Capitol Fax.com - Your Illinois News Radar » Question of the day
SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax      Advertise Here      About     Exclusive Subscriber Content     Updated Posts    Contact Rich Miller
CapitolFax.com
To subscribe to Capitol Fax, click here.
Question of the day

Wednesday, Aug 26, 2009 - Posted by Rich Miller

* This is completely non-political, but it’s been bugging the absolute heck outta me for quite some time.

The scenario is played out countless times a day. We’ve all experienced it.

You’re talking on your phone and the connection drops, probably because one or both callers has a mobile phone.

You call the person back and get a busy signal or voice mail because that person is calling you at the same time. You hang up and call back again and the same thing happens. This repeats over and over until one side surrenders and the other side makes a connection - or both sides surrender and the conversation is over.

Frustrating beyond belief.

* The Question: What should be the protocol for situations like this? Who, in your opinion, should call back and who should wait? Explain your reasoning, please.

I’ve decided to abide by the majority vote, so there are consequences to today’s QOTD. Thanks.

       

54 Comments
  1. - TTL, III - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 11:17 am:

    The person who initiated the original call should be the one to call back. Then there’s absolutely no confusion.


  2. - Rarely Posts - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 11:17 am:

    I thought that the protocol is always that the person who originated the call should place it again. I thought that was universal. I’ve not had the problem you describe.


  3. - just wondering - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 11:18 am:

    I always feel that if I made the call, I should make the return call. Seldom works.


  4. - wordslinger - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 11:18 am:

    I always let the other call back. Somebody has to stay in the clear, and most people like yapping on their cell phones more than I do, so I figure they’ll call back.


  5. - Inish - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 11:21 am:

    I always feel the need to call back if I was the listener to the call- it is not always clear to the speaker the call has been dropped. Generally works for me-


  6. - wizard - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 11:22 am:

    The originating caller should make the second contact. The caller had a reason to call and the dropped connection did not necessarily nullify that reason.


  7. - Jake from Elwood - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 11:23 am:

    I agree with those who have stated that he or she who made the call ought to be responsible to reinitiate the dropped call. That does not always occur in practice.


  8. - montrose - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 11:25 am:

    Yet another vote for the original caller being the one to make the call back.


  9. - Wumpus - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 11:25 am:

    Upgrade your plan to include call waiting.

    Both should continue to call intermittently. Whoever the call was most important to should call back.

    If Rich Miller is talking to Mike Murray and the call is dropped; of course Rich should call back to tell Mike that Rich wil be extending his 2 week vacation to a third week.

    Or Mike should call RIch back to tell him that he is too hungover or at Best Buy getting a new camera so he wil be late to work (again).


  10. - Cosmic Charlie - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 11:25 am:

    If you are certain the other person’s phone is responsible you should wait for that person to call back. I believe that failed attempt to reconnect is not becaue they are trying to call you but often becaue they still do not have a signal. Great Question.


  11. - John Bambenek - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 11:34 am:

    Can’t this be made into a drinking game somehow?


  12. - VanillaMan - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 11:35 am:

    The orginator calls back. I didn’t even think it could be otherwise.


  13. - Rubbernecker - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 11:36 am:

    Initiator should call back


  14. - dupage dan - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 11:40 am:

    Call waiting. Works for me.

    To answer the question - originator calls back.


  15. - Way South of the Border - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 11:40 am:

    My instinct has always been that the originator should, well, keep originating the call.

    But we live in a world of hierarchies and personality quirks. Bosses who think that subordinates should call back. People who use cellphones but don’t like them, and so wait for the other, apparently more phone-enamored guy to call back (I’ve had Wordslinger’s notion but haven’t allow myself to act on it).

    It will take more than instinct to sort this one out. Thanks Rich, for a great QOTD. Let’s have more techno-civility related surveys in the future.


  16. - Speaking at Will - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 11:41 am:

    Initiator should call back


  17. - soccermom - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 11:45 am:

    Originating caller calls back. Unless, of course, I am the originating caller and I don’t realize the call has dropped because I never let the other person talk anyway. In which case, the person on the other line can call back or skip 5 to 10 minutes of rant before I notice I’m talking to dead air.


  18. - TJ - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 11:46 am:

    I’ve always thought that it should be the originator as well…. though in circumstances where the original caller is your boss or your parents or your girlfriend/wife (aka - boss), you should probably call back.


