signage at the Walt Whitman library, to public authorities reform. I have relied on her for a bunch of things. She's on the ball, and she has a thousand times more passion than de Blasio, Yassky, Eugene or Mealy.
I have been an advocate of the Duffield Street Abolitionist homes, which are not even in our district. She has often shown up and been more helpful than David Yassky.
I'm not saying a word bad about the other candidates and I'm not saying that she's right 100% (or even 90%) of the time. But I will not only vote for Tish, I have some extra posters to give to anyone who wants. -
Smokin' Joe wrote: [quote=raulism]And I'm pretty sure they are legal.
perfectly legal. of course the politicians who wrote the law exempted themselves. i'm all for the first amendment and unfettered political speech (the ostensible basis of the exemption) but there are lines of personal space which should not be violated. just as i am not obligated to invite a politician knocking at the door into my home, i should not be subject to forcible intrusion by telephone either.
a politician who had any concern about barging in on voters while they're making dinner, working at home or going to the bathroom (to name just a few of the most common times these calls seem to arrive) could respect the do not call list even though they're not required to.
the other reason for my post of course was to get the word out that at least for some voters robocalls may backfire.
General rule of thumb: When you see a phone number you don't recognize, don't answer the phone.
2nd rule of thumb: if you answer the phone and it's not a call you want to take, tell them you don't want them calling you and hang up. (If you're going to the bathroom, what the hell are you doing answering the phone, anyway, for Pete's sake?!)
I've never understood people who answer their phone just because it's ringing... -
Smokin' Joe wrote: [quote=raulism]And I'm pretty sure they are legal.
perfectly legal. of course the politicians who wrote the law exempted themselves. i'm all for the first amendment and unfettered political speech (the ostensible basis of the exemption) but there are lines of personal space which should not be violated. just as i am not obligated to invite a politician knocking at the door into my home, i should not be subject to forcible intrusion by telephone either.
a politician who had any concern about barging in on voters while they're making dinner, working at home or going to the bathroom (to name just a few of the most common times these calls seem to arrive) could respect the do not call list even though they're not required to.
the other reason for my post of course was to get the word out that at least for some voters robocalls may backfire.
General rule of thumb: When you see a phone number you don't recognize, don't answer the phone.
2nd rule of thumb: if you answer the phone and it's not a call you want to take, tell them you don't want them calling you and hang up. (If you're going to the bathroom, what the hell are you doing answering the phone, anyway, for Pete's sake?!)
I've never understood people who answer their phone just because it's ringing... -
danielle123 wrote: I've never understood people who answer their phone just because it's ringing...
Well, you have a better chance than when it isn't ringing.... -
danielle123 wrote: I've never understood people who answer their phone just because it's ringing...
Well, you have a better chance than when it isn't ringing.... -
danielle123 wrote: 2nd rule of thumb: if you answer the phone and it's not a call you want to take, tell them you don't want them calling you and hang up. (If you're going to the bathroom, what the hell are you doing answering the phone, anyway, for Pete's sake?!)
for pete's sake, i didn't say i answered the phone while i was going to the bathroom.
and i'm talking about robocalls, so you can hang up or not answer but you can't tell them anything. -
danielle123 wrote: 2nd rule of thumb: if you answer the phone and it's not a call you want to take, tell them you don't want them calling you and hang up. (If you're going to the bathroom, what the hell are you doing answering the phone, anyway, for Pete's sake?!)
for pete's sake, i didn't say i answered the phone while i was going to the bathroom.
and i'm talking about robocalls, so you can hang up or not answer but you can't tell them anything. -
got a second robocall from di blasio today. obviously my message is getting through.
-
got a second robocall from di blasio today. obviously my message is getting through.
-
another today, my third. can't this guy get a life?
-
Earlier today I was annoyed to see a Di Blasio sign stapled to a light pole on Flatbush. For that, I will be sure to go to the polls this primary day to pull a lever other than his.
Watching Di Blasio et al debate on NY1 right now. He's sealing my vote against him with his performance. -
squindar wrote: Earlier today I was annoyed to see a Di Blasio sign stapled to a light pole on Flatbush. For that, I will be sure to go to the polls this primary day to pull a lever other than his.
I probably had the reaction the campaign was looking for ("ooo, orange! nice sign!")
although it won't influence my vote.
