"Michel Boucher" > wrote in message
. ..
> "Pete C." > wrote in news:4a3feed4$0$30276
> :
>
>> I for one never talk any louder on the phone than I do to people seated
>> at my table. I also tend to eat out a fair amount from time to time, and
>> have rarely observed anyone on a cell phone talking loudly either.

Anytime one modulates their voice to the people speaking around them they
are SHOUTING... each attempting to be heard over the others shouting louder
and louder. You just don't realize.

> That may have been the case twenty years ago, from whence many of these
> complaints arise back when cell phones were little more than glorified
> walkie-talkies and one had to call out the alphabet, but nowadays, cell
> phones are as clear as land lines.
>
> I don't shout into a cell phone, no one I've seen take a call shouts into
> their cell phone. Perhaps those who complain are living in a hard of
> hearing zone.


I think you're full of doodoo. I hear people shouting into cell phones all
the time, and there are reasons... signals vary by location, whether sitting
in one spot or moving down the road, signals fade in and out and/or people
move in and out of optimal signal range... I see people moving from window
to window trying to get a stronger signal, talking louder and louder.... CAN
YOU HEAR ME NOW? Also I think the biggest reason people shout is due to the
fact they are responding to the cell phoner on the other end constantly
attempting to out shout each other, because unlike land lines most folks are
using cell phones in a noisy situation, they are in open public places, in
cars there is road noise. With land lines you are typically in a quiet
place in your home or with public land line phones they're in sound deadened
booths. I've never met a person yet who will will admit to shouting on a
cell phone, the numbskuls are totally unaware. I encounter people on cell
phones all the time just walking down the road, arms waving, shouting like a
raving lunatic... I can hear them arguing from a hundred feet away. At
first I think it's an escapee from a mental institution arguing with
themself. No way does anyone use a cell phone and not shout. And all cell
phone users are rude *******s, thinking everyone wants to hear their inane
rantings. As soon as I realize some one has called me on a cell phone I say
I can't hear you, you're fading, then I hang up... I refuse to listen to
someone screaming in my ear and with entire phrases missing due to signal
loss. Cell phones are far from perfected... not much more than paper cups
with a string. I've had people come to visit begin calling me while still
ten miles away, giving me detailed infomation of their location and ETA...
finally, I'm here, I'm pulling into your driveway, I'm opening my door, can
you see me? And then when they come in they are on the cell phone one call
after another the entire visit, I wanna kill them. I never invite them
again. Most people who use cell phones are mentally ill, they're addicted
to the friggin' things. And an awful lot of people think having a cell
phone is a status symbol... they even like to flash that they have the
latest model. People who use cell phones have nothing to say worth
listening to. Anyone who makes more than 3 personal phone calls a day
hasn't a life, they're lonely.

brooklyn1 wrote:

> I........ I hear people shouting into cell
> phones all the time, and there are reasons...

I hear it all the time, too. Even in areas with good signal coverage, these
dimwits talk in loud voices. Hell, I can't even go into a bathroom stall to
take a dump without out some clueless mope making a call from a different
stall down the line. The first time this happened, I blurted out "you've got
to be freaking kidding me?". It was just so unbelievable. Not only from the
fact that these idiots think that they are just so addicted, that they feel
that they must talk whilst dropping a load.... but from the fact that they
are handling their cell phone with hands that are being exposed to pee and
shit. Care to borrow a cell phone from those bozos, anyone?

--
Dave
What is best in life? "To crush your enemies, see them driven before
you, and to hear the lamentation of the women." -- Conan

Pete C. wrote:

>>> Their job is to give me service, not to judge who I choose to converse
>>> with. I expect them to seat me, take my order, serve me, clear the
>>> dishes and bring me the bill, and my choice of dinner conversation has
>>> no impact whatsoever on their duties.
>> I suppose their presence there is an intrusion, so the best thing for a
>> server to do is to leave and come back when you are finished your call.
>
> No, the best thing for the waitstaff to do is to do their job. This
> means returning promptly to take my order,

But the server was there to take your order promptly and you were busy
on the phone. There are other people to be served.

>> A restaurant is not a place to be conducting business for
>> all to hear
>
> Restaurants have always been such a place, long before cell phones ever
> existed.


I did not say that business should not be conducted in a restaurant. I
said that it should not be conducted for all to hear.


>> and no one should have to listen to some inane conversation
>> between two people who have nothing important to say that could easily
>> be said elsewhere. Take it outside.
>
> Again, people have always had conversations in restaurants, long before
> cell phones were invented.

When we relied on pay phones they were out in a hallway so that you
could have some privacy and not be intruding upon other people.



>> From my experience, very few people do not talk louder when on a cell
>> phone. Bad reception is another reason to take the call outside.
>
> Your experience doesn't mesh with mine. Must be the people you associate
> with.


You have never heard people speaking with loud voices on cell phones in
restaurants?? I would suggest that you are denying the obvious.

"Dave Smith" wrote
> Pete C. wrote:
>
>
>>> A restaurant is not a place to be conducting business for
>>> all to hear
>>
>> Restaurants have always been such a place, long before cell phones ever
>> existed.
>
>
> I did not say that business should not be conducted in a restaurant. I
> said that it should not be conducted for all to hear.

But then how are the braggarts and blowhards to feel good about
themselves... sucessful people never broadcast their business, only the
liars, exaggerators, and losers do.

