Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!unix.cis.pitt.edu!dsinc!nucsrl!telecom-request From: kaufman@neon.stanford.edu (Marc T. Kaufman) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: Telecom Discussion in misc.consumers Newsgroup Message-ID: Date: 11 Mar 91 02:36:20 GMT Sender: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Organization: Computer Science Department, Stanford University, Ca , USA Lines: 26 Approved: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu X-Telecom-Digest: Volume 11, Issue 196, Message 4 of 12 In article ndallen@contact.uucp (Nigel Allen) writes: > Recent discussions in misc.consumers have dealt with Caller*ID and > MCI's latest sales gimmick, a check payable to you that becomes a > request to switch your long-distance default carrier to MCI if you > endorse the check. No problem. Just put someone else's number in the endorsement block. BTW: I have *TWICE* received $10 from AT&T for letting them convert one of my lines to AT&T. Unfortunately for them, the number in question is a forwarding entry (only) in another central office (I wanted to keep my old number, even though I moved). Such forwarding numbers do not have ANY LD preference associated with them, so AT&T keeps trying to change it :-) PacTel says to keep the money, AT&T wouldn't understand. Marc Kaufman (kaufman@Neon.stanford.edu) [Moderator's Note: I wonder if they will start doing that with the old number for my second line, which is now the 'distinctive-ringing' number for my first line (with no outgoing calls through it)? PAT]