Here's a report from the DOJ on the abuse of 911 calls: http://www.cops.usdoj.gov/mime/open.pdf?Item=470
This is not a new problem. -Rick On 12/22/06, Bill Cammack <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Abuse can't be avoided, for the reasons someone stated before. The best > bet with a > system like that would be to have the emergency information hidden and > only accessed via > a button on the user's page. Even then, as Edmund stated, there's nothing > stopping > someone from using the button when it wasn't necessary, not only spamming > that one > user, but the system in general that would be used to monitor these > button-presses. I > know you're saying the emergency contact people would be contacted > directly, but there > would also have to be some sort of system of tracking who "dialed it in", > especially if there > are supposed to be penalties for system abuse. > > Second, lots of people are going to put in fake information if the form is > mandatory. If it's > not mandatory, they're not going to put in information at all. Only the > people that > completely buy into the system and trust it will be able to benefit if > something goes wrong > with them. > > On top of that, having the emails/IMs go to an emergency contact person > instead of a > centralized group that's been charged with handling these things assumes > that A) the > person on the contact list has immediate access to either IMs or their > email, and B) they're > willing/able to do something about it, immediately. That's why people get > paid to be > firemen. Their job is to sit around doing nothing until the moment that > they're needed, > then they go into action, IMMEDIATELY, and do what they're trained to do. > Your system > would need a central location that has these contacts 'on file', and is in > charge of making > things happen, ASAP. > > I think your idea is a very good one, but implementing it creates > opportunities for abuse > and you have to take the good with the bad in order to be able to > potentially save > someone's life. > > --- In [email protected] <videoblogging%40yahoogroups.com>, > "Zadi" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I've been mulling over a few ideas for the past couple of days and I > > came up with this: > > > > What if MySpace (or any social networking site) had an "in case of > > emergency, contact" form that you had to fill out when you signed up? > > Just like how when you enroll in a school or go to the doctor's > > office they always make you fill out that tiny form. What if you had > > to enter the email address or IM/text message info of an emergency > > contact? > > > > How would usage abuse be prevented? Maybe there is a process. You have > > to enter your contact info and if you're found to be abusing the > > system, your account is erased. Also, people are less likely to prank > > a person they don't know (the emergency contact) than they are the > > person they are targeting, or the site admin. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > Zadi > > http://zadidiaz.com > > http://jetsetshow.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 12/20/06, Edmund Yeo <eswiftfire@> wrote: > > > > > > > > It's not unreasonable, yeah, just that having a panic button > > does make > > > > people more vulnerable to pranks. > > > > > > > > Like "Wheeeee, I found Britney's Myspace page, now I shall press the > > > > 'panic button'... once every single hour!" > > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
