Path: utzoo!attcan!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!wuarchive!swbatl!texbell!vector!telecom-gateway From: KSELLING@eagle.wesleyan.edu (Kenneth Selling) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Looking Up #'s Not In The Phone Book Message-ID: Date: 26 Jul 89 19:27:16 GMT Sender: news@vector.Dallas.TX.US Lines: 30 Approved: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 259, message 2 of 10 In TELECOM Digest vol. 9, issue 255, laura halliday says: > Long distance directory assistance is free here in B.C. For local information > you call 411, as usual, but it will cost you 55 cents (Canadian) if the > number is in the local phone book. This makes a lot of sense. For a long time, I have disliked the idea of being charged for look-up of a local number which is not even in the phone book (such as new or changed listings.) I can see the rationale for charging for a *local* number already listed -- it penalizes those unwilling to look it up themselves. (Yes, I agree with those who dislike the BOC's policy of charging for directory assistance from BOC-owned payphones. If there is no phone book -- too bad. The BOC has no incentive to replace ripped or stolen phone books. In fact, they have a strong disincentive; the longer they put off putting in a book, the more revenue they get looking up numbers.) The BOC databases could surely accommodate an extra bit per listing, describing whether a number is in the current phone book or not. Am I the only one (except for those denizens of BC Tel.) who is irritated with the policy of charging for look-up of numbers which are not even in the local phone book? Ken Selling Organization: Wesleyan University Internet: kselling@eagle.wesleyan.edu BITNET: kselling%eagle@wesleyan.bitnet =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=