Level 3 Communications

So your idea is that because someone sells something, they are responsible of its use?  So if Chevy sells a car and that person goes out gets drunk and gets into an accident that kills someone, Chevy is responsible?  If a pharmacist fills a prescription and that person sells those pills on the street, and someone dies, is the pharmacist responsible?  Please enlighten me, because I guess I am not seeing the correlation (which does not in fact prove causation) in your theory.  Not to mention that I just read a forum post not to long ago where Level 3 was instrumental in taking down scammers.

yes some one called me from a 330-236-0346 saying it was a payday loan that i had and if i didnt pay it back by 5 i will have a warrant issue for my ARREST

Caller ID can be spoofed. And usually is, by scammers.

"the last time one of those fake charities contacted me, it read: "LEVEL 3 COMMUNICATIONS" across my caller id"

If the caller spoofs the Caller ID number, the CNAM lookup with return the owner of that number. That doesn't mean the call actually came from there. Usually quite the reverse.

I know what spoofing is, HOWEVER....a lot of times I Google a number and it belongs to Level 3 and it is the number actually used by scam company. Yes, I research and find out.

You gave a satisfactory explanation, leave it at that.

Not the same thing. More like a drug pusher peddling drugs than a Chevy....Or ANY of the unethical things people sell. How about the guy who sells synthetic marijuana and takes no responsibility for the kid who crashes the chevy?...But that's alright because there were no laws against selling synthetic marijuana at that time. (RL scenario) The one instance where they help catch scammers makes up for all the fake charities that get publicly busted, yet continue to work using Level 3? I may be wrong from time to time, but where there's smoke there's often fire. Every single time I look up a number and it's connected with Level 3, it just so happens to be a nuisance call center. So that's my PERSONAL experience with them and it's not hard to figure out why I'm not Level 3's biggest fan. That article you mention has to do with hackers and malware, NOT TELEMARKETING SCAMS.
Level 3 is  also a software company and is just protecting their own  interests. If they really cared about the public, we would hear about MORE scammers being busted.

Sir Bedevere says they do infact cater to the public...I will take his word for it. After going to their website, I was under the impression they only service companies. Easy mistake to make because they say nothing about private phone lines.

It's like the fellow at the gas station who sells copper s.o.s. scrubbing pads behind the front counter. (the ones that just so happen to be used by crack heads to smoke crack with) The vendor is doing nothing wrong because we all know that ordinary people go to gas stations to buy copper s.o.s. scrubbing pads. Perfectly legit.

In this way, Level 3 is perfectly legit as well.

Sorry but your analogy is again flawed (sorry to use big words).  You see the drug dealer is already committing a crime by selling the drug, as opposed to Level 3 or the Chevy dealer who are doing nothing illegal.  But you go ahead and keep believing what you want because that is what belief perseverance is.  You see you will do nothing that might prove your wrong.

BigA, it has been my experience that people who rely on analogies in general, regardless of whether the analogies are valid, do so because they don't have any evidence to support their argument. Like what percentage of the calls coming from Level 3 Communications are illegal? Or what percentage of all illegal calls made come from Level 3? Is the volume of illegal calls from Level 3 to all recipients (not just the person posting) greater or less than the volume from other providers (in proportion to their legal calls)? As they say in the science business, "the plural of anecdote is not data".

Just going into my own personal experience Sir, not writing a scientific thesis.  I am one person not a control group and you can't get a statistical survey on one person alone so I'm not arguing against you...

As BigA pointed out, they busted some criminals. What BigA neglected to point out is that those crooks were committing cybercrime. (Gee, I wonder why would a company that sells internet security be interested in catching cyber criminals? ) Level 3 does not seem as enthusiastic about catching the scores of telemarketing crimes going through Level 3's systems... Of course this is purely subjective observation and speculation.

Note: I saved my big words for you, and not BigA.

"So your idea is that because someone sells something, they are responsible of its use?  So if Chevy sells a car and that person goes out gets drunk and gets into an accident that kills someone, Chevy is responsible?  If a pharmacist fills a prescription and that person sells those pills on the street, and someone dies, is the pharmacist responsible? "~BigA

"BigA, it has been my experience that people who rely on analogies in general, regardless of whether the analogies are valid, do so because they don't have any evidence to support their argument."~Sir Bedevere

Laddie, ye aren't making it any easier on ye own self by continuing the argument.

"So your idea is that because someone sells something, they are responsible of its use?  So if Chevy sells a car and that person goes out gets drunk and gets into an accident that kills someone, Chevy is responsible?  If a pharmacist fills a prescription and that person sells those pills on the street, and someone dies, is the pharmacist responsible? "~BigA

"BigA, it has been my experience that people who rely on analogies in general, regardless of whether the analogies are valid, do so because they don't have any evidence to support their argument."~Sir Bedevere

You had big words in there?  Guess you really must have a limited vocabulary.  But keep posting.  I have already noted a couple of mistakes you made.

hey Big A here is an idea to ponder about how about setting up a fake sales line say like, Wooden aircraft wing spars for Spad 13 1917-1918 model and and ask an outrageous price for just one. It took four two front and two rear, wire braced, left and right, I myself believe in ignoring the pest.