Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!ames!sun-barr!texsun!texbell!vector!telecom-gateway From: stiatl!john@gatech.edu (John DeArmond) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Why DA Costs Should Be Spread Among All Subscribers Message-ID: Date: 6 Sep 89 17:48:56 GMT Sender: news@vector.Dallas.TX.US Organization: Sales Technologies Inc., "Where Time Stands Still" Lines: 27 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 353, message 2 of 9 nvuxr!deej@bellcore.bellcore.com (David Lewis) writes: ^In article , stiatl!john@gatech.edu ^(John DeArmond) writes: ^^ The phone company is more than capable of matching DA accesses ^^ against calls made from a business. If the number of DA accesses is ^^ disappropriate to the call loading, then charge them heavily for the ^^ service, heavily enough to discourage further abuse. ^Unfortunately, if a phone company says "Well, XYZ Corp is abusing DA, so ^I'm going to charge XYZ Corp $5 a pop for DA," the next thing that ^happens is XYZ Corp goes to the PUC, the FCC, court, and anywhere else ^their lawyers can think of, and blasts the phone company for ^discriminatory pricing. And most likely wins, too -- But you missed my point. Sure they can't do this under the current rules. I'm advocating CHANGING THE RULES just as they did to allow for billed DA in the first place. I repeat, you don't punish the whole population for the misdeeds of a few. At least that used to be the American way. John -- John De Armond, WD4OQC | Manual? ... What manual ?!? Sales Technologies, Inc. Atlanta, GA | This is Unix, My son, You ...!gatech!stiatl!john **I am the NRA** | just GOTTA Know!!!