Well stated! Thank you David Casem
📞 𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗲𝗯𝗮𝗰𝗸 𝗺𝗲𝘁𝗿𝗶𝗰𝘀: 𝗥𝘂𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝘁𝗵𝗲𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗻𝗼𝘁 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗺𝗲 We've all been told: minimize tracebacks—or else. When a small carrier gets a wave of them (often from the same scammer, same number, same vector), they all count. When state AGs cite traceback data, it’s the “north star” for enforcement — held up as proof of failure. But now, when over 𝟰𝟬% 𝗼𝗳 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗲𝗯𝗮𝗰𝗸𝘀 point to the major mobile operators, the new line is: “Oh, well that’s just because ITG is focused on SIMBox scams. It’s not representative.” Wait—what? 🤯 So we’re now publicly acknowledging that: • Industry Traceback Group data is cherry-picked. • It’s not representative of consumer harm. • And it shouldn’t be used to draw industry-wide conclusions? Because if that’s the defense for Tier 1s… it better be the defense for everyone. If it’s good for the goose, it’s good for the gander. 𝗬𝗼𝘂 𝘀𝗵𝗼𝘂𝗹𝗱𝗻'𝘁 𝗴𝗲𝘁 𝘁𝗼 𝗿𝗲𝘄𝗿𝗶𝘁𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗿𝘂𝗹𝗲𝘀 𝗺𝗶𝗱-𝗴𝗮𝗺𝗲—𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝗯𝗲𝗰𝗮𝘂𝘀𝗲 𝘆𝗼𝘂 𝗱𝗼𝗻’𝘁 𝗹𝗶𝗸𝗲 𝘄𝗵𝗲𝗿𝗲 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝗲𝗯𝗮𝗰𝗸𝘀 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝗱, 𝗲𝘃𝗲𝗻 𝗶𝗳 USTelecom | The Broadband Association 𝗵𝗮𝘀 𝗮 𝗰𝗼𝘇𝘆 𝗿𝗲𝗹𝗮𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀𝗵𝗶𝗽 𝘄𝗶𝘁𝗵 𝘁𝗵𝗲 Federal Communications Commission. This isn’t about pointing fingers—it’s about building a system that’s fair, transparent, and consistent. If the standard doesn’t hold for everyone, maybe it shouldn’t be a standard at all.