Path: utzoo!utgpu!watmath!att!dptg!rutgers!cs.utexas.edu!sun-barr!newstop!texsun!texbell!vector!telecom-gateway
From: albert%endor@husc6.harvard.edu (David Albert)
Newsgroups: comp.dcom.telecom
Subject: Re: US Sprint Rep Responds to Comments in the Digest
Message-ID: 
Date: 8 Aug 89 13:37:30 GMT
Sender: news@vector.Dallas.TX.US
Reply-To: David Albert 
Organization: Aiken Computation Lab Harvard, Cambridge, MA
Lines: 28
Approved: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us
X-Submissions-To: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu
X-Administrivia-To: telecom-request@vector.dallas.tx.us
X-TELECOM-Digest: volume 9, issue 281, message 1 of 10

In article  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."