Curious

Mar. 27th, 2003 07:43 pm
coalescent: (Default)
[personal profile] coalescent
Somebody just called my house. I let my dad answer the phone, because these days if people are trying to get through to me they tend to use my mobile. Plus, I was half-way through a rather good story from the latest Asimov's.

After a few seconds, my dad comes to find me. "It's SFX magazine," he says, as he passes me the handset; but when I put it to my ear, there's only a dial tone. So now I'm trying to think of someone who'd (a) want to wind me up by pretending to be SFX and (b) have my home phone number, and I'm failing.

Date: 2003-03-27 11:47 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pikelet.livejournal.com
Why would there be a dial tone? Shouldn't there be a single 'dead line' tone instead, if they've just hung up?

Maybe your dad hung up on them accidentally, just as they were going to offer you a job! Or maybe your dad's making it all up, and there was really nobody on the phone at all who wanted to speak to you!

Your family hates you! Run! Run, while you still can!

Date: 2003-03-27 11:54 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pikelet.livejournal.com
Oh, and you did dial 1471, I presume?

Date: 2003-03-27 12:07 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] coalescent.livejournal.com
'dead line' tone instead

Yes. I mistyped.

And yeah, I tried 1471. Caller witheld their number.

Date: 2003-03-27 12:11 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] coalescent.livejournal.com
Maybe your dad hung up on them accidentally

The crazy thing is, I think he might have done. We have wireless phones, right? One upstairs, one downstairs. He was upstairs when the phone rang, I downstairs. He brought the phone down, but rather than giving it to me he picked up the other one, pressed buttons and handed it to me. I could almost swear he pressed the buttons in the wrong order...

Date: 2003-03-27 01:11 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] pikelet.livejournal.com
Are these two wireless phones connected to a single phone sockey via the same base station? Because we've had a couple of those over the years, and it's a bugger (and sometimes physically impossible, depending on model) to transfer a call from one handset to the other. Can't treat 'em like separate phones within the same house - so it could be the result of a messed-up attempt to move a call between handsets.

Ah, well, guess you can kiss that job goodbye, then.

Date: 2003-03-27 01:54 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] coalescent.livejournal.com
Are these two wireless phones connected to a single phone sockey via the same base station?

No. Two base stations, two handsets. So the aim was to pick up on one and hang up on the other, except I think he did them the wrong way around.

Ah, well, guess you can kiss that job goodbye, then.

Yeah, thanks for that. :-p

Date: 2003-03-27 02:34 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] tizzle-b.livejournal.com
So the aim was to pick up on one and hang up on the other, except I think he did them the wrong way around.

When you use the phone, the person *calling* has the power to end the call.

Even if you hang up on them, picking the phone back up will still allow you to be 'connected' until they hang-up.

If anyone was going to be phoning you and wanted to speak to you, I'm sure a few seconds of dead time wouldn't put them off.

Date: 2003-03-27 11:53 am (UTC)
From: [identity profile] hawkida.livejournal.com
You don't have a subscription that might be about to run out do you? Because it could be something dull and mundane like the sales people trying to get you to renew. Or subscribe to some other wonderful magazine that you fit the target audience for.

Date: 2003-03-27 12:09 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] coalescent.livejournal.com
subscription that might be about to run out do you?

That seems most likely, but I'm subscribed for a good while yet. Plus, I'm fairly certain I've never given the subscription department of Future Publishing my phone number.

The 'trying to offer me another magazine' theory sounds plausible, though. Or just some survey or other.

Date: 2003-03-27 12:10 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mattia.livejournal.com
Weird.

Either way...SFX? Ew.

Date: 2003-03-27 12:12 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] coalescent.livejournal.com
Either way...SFX? Ew.

Why?

I know there's all sorts of stories about them being nasty to do business with, and I wouldn't know anything about that, but as a magazine I think they're pretty damn good at what they do. They could be a little tighter on the spoiler front, but they're better than they used to be.

Date: 2003-03-27 12:26 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] despotliz.livejournal.com
Also, I'm yet to find a magazine which covers TV, film, books and comics in one go. And they're not as bad on the jms-slagging and the gratuitous scantily clad women any more, and they seem to have less big obvious huge spoilers than Dreamwatch these days.

Date: 2003-03-27 11:57 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mattia.livejournal.com
OK. They've improved, then. I'm thinking the Bab5 fans I know have negatively affected my opinion of them.

Re:

Date: 2003-03-27 12:52 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mattia.livejournal.com
Oh, dunno. I've got some mixed feelings there. They're an OK mag, better than many others (like, say, dreamwatch), perhaps the best mainstream 'genre' mag. I'm not too terribly impressed with some of the reviewing skillz (the shorter reivewlets, in general) and find that I can find better thoughtful articles, oped pieces, etc. for free, online. Maybe it's just that I don't feel they're great value for my money.

As a general rule, that is. To their credit, they do cover the MEverse rather well indeed.

Date: 2003-03-27 01:04 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] snowking.livejournal.com
Best magazine on the market. Dave Langford and Simon Pegg.

Re:

Date: 2003-03-27 02:15 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] mattia.livejournal.com
They write in it?

To be honest, I haven't read a copy in well over a year and a half.

re: Simon Pegg

Date: 2003-03-27 03:08 pm (UTC)
From: [identity profile] applez.livejournal.com
(bowing) We are not worthy! We are not worthy! (con't)

:-)

---

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags

Profile

coalescent: (Default)
Niall

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Page generated Jan. 23rd, 2026 08:30 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios
March 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 2012