  19. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 11:48 am:

    ===though in circumstances where the original caller is your boss or your parents or your girlfriend/wife (aka - boss), you should probably call back. ===

    And therein lies the rub. What if your boss, who originated the call, is calling you back while you’re calling her back? Your boss gets frustrated and out the door you go. lol


  20. - lake county democrat - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 11:49 am:

    Initiator unless I’m pretty sure the drop is my phone co’s fault. This reminds me of when you’re walking down the hall or street and come across someone and you each move to the left/right to try to let the other by and keep getting “stuck.” An episode of the old CBS Radio Mystery Theater called it “That Bizarre Waltz.”


  21. - TJ - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 11:52 am:

    ===And therein lies the rub. What if your boss, who originated the call, is calling you back while you’re calling her back? Your boss gets frustrated and out the door you go. lol ===

    I’ll let you know as soon as either my boss, my parents, or my girlfriend does something technology-related faster than me, so that hasn’t been a problem for me yet, haha.


  22. - Collin Hitt - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 11:53 am:

    My family and I dealt with this two years ago, and it works like a charm. The person who placed the call is the one who calls back.


  23. - Justice - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 11:57 am:

    I say “Form a committee, give it an official sounding name, fund it by using funds legislated for another completely unrelated project, assign sub committees, and meet once a month over a dinner paid for by the committee funds. After a year or so, dissolve the committee and suggest that a tax be implemented to study the problem further under a bill to which it is attached for studying railroad relocation issues.


  24. - Anon - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 11:59 am:

    You should walk to the other side of the rotunda and talk with them face-to-face.


  25. - iPhoneuser - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 12:13 pm:

    Hey Rich - a big part of your phone being dropped is that you’re likely using the 3G capability on the iPhone. The folks at the Apple store have told me that you need to go into your network options (under settings/general) and disable the 3G network and go back to 2G. AT&T (argh) didn’t anticipate the use on their network and don’t have enough towers to keep up with 3G network demands. So until the build new towers (years from now), your calls are gonna get dropped - over and over.

    In the meantime, the initiator calls back.


  26. - Levois - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 12:15 pm:

    I would say it depends on who called first. If you called first then you should call back. The other person should wait a period of time and if you didn’t get back through to that person you should wait until they may call you back!


  27. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 12:21 pm:

    Sounds simple enough. Whoever can get voice mail should leave a message; wait for a call back; and if the interruptions due to breaks in service are interfering with subsequent conversations, make other arrangements to get in touch.


  28. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 12:26 pm:

    For the younger crowd, if you’re in the same room together and hand gestures, reading lips, and facial expressions don’t get the message across, learn Morse code.


  29. - Obamarama - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 12:26 pm:

    Text: Sorry, call dropped.

    Wait for response either via text for voice.


  30. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 12:29 pm:

    ========
    The person who initiated the original call should be the one to call back. Then there’s absolutely no confusion.
    ========

    Have you ever been at an intersection with four stop signs?


  31. - Nuance - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 12:30 pm:

    Call a town hall meeting. Fill half the room with those that support the initiator the other half with those that do not. Let both sides start yelling their opinions and they select the opinion of the side that yells the loudest and the longest.

    The originator unless it is a three-party call where it gets a little more confusing.


  32. - phil - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 12:39 pm:

    Excellent question:

    The person who initially called has the responsibility for calling back.


  33. - CC - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 12:56 pm:

    WGN radio was discussing this just yesterday afternoon. Their consensus was the person who initiated the call calls back. That was always what I personally believed as well.


  34. - Rob_N - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 1:02 pm:

    Agreed. The person who originally placed the call makes the call back after a drop.

    Sometimes it just won’t go through though if one or the other is in a dead zone.


  35. - Mountain Man - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 1:02 pm:

    Whoever was using the phone that lost the signal should be the one to re-initiate contact.


  36. - Rich Miller - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 1:05 pm:

    ===Whoever was using the phone that lost the signal should be the one to re-initiate contact. ===

    I might agree except that I’m often not sure who lost the connection.


  37. - SouthernIL - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 1:07 pm:

    LOL! Yes, frustrating. However, I use the 3 minute rule. By then the person on the other end realizes they have been having a one way conversation and will have disconnected on their end. Then! I make a call to continue … and while I listen to ring to the other end, the infamous “beep” letting me know of an incoming call and usually find that person is calling me back! All good.


