From telecom-request@delta.eecs.nwu.edu Tue Aug 22 23:18:18 1995 by 1995 23:18:18 -0400 telecomlist-outbound; Tue, 22 Aug 1995 20:24:14 -0500 1995 20:24:11 -0500 To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu TELECOM Digest Tue, 22 Aug 95 20:24:00 CDT Volume 15 : Issue 354 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson IntegreTel/VRS Billing-Bulk Block Procedure (Joshua G. Fenton) Re: Integratel Customer Service (John Levine) WKP, Infotext, and Carrier Assignments (Van Heffner) Re: Allnet Tries to Hide Adult Services (Nathan Duehr) Re: Allnet Tries to Hide Adult Services (Darryl Kipps) Re: Allnet Tries to Hide Adult Services (bkron@netcom.com) Re: Allnet Tries to Hide Adult Services (David Devereaux-Weber) 2500 Set Schematics Wanted (Charles B. Robey) Re: Seven Digits Across NPA Lines (Linc Madison) Sending Telegrams via the World Wide Web (Nigel Allen) AT&T Credit For Cut Calls (Steven Lichter) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 500-677-1616 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ************************************************************************ * * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent- * * ing views of the ITU. * ************************************************************************ * In addition, TELECOM Digest receives a grant from Microsoft to assist with publication expenses. Editorial content in the Digest is totally independent, and does not necessarily represent the views of Microsoft. ------------------------------------------------------------ Finally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Pat, The accounts payble administrator here has been working very hard to get through to IntegreTel, Inc. & VRS Billing Systems, Inc. to block numbers from our campus. After several weeks, she managed to get a decent rep who provided the following information via fax: (My paraphrasing, exact text is denoted by "") To block 10 numbers or less, call 1-800-BLOCKME (800-256-2563) [TELECOM Editor's Note: Really, 1-800-4-BLOCKME (800-425-6256, optional 3) See my note at the end of this file. PAT] Larger quantities of numbers, you can send an ASCII text file on diskette. The file must be a flag text file, not WordPerfect, Excel, etc. Each phone number should be on a separate line, 10 digit number, followed by carriage return. No dashes, commas, or blanks. "If numbers are within a range, please include the range in a cover letter". Enclose a cover letter with: company, organization, or institution name, address, contact person with phone number in case of processing errors. Mail diskette to: IntegreTel/VRS Billing Systems, Inc. Consumer Relations Department PO Box 611987 San Jose CA 95161-1987 Questions should be directed to the 1-800-BLOCKME number. "Please note: This blocking services if free of charge and normally takes 10 working days to take effect. This blocking service takes advantage of modern blocking technology that should prohibit access to services, but is not 100% guaranteed and only effective for such services that are billed by VRS Billing Systems and/or IntegreTel." Hope all of you find this information helpful! Joshua Fenton ccjf@augustana.edu or joshuaf@sparc5.augustana.edu Joshua G. Fenton, Augustana College Computing Services Phone +1.309.794.7309, Fax +1.309.794.7431 639-38th Street, Rock Island IL 61201-2296 USA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I tried it your way and got a sort of irritated lady who told me it was 4-BLOCK-ME **not** BLOCK-ME. So I redialed it as suggested and did indeed get through to an automatic service. I only have a couple of complaints about it and both are minor. Your ANI is delivered to them at the time you call, and if you indicate you wish to block your home number, they respond by blocking the ANI given to them without an opportunity to block *additional* residence numbers unless apparently you call them from each line involved, one at time. They offer the choice of blocking '800 callback services' as well as 'international services'. A third option is to block 'all services billed by Integratel/VRS'. They do offer a menu selection for blocking of business phones but I did not try that one. Perhaps it allows more than one entry per call. To repeat though, as the irritated lady told me -- after apparently receiving many such calls -- 'the number for those people is eight digits long': (1-800) 4BLOCK-ME, or 1-800-425-6256. What you do with the '3' on the end is up to you, I guess. Maybe this could be the start of something new in the USA: Eight digit numbers, with Integratel boldly providing the leadership and setting the example for other telco organizations -- even Bellcore! PAT] ------------------------------ > me: "I can be charged for 800 number calls? I thought they were free." > Her: "You sure can - calls to psychic hotline, chat lines, others." > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: She was speaking a little shorthand in > the call and should have perhaps been more precise. There is no charge > to the caller for carriage of his traffic to an 800 number. ... I was under the distinct impression that IXCs were permitted to charge to an 800 caller's line only with a prior written agreement, under a recent FCC rule. We went around with this a while ago, with many people pointing out that often someone who was using a phone to call an 800 number had no authority to charge anything to that phone line. