See the bottom of this issue for subscription and archive details.
| Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 07:12:42 -0500
From: Ben Combee <ben.combee@gmail.com>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Theatres struggle with phone use
Message-ID: <55a79fbc.41a9ca0a.f6400.1e7a@mx.google.com>
Submitted for your approval, one of the 'don't talk' messages that our
local Alamo Drafthouse theater shows before films
http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=JVz-fO7kxcQ
***** Moderator's Note *****
It's laced with (bleeped) profanity, and the messages that is repeated
was clearly from a very irritated former patron.
Of course, the question is "Does it cost more than it makes?"
Bill Horne
Moderator
|
| Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 16:16:30 +1000
From: David Clayton <dc33box-usenet2@NOSPAM.yahoo.com.au>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Theaters Struggle With Patrons' Phone Use during shows
Message-ID: <pan.2015.07.16.06.16.23.166155@NOSPAM.yahoo.com.au>
On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 12:11:19 -0700, Don Y wrote:
.......
> Imagine if the handicap space took a photo of your license plate when you
> parked there. If not registered as having a handicap permit, a "ticket"
> is mailed to your home with photographic proof of the infringement (like
> "red light cameras", etc.)
And we all know that people with these permits are - supposedly - only
allowed to use the designated parking spots when directly transporting the
person the permit was issued to, don't we?
Maybe we need to "Chip" people assigned these permits to have some
technology verify that the vehicle is in fact entitled to use the parking
spot?
--
Regards, David.
David Clayton
Melbourne, Victoria, Australia.
Knowledge is a measure of how many answers you have, intelligence is a
measure of how many questions you have.
|
| Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 10:42:39 -0400
From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Theaters Struggle With Patrons' Phone Use during shows
Message-ID: <mo8fqa$f0f$1@dont-email.me>
On 7/16/2015 2:16 AM, David Clayton wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 12:11:19 -0700, Don Y wrote:
> .......
>> Imagine if the handicap space took a photo of your license plate when you
>> parked there. If not registered as having a handicap permit, a "ticket"
>> is mailed to your home with photographic proof of the infringement (like
>> "red light cameras", etc.)
>
> And we all know that people with these permits are - supposedly - only
> allowed to use the designated parking spots when directly transporting the
> person the permit was issued to, don't we?
>
> Maybe we need to "Chip" people assigned these permits to have some
> technology verify that the vehicle is in fact entitled to use the parking
> spot?
OK, I get it that you're joking (or, at least I hope you are).
But ...
The game isn't about enforcing the "rules". The political game is run so
as to make sure that few people know how many are breaking the rules.
If nobody complains about the use of cellphones in theaters, the problem
doesn't exist.
In other words, so long as no one knew the football players were given
handicapped placards so as to spare them the extra few yards of running
practice they might have gotten without them, everyone was "happy" for
purposes of counting votes. It was only when the process became so
perverted, and it's results so obvious, that excuses were impossible and
authorities took action.
Bill
--
Bill Horne
(Remove QRM from my address to write to me directly)
|
| Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 09:16:24 -0700
From: Don Y <anonymous@invalid.telecomdigest.us>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Theaters Struggle With Patrons' Phone Use during shows
Message-ID: <mo8lc1$fes$1@speranza.aioe.org>
On 7/15/2015 11:16 PM, David Clayton wrote:
> On Wed, 15 Jul 2015 12:11:19 -0700, Don Y wrote:
> .......
>> Imagine if the handicap space took a photo of your license plate when you
>> parked there. If not registered as having a handicap permit, a "ticket"
>> is mailed to your home with photographic proof of the infringement (like
>> "red light cameras", etc.)
>
> And we all know that people with these permits are - supposedly - only
> allowed to use the designated parking spots when directly transporting the
> person the permit was issued to, don't we?
>
> Maybe we need to "Chip" people assigned these permits to have some
> technology verify that the vehicle is in fact entitled to use the parking
> spot?
Insert "permit" (which can now be a credit card sized item as it doesn't
need to remain in the vehicle "on display" -- if something else is actively
performing the validation) into parking meter style monitor. If you want
to be pedantic, photo the cardholder at the same time. Treat them like
parking meters -- collect the data weekly and issue citations (just like
red-light cameras have their photographs reviewed by a police officer
prior to sending out citations)
[There was a move, here, to put photo of cardholder on the "tag" but those
folks objected -- claiming it could be used to exploit them. I guess on
the assumption that folks could look inside the vehicle, see their
photo dangling from the rearview mirror and chase them down in the
store, etc. -- it never occurred to them that you could redesign the
permit with a crease in it so the photo is only visible if someone
unfolds it to examine the photo -- like a police officer!]