Dave Smith wrote:
>
> Pete C. wrote:
>
> >>> Their job is to give me service, not to judge who I choose to converse
> >>> with. I expect them to seat me, take my order, serve me, clear the
> >>> dishes and bring me the bill, and my choice of dinner conversation has
> >>> no impact whatsoever on their duties.
> >> I suppose their presence there is an intrusion, so the best thing for a
> >> server to do is to leave and come back when you are finished your call.
> >
> > No, the best thing for the waitstaff to do is to do their job. This
> > means returning promptly to take my order,
>
> But the server was there to take your order promptly and you were busy
> on the phone. There are other people to be served.

BS, if the server actually came over and politely asked if I was ready
to order I most certainly was. It is no different than doing the same
when I'm having a conversation with someone seated at my table.

>
> >> A restaurant is not a place to be conducting business for
> >> all to hear
> >
> > Restaurants have always been such a place, long before cell phones ever
> > existed.
>
> I did not say that business should not be conducted in a restaurant. I
> said that it should not be conducted for all to hear.

And it is only conducted "for all to hear" if your nosy and trying to
listen in. It is never conducted any louder than a normal conversation.

>
> >> and no one should have to listen to some inane conversation
> >> between two people who have nothing important to say that could easily
> >> be said elsewhere. Take it outside.
> >
> > Again, people have always had conversations in restaurants, long before
> > cell phones were invented.
>
> When we relied on pay phones they were out in a hallway so that you
> could have some privacy and not be intruding upon other people.

People never got up, left the table and stood in the hallway to have a
conversation, they had their conversation at the table.

>
> >> From my experience, very few people do not talk louder when on a cell
> >> phone. Bad reception is another reason to take the call outside.
> >
> > Your experience doesn't mesh with mine. Must be the people you associate
> > with.
>
> You have never heard people speaking with loud voices on cell phones in
> restaurants?? I would suggest that you are denying the obvious.

No, I haven't in many hundreds of restaurant visits. Perhaps I frequent
classier restaurants with people who talk at a normal level on cell
phones, or perhaps anyone trying to talk on a cell phone was drowned out
by someone else's screaming hell spawn.

"James Silverton" > wrote in message
>
> I'd repeat that when you are driving you don't look at the passenger when
> you are talking, so what's the difference?
>

Its a brain function thing. When driving I most always have the radio on
and listen to music or at times a talk show. When traffic gets heavy,
weather turns bad, road may have a potential hazard, I usually miss what is
happening on the radio. If I have a passenger, the conversation may stop.

When talking on the phone, the other person takes on a higher importance and
takes a larger part of our attention, more than the road, thus the problems.
Study after study has shown this to be true. It gets even worse if the
driver tries to write down a message at the same time. It is easy to shift
attention from conversation to the road when driving with a friend or
spouse, but if you are talking to a customer or your boss, you probably give
them more of your brain power.

Have you ever been on the highway and when approaching an exit or entrance
the cars around you may be changing lanes or merging with traffic and all of
a sudden when you pass that you realize you missed hearing the weather
report. You made the attention shift when needed.

"brooklyn1" > writes:


> YOU HEAR ME NOW? Also I think the biggest reason people shout is due to the
> fact they are responding to the cell phoner on the other end constantly
> attempting to out shout each other...

No. The real reason is becasuse there are no standards. When Ma Bell
was a monopoly, there was a company-wide stadard for minimum
gain/valume for mouth/earpieces. The legacy that was that minimum std
can still be seen on vu meters (that red zone) on audio equip. Now
that every company in the World has its own std, or none at all, it's
a crap shoot. I've heard people talk on cellphones and sound like a 90
yr old emphysema sufferer, then they'd get a new cellphone and sound
like a boisterous 20 yr old. Same person, different phone.

Most of the cellphones are crap. And you can't tell me a mouthpiece
located up by your earlobe is going to pick up voice as good as a
mouthpiece down by your mouth. Sadly, desk phones aren't much better.
Even commercial phones like Plantronics are iffy. I always have to
tell support ppl on the other end to turn up their volume, no doubt
cuz my mom's cordless phone earpiece is also a piece of crap (GE). In
short, most phones are crap.

nb

Pete C. wrote:

>
>>> Restaurants have always been such a place, long before cell phones ever
>>> existed.
>> I did not say that business should not be conducted in a restaurant. I
>> said that it should not be conducted for all to hear.
>
> And it is only conducted "for all to hear" if your nosy and trying to
> listen in. It is never conducted any louder than a normal conversation.

Sorry, but I have been privy to one side of far too many cell phone
calls because of the volume of someone sitting in a restaurant. I wasn't
prying. I couldn't help but overhear them, even above the real people to
real people conversations.


>>> Again, people have always had conversations in restaurants, long before
>>> cell phones were invented
>> When we relied on pay phones they were out in a hallway so that you
>> could have some privacy and not be intruding upon other people.
>
> People never got up, left the table and stood in the hallway to have a
> conversation, they had their conversation at the table.

They left the room to use the phone.


>>> Your experience doesn't mesh with mine. Must be the people you associate
>>> with.
>> You have never heard people speaking with loud voices on cell phones in
>> restaurants?? I would suggest that you are denying the obvious.
>
> No, I haven't in many hundreds of restaurant visits. Perhaps I frequent
> classier restaurants with people who talk at a normal level on cell
> phones, or perhaps anyone trying to talk on a cell phone was drowned out
> by someone else's screaming hell spawn.