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It can be a 'verbal agreement' as well, or an 'agreement' that is implied by some single action on the part of the caller such as pressing a touchtone button. In fairness to the folks who run those services, bear in mind that many magazine and mail order purchases come with forms already addressed in your name with your only action required being to check a box entitled "YES ... send me a subscription and bill me later." Those have been upheld as legal, with the rule being that as long as the respondent is required to take 'some positive action in agreement with the proposal made by the seller' then the contract is enforceable. If you and I mutually agree that your pressing a button on the phone and causing the phone to make a noise that my computer understands to mean 'yes' will commence the sale or delivery of my goods or services to you, then I gotcha! Since voicemail and the pressing of buttons on phone to communicate requests and decisions is very common these days, one can hardly claim that the same principle, when used by Information Providers is somehow too unusual or different in nature. Check a box ... press a button ... etc. The other thing the IP's successfully claimed was that in 'regular telephone calls' the operator is allowed to accept your verbal approval to charge your number for a collect call. No prior written agreement is required when the operator asks, "I have a collect call will you accept the charges." Therefore, the IP's said it is an unfair advantage for telco to be able to work with verbal agreements on charges to telephone accounts but for us to be required to have written agreements." And in these times in which we live -- the era of post-divestiture and all -- the telco is required to deal with one and all at 'arms length' as they say. If Western Union, an entity separate and not associated with telco, is permitted to speak with you on the telephone and charge the cost of your transaction to your telephone bill based on your verbal statements, then other vendors similarly situated must be permitted to do so as well said one IP. You dial an 800 number to speak with the Western Union operator don't you? It never occurred to you that you were being 'charged for a call to an 800 number' when Western Union charges were placed on your phone bill, did it? Good ... now we understand one another. PAT] ------------------------------ I don't know of any way to identify 500 carrier assignments at the moment, but if you are looking for 800/900 number assignments there is a relatively quick (and cheap) way to do so. Infotext Magazine (the trade journal of the pay-per-call industry) sponsors a toll-free audiotext service called The Interactive Exchange. It contains some useful information, including: * 800 & 900 NXX CARRIER ASSIGNMENTS Let's you quickly access 800 and 900 NXX assignments. Just enter the 3-Digit NXX code. * WEEKLY NEWS Weekly news updates on the pay-per-call industry. * STATE INFORMATION Enter the two-letter state postal abbreviation to hear pay-per-call regulatory news for that state. A list of all area codes (including NANP) for that state is also given. * CARRIER INFORMATION Supposedly updated information on new carrier features. All I ever hear when using this feature is the carrier's address and phone number. Press 'A' for AT&T, 'M' for MCI, and 'S' for Sprint. THE INTERACTIVE EXCHANGE: 1-800-321-TEXT Like any voicemail-type IVR system, it seems to send you to the wrong places at times, and can be a bit confusing. The price is right though! You don't even have to pay for the phone call (and NO, it is not an 800 number that bills you back onto your phone bill). I would also highly recommend reading {Infotext Magazine}. It is really the only publication (left) that caters to the 'service bureau industry'. Just reading some of the ads from the service bureaus gives an interesting insight into what is going on in the industry. It is free to qualified subscribers. You can find subscription info at our FAQ File homepage below. P.S. FYI, I just looked at their latest issue, and guess who has the centerfold ad? WKP, Incorporated! Here is a little snippet of their ad: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: WKP is the audiotext industry's only full-service carrier serving domestic and international markets. WKP has emerged as the leader in the US market providing solutions for all forms of domestic and international dialing. WKP