Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: "Donald E. Kimberlin" <0004133373@mcimail.com>
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: MCI, VISAPhone, and Call Canada/Europe/Pacific
Message-ID: <10580@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 7 Aug 90 19:38:00 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: TELECOM Digest
Lines: 67
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 550, Message 5 of 7


        My original post had said I would summarize results of this
message in about a week.  However, it seems there are participants of
this forum whose is more inflammatory rhetoric than study of
telecommunications and its impact on society.
 
        The result so far has been (thankfully) only a few direct
messages and the post referred to here that are way off the beam of
what the message was about.
 
        That beam was to see if in fact Americans would rise to an
issue for democratic debate by electronic means, no matter whether
or not you agree with the debate or issue.
 
        Regrettably, the replies have instead been from people who
indicate by their very comment that they would NOT aid the spread of
debate.  In doing so, these individuals indicate themselves to be
guilty of their own form of the same narrowmindedness they so loudly
protest in this forum, some of them daily.
 
        To straighten out some of the trivialities that have now
been published and correct some of the outright errors:
 
1.) Mr. da Silva asks:
>So who do you call to express support for Roseanne Barr?
 
Response: I don't know who takes telephone calls, but you are free to
fax Mr. McGrover your opinion, pro or con.  He thinks the majority is
con, but does accept opposing viewpoints ... even at his own expense.
Are you that open-minded?
 
2.) Mr.da Silva states:
>I note that this article was posted by an MCI Mail employee
 
Response:  I suggest you take a course in Critical Reading.  The post
clearly states:
>Org: Telecommunications Network Architects, Safety Harbor, FL

 ..For the record, TNA has NO affiliation with MCI.  In fact, TNA is
so independent of MCI it scares MCI people sometimes.  If, however,
Mr. da Silva has some information that MCI will buy me out for the
right price, I would be pleased to entertain an offer.
 
3.) Mr. da Silva states:
>... MCI is likely to be one of the companies benefiting from this
>campaign, both from MCI Mail FAX and MCI long distance service)

Response:  Absolutely wrong and utterly misleading!  The original
message clearly states:
>...he fully expects and understands he's liable to run up a huge
AT&T Readyline WATS bill...
 
        I want to make it crystal clear that MCI in no way has any
interest nor even the means to make a penny from what is being done.
 
        And to those on this forum who HAVE responded and reacted in
the sense of opening electronic democracy ... McGrover has told me that
some of you did, with both West Coast talk radio shows and a reader
from a Massachusetts newspaper, plus others, congratulations on
reading the post properly and not making themselves judges of
limitations on the First Amendment rights of people they don't agree
with.
 
        [For latecomers, the campaign is to FAX (no voice accepted)
messages about Roseanne Barr's performance of the national anthem to
800-468-0344.]