The problem isn't perceived (by society) to be big enough to warrant
this sort of attention. Folks who need the spots can either find
another -- or, grumble/wait. OTOH, at $500/infraction, one assumes
lawmakers are claiming this to be a "privilege" worth protecting.
Of course, a $1000 fine on IMPROPER USE of such credentials might help!!
[Knowing several people with severe physical disabilities makes me
a bit touchy about abuses of this!]
|
| Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 10:32:46 -0400
From: Bill Horne <bill@horneQRM.net>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Theaters Struggle With Patrons' Phone Use during shows
Message-ID: <mo8f7p$crr$1@dont-email.me>
On 7/15/2015 3:11 PM, Don Y wrote:
> Fourth, businesses seem to be reluctant to "discipline" their
> customers. I suspect the rationale is something along the line
> of not wanting to alienate a customer (source of income) and
> imagining that other customers will "put up with" the inconvenience.
> (i.e., they never see other customers taking their business elsewhere
> hence no cost of "failed enforcement").
>
> Consider how often someone goes through a checkout with clearly
> more than "10 items". What would it take for the cashier to
> simply state: "I'm sorry, ma'am/sir; but this lane is for
> customers with 10 items or less".
[snip]
> E.g., imagine if the cash register in the 10-items-or-less lane at the
> checkout actually refused to process more than 10 items! And, the
> charge/debit-card reader refused to process another transaction on
> the same "card/account" for 5 minutes. I.e., only your first 10 items
> will be allowed to be purchased -- no need for the employee to play
> policeman, etc.
A store manager would never countenance such a thought: it would cut
into impulse sales, and the candy, batteries, and pulp magazines
offered at checkout kiosks are the highest-profit items.
Here's the secret to success in retail: the guy who ticks off the least
number of customers wins. That means that when a large number of people
complain about cellphone use in theaters, the management will come to a
decision that offending one or two customers is better business than
making excuses to the those whom complain.
So, the next time you see it, tell the management that you're offended
and angry.
Bill
--
Bill Horne
(Remove QRM from my address to write to me directly)
|
| Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 09:46:30 -0400
From: Pete Cresswell <PeteCress@invalid.telecom-digest.org>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Theaters Struggle With Patrons' Phone Use during shows
Message-ID: <9ddfqal5cjgnp50bma76enst0ulgerlrv3@4ax.com>
Per Don Y:
>I think any other approach has to be effectively fool-proof. I.e.,
>your phone WILL NOT operate in these confines -- you don't have a
>choice in the matter (and our staff needn't be inconvenienced to
>feel like policemen in enforcing it).
>
>E.g., imagine if the cash register in the 10-items-or-less lane at the
>checkout actually refused to process more than 10 items! And, the
>charge/debit-card reader refused to process another transaction on
>the same "card/account" for 5 minutes. I.e., only your first 10 items
>will be allowed to be purchased -- no need for the employee to play
>policeman, etc.
+ 1 on both...
--
Pete Cresswell
|
| Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 14:03:31 -0500
From: Dave Garland <dave.garland@wizinfo.com>
To: telecomdigestsubmissions.remove-this@and-this-too.telecom-digest.org.
Subject: Re: Theaters Struggle With Patrons' Phone Use During Shows
Message-ID: <mo8v3i$dnr$1@dont-email.me>
On 7/12/2015 2:26 PM, Don Y wrote:
> I've often wondered why such venues don't "shield" the rooms with
> aluminized paint, etc. Granted, it won't stop folks from playing
> games on their phones -- but the inbound/outbound traffic would
> be stopped.
>
> [I suspect an active jammer is illegal]
It is, although it's not hard to find the hardware if you poke around
on the 'net a bit.
> I've thought of painting the rooms, here, similarly in an attempt to
> curb RF leakage (and infiltration) -- WiFi services that I'm not
> keen on others being able to snoop, interact or distrupt.
Around here, many houses are stucco (concrete trowelled onto wire mesh
backing). If they had a little attention to making sure all the wire
mesh was grounded, and aluminum storms, they'd be a pretty fair
Faraday cage. Add steel roofing, and you're all set. And in fact just
as they are, many have poor to no cell reception (or access to
municipal wifi, unless an exterior antenna is installed).
|
TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly to telecom-
munications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in
addition to Usenet, where it appears as the moderated newsgroup
'comp.dcom.telecom'.
TELECOM Digest is a not-for-profit educational service offered to
the Internet by Bill Horne.
This Digest is the oldest continuing e-journal about telecomm-
unications on the Internet, having been founded in August, 1981 and
published continuously since then. Our archives are available for
your review/research. We believe we are the oldest e-zine/mailing list
on the internet in any category!
URL information: http://telecom-digest.org
Copyright © 2015 E. William Horne. All rights reserved.
Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as
yourself. Thank you!
All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the
author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only
and messages should not be considered any official expression by the
organization.