Offers: * All transport, switching, call processing and accounting. * Multiple dialing plans including: 10XXX, 011, 500, 800 and many alternative transport vehicles. * A choice of service bureaus that provide audiotext, live one-on-on (SIC), psychic, conference calling and many other live and recorded services. * Billing company choices that process call records at WKP tariffed/dominant carrier rates. * 800 billing on LEC Calling Card, Visa/Mastercard and Check Debit. * Comprehensive fraud control and caller screening. * Customized tag messaging. * No start-up fees, no number fees and no minimum volumes required. For more information (on WKP) please contact Brayton Johnson at 206-622-4187. WKP INCORPORATED 1200 Fifth Ave., #1206 Seattle, WA 98101 Tel: (800) 882-9215 (!) Fax: (206) 622-3708 ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: BTW, I have ABSOLUTELY NO association with Infotext or WKP whatsoever. I do find Infotext facinating reading though. Van Hefner Publisher Discount Long Distance Digest vantek@northcoast.com FAQ FILE HOMEPAGE http://www.webcom.com/~longdist/dldfaq.html ------------------------------ Michael Fumich <0003311835@mcimail.com> wrote: [Clipped a big story about how Michael called Allnet Long Distance and was trying to find out who is responsible for some phony 500 numbers that are sending calls overseas to "adult phone services" at horrendous rates. Allnet responded that they don't do that kind of business, and that their company practice is not to do so.] > The plot thickens!: > When I dial 10718-1-700-555-4141, the equal access test number, I find > that I have reached "The Equal Access Dialing" network. When I dial > 10718 +0 + # to reach an operator the call does not complete and gives me > Switch "WCCH2". > The exact same thing happens with 10509, assigned to International > Audiotext Network Inc. , also of Seattle WA. In fact, several PIC's > known to be used by Adult Service Providers gave me the recordings > described above. > The heart of the matter?: > "WCCH2" in fact indicates the call is being handled by WCT, Inc. a > long distance company located in San Luis Obispo CA. I was informed > that "Worldcall" was one of their brands. WCT is owned by Frontier > Communications International as is (surprise!) ALLNET. I probed > further (and higher up) and when I mentioned WKP? BOOM! "Who are YOU!" > "What do you REALLY want?" "No Comment!" etc., etc. etc. There is no secret here, Allnet and WCT were both purchased by Frontier Communications *very recently*. In fact, Allnet's shareholders just agreed to the merger Wednesday. Other companies purchased include ConferTech, American Sharecom, Schneider Communications, LinkUSA, and ETI. The only company expected to be operating under their old name after the merger is complete is LinkUSA. All of the other companies will become Frontier Communications. > My mother had a saying she was rather fond of ... "Oh what a tangled > web we weave, when we practice to deceive" . This is a very tangled > web indeed! I think you are looking in the wrong place. My guess would be that as these companies merge, their traffic will be handled on the "other" company's switches, etc. Allnet probably has no idea that they are carrying this traffic. Nathan Duehr, Technical Service Associate ConferTech International, Wholly Owned by ALC Communications (Allnet) The opinions above are my own, and not the opinions of ALC. I guess I'd better say that. ------------------------------ In article , 0003311835@mcimail.com is: > [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Well readers, if your PBX is capable of > screening as far the prefix within an area code, you might want to Snip > also. And don't forget 900-999. That one is very bizarre and very > expensive. ·_ Pat ... are you referring to (900) 999-XXXX or (500) 900-XXXX thru 999-XXXX? > And I do not grouse about them because they do sex talk on the phone. > My complaint is that they moved out the tidy little box we had for > them known as 900/976 where phone system admins could be protected > against abuse, and began abusing 800 as well. I don't care what anyone > chats about on the phone or their computer as long as they pay their > own bills, and 900/976 along with billed number screening was one way > to assure that was pretty much done. PAT] AMEN! Darryl Kipps dkipps@globalcom.net CIS: 72623.456 Winchester, VA [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: I was referring to 900-999. Those can really get raunchy, and quite expensive. I guess we can assume the adult phone services are like any other business in the 'community' which a large segment of the community finds distasteful. Consider the adult bookstore in your community: how many different times have petitions been passed and motions made at city council meetings to have them closed down or moved to a different location under the guise of zoning restrictions, etc. People say adult bookstores and prostitution