Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request From: David Pletcher Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Here We Go Again Message-ID: <10473@accuvax.nwu.edu> Date: 5 Aug 90 00:09:02 GMT Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711 Lines: 59 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 10, Issue 543, Message 1 of 9 In article <10411@accuvax.nwu.edu> John Higdon writes: >Pac*Bell bill insert: >After August 5, 1990, all pay telephones will be required to provide: >* Free access to: > - 800 services > - 950 dialing (long-distance company code dialing) >***End of quote from Bill Insert*** Has anyone else noticed that 10XXX LD carrier selection is conspicuously absent from this list of goodies, so that there is no way to reach any worthwhile long-distance carrier (i.e. AT&T)? I just spent about a half hour on the phone today talking to several levels of AT&T supervisors in various places, asking them why they did not have any 950 access code or an 800 number to get to AT&T long distance. I tried to explain the new California PUC ruling, and the fact that many potential AT&T customers would still be unable to reach AT&T from the omnipresent COCOTs in California. The people I talked to seemed somewhat surprised by this, and said they would mention it to their bosses. None of the people I spoke to had ever heard anyone mention this problem before, so is it possible that AT&T is just totally unaware that their customers can't reach them from 75% of the payphones in California? If you are worried about this like I am, I urge you all to call AT&T and let them know that you want them to do something about this problem, like providing 950 or 800 access numbers or leaning on the PUC to allow 10XXX access from COCOTs. >"This agreement ... establishes quidelines for enforcing..." >HaHaHaHa ... etc. I'll tell you what enforcement would be. Announce >via the media that on Monday, Aug. 6, any member of the public who >finds a COCOT that is not in compliance with these rules may deface, >smash, or otherwise destroy the offending instrument without fear of >civil or criminal penalties. That's enforcement! >Anyone want to join me for a "phone inspection cruise" on Monday? Well, I've rounded up about five of my friends and we are going to start searching out the offending COCOTs in Sacramento on Monday morning. We haven't decided exactly what to do yet, but our tentative plan is to call the phone's repair service, post a notice explaining that the phone is out of order and should be used for emergency calls only, and then compile a list and send it to the PUC. Happy hunting! David Pletcher dpletche@jarthur.claremont.edu [Moderator's Note: When the phone is marked Out of Order, put a gummy label sticker over the coin slot to reinforce your message. PT]