A followup to yesterday's call.

"Someone" called today (I want to say again) identifying themselves as needing to speak with my spouse, as it was a "human rights" call.

Innnnnnnteresting.

Today's tactics were already just a little bit different.

TODAY, the nice young man said that for "privacy" concerns he could ONLY reveal the name of the charity behind the call to my spouse (by name).

Innnnnnteresting.

So I made as if to take a message, shuffling papers loudly and acting befuddled, giving him the narration as I "got some paperr.... here's a pen.... that doesn't work! okay, found one! Yay!(in a singsong voice) Okay hang on, alright now

Me: "I have some questions, okay Gary?" (he'd identified himself as Gary)
"Gary": "Okay..."
M: "Who do you work for?
G: "Excuse me?"
M: "I'm sorry, WHOM do you work for?"
G: "Gordon Schwenkmeyer & Company"
M: "And where are you located?"
G: "San Diego"
M: "Okay, Gordon, hang on one second please" (type into Google)
M: "Oh! There you ARE! Hey wait a minute. Wait a minute. This says you're a *telemarketing* company, not a charity."
G: "Yes, that's right."
M: "So *you're* not a charity."
G: "No, we're *calling* on behalf of a human rights organisation."
M: "Whom you refuse to disclose."
G: "I told you, that for *privacy* purposes, we can ONLY disclose that to (spouse)"
M: "Nonsense. You can tell me who they are if you *wanted* to do."
G: "No. I can only disclose that information to (spouse)."
M: "Liar! I AM (spouse)'s husband and anything that you can say to her you can say to me. So who are you calling for?"
G: "I'm very sorry, but I can ONLY-"
M: "Bullshit!"

at that point, nice Gary gave me a polite brushoff and assured me that they would try to call sometime when they could speak to (spouse). Yeah, Good luck with that, buddy. Heaven help you if you do. And he hung up on me right quick.

So here's a recap:

Yesterday's caller said that their company was
called "GSI"
Today, we got an actual name:
Gordon & Schwenkmeyer Inc 619-497-5600. 2221 Camino Del Rio S # 20, San Diego, CA 92108.

Here's the first funny: 619-497-5600 is disconnected.

THIS number 858-496-2100, however is live.

A couple of questions and stories told got me passed up the chain to one

Cisco Hunter.

Mr Hunter was very pleasant, and cooperative. And he confirmed that GSI *does* do charity calls. However, they do NOT engage in this kind of non-cooperative cadginess where they refuse to identify which charity they are calling on behalf of. What's more, he says that he knows of NO "human rights" campaigns that GSI is calling for today or this week.

So Cisco and I joked and laughed together and I asked him if he was *sure* that it wasn't any GSI employees calling us, and I assured him that I believed him. He also assured me that if we asked to be removed from their lists that GSI would not contact us on behalf of ANY client.

He also said that his employees are required, if asked, to divulge THEIR
"phone ID."

Innnnnteresting.

I did eventually give him (spouse)'s name so he could "double check" for me. A risky move, but...
Here's the interesting test:

-If the calls continue, then they are OBVIOUSLY and BLATANTLY illegal scam calls, which gives me carte blanche to abuse and berate them in any fashion I wish.

But...
-If the calls cease as of now, then they- GSI - was the culprit.

The suspense is killing me.

Phonespam potatoe potahtoe

It's pretty obvious that most of the time when phone solicitors call, that their primary mission is to make money off of you and that while many marketing calls are legit, too many are not.

It's an interesting side effect of the "Do Not Call Registry" now that I can be fairly confident that ANY call I recieve from (number blocked) is going to be a shady solicitation call at the very best. I can ASSUME that they're scammers and be 99% right.

SUPPOSEDLY, there is an exemption for calls from charitable organisations and political causes.
Fine. But I've drawn the conclusion that 99% of the *charitable* calls are scams as well.

We have a *small* list charities we donate to, and they're causes we believe in and causes that we feel will tangibly benefit from our financial support.

And they, with some training, have learned that it's more productive to remind us by mail than it is to call us.

So, who has been calling us?

A list of other "organisations" who ask for my wife by name, and claim, when I ask who is calling, claim to be "a charitable organisation (she) has done business with".

Uh huh. Interesting.

After a bunch of these calls who all sounded the same, and after applying my usual probes with some vigour when they called, so far not a single one of these "charities"
NOT ONE.
EVER.
is ever *actually* the charity in question. What's more, my usual question:
"So... are you an employee of (charity you claim to be) or are you a call center with (cyctb) as a *client*"
got some unusually "noisy" cadging in the replies. The word they kept weaslevoiding was not "call center" (as was the case with the telemarketers) but "client".

At first this puzzled me, but then finally I put two and two together.