  38. - borzoi - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 1:13 pm:

    The whole scenario is frustrating.

    I work in telecommunications, and I guess what really ought to happen in this scenario is a hijacking of the call out of the Voice Mail and back into a live connection. It shouldn’t require the end users to re-invent packet collision and re-transmit techniques.


  39. - Pat Collins - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 1:19 pm:

    Whoever was using the phone that lost the signal

    Unless you know you are in an area with bad coverage, you can’t be sure who dropped the call.

    The person who MADE the first call should make the call back. I would think this is mostly a problem when one of the phones is a landline, most cell plans have some form of call waiting.


  40. - Pat Collins - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 1:20 pm:

    Of course, you can always TEXT the person that you will call back, if they are on a cell :)


  41. - BIG R.PH. - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 1:32 pm:

    Just count to 60.

    If they haven’t called you back then initiate the call back.

    9 times out of 10 they will already have called you back.


  42. - Chi Gal - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 1:34 pm:

    Initiator should place the call but it NEVER works that way in my family. Frustrating to the max!


  43. - Will County Woman - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 2:03 pm:

    i think that the person who initially made the call should be the person to the other party back when a call is dropped.


  44. - trafficmatt - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 2:17 pm:

    First, we have the cell phone companies just improve the networks instead of focusing on cool ringtones, MP3 file storage, entertainment crap, etc., etc., etc., and then we won’t have that problem.

    The person who initiated the call should always re-call.


  45. - MrJM - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 2:24 pm:

    This scheme works for me:

    I never call back.

    – MrJM


  46. - Arthur Andersen - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 2:25 pm:

    The AA family made the same pact as the Hitt’s, with the same great results.


  47. - Anon14 - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 2:34 pm:

    Originator, always!


  48. - orlkon - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 3:28 pm:

    The peron who orginated the call they presumably wanted to talk to the other person. The other person had no control over initiating the conversation unless they had caller i.d. or just didn’t answer their phone. In that case the best way to avoid a phone call is to not have a phone


  49. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 3:33 pm:

    This is a classic game theory problem. Tom Schelling, the nobel laureate, has written on it (albeit before cell phones came into play). The originator should call back.


  50. - Fed Up - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 4:08 pm:

    Another good reason to ban cell phones forever !!!!!


  51. - one day at a time - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 5:35 pm:

    Family and work rule…If you iniitated the call and it is dropped…You initiate the recall. I’ll be waiting but not calling you back.


  52. - Lynn S - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 10:18 pm:

    - John Bambenek - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 11:34 am:

    Can’t this be made into a drinking game somehow?

    John, are you hanging out in Campustown with Mike Murray? ;-)


  53. - Bobs yer - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 10:21 pm:

    Turn off the phone and go play 18. Give you a sense of perspective.


  54. - Anonymous - Wednesday, Aug 26, 09 @ 11:41 pm:

    You’re right, Unc. That’s very, very good advice to consider every once in a while.


Sorry, comments for this post are now closed.


* Reader comments closed for the weekend
* Isabel’s afternoon briefing
* Things that make you go 'Hmm'
* Did Dan Proft’s independent expenditure PAC illegally coordinate with Bailey's campaign? The case will go before the Illinois Elections Board next week
* PJM's massive fail
* $117.7B In Economic Activity: Illinois Hospitals Are Essential To Communities And Families
* It’s just a bill
* Showcasing The Retailers Who Make Illinois Work
* Open thread
* Isabel’s morning briefing
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Supplement to today's edition
* SUBSCRIBERS ONLY - Today's edition of Capitol Fax (use all CAPS in password)
* Live coverage
* Pritzker calls some of Bears proposals 'probably non-starters,' refuses to divert state dollars intended for other purposes (Updated)
* Yesterday's stories

Support CapitolFax.com
Visit our advertisers...

...............

...............

...............

...............

...............


Loading


Main Menu
Home
Illinois
YouTube
Pundit rankings
Obama
Subscriber Content
Durbin
Burris
Blagojevich Trial
Advertising
Updated Posts
Polls

Archives
April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004

Blog*Spot Archives
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005

Syndication

RSS Feed 2.0
Comments RSS 2.0




Hosted by MCS SUBSCRIBE to Capitol Fax Advertise Here Mobile Version Contact Rich Miller