Talk:2053: Incoming Calls

The "other scammers" section is far too small. 108.162.216.166 16:54, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

We have two title texts explanations. With slightly conflicting information. Combine and brush up or should we just do one or the other for now? I like the CBS source in the first so I think we should absolutely preserve that at least. Lukeskylicker (talk) 17:15, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Supposing that you are correct, I have to add that I have never heard of the headset trick being used to buy time to connect you to a real scammer. But then again, I don't get scammed that often. Kwonunn (talk) 17:44, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

He forgot bill collectors. 162.158.63.52 (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

As the link from the first title text explanation points out, they don't *need* your credit card or social security number as many phone companies, especially mobile companies, will allow a third party to add charges to your phone bill if you've agreed to pay the money. With that in mind, I don't think the second explanation flies. 162.158.186.90 17:42, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

This only makes sense if it’s proportional or percentage based. But then that makes one wonder if some of this might be because the number of calls dropped over time. -- Mr.Dude (talk) (please sign your comments with ~~~~)

There's a contradiction between "it's safe to assume that calls from his family didn't decrease over the years", and "Over time, Randall's friends and family have been less likely to make phone calls to him, likely due to the use of text messages and other messaging apps.". I'd suggest rephrasing the first part to say "it's possible the calls from family didn't decrease over the years, in which case they only make up a smaller fraction as the number of total calls increases since 1990.", or simply "some of the categories like family calls appear to be occurring less often but may only be decreasing in frequency in proportion to total calls" 162.158.142.28 21:10, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

I know for me personally family calls have decreased as texting and other messaging apps have become more common, and the same might have happened for him. It is clear that this graph excludes texting as by the present the only friend calling is that one friend that hates texting. That person may be the best way to figure out if the absolute volume of calls has increased...it appears the volume of total calls has increased, at least recently, as that one friend originally took up a larger proportion of the vertical space (of course the frequency of correspondence with that friend may also have changed).172.68.46.5 16:51, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for your written thoughts. You also can enhance the explanation. But for now I've added a new paragraph about texting, just because it's not part of the comic. And, sorry I missed it, I also hate tex...ng ;) --Dgbrt (talk) 17:29, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

At least not being British he missed the PPI calls. 162.158.154.235 21:16, 1 October 2018 (UTC)

Along with the current spate of automated calls telling me that my IP address needs to be changed as it has been "compromised in multiple countries". Gearóid (talk) 06:44, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

The trick is not always just to get you thinking you're talking to a real person. More likely it is to get a recording of you saying "yes", which can be used maliciously.--162.158.94.20 08:19, 2 October 2018 (UTC)

AFAIK, that has only been done once, there is a question on it here: https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/42050/have-phone-scammers-recorded-yes-statements-to-fraudulently-authorise-payments (I was going to say that it was probably a myth, but the accepted answer had not been written when I last read that page. Pays to check sources I guess, be it for updated webpages, or to counter scammers Baldrickk (talk) 12:57, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

Referencing "the famous WhatsApp" seems unnecessary. It could be replaced with something like "various mobile messaging apps" 172.68.133.168 anonanon

Could someone please provide more information about that "auto insurance scammer" part? From my foreign perspective, this means nothing at all and it seems odd that Randall's scammer calls were so numerous and so single-minded in their focus for such a long time. Were these calls really the only scams during that time? Did other scammers then copy their methods? It may seem obvious to you but it certainly isn't for me.141.101.88.196 09:30, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

I don't specifically know what that scam is; maybe that was just a scam that Randall personally got a lot of calls about and/or has an especially vivid memory about? -boB (talk) 14:06, 3 October 2018 (UTC)

"Rachel" from credit card services deserves her own category. Whenever I have a few minutes to kill, I wait for a "representative" and then keep asking WHICH of my cards he's calling about and torment them with stupid questions until they hang up (or ask for the person in charge of office supplies and try to sell them toner). Also deserving of their own category are the scammers who call about changing my energy supplier and those offering solar panels. To these I usually tell that I like paying higher rates to my electric company, that we have a nuclear reactor in the basement, or that we steal our electricity from our neighbors.