Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!uwm.edu!linac!att!ucbvax!agate!telecom-request From: gdw@groucho.att.com (Gordon D Woods) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: My First Month of Caller ID in Atlanta Message-ID: Date: 29 Mar 91 00:41:14 GMT Sender: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories 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 11, Issue 250, Message 6 of 11 com (Dave Levenson): > The press has reported several times on the significant drop in the > number of harassment or obscene call complaints received by > authorities. Does this mean that individual subscribers are taking > matters into their own hands? Does it mean that would-be prank > callers are deciding not to call? I don't know. I once used it to > call back a kid who bothered me early in the morning, and haven't been > bothered since. I wonder if the reduction in complaints is actually due to the simultaneous introduction of CALL TRACE and CALLER*ID in NJ. With CALL TRACE you get a major advertised advantage of CALLER*ID with none of the disadvantages. You don't even have to subscribe to CALLER*ID; just enter *76 (I think. It's advertised) and the prankster's number is recorded for the police. Only the police know the caller's number. I think the prank callers have quickly learned this and reduced their calling.