Classy restaurants and cell phones. Sorry. They don't mix. People with
class don't use cell phones in nice restaurants.

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 05:08:37 +0000 (UTC), elaich > fired up
random neurons and synapses to opine:

>Terry Pulliam Burd > wrote in
:
>
>> I beg to differ. My boss has been cited three times now and the fines
>> escalate.
>
>At what point will he learn?

He's a lawyer. Uneducable.

Terry "Squeaks" Pulliam Burd

--

"If the soup had been as hot as the claret, if the claret had been as
old as the bird, and if the bird's breasts had been as full as the
waitress's, it would have been a very good dinner."

- Duncan Hines

To reply, replace "meatloaf" with "cox"

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 16:07:34 -0500, Michel Boucher
> wrote:

>That may have been the case twenty years ago, from whence many of these
>complaints arise back when cell phones were little more than glorified
>walkie-talkies and one had to call out the alphabet, but nowadays, cell
>phones are as clear as land lines.

I'm with a very large and reliable carrier... but I don't think their
overall voice quality is as good as a land line. Whenever I try to
speak in what (to me) is a normal voice, I often get "What?"
>
>I don't shout into a cell phone, no one I've seen take a call shouts into
>their cell phone. Perhaps those who complain are living in a hard of
>hearing zone.

That's the US. We have to shout into our cells or we aren't heard
clearly on the other end (enough times to make it annoying). We also
get some sort of an echo, not all the time - but enough to make it
annoying. Mine could be caused by the hilly terrain, but I doubt it.

Of course, there are the alpha males (mainly) who raise their voices
so others in the vicinity can overhear how "important" they are.
Trust me on that one. I've experienced it in person with someone very
close to me... and if you call them on it, they'll deny it from now to
eternity.


--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 18:20:54 -0700, Lin >
fired up random neurons and synapses to opine:

>Might I ask which Audi you have? Bob really wants one. My eldest
>daughter has an A6 and I truly enjoyed riding with her in it.

It's my third Audi. My first was an A4 Quattro, which was a dandy
little scoot, but when I moved to 8,500 feet in the mountains of
Colorado really needed something beefier and with 4 wheel drive as
opposed to all wheel drive. Moving to southern California, my Range
Rover seemed like a very stupid vehicle to have, so I bought another
Audi, but got the somewhat larger A6. Nice car, but when it came time
to replace it, I scaled back to the A4 again. Nothing matches the A4 -
it's a zippy little buggy, manueverable as h*ll, dependable, big *ss
trunk, just a great little car. The Range Rover, I might add, was a
maintenance nightmare. Damned thing weighed 3 tons, went through
brakes every 6 months and tires ever 20,000 miles. And the chassis
"elevator" started to wear out at about 60,000 miles. This Audi only
has 3K on it, but so far, I love it.

OB: A granddaughter's birthday dinner this weekend is going to feature
Gloria's (peuster) Strawberry Cake. Strawberries are perfect right
now, so I plan to make a loose puree of strawberries and incorporate
some strawberry chunks to plop on the cake and ice cream.

@@@@@ Now You're Cooking! Export Format

Strawberry Cake

desserts

6 T unsalted butter; plus more for pie plate
1 1/2 c all-purpose flour
1 1/2 t baking powder
1/2 t salt
1 c sugar, plus 2 t
1 large egg
1/2 c milk
1 t pure vanilla extract
1 lb strawberries; hulled and halved

1. Preheat oven to 350F. Butter 10-inch pie plate. Sift
flour, baking powder, and salt together in a medium bowl.

2. Put butter and 1 c sugar in the bowl of an electric mixer
fitted with the paddle attachment. Mix on medium-high speed
until pale and fluffy, about 3 minutes. Reduce speed to
medium-low; mix in egg, milk, and vanilla.

3. Reduce speed to low; gradually mix in flour mixture.
Transfer batter to pie plate. Arrange strawberries on top of
batter, cut sides down and as close together as possible.
Sprinkle remaining 2 T of sugar over berries.

4. Bake cake 10 minutes. Reduce oven temperature to 325F.
Bake until cake is golden brown and firm to the touch, about
1 hour. Let cool in pie plate on wire rack. Cake can be stored at room
temperature, loosely covered, up to 2 days.

Contributor: Puester@rfc

Terry "Squeaks" Pulliam Burd

--

"If the soup had been as hot as the claret, if the claret had been as
old as the bird, and if the bird's breasts had been as full as the
waitress's, it would have been a very good dinner."

- Duncan Hines

To reply, replace "meatloaf" with "cox"

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:17:48 -0600, wrote:

>In short, most phones are crap.
..... these days.

Remember when you could drop them on the floor a bazillion times
(probably even take them into the shower with you) and they'd still
work well the next day? They were ugly, but they worked and if they
didn't they were replaced for free.


