Porc 411.... and long messages

[Coconut]

Am I wrong in saying that Porc 411 is meant for time-sensitive announcements and updates when a computer is not available? I think telling stories should be saved for forums and articles. If you must alert Porc 411 listeners to your story, tell them where to read it online.    I don't want such a valuable service to be discontinued from misuse

The rambling still has 2 minutes to go

[David]

I agree.  If it is abused, or even used too much, then it will not be as effective, primarily because people will not listen to it. 

[error]

Yeah, this guy could have told everything that needed to be said in 30 seconds. I don't even know who it is.

Then again I hesitate to put a time limit on Porc-411 because of things like Dave's open carry incident, where the audio wound up close to 15 minutes.

[Coconut]

Then again I hesitate to put a time limit on Porc-411 because of things like Dave's open carry incident, where the audio wound up close to 15 minutes.

I agree. Important events need time... just not stories. I don't propose any changes outside of better education for what it's for.

[KBCraig]

The folks from Vermont also had some lengthy narratives, which could have been posted in a minute or two, tops.

Today's call:

http://nhunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=15335.msg259640#msg259640

[dalebert]

Perhaps you could make a call to Porc 411 suggesting that long stories are for forums. I was annoyed by this as well.

[les nessman]

    Despite the ramblings occasionally, I really like the whole Porc 411 concept.  I remember when Tackle the World was kidnapped in Milford and the PD left the passengers on the side of the road to walk home, and Dadas  open carry, and both incidents had double coverage via Porc 411 and video which is very handy.   When information is recorded offsite it makes things a little tougher to cover up by crooked thugs.

[shyfrog]

I would have preferred reading through John Galt's speech... again

[FTL_Ian]

If the message is boring or unimportant, I just press stop and move on.  No big deal.

[K. Darien Freeheart]

error,

I'm not sure what the platform running Porc411 is (I'm assuming it's an Asterisk rig) but is it possible to setup number based opt-in and opt outs? Thinking scalability, the number will eventually be pranked, telemarketed to and used for frivolous crap so it might be beneficial to eventually say "Okay, you're a douchebag, your number is banned" after repeated reports of abuse?

Then again, maybe it's better to let people sort through it themselves. Just thinking out loud.

[error]

I can ban numbers, yes; in fact one is banned. But I can't (yet) have individuals choose which numbers to filter out for themselves and still deliver to others. That would take some actual work.

[Nat F]

I can ban numbers, yes; in fact one is banned. But I can't (yet) have individuals choose which numbers to filter out for themselves and still deliver to others. That would take some actual work.

I would suggest a small improvement rather than implementing per subscriber filtering on the sending side.  Simply change the subject line to a more informative line.  It's currently "[Porcupine 411] New message 60 in mailbox 16034130411"
Changing one line in voicemail.conf should improve things
emailsubject=[Porcupine 411]: Call from ${VM_CALLERID} on ${VM_DATE}

People can then filter out phone numbers at their mail client (it's often easier to filter on subjects than bodies) plus people reading the porc 411 emails on thin clients can more determine the source of the message without having to download the body of the email.  Just a suggestion though.
-Nat

[error]

That's actually a good idea.

[Nat F]

That's actually a good idea.

Thanks, I like to think I have those occasionally. 

-Nat

[KBCraig]

Hey, Jeremy, hang up the phone!


Or turn some good music on. Or sumthin'.