Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!linac!att!pacbell.com!lll-winken!telecom-request From: peter@taronga.hackercorp.com (Peter da Silva) Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: PacBell Blocks 950-xxxx Message-ID: Date: 29 Mar 91 03:41:35 GMT Sender: Telecom@eecs.nwu.edu Organization: A corner of our bedroom Lines: 13 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 252, Message 11 of 11 > [Moderator's Note: The difference is, we don't usually expect this > sort of response from Bell payphones ... with COCOTS it is old hat: > refused connections and outrageous prices, etc. We know complaining > about COCOTS does very little good. No so with Bell payphones. PAT] I don't know about you, but I've always found payphone prices outrageous. Even worse was being charged "operator assisted" rates for using my AT&T phone card -- no operator involved. No, COCOTs are at worst just a bigger dose of the same medicine. Plus, just because it's a Bell phone doesn't mean it's not a COCOT. (peter@taronga.uucp.ferranti.com)