HOW do you want the candidates to let you know they exist if they are not allowed to call, or talk, or (now) put up signs? -
pitu wrote:
advertise on TV. Oh wait, they do that.
HOW do you want the candidates to let you know they exist if they are not allowed to call, or talk, or (now) put up signs?
advertise on the radio. Oh wait, they do that.
participate in debates. Well they sometimes do that (and sometimes they shouldn't, judging from a few I've seen lately)
Calling isn't illegal. Annoying as hell, but not illegal. It would be great if they would voluntarily adhere to the do-not-call registry, which they are not required to do. Stapling signs to public property is illegal.
Illegal posting violations may result in civil penalties of a minimum of $75 and a maximum of $200 for the first violation and a maximum penalty of $300 ($300 - $550 for posting on trees) for the second and each subsequent violation. Where candidates place multiple posters lined up a pole, the law triggers automatic multiple violations. The typical candidate practice of placing multiple posters back-to-back on street light poles could subject candidates and their campaigns to penalties which would likely exceed the cost of printing the posters. source: http://tinyurl.com/mxegmd
-
pitu wrote: HOW do you want the candidates to let you know they exist if they are not allowed to call, or talk, or (now) put up signs?
they can make web sites, our tax dollars kindly give them a free spot to say pretty much whatever they want in the voter guide mailed out to every registered voter, they can debate, they can hand out flyers, they can stand in the public square and speak, or do the same on radio, tv or the internet . . .
and let me be clear, i'm happy for them to call. if bill di blasio or any other candidate wants to talk to me about why i should vote for him, i am happy to have that conversation. but a conversation means he can talk but i can question him, disagree or ask for details if i choose.
ok, a citywide candidate can't personally call everyone. right. i would be happy to have a real conversation with a campaign staffer or volunteer. i'm fine with civilized discourse.
but a prerecorded robocall is no more than a fart. i'd rather he do it somewhere else. -
Smokin' Joe wrote: but a prerecorded robocall is no more than a fart. i'd rather he do it somewhere else.
Well said.
I've had actual one-on-one conversations with staffers and/or candidates, and it makes me at least feel like I'm a part of the process (and sometimes causes me to mull things over for a day or two and decide to give them some money).
When the candidates willingly reduce their campaigns to one of brand-awareness over everything else (i.e. "I'm votin' for Mark Green cuz I know his name! He's gotta be good!") it turns me off to the process entirely.
The entire political process is so bankrupt and corrupt as it is. I look for the candidates who are willing to rise, if just ever so slightly, above the muck. -
received a fourth robocall today on behalf of de blasio. the recording unfortunately was by tish james, who i like. so i took danielle123's advice and picked up the phone and called her office. amazingly, she answered the phone. she listened to what i had to say, apologized for the annoyance, and offered to have someone in the di blasio campaign call me. who knows if this will have the slightest effect on future robocalling, and i still will not vote for di blasio, but i appreciate being listened to for once instead of talked at.
as squindar would put it, tish has risen above the muck, again, in my book.
Howdy, Stranger!
Categories
- 40K All Categories
- 27.1K Neighborhoods
- 5.1K Crown Heights/Prospect Lefferts Gardens
- 7.1K Prospect Heights
- 2.3K Fort Greene, Clinton Hill, Bed-Stuy
- 8K Park Slope
- 549 Williamsburg, Greenpoint, Bushwick
- 442 Flatbush/Midwood/Ditmas Park
- 657 BoCoCa (Boerum Hill, Cobble Hill, Carroll Gardens)
- 151 Red Hook
- 104 Gowanus
- 304 Bay Ridge/Bensonhurst
- 130 Coney Island, Brighton Beach, Sheepshead Bay
- 270 Brooklyn Heights, DUMBO and Downtown
- 598 Windsor Terrace / Kensington
- 673 Greenwood Heights and Sunset Park
- 749 Brooklyn and Beyond
- 6.3K Stuff
- 86 Brooklyn Back When
- 1.2K Brooklyn Pets
- 257 Brooklyn Kids
- 241 Brooklyn Eats
- 51 Brooklyn Booze
- 3.6K The Lounge / Random Stuff
- 611 Brooklyn Politics
- 122 Brooklyn Sports and Fitness
- 111 Brooklyn Photos
- 339 Site Issues
- 8 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
- 6.2K Listings
- 1.1K APARTMENTS and REAL ESTATE
- 1.3K Sales Openings Events
- 2.3K The Classifieds