Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!umich!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: optilink!cramer@uunet.uu.net (Clayton Cramer)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Toll Calls on 800 Service
Message-ID: <11409@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 27 Aug 90 22:53:34 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: Optilink Corporation, Petaluma, CA
Lines: 63
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 600, Message 8 of 9


In article <11299@accuvax.nwu.edu>, john@bovine.ati.com (John Higdon)
writes: 

>"Sander J. Rabinowitz" <0003829147@mcimail.com> writes: 

## 2) We have a five-year old in our house, and hearing of all the
## horror stories regarding 900 and 976 services involving children
## playing with the phone, we now have 900 and 976 service blocking.
## Now, with the advent of NON-tollfree 800 service, I am at a loss
## as to how to deal with it (aside from physically putting locks on
## the phones).  Whereas I can generally do without 900 service, I
## don't think I can say the same regarding 800 service.  

# Excuse, please. Pray tell, what do you do about all of those hundreds
# of "pay" prefixes (like 212, 303, 415, etc., etc.) with that 
# five-year-old in the house? For years I have heard people moan the big
# groan about how tough it is with small children in the house who
# could accidently pick up the phone and dial things that would
# actually COST MONEY!!! But it is always in reference to 900/976 (the
# evil, wallet-sucking devil prefixes) and never about the mundane,
# simple, little-talked-about toll calls. Other than possibly the
# amount, what's the difference?

The difference is that no one runs TV ads aimed at children
encouraging them to dial prefixes like 212, 303, 415, etc.  Further,
even if kids did dial such numbers, the odds are remote that they
would do so 20 or 30 times in a week.

Also, SOME of the 900/976 numbers (NOT the ones aimed at kids), carry
material that is utterly inappropriate for a five-year-old.  It's
unfortunate that the adolescent phone sex services are on the same
prefix/area code as some of the other pay-per-call services.  If they
were kept separate, I would probably arrange for those to be kept
unavailable from our phone, and the other pay-per-call services
available.  As it is, everything is off limits.

# Reminds me of an incident at a client's business. The controller was
# looking over some phone bills. There was (probably) page after page of
# major employee phone abuse -- personal short-haul toll. Many tens of
# dollars were involved. Then her eyes zeroed in on one particular call:
# Memphis TN. It was for $0.16., made on a Sunday. You would have
# thought that she had nailed D. B. Cooper. "I'm going to find out who
# made this call and make them pay for it."

# Sixteen cents? No the problem was that it was Memphis, TN. Never mind
# that office people routinely chat to their wives, girl/boy friends,
# etc., and run up bills for individual calls as high as a few dollars.
# It's that someone would have the nerve to use a company phone to call
# THAT FAR AWAY without copping to it. During the business day a local
# call of 11 minutes would cost $0.16. I wonder how many of those are
# personal.

Doubtless, the call to Memphis wasn't the major cost to the company --
but it was the most obvious.  Sorting personal calls from business
calls Mon-Fri would be nearly impossible -- but a call on a Sunday
isn't just clearly a personal call, it's someone who probably came in
to the office just to avoid the charge.  (Which says something about
what a cheapskate and fool such a person must be, for $0.16.)


Clayton E. Cramer {pyramid,pixar,tekbspa}!optilink!cramer
You must be kidding!  No company would hold opinions like mine!