--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On 22 Jun 2009 23:50:11 GMT, "Michael \"Dog3\""
> wrote:

>"Pete C." >
nster.com: in
>rec.food.cooking
>
>>
>> Again, I have witnessed very few instances of people in a restaurant
>> talking loudly on a cell phone. I have witnessed far more instances of
>> someone darling hell spawn screaming at OSHA violating sound levels,
>> being allowed to run around tripping the waitstaff, jumping up and
>> down in the booth, tossing food onto the next table, etc. Ban children
>> in restaurants, not cell phones.
>
>Oh Gawd. Banning unruly children wins hands down. No contest.
>
Jesus, Mary and Joseph, Mr. Michael.... Where on earth do you eat at
your age? I can tell you that unless one is totally intolerant of
children, even the absolutely cheapest place I eat at has children who
are well behaved. If a (tiny) child cries, blame the parents. They
should *not* deprive that poor child of his or her nap just for a meal
out.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

In article >,
"> Stu" > wrote:

> On Sun, 21 Jun 2009 13:24:34 -0400, George >
> wrote:

> >Naw, we are turning into nanny states with feel good laws.


> wanting you to stop at the market. You and her get into a heated
> arguement, you are distracted and run someone down at a crosswalk.
> Not just their life is over but your's as well.
>
> I think it's a good law.

No, it's a bad law, but it seems like it is necessary. Some people can
talk and drive. Some people can't. Those who can't, are not only
oblivious to their driving while they are talking, but they are also
oblivious to the fact that they are unable to do both at the same time.
So we need a law.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

In article
>,
John Kane > wrote:


> "The risk of a collision when using a cellular telephone was four
> times higher than the risk when a cellular telephone was not being
> used . "
>
> "... units that allowed the hands to be free offered no safety
> advantage over hand-held units ."

I would argue with that, with no statistics or logic. People who are
too clueless to be able to drive while talking on a cell phone are too
clueless to buy a hands-free unit.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

sf wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:17:48 -0600, wrote:
>
>> In short, most phones are crap.
> .... these days.
>
> Remember when you could drop them on the floor a bazillion times
> (probably even take them into the shower with you) and they'd still
> work well the next day? They were ugly, but they worked and if they
> didn't they were replaced for free.
>
>
Free was actually pretty expensive. The "Bell system" was before my time
but I have seen phone bills from back then and they would be quite large
in today's dollars. People bought into the idea that cheap is the only
criteria. Often its not.

wrote:
> "brooklyn1" > writes:
>
>
>> YOU HEAR ME NOW? Also I think the biggest reason people shout is due to the
>> fact they are responding to the cell phoner on the other end constantly
>> attempting to out shout each other...
>
> No. The real reason is becasuse there are no standards.

The main reason is because of the limitation of the way the cell system
works there is no sidetone on a cellphone like there is on a landline
phone. So there is no feedback regulation.

When Ma Bell
> was a monopoly, there was a company-wide stadard for minimum
> gain/valume for mouth/earpieces. The legacy that was that minimum std
> can still be seen on vu meters (that red zone) on audio equip. Now
> that every company in the World has its own std, or none at all, it's
> a crap shoot. I've heard people talk on cellphones and sound like a 90
> yr old emphysema sufferer, then they'd get a new cellphone and sound
> like a boisterous 20 yr old. Same person, different phone.
>
> Most of the cellphones are crap. And you can't tell me a mouthpiece
> located up by your earlobe is going to pick up voice as good as a
> mouthpiece down by your mouth. Sadly, desk phones aren't much better.
> Even commercial phones like Plantronics are iffy. I always have to
> tell support ppl on the other end to turn up their volume, no doubt
> cuz my mom's cordless phone earpiece is also a piece of crap (GE). In
> short, most phones are crap.
>
> nb

