Greetings to the readership:
There have been reports over time that each Kingdom Hall keeps a "Do Not Call" list of addresses. These are addresses in the congregation's territory where, for one reason or another, the JWs in the field service are advised not to make calls. However, it has also been reported that sometimes a call will be made even if the householder has requested no more visits from the JWs, and the excuses heard from the WTBTS include "perhaps they have changed their mind" and "perhaps they have moved".
While I support the right of a religious group to go from door-to-door, I also support the right of a householder to decline any such visits. After a householder has given a single instance of adverse notification, it is a sufficient and permanent notice to the calling group that no more visits are welcome. Furthermore, if the calling group does not observe the request to stay away, then they should be held responsible for damages for negligent behavior and trespass.
Looking at the issue form the other side, how would the attendees at at Kingdom Hall Sunday WT study react if a band of opposers or apostates came knocking on the door halfway through the meeting? And what if the number of those knocking was twice the number inside the Kingdom Hall? I have no doubt that the WTBTS would assist the elders in obtaining legal restraining orders if that was what was needed to keep the Kingdom Hall free from interruptions. And it would be within their legal rights to do so. But what about householders' legal rights?
My thought and observations here are that the WTBTS and its agents in the congregations have shown that they cannot be trusted to maintain and observe a Do Not Call list. Therefore, they need some help with both the list and with a protocol for enforcement. And so here is my idea:
An independent, non-profit company is established to construct and maintain a Do Not Call list for an entire country. The company takes on the responsibility of constructing and maintaining the list and it uses whatever tools it needs (the Internet, mailings, input from the WTBTS, etc.) to build the initial address list. The list of DNC addresses for any particular territory is made available to the congregation covering that territory. Due to privacy concerns, only the addresses and not names are revealed to the congregation.
The enforcement comes in the form of civil penalties for violations. The penalties are assessed against the WTBTS and not the local congregation, as the congregation is really just an agent of their masters in Brooklyn. The violations are reported to the list maintenance company who then routes them through the appropriate legal channels, and the WTBTS will have a chance to pay the householder instead of being dragged into court. I propose that the initial penalty for a violation at any one address should be quite modest, say US$5, as I think that would be sufficient for the money-loving WTBTS to stay away from where they are not wanted. Repeated violations at the same address would call for increased penalties.
A few years ago this would have been infeasible, but now with the Internet and the prevalence of home computers (at least in the more developed countries), it can be made to work.
I have many more pages of thought on this covering the specifics of the implementation, but first I'd like to read some feedback from the readership.