Most "marketing" calls I get nowadays are in fact scams of some sort, and shady at best. How do I know? Well, because for one thing, they're in direct violation of the (NDNCR). They're breaking the law even to call me.
Unlike the calls from credit card co's, they also *don't* have alot of info about me/us. They usually have a name, but have nothing else. They claim to not even know the number they dialed.
When I ask for "supervisors" they also, almost unanimously, claim to be working from home.
Interesting.
I can't help but wonder what portion those signs on the telephone poles that say "Earn $$$$ working at home" are gateways into distributed labour for these scams. And the people who wind up working these angles get a commission, maybe, pay a fee for the device/info/apps who do the robo-calling, and then get the credit card numbers. Then either forward that info to the (Company) or keep the money themselves.

And so, after awhile, this system will begin to break down as these "individual contractors" learn that they can be prosecuted after all. Word gets out, and your workers walk or worse yet, know what you're doing and refuse to play.

If ONLY there were a way to have this network of "Home Workers" make robo calls for you that weren't illegal.
Charity calls.
Tada!

Yup. And what's best, is that you can do the legwork to learn how to set up a small non-profit in your home who's "mission" is to call people up and ask them for money and then give some portion of the money you collect to the charities you support. Non-profits are allowed to *make* a profit, they just have to be honest about whom they give money to and why.
"Operating Expenses" can cover an AWFUL lot of wonderful little things...
And you can buy a few lists of contact info off of some other non-profits and charities (some will sell, others will not), even obtain such lists illegally, but hide the illegal acquisitions in the master list and just say "oopsie" if anyone finds out.
And so, when you call, as long as the mark is giving their credit card number out, they'll never know that it's you and not Amnesty, you and not Habitat For Humanity, you and not National Right To Life, etc etc.

So you can use this knowledge yourself, or better yet, avoid liability by packaging this knowledge up and selling "starter kits" to would-be home business owners.
Can't you just hear the pitch coming from a nicely suited lady or gentleman with a headset mic intoning to his/her powerpoint presentation:
"It's all perfectly legal as long as you are actually donating (some acceptable %) of your take, it's a win win scenario!" (and the crowd in the hotel function space or church basement cheers).
And the beauty of this system, is that the charities will not turn down your money, so after a round of successful calls, you're "in business". You may even get a positive reference FROM THE CHARITY/IES IT/THEM/SELF/SELVES.

Or, you can just be a scammer and claim to represent some charity, because you stole the phone numbers from a charity's phone list, and say whatever the hell you want on the phone until someone gives you their credit card number.

Hence the weaselvoiding of the word "client". The charity is not the "client". They're the "beneficiary". And the caller is not a contractor to them (as with telemarketing) but an "independent organisation" who's calling you, primarily for their OWN interest.

And the beauty of going the charity route, is that you don't have to actually be selling anything to complete this deal. The Mark GIVES YOU MONEY, and as long as you're kicking back some (acceptable amount) to the charity that you claim to be benefiting, all the (rest of the) money goes to you. With no sales, there's little to no overhead.
THIS is the telecaller's dream come true, and it's all legal.

My plan of action is still the same.

Trust no one, give no information, persistently DEMAND information from them..

And mess with them.

Most people just hang up, and I've got to stress again and again, that hanging up is a contingency that gives NO FEEDBACK to them, which means they continue the BAD BEHAVIOUR.

It is essential, with the goal at the very least, to have the calls stop coming to you
TO PROVIDE NEGATIVE REINFORCEMENT of some sort so that they regret calling YOU.
Waste their time.
Call them out on their lies/evasions/weaselvoidances, but in ways that make them think that
they are besting *you*, that they're outfoxing your probes. Make them think that you ARE a mark, if *only* you could be reassured. They don't want to pursue a bad call, (no $ for them), but a curious person who seems gullible is GOLD

When you finally get them to admit that they're not really the (charity), asking them the name of their company is fun (usually you just get initials), but then play the "concerned" card and ask for their address, (for protection against fraud) and enter the Initials and address into Google and watch the fun.

Betcha $1 that 99% of these "companies" will show no direct match. Or a gajillion matches as did my last caller "GSI".

I MUST remind myself to google them AS I'm talking, and not after!
Because I can't WAIT to hear what happens when I tell them:
"I'm really sorry, but I'm not getting a good match from Google when I type your info in. Can you tell me more about your company please?"

I must also remind myself that most of the time I'm at the computer desk, I'm sitting here looking right at my digital recorder. I could record some of these calls for posterity and education.

Anyway, my conclusion:

The overwhelming majority of "charity" solicitation calls are not originating fromt the charitable organisations these people claim to represent. They are either from "direct marketing" firms who have diversified into charity work, or more likely, "home" businesses set up to be "non-profits" with the "charities" as a beneficiaries.

I'm not saying that we shouldn't support non-profits and charities. Do so directly, their website or by mailing a check directly to them.
But I would not, in good conscience give out credit card info to a voice on the phone.
And THAT is what they are ALL after when they call you at home.