Steve sure you don't live in the bay area of California? Sounds like the company the hubby type works for. The chairman of the board wanted a new 50 mil jet to go along with his two year old one, just in a different interior design. To make sure the stock stays high, they have cut out bonuses, and stock options and all raises. cut the matching retirment amount in half, and raised the amount you pay for the company self insurance plan by almost triple while making us pay more out of pocket at the second step when we go to the DR. We are all wondering what the man will want next year, a new country club to go with his golf company he bought a few years back? Then why doesn't the rank and file employee complain about irregularities to the ftc? Becasue the retirement fund id all tied to company stock, and if it was leaked what is happening and where the books are cooked, everyone with a retirement amount, will lose it all. Catch 22
Nope, never even been to the bay area, but all companies are the same. Since I work for the government instead of private sector, I am sort of protected from this sort of thing but I'm not blind. I'm a bit of a mercenary in that I give employers the same loyalty they give me... they will toss you out if it saves a few pennies, and work you to death meanwhile. Loyalty begets loyalty and the reverse is also true. At Rocktdyne (now part of Boeing) they had a thing called "green time" in addition to the usual corporate nonsense. They compelled people to "donate" free time to the company under the threat that failure to "donate" would be reflected in appraisals. The reason was the usual... short schedule and no money. That same year, a shitload of people were laid off just before Christmas while the suits gave themselves huge bonusas with the money they didn't have. Needless to say, I reported this to the government auditors, and yes it was illegal.
I just sent the following email to Photovision:
"I tried to subscribe via email but was rejected because I would not supply my phone No.
I will not give out my phone number to commercial firms unless I am guaranteed that it will not be used for purposes other than contact between the magazine personnel and me. I am _very_ sorry for this as I would really liked to have subscribed. Is this information required in a written request as well?
Truly, dr bob
R. Eugene Smith
For some reason I really have a problem with tele-marketing and it seems that every time we give out a phone nomber, even to legitimate businesses, we are bombarded with tele-marketers for about a month or two.
I expect a reply fron Photovision, but also expect a rather "company business" standing operating proceedure. What is the impression of other APUG members? Should I continue efforts or will this cause heartburn?
As I see it, the important thing is support to the magazine, so they dont have to know you are an APUG member.Rip one of those little cards from the magazine and send it in with a check, that way you dont have to give out your phone number. Or, if you want to deal with a person, e mail their subscription department or phone them and tell them you absolutely do not want to give out your ph#. If you wish to pay with a CC then I think this is a requirement, since the CC demands this as part of the info. I dont know their phone number, or e mail address, but is easy enough to get at their web site.
Originally Posted by dr bob
actually the phone number is not required for the cc companies either. Just the mailing and billing address must correspond. If in doubt, just put in a fake telephone number. We have two main lines into this house. One has no phone hooked to it. I often just put that phone number down. It's real, but no one ever answers the line.
Sponsored Ad. (Subscribers to APUG have the option to remove this ad.)
I just checked with the Photovision web guy, Michael Bosworth. Michael says the telephone number is not required. However, your concerns are real so he is going to change the site in the next few days so that there will be * next to required fields.
However, I'm with Aggie. I haven't given my real phone number to anyone I don't know since the Sixties!
The Darkroom Cookbook
The Variable Contrast Printing Manual
The Film Developing Cookbook
The Nude at Big Sur
Ok Steve? Is the rumor, on the Pure_silver list true? Have you resigned from Photo vision Magazine dur to editorial differences with the publishers?
FWIW, I emailed Deana at the magazine with whom I have been in contact with about not receiving my magazines and I pointedly asked if she could/would respond to the Steve resigning issues. Maybe she will write and maybe she won't.
Just received an E-mail from Richard l. Gifford , on my Pure_Silver List, that he has spoken with Steve( via E-Mail). That the magazine has got the votes to go digital and that Steve has resigned over it. Still haven't heard a confirm from Steve personnally. Guess we didn't pony up enough afterall.
Grain- it's a three dimensional problem.
Steve writes in his current column:
"For example, on June 6, I posted a message on a web site, devoted entirely to film-based photography. I explained to the 720 members that PV is the only magazine dealing with all aspects of film-based photography. I offered a free issue to the first 100 members that wrote or called, no obligation.
To date, thirty-four members have taken me up on the offer for a free issue and less than that have subscribed."
For the rest of the piece see:
Well, I purchased a two-year subscription to support their commitment to film-based photography, but if they abandon that commitment, I will cancel my subscription and request a refund.