Pete C. wrote:
> Dave Smith wrote:
>> Pete C. wrote:
>>
>>> No, I expect to have dinner conversation just like anyone else eating at
>>> a sit down type restaurant. It makes no difference whether the person
>>> I'm conversing with is sitting next to me or not.
>> Good for you, but I really resent having to overhear one side of a
>> conversation half way across a restaurant, usually so loud that it
>> drowns out the other two sided conversations with real people present.
>
> I for one never talk any louder on the phone than I do to people seated
> at my table. I also tend to eat out a fair amount from time to time, and
> have rarely observed anyone on a cell phone talking loudly either.
> Usually the loudest distraction at a restaurant in the darling hell
> spawn of some PYV obliviots.
>
>>> They are there to provide a service - to me - and there tip is dependent
>>> on doing such in an appropriate manner.
>> In other words, you are going to leave a big enough tip to compensate
>> for rudeness ?
>
> I leave a tip that is directly proportional to the service provided. If
> the waitstaff chooses to be inattentive in servicing my party, then they
> will receive a very small tip. If the waitstaff is attentive, accurate
> and pleasant they will receive a good tip.
>
>>> Their job is to give me service, not to judge who I choose to converse
>>> with. I expect them to seat me, take my order, serve me, clear the
>>> dishes and bring me the bill, and my choice of dinner conversation has
>>> no impact whatsoever on their duties.
>> I suppose their presence there is an intrusion, so the best thing for a
>> server to do is to leave and come back when you are finished your call.
>
> No, the best thing for the waitstaff to do is to do their job. This
> means returning promptly to take my order, ensuring that the order goes
> to the kitchen in a timely manner, ensuring the food is delivered in a
> timely manner, ensuring our beverages are refilled as appropriate and
> following up when we're finishing the meal to see if we want to order
> dessert or are ready for the bill. None of this has any connection to
> whether I am having a conversation with someone at my table, or someone
> on the phone.
>
>>> My point once again is that there is no difference and those that feel
>>> there is have some discriminatory bias.
>>> Having been in the "on the phone while waiting in line" situation
>>> before, I've never had a problem with it. When my turn in line comes up,
>>> as the previous customer is stepping out of the way, I tell the person
>>> I'm talking to to "hang on a minute", place my order (or whatever), then
>>> move aside for the next person in line and resume my conversation.
>> I am probably not the only person who has been stuck in line behind some
>> rude buffoon who thinks that their phone conversation with their friend
>> is more important that the time of the business, whose employer is
>> wasting time waiting for them to place their order, or the time of the
>> people waiting in line behind them.
>
> Probably, but that has nothing whatsoever to do with the cell phone. The
> idiots who act like that are just idiots plain and simple, and if it
> isn't the cell phone, it would be the makeup, ipod, coupon envelope, or
> some other distraction that keeps them from dealing with the task at
> hand.
>
>>>> Well, we have differing opinions. However, I don't mind someone on a
>>>> cell phone as long as it is not loud and annoying. Some need to be
>>>> available. Medical people come to mind immediately. They have to take
>>>> calls.
>>> We all need to be available for any reason. In these days of ever
>>> increasing time pressures we need to take the time to converse with our
>>> friends and associates.
>> No. We don't all need to be on call.
>
> Tell that to my employer, I'd be quite happy to not be on call.
>
>> There is a time and place for
>> everything.
>
> Indeed.
>
>> A restaurant is not a place to be conducting business for
>> all to hear
>
> Restaurants have always been such a place, long before cell phones ever
> existed.
>
>> and no one should have to listen to some inane conversation
>> between two people who have nothing important to say that could easily
>> be said elsewhere. Take it outside.
>
> Again, people have always had conversations in restaurants, long before
> cell phones were invented.
>
>> >> People tend
>>>> to talk louder when they are on the phone that when talking face to face.
>>>> Lots of reasons for that. Poor reception etc.
>>> Probably just ignorance. I never talk louder, and talking louder does
>>> nothing to overcome bad reception.
>> From my experience, very few people do not talk louder when on a cell
>> phone. Bad reception is another reason to take the call outside.
>
> Your experience doesn't mesh with mine. Must be the people you associate
> with.
>
>>> I'm attacking the entire misguided mistaken concept that somehow talking
>>> to someone on the phone is different than talking to someone sitting
>>> next to you. Unless you want a totally silent no talking allowed
>>> restaurant, you have no right to complain or discriminate about who I
>>> choose to converse with while I'm having my dinner.
>> It is much like taking a call and having an extended conversation with
>> someone on the phone when there are guests present. It's just plain rude.
>
> The person on the phone is *my* guest at *my* table. You are at *your*
> table and are free to converse with *your* guests.
>
>>>>> 2. Nosy people only get to listen in to half the conversation.
>>>> You forgot the and.
>>>>
>>>> 2. Nosy people only got to listen in to half the conversation and people
>>>> who don't give a shit about, and don't want to hear, what you have to say
>>>> to begin with.
>>> Nope, no different than the same conversation with the person sitting
>>> next to you.
>> Except that there is a person there. It is nosey for the people nearby
>> to make a conscious effort to eavesdrop on your conversation, but the
>> fact is that most people talk so loud on a cell phone that the people
>> next to them can't help but overhear, along with half the people in the
>> restaurant.
>
> Again, I have witnessed very few instances of people in a restaurant
> talking loudly on a cell phone. I have witnessed far more instances of
> someone darling hell spawn screaming at OSHA violating sound levels,
> being allowed to run around tripping the waitstaff, jumping up and down
> in the booth, tossing food onto the next table, etc. Ban children in
> restaurants, not cell phones.

You must live in a radically different area than here. Part of going to
a restaurant is to get away for a short time. It is very unusual not to
hear loud cell conversations in any restaurants I have been in (of
course beginning with an uber loud stupid ringtone that they let play
for a really long time before they answer).

Dave Smith wrote:
>
> Pete C. wrote:
>
> >
> >>> Restaurants have always been such a place, long before cell phones ever
> >>> existed.
> >> I did not say that business should not be conducted in a restaurant. I
> >> said that it should not be conducted for all to hear.
> >
> > And it is only conducted "for all to hear" if your nosy and trying to
> > listen in. It is never conducted any louder than a normal conversation.
>
> Sorry, but I have been privy to one side of far too many cell phone
> calls because of the volume of someone sitting in a restaurant. I wasn't
> prying. I couldn't help but overhear them, even above the real people to
> real people conversations.

Well, you must be going to a different class of restaurant from the ones
I go to. I've seen plenty of people at restaurants having phone
conversations and pretty much none of them at anything above "normal"
conversation volume.

>
> >>> Again, people have always had conversations in restaurants, long before
> >>> cell phones were invented
> >> When we relied on pay phones they were out in a hallway so that you
> >> could have some privacy and not be intruding upon other people.
> >
> > People never got up, left the table and stood in the hallway to have a
> > conversation, they had their conversation at the table.
>
> They left the room to use the phone.

They never left the table to have a conversation. Using the phone is
*gasp* a conversation. The lack of the phone at the table is the only
reason they got up, and indeed phones at the table at truck stop
restaurants has been the norm for a long time.

>
> >>> Your experience doesn't mesh with mine. Must be the people you associate
> >>> with.
> >> You have never heard people speaking with loud voices on cell phones in
> >> restaurants?? I would suggest that you are denying the obvious.
> >
> > No, I haven't in many hundreds of restaurant visits. Perhaps I frequent
> > classier restaurants with people who talk at a normal level on cell
> > phones, or perhaps anyone trying to talk on a cell phone was drowned out
> > by someone else's screaming hell spawn.
>
> Classy restaurants and cell phones. Sorry. They don't mix. People with
> class don't use cell phones in nice restaurants.

