Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!wuarchive!usc!apple!bionet!hayes.ims.alaska.edu!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: dhepner@hpcuhc.cup.hp.com (Dan Hepner)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Caller*ID and Unanswered Phones
Message-ID: <15249@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 4 Dec 90 19:54:56 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: TELECOM Digest
Lines: 20
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 868, Message 2 of 8


>From: dattier@ddsw1.mcs.com (David Tamkin)

>| The proposed Pac Bell scheme doesn't allow for easy
>| limiting of incoming calls to only those which contain CID info.

>It's easy enough: look at your CID display, and if it says "blocked,"
>"private," or "refused," don't pick up the phone.

Case 1: You're awakened by a call at night, turn on the light, see the
"blocked" indication, and decide not to answer the phone.  Contrast
that to having slept through the entire event because the phone never
rang.

Case 2: It's now near morning, and case 1 has now just occurred for the
18th time. Contrast that to having missed the entire event because the 
phone never rang. 


Dan Hepner