Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request From: barrey@ka (Barrey Jewall) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: COCOTery Message-ID: <12638@accuvax.nwu.edu> Date: 26 Sep 90 05:43:21 GMT Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu Reply-To: Barrey Jewall Organization: Novell, Inc., San Jose, Califonia Lines: 43 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 682, Message 1 of 13 In article <12551@accuvax.nwu.edu> dplatt@coherent.com writes: >> {Much useful info about a COCOT search deleted for brevity} >I ran into a COCOT in Palo Alto (Liddicoats, on University Avenue) >which was in violation of most of the new regs: $.25 for a local call, >950 restricted, 1-800 restricted, 10xxx restricted, no instructions or >rates. >I called the operator and reported the problem (the PacBell operator >tranferred me to her supervisor, who took the actual report). A >couple of days later, the phone was still in violation ... so I stuck a >laserprinted "Out of order, programming violation" sticker over the >coin-slot and checked off all of the violation categories. >So ... things are getting better ... but we aren't there yet. Perhaps if you were able to distribute copies of say, the PostScript file for that little label, and a few hundred or dare I say, thousand of TELECOM Digest's readers were to stick these on whatever COCOT's were found to be in violation, we might see a bit more compliance with the rules and regulations. I suggest distributng a file for the reason that we are a lazy lot here, and if we can just download it and print it out, we are more likely to do so thna if we had to create our own labels. Besides, if they all look the same, the net effect is much better!! I am just assuming PostScript because that is what I use, if another format is more universal, let's go with it.... Anyone else think this is a good idea??? + Barrey Jewall ++ "My opinions are my opinions" + + barrey@novell.com ++ (rather self-evident, eh?) + + Novell, Inc.- San Jose, Calif.++ + [Moderator's Note: Well, I think it is a good idea! If he will send along a script, preferably in 'c', I will post it here, or in a special edition, depending on the size. PAT]