Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request From: Lars J Poulsen Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom Subject: Re: One-armed Bandits Message-ID: <2595@accuvax.nwu.edu> Date: 4 Jan 90 07:46:29 GMT Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu Reply-To: Lars J Poulsen Organization: Advanced Computer Communications, Santa Barbara, California Lines: 59 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 6, message 2 of 8 In article <2542@accuvax.nwu.edu> STEVEF%WALKER_RICHER_QUINN@mcimail.com (Steve Forrette) writes: >IMHO, COCOT's provide nothing but a disservice to the calling public. Agreed. >So by not allowing free collect/calling card calls, the replacement >phones have removed what I consider to be a substantial service in the >public interest that the phone network had previously provided. Agreed. >Pacific Bell's attitude to problems is "fill out this form, send it >in, and if we get 3 complaints on the same phone, *maybe* we'll >disconnect it." I can understand 3 complaints for money-eating, poor >quality, etc., but for blatant tariff violations? If a phone is >charging 60 cents for a call which by law can cost at most 25 cents, >why does it take 3 complaints to have it shut off? Because any single violation could be an honest keystroke error in configuration. Technically, each business hosting a COCOT is the operator of that service, and each must be given a chance to clean up their act. Never mind that you and I know that the real operator is the device manufacturer who knows better and preprograms all of them in violation of the rules. >Granted, they will probably look into it on the first complaint, but >for something as serious and reproducable as that, why three before >guaranteed action? >And these tariff violations are not as uncommon as you may think. A >couple of years ago, I got a copy of all the rules from Pacific Bell >(so I would know what I was talking about), and did a little testing. >Out of the 20 phones I tested, NOT A SINGLE ONE was compliant. If it's that clearcut, we should be able to put them all out of service within a month!!! How long is the list of rules, what are the typical violations, and did they guarantee to shut them d~rown after 3 complaints ? An afternoon a week would be very well spent shutting down COCOTs. Here in Santa Barbara, (GTE country) we're a bit behind in COCOTs; I don't think I have seen any yet, but when they start coming, I'd love to nail them. / Lars Poulsen (800) 222-7308 or (805) 963-9431 ext 358 ACC Customer Service Affiliation stated for identification only My employer probably would not agree if he knew what I said !! [Moderator's Note: The above message had to be substantially edited to remove excess quotes. May I remind everyone that messages which contain more than a 50/50 ratio of quotes to new text will NOT pass the Usenet gateway, thus cannot be used here. Keep quotes to a minimum, or better still, don't quote at all; just paraphrase earlier remarks. PT]