should all be confined to a so-called 'red light district' and as to be expected, the people involved in those businesses fight such efforts to restrict them. You say they bring down the neighborhood and cause a lot of 'victimless crimes' to occur. There is no such thing as victimless crime (if some action has been codified as a crime, then by definition there are victims involved), but that is not the point I wish to make. It takes a major effort to remove nuisances of that sort if indeed there is any constitutional right to remove them at all. We sort of had it nicely controlled before with the equivilent of a 'red light district' in the 900/976 territory. But when business started to go to down because the assigned district was so out of the way and difficult to reach that most citizens did not go past there on a regular basis anyway, the merchants in that district decided they needed to expand. They moved out on Main Street once again with their wares in plain view, knowing full well that as the poet John Bunyan said, "what we say, and what we do, in real life are often two." So here they are once again on Main Street: Alexander Graham Bell Boulevard, with new and shiny storefronts in the 500 block, instead of their old location down in the 900 block where no one goes any longer except a few people who still know ways of getting around all the barricades the community put up down there. So *now* what do you propose to do people? Block 500's as well? PAT] ------------------------------ jensoft@blarg.com (Jensoft) writes: > Baylan Communications Inc > Vienna VA It's actually in Sterling, VA. > International Audiotext Network > Seattle WA > 206-286-5200 This one answers "Callback Services" with a voice-prompt menu offering to connect you with various departments. When you select "information about our services" and are routed to the "telesales" department, you get a live human being ... at 1 o'clock in the morning! > This last one isn't exact, but it's a likely culprit! > W K Enterprises Inc > Tacoma WA Hardly! They're a cabinet shop here in Washington state! ------------------------------ Pat, I have reservations about distributing this information, but it may help someone who is attempting to investigate this company. Regarding WKP.COM: If you point your World Wide Web browser at http://www.wkp.com you get "Internet Strip Show". For $15(?) per day (charged to your VISA or Mastercard), you can watch "live strippers" over the Internet. David Devereaux-Weber, P.E. djdevere@facstaff.wisc.edu The University of Wisconsin - Madison Division of Information Technology Network Engineering (608)262-3584(voice) (608)265-5838(FAX) [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: How fascinating. I wonder if as a service to bored office workers sitting around at four in the afternoon waiting for five o'clock to come they also allow you to charge it to the phone number to which your modem is connected? That would sure get things in an uproar wouldn't it ... ... Speaking of c-sex, I am amazed at the large number of office workers and assorted bureaucrats with computers and modems at their disposal one will find on Compuserve CB in the middle of the afternoon. Check it out sometime. Login to the adult CB simulator some afternoon and see all the business executives, etc sitting on there, purportedly reading 'email' or working on the company's latest 'contract proposal' ... PAT] ------------------------------ I have a friend who has, squirreled away in his garage, a very old wood telephone, with the crank and all. I offered to get it working for him if he could find me an old 2500 set, to take the network from. He got it, but when I went looking for my old ITT maintenance manual, well, I couldn't find it. Does anyone have a schematic for a 2500 set, so I can figure how do the wiring involved with this? If this is in computer form, could you mail it to me? I don't work in telecom any more, but I know what to do with it. Chuck Robey chuckr@eng.umd.edu 9120 Edmonston Ct #302 Greenbelt, MD 20770 (301) 220-2114 ------------------------------ James E. Bellaire (bellaire@tk.com) wrote: > Q. Why should NPAs be required to split rather than be overlaid? > A. They should not. NPA overlays have been in use for several years in > New York and California. This means 10 or 11 digit dialing for local > calls, with the old users being able to keep their numbers. Sometimes > 7 digit dialing is allowed IF the area code is the same. This is utterly false. There are no (zero) NPA overlays in California and there is only one that is in VERY limited use in New York. The 415/510 split was a split, not an overlay. The 213/818/310 and 714/619/909 splits were splits, not overlays. The 212/718/718 split (I list 718 twice because the Bronx initially kept 212 but later moved into 718) was a split, not an overlay. The 917 overlay on 212/718 is used only by a small number of cellular phones. In none of these cases were old users