Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!clyde.concordia.ca!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu (David Lesher)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Knowing You're a Call Waiting Beep
Message-ID: <10771@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 12 Aug 90 21:59:29 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Reply-To: David Lesher <wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu>
Organization: NRK Clinic for habitual NetNews abusers
Lines: 25
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 564, Message 2 of 12


[about the difference in ring to the calling party if calling party is
call-waiting a conversation in progress]

>[Moderator's Note: {edited}IBT says they don't intend to change the
>rings or otherwise make an obvious response to the caller about the
>status of the other person's phone. Why? They say it is none of your
>business if the person you are calling is already on the phone.]

You seem to be missing the crucial point. IBT or Pac*Bell wants the
Call Interruptus to be used every time to avoid setting up non-revenue
calls. They want you to stay on the line, at least until the
supervision latches, and the billing counter goes 'DING'. If you knew
you were interupting someone - you might feel guilty, hang up and call
again later.


wb8foz@mthvax.cs.miami.edu 
(305) 255-RTFM
pob 570-335
33257-0335


[Moderator's Note: That may be what they want, but a by-product is the
privacy retained by the person being called.  PAT]