Not my experience. Classy people, or simply those with a clue don't
raise their voice on a cell phone.

sf > wrote in
:

>>That may have been the case twenty years ago, from whence many of
>>these complaints arise back when cell phones were little more than
>>glorified walkie-talkies and one had to call out the alphabet, but
>>nowadays, cell phones are as clear as land lines.
>
> I'm with a very large and reliable carrier... but I don't think their
> overall voice quality is as good as a land line. Whenever I try to
> speak in what (to me) is a normal voice, I often get "What?"

Well, it depends where you are. Ambient noise affects your hearing,
certainly. When I left work, I called my wife from downstairs on the
sidewalk so we could coordinate going home (we worked two blacks apart).
If a truck was going by I could hardly hear her but she would have no
problem hearing me sitting in her office. I'm with Bell and in a
relatively quiet room I have no problems hearing or being heard.

The comparison between the reliability of cell phones and land lines is
comparable around here, if you use a cell in an environment similar to
where your ll is located. Obviously, ambient noise has an impact. The
summer they ripped up the street outside my window and were blasting to put
in new sewage, the difficulty in hearing people on ll went up considerably.

> Of course, there are the alpha males (mainly) who raise their voices
> so others in the vicinity can overhear how "important" they are.
> Trust me on that one. I've experienced it in person with someone very
> close to me... and if you call them on it, they'll deny it from now to
> eternity.

I worked for politicians (as non-pol staff), I'm well aware how annoying
alpha males can be...and there are alpha females as well in the pack.

--

Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest
of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest
good of everyone. - John Maynard Keynes

Pete C. says:
> Not my experience. Classy people, or simply those with a clue don't
> raise their voice on a cell phone.

Classy and cell phone are mutually exclusive.

The primary lure of the cell phone is that it affords one the luxury of more
easily engaging in monkey business in private... I refer to the cell phone
as the Sneak/Cheat Phone. I don't think I need to explain.

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 09:11:07 -0400, George wrote:

> wrote:
>> "brooklyn1" > writes:
>>
>>> YOU HEAR ME NOW? Also I think the biggest reason people shout is due to the
>>> fact they are responding to the cell phoner on the other end constantly
>>> attempting to out shout each other...
>>
>> No. The real reason is becasuse there are no standards.
>
> The main reason is because of the limitation of the way the cell system
> works there is no sidetone on a cellphone like there is on a landline
> phone. So there is no feedback regulation.
>

that's my understanding too, and it makes perfect sense.

i have a hard time believing the couple people saying they've never heard
someone talking abnormally loudly on a cell.

your pal,
blake

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 15:52:32 -0500, Pete C. wrote:

> Dave Smith wrote:
>>
>> Pete C. wrote:
>>
>>> No, I expect to have dinner conversation just like anyone else eating at
>>> a sit down type restaurant. It makes no difference whether the person
>>> I'm conversing with is sitting next to me or not.
>>
>> Good for you, but I really resent having to overhear one side of a
>> conversation half way across a restaurant, usually so loud that it
>> drowns out the other two sided conversations with real people present.
>
> I for one never talk any louder on the phone than I do to people seated
> at my table. I also tend to eat out a fair amount from time to time, and
> have rarely observed anyone on a cell phone talking loudly either.
> Usually the loudest distraction at a restaurant in the darling hell
> spawn of some PYV obliviots.
>
>>
>>>
>>> They are there to provide a service - to me - and there tip is dependent
>>> on doing such in an appropriate manner.
>>
>> In other words, you are going to leave a big enough tip to compensate
>> for rudeness ?
>
> I leave a tip that is directly proportional to the service provided. If
> the waitstaff chooses to be inattentive in servicing my party, then they
> will receive a very small tip. If the waitstaff is attentive, accurate
> and pleasant they will receive a good tip.
>

once again, you sound like a real prick.

blake

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 21:16:10 -0400, Dave Smith wrote:

> Pete C. wrote:
>
>
>>> From my experience, very few people do not talk louder when on a cell
>>> phone. Bad reception is another reason to take the call outside.
>>
>> Your experience doesn't mesh with mine. Must be the people you associate
>> with.
>
> You have never heard people speaking with loud voices on cell phones in
> restaurants?? I would suggest that you are denying the obvious.

they wouldn't dare! if they did, peter would crush them with an icy stare!

your pal,
blake

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 09:10:09 -0400, George >
wrote:

>sf wrote:
>> On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:17:48 -0600, wrote:
>>
>>> In short, most phones are crap.
>> .... these days.
>>
>> Remember when you could drop them on the floor a bazillion times
>> (probably even take them into the shower with you) and they'd still
>> work well the next day? They were ugly, but they worked and if they
>> didn't they were replaced for free.
>>
>>
>Free was actually pretty expensive. The "Bell system" was before my time
>but I have seen phone bills from back then and they would be quite large
>in today's dollars. People bought into the idea that cheap is the only
>criteria. Often its not.

The Bell System was before your time. We had a system that worked and
machinery that worked - presplit. Yes, there were some things that
could have been better... like giving us free "anytime" minutes, but I
paid for unlimited out of area, yet local (I forget what they called
it) and long distance at an ok price AFAIC: about $20 per month each.
The system took a real nosedive into the crapper after they split up
Ma Bell.