able to keep their numbers, except to the extent that the original plan for 917 was abandoned. (The plan was to force all cellular and beeper numbers into 917.) There is one planned NPA overlay coming to California, but the details are still in flux. I believe the first fully operational overlay in the U.S. will be Houston, Texas, ACs 713/281, and the people in Houston are NOT happy about it, either. In California, all calls to a different NPA, whether local or toll, must be dialed as 11 digits. All calls within a given NPA, whether local or toll, may be dialed as 7 digits. Thus, from my home in San Francisco, a local call to Oakland is 11 digits but a toll call to Palo Alto is 7. Linc Madison * San Francisco, California * LincMad@Netcom.com ------------------------------ Unitel Communications Inc. now allows users to file telegrams using the World Wide Web. If your Web browser supports forms, go to http://www.alliance9000.com/E/10/ORDER.HTML to send your telegram. For more information, see http://www.alliance9000.com/E/10/10.HTML I realize that the telegram is now largely obsolete, but it's interesting seeing Unitel do this. It's quite a change from walking down to CNCP's Halifax telegraph office late at night eighteen or nineteen years ago to have stories from the student newspaper at Dalhousie University sent as press-rate telegrams to the telex machine in Ottawa of Canadian University Press, the co-operative news agency of student newspapers. Nigel Allen (formerly of The Dalhousie Gazette) 52 Manchester Avenue, Toronto, Ontario M6G 1V3, Canada Internet: ndallen@io.org http://www.io.org/~ndallen Telephone: (416) 535-8916 ------------------------------ It seems that AT&T now has a new policy on giving you credit for calls of one minute. My BBS calls its Hub during the night to get its mail and newsgroups. At times for one reason or another the call will get cut off; maybe because of something in the network or noise or god knows what; remember it is a modem and not voice. Up until this month when I called to get the credit; most times it is just a few cents and never amounts to much, but money is money when you run a BBS and don't charge. Now they will not give you credit unless there is another call right after the bad one. Well this last month was a real bad one and in one case my system tried 14 times right in a row and never got connected; other times it was just a time or two and then maybe did not get connected because the other end got busy or did not answer. I took my complaint through the system and yesterday got a call from the Ofice of The Chairman of AT&T, who said that a credit would be issued for a grand total of $4.95 with tax. It seems that the manager with AT&T at a lower level was willing to lose a customer for such a be issued for a grand total of $4.95 with tax. It seems that the manager with AT&T at a lower level was willing to lose a customer for such a small amount because of their so called new policy. They would have lost both my phones as well as my wats line, which is a lot more. This person told me that they could not say that they would issue a credit each month this happens, but if it is just a couple of times I never even bother. The reason behind this policy is they can't be sure if it is their equipment, local equipment or the subscriber's equipment on either end and besides the phone circuts are made for voice. Right on all of the above, but I never got anything for the call since I was cut off, and the newer modems are made to work over the voice network just fine as is proved by my 95% trouble free operation. I also pointed out that the modems we are using are made by AT&T Paredyne, so maybe there is a problem with them. Also AT&T now has Internet access and they will have the same problems we all have. He agreed that this is an ongoing problem that they will live with, this was not the chairman and I don't think he will even hear about it, but should this occur again I will move my service as with the small users the costs are almost all the same, I have checked. The above are my ideas and have nothing to do with whoever my employer is. SysOp Apple Elite II and OggNet Hub (909)359-5338 2400/14.4 24 hours, Home of GBBS/LLUCE Support for the Apple II. