1. never signed up for anything like this,
  2. never donated to or signed up for emails from the DNC, et al.,
  3. political texts like this come all the time, and
  4. I hesitate to reply “stop” because I don’t want them to know this is a live number (is my instinct here outdated/inapplicable?)
  • Para_lyzed@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 months ago

    Your number is on a list of real numbers with real identities associated with them that was sold to them. Data brokers sell this information daily. They already know your number is real, but in order to comply with the law, they have to provide you with a legitimate option to opt out, so you will actually stop receiving correspondence from them if you ask them to stop (it is legally required). If not, they could be subject to a fine, but you’d obviously have to file a complaint with the relevant regulatory body for that.

    If you do not attempt to opt out, they cannot be fined for spam if this is part of a legitimate donation campaign. If you don’t reply, they will continue sending messages to you in the future. It costs them almost nothing to do, so even if they didn’t know your number was real, they would do it anyway. Most of the people who donate from these messages don’t reply through text message anyway. And if this were an actual scam, then there is nothing they gain from receiving a text back so long as you do not open their link. But again, in order for legal action to be taken (since these political reach outs are legal and not spam so long as there is an option to opt out), you must first try to opt out.

      • Vanon@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        I thought this was the best course of action, too. It was not. New numbers, seemingly infinite, keep spamming me. They are political, seemingly real Democrat-linked entities (but I’m skeptical because this spam is obviously a brain-dead idea). After replying “STOP”, they definitely slowed.

      • Para_lyzed@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        True, but if you get a new phone and your blocked numbers list is reset, or they send messages from a different number, then you could get them again in the future. I see this often because there are multiple people in that campaign that will all reach out to people with their own phone numbers. Opting out prevents that for legitimate donor campaigns (you are removed from the list for all of the solicitors associated with that campaign), but obviously not for scams. There is no harm in doing both, and I would recommend that (it’s what I do).

          • Para_lyzed@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Mine reset when I switched phones a couple months ago, and I had to manually add them to my new phone. If I hadn’t noticed, then my blocked numbers list would be empty. Not saying that is a common issue, but it doesn’t hurt to opt out before blocking; just don’t click any links or say anything other than the opt out keyword.

          • Rentlar@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            New phone, new carrier, new sim card, wiping your phone to refresh it. If you haven’t specifically backed up your blocklist and imported it then it could reset.

              • Rentlar@lemmy.ca
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                edit-2
                3 months ago

                Why am I supposed to assume you own an iPhone? I’m trying to list out all the potential cases in general for you and for other people. If you switch from Android to iOS or vice versa this would be the case. Seamless backup solutions aren’t exclusive to Apple either.

        • lars@lemmy.sdf.orgOP
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          It’s ALLLLLLWAYS new numbers and my long-curated block list already has hundreds of numbers.

          • Para_lyzed@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            In that case, you’re best off opting out and seeing if it works. If you get a text from the same group at a later date, then you can report them to the FTC. Please do not do this unless they do not honor your opt out request, as politically affiliated groups are legally allowed to market in this way so long as they provide a means to opt out of communication. Falsely reporting puts strain on the already incredibly underfunded system and prevents real scams from being caught and dealt with due to a lack of resources. I recommend you keep a list of groups you have opted out from that is easily searchable to track this. 4 years ago I got multiple of these texts per day. I have been opting out every time I receive one, and now I have not gotten one in over 2 years. Eventually you will run out of groups to opt out of, and will only be messaged by newly created groups, which will happen much more slowly than all of the groups constantly texting/calling.

            Beyond that, there isn’t really much you can do. Your number is on a list, and people are buying that list. Although you could see if putting your number on the national do not call list would help (EDIT: though apparently political organizations are exempt from that on further reading). I have not done this personally, but I came across it while looking up how to report scam texts. Perhaps it could be beneficial to you (who knows?)

      • Em Adespoton@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 months ago

        Blocking numbers is only useful against actual consumer numbers where there’s a real person with a SIM card on the other end.

        Bulk calls/texts use number pools, and those pools don’t tend to be reused after a campaign; they’re just rented out to someone else.

          • Em Adespoton@lemmy.ca
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 months ago

            Depends. Usually it applies to the campaign. Sometimes it applies to the company. Sometimes it just gets you flagged as a responsive human.

    • Onno (VK6FLAB)@lemmy.radio
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 months ago

      In Australia laws like what you describe exist, but political parties are exempt. I doubt that we’re the only country where that is the case.

      • Para_lyzed@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        3 months ago

        While I would have to find the US law and examine it more closely to tell if that is true here, these groups are not actually representatives of political parties. They are groups of self-proclaimed political advocates that try to raise money to host events that raise awareness of their causes for local voters. But they would not qualify for an exemption due to association with a political party, as they are not officially connected to or endorsed by a party.

        • Onno (VK6FLAB)@lemmy.radio
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Yeah, no.

          That’s covered by political activity in the same laws. The list of exemptions here is pretty broad and goes well beyond actual officially registered political parties.

          Here’s the list for the Australian Privacy Laws: https://www.alrc.gov.au/publication/for-your-information-australian-privacy-law-and-practice-alrc-report-108/41-political-exemption/exemption-for-registered-political-parties-political-acts-and-practices/

          And here’s the restrictions around spam: https://www.acma.gov.au/political-calls-emails-and-text-messages

        • mark3748@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 months ago

          Political Communications to land lines are generally exempt from do not call. Cellular communications require prior consent, but the “consent” could be as flimsy as being registered with a certain party. You must be able to opt-out from the communication, and that’s why they have the “reply stop” verbiage. If they don’t honor your request, you should report it. Failing to actually make an effort to stop the communication (as is strangely being suggested) should be the only reason you would continue to receive them.

          The direct affiliation with a party or campaign is not a requirement.

          Here is the relevant information from the FCC https://www.fcc.gov/rules-political-campaign-calls-and-texts

          • Para_lyzed@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            3 months ago

            Yes, I believe all of that is in line with what I have stated. Just to clarify, my interpretation of the previous comment was that political parties were exempt from the requirement to provide an opt out in Australia for political parties (by my interpretation, just the official parties and not unrelated political organizations), and they implied they believed it to be the case in many other countries. I have not recently reviewed the relevant laws, so I was not 100% certain if that implication would prove true in the United States (though was pretty confident that was not the case by my previous experiences with messages from officially endorsed organizations), but I went on to explain how these are not officially endorsed by political parties anyway, so if such an exemption did exist, it should not apply to this particular message.

            Thank you for the clarification!