I don't have a land line anymore, the system was that bad when I
dropped it. I'd had my phone number for 30 years and the only changes
were when my phone company merged with another in some way. I never
initiated switching providers, it was forced on me. Yet when I wanted
to switch my house number over to my cell phone, they took over two
weeks and still couldn't figure out which provider actually owned the
number.

All phone systems are **** poor now, cellular too, but at least it can
travel with me.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:43:30 -0500, Pete C. wrote:

> Dave Smith wrote:
>>
>> Pete C. wrote:
>>
>>>> From my experience, very few people do not talk louder when on a cell
>>>> phone. Bad reception is another reason to take the call outside.
>>>
>>> Your experience doesn't mesh with mine. Must be the people you associate
>>> with.
>>
>> You have never heard people speaking with loud voices on cell phones in
>> restaurants?? I would suggest that you are denying the obvious.
>
> No, I haven't in many hundreds of restaurant visits. Perhaps I frequent
> classier restaurants with people who talk at a normal level on cell
> phones, or perhaps anyone trying to talk on a cell phone was drowned out
> by someone else's screaming hell spawn.

you really are a consummate ass.

blake

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 09:11:07 -0400, George >
wrote:

>The main reason is because of the limitation of the way the cell system
>works there is no sidetone on a cellphone like there is on a landline
>phone. So there is no feedback regulation.

Is this a technical impossibility or do they just have us by the balls
and will only do it when we start losing interest in their product?

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 09:11:04 -0500, Michel Boucher
> wrote:

>Well, it depends where you are. Ambient noise affects your hearing,
>certainly.

I talking about being in a relatively quiet house, with no extra noise
from other electronic devices to interfere.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On 23 Jun 2009 12:53:43 GMT, "Michael \"Dog3\""
> wrote:

>When we went out to dinner as youngsters we had to behave. There were
>consequences for bad behavior.

I imagine that was the policy with your own children as well!

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 08:20:32 -0500, "Pete C." >
wrote:

>
>Dave Smith wrote:
>>
<snip>
>>
>> Classy restaurants and cell phones. Sorry. They don't mix. People with
>> class don't use cell phones in nice restaurants.
>
>Not my experience. Classy people, or simply those with a clue don't
>raise their voice on a cell phone.

I have a feeling the cell system is better Down Under.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

On Jun 22, 1:59*pm, "Nancy Young" > wrote:
> John Kane wrote:
> > On Jun 22, 9:22 am, "Nancy Young" > wrote:
> >> Sorry! Peter Pan syndrome is when you're really good at your
> >> job so they keep promoting you until you're in a job you aren't
> >> good at. Called Rising to your level of incompetence.
> > Peter Pan? *I know it as the Peter Principle, named after Dr. Laurence
> > J. Peter. I've never heard it called the Peter Pan Principle.
>
> > Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Principlefor a quick summary.
> > BTW the book mentioned is a lot of fun.
>
> > John Kane Kingston ON Canada
>
> I read it many years ago. *I forget why I thought that Pan belonged
> in there.

Well this is r.f.c. Pans are a logical topic for discussion.

John Kane Kingston ON Canada

sf > wrote in news:k8524597snj602oba8k4nqq58aqmvvgqhe@
4ax.com:

>>Well, it depends where you are. Ambient noise affects your hearing,
>>certainly.
>
> I talking about being in a relatively quiet house, with no extra noise
> from other electronic devices to interfere.

Well, then if you're not getting good reception, I suggest your provider is
inadequate to the task. Possibly, their frequencies are overloaded. I
often hear tell of a rare phenomenon hereabouts: the dropped call. Verizon
seems to have made its reputation on "fewer dropped calls", not "no drapped
calls". I can't recall the last time I lost connection.

The step-daughter's boyfriend might know why these things are or aren't
(he's a specialist in audio, speech and lasnguage processing which includes
satellite-based communications). Unfortunately he's not here right now.
I'll ask him next time I see him.

--

Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest
of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest
good of everyone. - John Maynard Keynes

John Kane wrote:
> On Jun 22, 1:59 pm, "Nancy Young" > wrote:
>> John Kane wrote:
>>> On Jun 22, 9:22 am, "Nancy Young" > wrote:
>>>> Sorry! Peter Pan syndrome is when you're really good at your
>>>> job so they keep promoting you until you're in a job you aren't
>>>> good at. Called Rising to your level of incompetence.
>>> Peter Pan? I know it as the Peter Principle, named after Dr.
>>> Laurence J. Peter. I've never heard it called the Peter Pan
>>> Principle.
>>
>>> Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Principlefor a quick summary.
>>> BTW the book mentioned is a lot of fun.

>> I read it many years ago. I forget why I thought that Pan belonged
>> in there.
>
> Well this is r.f.c. Pans are a logical topic for discussion.

(laugh!) You're right! I didn't get my words mixed up, I was just trying
to get it on topic.

nancy

blake murphy wrote:

> i have a hard time believing the couple people saying they've never
> heard someone talking abnormally loudly on a cell.

Especially given some people talk really loudly on any phone,
cell or not.

