eli@chipcom.com (08/07/89)
I talked to my pal at US Sprint. he responded to the following 3 questions: ?? Any comment on the Port Authority / Grand Central FONcard shutdowns? some netters complained that this was an evil thing to do, since John Doe Just Off The Bus could not use his FONcard upon arriving in NYC. .. "The shutdown was not for all of Port Authority / Grand Central, it was just for a few payphones that were causing the trouble. John Doe is probably better off being prohibited from using the phone than if he did use the phone and someone watched over his shoulder, stole his FONcard number, and racked up thousands of calls on his bill." ?? What is the deal on remote areas that cannot reach US Sprint. Another netter had moaned about remote areas in California being stuck with ATT. .. "Telcos with less than 10,000 lines are not required to provide equal access. There is nothing that Sprint can do about this." ?? Any comment on the Sprint rep who said "if it doesn't work, you can always use ATT". .."Any company has dopes." -- Steve Elias -- eli@spdcc.com, eli@chipcom.com [mail to chipcom.chipcom.com bounces!] -- voice mail: 617 859 1389 -- work phone: 617 890 6844
albert%endor@husc6.harvard.edu (David Albert) (08/08/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0278m04@vector.dallas.tx.us> eli@chipcom.com writes: >I talked to my pal at US Sprint. he responded to the following 3 questions: >?? Any comment on the Port Authority / Grand Central FONcard shutdowns? > .. "The shutdown was not for all of Port Authority / Grand Central, it > was just for a few payphones that were causing the trouble. John Doe > is probably better off being prohibited from using the phone than if > he did use the phone and someone watched over his shoulder, stole his > FONcard number, and racked up thousands of calls on his bill." I fail to understand why your friend would say something as patently ridiculous as this and expect anybody to accept it. Since John Doe is not responsible for those calls, the only reason he is "better off" is that he saves a few moments of aggravation. Or is the Sprint spokesman suggesting that John Doe will have a serious problem getting the calls removed from his bill, presumably because of Sprint's notorious billing inefficiencies and other problems? Either way, the comments don't bode well for Sprint. I've never had any serious problems with my Sprint service, but I count my blessings every day. David Albert / UUCP: ...!harvard!albert / INTERNET: albert@harvard.harvard.edu --"You carry water from a mile away? How can you do that?" --"That's where the water is."
amb@cs.columbia.edu (Andrew Boardman) (08/09/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0278m04@vector.dallas.tx.us> eli@chipcom.com quoth: >I talked to my pal at US Sprint. he responded to the following 3 questions: >[...] > .. "The shutdown was not for all of Port Authority / Grand Central, it > was just for a few payphones that were causing the trouble. John Doe > is probably better off being prohibited from using the phone than if > he did use the phone and someone watched over his shoulder, stole his > FONcard number, and racked up thousands of calls on his bill." Considering that said phones are not *labelled* as such, Mr. Doe would probably try his call, have his Sprint account ripped off anyway, and then go through the further inconvienience of having to retry the call somewhere else... Andrew Boardman amb@cs.columbia.edu (or, if you must, ab4@cunixc for bitnet people)
henry@garp.mit.edu (Henry Mensch) (08/10/89)
David Albert asks why the Sprint rep would say something as bogus as he did. Obviously, the Sprint rep understands Sprint's inability to handle billing properly in the first place, and "knows" that it will take months or years to have these calls taken off the customer's bill! :) # Henry Mensch / <henry@garp.mit.edu> / E40-379 MIT, Cambridge, MA # <hmensch@uk.ac.nsfnet-relay> / <henry@tts.lth.se> / <henry@sics.bu.oz.au>
scott@dtscp1.UUCP (Scott Barman) (08/12/89)
In article <telecom-v09i0278m04@vector.dallas.tx.us> eli@chipcom.com writes: >X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 278, message 4 of 12 >I talked to my pal at US Sprint. he responded to the following 3 questions: >?? Any comment on the Port Authority / Grand Central FONcard shutdowns? > some netters complained that this was an evil thing to do, since > John Doe Just Off The Bus could not use his FONcard upon arriving > in NYC. > .. "The shutdown was not for all of Port Authority / Grand Central, it > was just for a few payphones that were causing the trouble. John Doe > is probably better off being prohibited from using the phone than if > he did use the phone and someone watched over his shoulder, stole his > FONcard number, and racked up thousands of calls on his bill." This is one of the reasons why I dropped Sprint in favor of AT&T. It is not the first time a telco decided what was in my best interest. When I used to live and do business in NYC and had to contact someone long distance, I ended up getting a card from NY Tel before returning the card to Sprint. What I thought was even funnier was that after I paid off the last bill I kept getting bills with a zero balance. After six months of it, I finally got through to their 800 number on the first try to remind them I changed LD companies and to stop sending me bills. This was a couple of years ago (started about six months after NY Tel sent out their "ballots" on Long Island), I hope they've improved their billing now! -- scott barman {gatech, emory}!dtscp1!scott