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: They were not 'willing to lose your business over $4.95', they were willing to lose your business because you nickle and dime them to death month after month over credit for stuff that in all likely- hood is *not* their fault. People seem to feel that whenever there is a problem with a phone call the phone company is automatically at fault and should be required to absorb the loss. I disagree. AT&T and the local telcos are usually more than generous about making allowances when there is any question at all about who is at fault. The local telcos routinely write off small amounts as a courtesy to the IXC's rather than charge them back for investigation and the IXC's do the same for the local telcos. Rarely is it worth the time to investigate *where* the fault occured in a telephone connection. Both the IXC's and the local telcos also write off a lot of charges due to just plain customer stupidity and stubborness also; it costs less than it does to have to respond to a commission complaint filed by a subscriber who read some consumer journal and knows his rights by God! and wants his money back. Everyone knows that the human ear is far less sensitive to noise on the line than a modem, and that the human brain can make sense out of things a modem would be completely confused by. Telephones come with receivers which are placed against your ear, not with modem connections. That over simplfies it a little, but I have seen idiots ask for credit on the dumbest things. A few years ago a lady goes to a payphone and dials my *modem* number in error. Or rather, she dialed it correctly because her basic premise -- the number she thought she wanted -- was incorrect. She stands there at the payphone and makes five calls in a row to my modem, then has the unmitigated gall to call up repair service and report my number out of order 'because there are just loud noises on the line when I call it.' The repair guy calls me on my other line to ask me if there is a problem. I told him there was not, and he tells me about this lady, and how after turning me in to repair then wants to know how to get back the money she lost in the payphone due to this 'phone company screwup' ... everything is the phone company's fault, you see. Ask the newspapers, ask any talking head on your television set. Area codes change on every street corner? Must be a plot by the phone company to turn more local calls into long distance ones. As we used to say in years past to CB'ers with poor quality radios, "Take it back to K-Mart or Radio Schlock and demand a refund. Tell 'em to give you back your welfare check for this month then go by a decent radio that doesn't sound like pooh!" Put in 1995 terms, check those modems and their settings. Look for loose connections on your own premises. Consult with other users of the same hub and see if they also have hassles like this every night during the National Mail Hour. Ask the sysop of your hub to relate his experiences. Once you have completely eliminated yourself and your hub as the source of this problem ... or at least 75 percent of it, *then* go to telco and get your refund for this month. Otherwise quit bothering them. And by the way, if you think AT&T is stingy with refunds due to customer goodwill, try one of the others you highly tout. See how soon they get a bellyful of your complaints also. PAT] ------------------------------ [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: This one could be retitled as a "Last Laugh!", my periodic joke feature ... but then I realized the guy is serious. Read on ... PAT] SPEAK UP AMERICA -- MAKE YOUR VOTE COUNT Question: Should the United States Government interfere and put restrictions on the use of the Internet?? CALL: 1-900-945-5600 ext 163 and cast your vote. Cost: $1.98 per call (NOT per minute) Call Today Must be 18+/Touch Tones Only InfoService/Studio City, CA/213-993-3366 Results of this survey will be compiled and sent to members of the House and Senate. Thank you for casting your vote and for making your voice heard. [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Isn't that precious! I wonder what he thinks 202-225-3121 is used for? I wonder if he has ever heard of whitehouse.gov or of the various representatives in Congress who have email addresses? *Why* -- pray tell -- would anyone with an Internet address who reads his message not simply send email to the proper people? Oh? You don't know what net addresses to use? That's okay, I have dozens of long winded messages in my queue here from the EFF/ACLU/CPSR and other groups who will be more than glad to tell you who you should be email bombing on a daily basis. Not only that, they know just what you should say when you write. When this guy wrote me, he cross-posted to about a hundred other groups on Noisenet. I suspect when the software saw me in there (moderated) it probably jinxed his message from reaching all the other groups. At the same time as the above arrived, I got another one touting a 900 'dateline' service, where if I so choose, I may meet the man of my dreams. He wanted that one printed also, to the same hundred or so noisegroups. Perhaps as a courtesy, I should carefully remove my name out of the newsgroups line, and feed the whole thing back into the stream again so that others may be as amused as I was by this fellow. So you see, it isn't just AOL that comes up with rather incredible people sending out messages. Obviously netcom has a few stashed away also. As I said, a last laugh for today ... but not a very funny one. PAT] ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #354 ******************************