Certainly I had encountered the occasional person who yells into
their phone, startling everyone around. In my travels lately, though,
I don't know if people are more accustomed to the cell phone, or
they have finally figured out they are irritating the people around
them, I have noticed people are pretty quiet on the phone these
days.

nancy

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 12:57:15 -0500, Michel Boucher
> wrote:

>Well, then if you're not getting good reception, I suggest your provider is
>inadequate to the task. Possibly, their frequencies are overloaded. I
>often hear tell of a rare phenomenon hereabouts: the dropped call. Verizon
>seems to have made its reputation on "fewer dropped calls", not "no drapped
>calls". I can't recall the last time I lost connection.

I'm with Verizon and I have an LG phone. Overloaded frequencies could
be a problem considering where I live, but dropped calls are so rare I
don't even think about them. I blame the terrain mainly (I had to
switch to cable because the surrounding hills caused "ghosts" on my tv
because the signal bounced off them). In my experience, voice quality
improves greatly after one party switches to a land line. I haven't
noticed if the echoes happen between Verizon and one other particular
carrier. I think the person I speak to the most when I have that
problem is going to switch over to Verizon when her contract is up.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.

sf wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 09:10:09 -0400, George >
> wrote:
>
>> sf wrote:
>>> On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 20:17:48 -0600, wrote:
>>>
>>>> In short, most phones are crap.
>>> .... these days.
>>>
>>> Remember when you could drop them on the floor a bazillion times
>>> (probably even take them into the shower with you) and they'd still
>>> work well the next day? They were ugly, but they worked and if they
>>> didn't they were replaced for free.
>>>
>>>
>> Free was actually pretty expensive. The "Bell system" was before my time
>> but I have seen phone bills from back then and they would be quite large
>> in today's dollars. People bought into the idea that cheap is the only
>> criteria. Often its not.
>
> The Bell System was before your time. We had a system that worked and
> machinery that worked - presplit. Yes, there were some things that
> could have been better... like giving us free "anytime" minutes, but I
> paid for unlimited out of area, yet local (I forget what they called
> it) and long distance at an ok price AFAIC: about $20 per month each.
> The system took a real nosedive into the crapper after they split up
> Ma Bell.

That was my point. Price and quality both went down. Is cheap always better?
>
> I don't have a land line anymore, the system was that bad when I
> dropped it. I'd had my phone number for 30 years and the only changes
> were when my phone company merged with another in some way. I never
> initiated switching providers, it was forced on me. Yet when I wanted
> to switch my house number over to my cell phone, they took over two
> weeks and still couldn't figure out which provider actually owned the
> number.

Sure, that was the result of slicing and dicing the Bell system into
little pieces.

>
> All phone systems are **** poor now, cellular too, but at least it can
> travel with me.
>

sf wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 09:11:07 -0400, George >
> wrote:
>
>> The main reason is because of the limitation of the way the cell system
>> works there is no sidetone on a cellphone like there is on a landline
>> phone. So there is no feedback regulation.
>
> Is this a technical impossibility or do they just have us by the balls
> and will only do it when we start losing interest in their product?
>
Its quite difficult to do sidetone when a device is moving because
timing is changing all of the time. It leads to weird echoes.

sf wrote:
> On Mon, 22 Jun 2009 16:07:34 -0500, Michel Boucher
> > wrote:
>
>> That may have been the case twenty years ago, from whence many of these
>> complaints arise back when cell phones were little more than glorified
>> walkie-talkies and one had to call out the alphabet, but nowadays, cell
>> phones are as clear as land lines.
>
> I'm with a very large and reliable carrier... but I don't think their
> overall voice quality is as good as a land line. Whenever I try to
> speak in what (to me) is a normal voice, I often get "What?"
>> I don't shout into a cell phone, no one I've seen take a call shouts into
>> their cell phone. Perhaps those who complain are living in a hard of
>> hearing zone.
>
> That's the US. We have to shout into our cells or we aren't heard
> clearly on the other end (enough times to make it annoying). We also
> get some sort of an echo, not all the time - but enough to make it
> annoying. Mine could be caused by the hilly terrain, but I doubt it.

If you need to shout into your phone and hear echoes it might be time to
consider another carrier or at least a different handset.

>
> Of course, there are the alpha males (mainly) who raise their voices
> so others in the vicinity can overhear how "important" they are.
> Trust me on that one. I've experienced it in person with someone very
> close to me... and if you call them on it, they'll deny it from now to
> eternity.
>
>

brooklyn1 wrote:
> Pete C. says:
>> Not my experience. Classy people, or simply those with a clue don't
>> raise their voice on a cell phone.
>
> Classy and cell phone are mutually exclusive.

Really, you know this how?

>
> The primary lure of the cell phone is that it affords one the luxury of more
> easily engaging in monkey business in private... I refer to the cell phone
> as the Sneak/Cheat Phone. I don't think I need to explain.
>
>
>
No, a cellphone is a powerful and inexpensive tool.

Example: water company wants to change the meter. So there are two options:

1) old school I hate technology Luddite, "sir, our crew will be there
sometime on Tuesday between 8 and 3 o'clock" so you need to wait like a
moron.

or

2) good use of technology "thanks for giving us your cell number, our
crew will notify you 20 minutes before they will arrive as you asked"

If someone happens to be a moron it isn't the fault of the device.

On Tue, 23 Jun 2009 14:29:15 -0400, George >
wrote:

>That was my point. Price and quality both went down. Is cheap always better?

Ma Bell had a monopoly and that's why it was broken up. We didn't
save any money and increased competition has not improved the system.

--
I love cooking with wine.
Sometimes I even put it in the food.