Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!mailrus!accuvax.nwu.edu!nucsrl!telecom-request
From: stank@cbnewsl.ATT.COM (Stan Krieger)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: Groan, CALLER-ID Again??
Message-ID: <4783@accuvax.nwu.edu>
Date: 5 Mar 90 15:37:47 GMT
Sender: news@accuvax.nwu.edu
Organization: Summit NJ
Lines: 56
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 146, Message 5 of 9


> Folks, Ma's kids don't just want Caller-ID for the revenue it
> generates directly. THEY WANT TO BE ABLE TO GET OUT OF HELPING YOU ON
> ANNOYING CALLS.
 
> When they have CID, they can say: 
> 	"Don't call us; call your rep, pay for CID, and THEN 
> 	give the cops the number."

I have opposed Caller ID from the moment NJ Bell announced it, and
even wrote a letter to the president of the company forbidding him
from presenting my number to anyone but the local police department,
fire department, and rescue squad.  A few weeks later, a trained
propagandist from NJ Bell called me and tried to convince me how
wonderful the service was; he didn't.

As far as I am concerned, the only people/groups who NEED caller ID
are:

     1.	Police Department
     2.	Fire Department
     3.	Ambulance/Rescue/First Aid squad
     4.	Businesses that take phone orders (like a pizzaria).

As far as the big non-argument that the Baby Bells use; specifically,
it will cut down on annoying calls by identifying the caller, the
technology to track down such calls (do they call it "Call Trace"?)
exists separate from, although obviously related to, the Caller ID
feature; this alone negates the entire "prank call" reason as a NEED
for Caller ID.  The bottom line is that private residences do not NEED
Caller ID.

Now, for those of you who say that you want to know who's calling so
you can "screen" calls, as if you can decide merely from seeing an
incoming phone number which calls are "important", "beneficial", or
"meaningful" to you, all I can say is "Aren't you special?" (use a
Dana Carvey Church Lady voice as you read this last quoted item).

Since the "prank call" reason just doesn't exist as a justification
for Caller ID, the only other reason people would like Caller ID is to
"avoid" certain callers, and I'm sure in most cases, the callers they
want to "avoid" are those they owe money to.  And if that's the reason
anyone thinks they need Caller ID, it's probably the best
justification for not letting them have it.

Finally, and this point hasn't even been discussed, has anyone noticed
that as soon as Caller ID was announced, there were already phones
available to display the information?  Obviously this means that the
Baby Bells had a whole sales and propaganda campaign already set up
well before they went to their first public utility commission with
this great "new" service idea.


Stan Krieger
Summit, NJ
 ...!att!attunix!smk