|Re: Payphone Surcharges (was: Unanswered Cellphones)|
|Seth Breidbart (email@example.com)|
Tue, 3 Jan 2006 20:51:16 +0000 (UTC)
In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>,|
> DevilsPGD wrote:
>> Unless the owner of the payphone is threatening or inflicting harm
> In terms of the letter of the law you are correct. But when someone
It wasn't the owner of the payphone who forced you to make those
> I was using a calling card and the pay phone used the long distance
So the problem was your own ignorance.
> After complaining, they took off the $25/minute charges. That's
Taking off the charge is fraud?
> (BTW, there were no directions on my calling card number -- which
Are you sure you never got directions with it? Can you prove that?
> Do you think a supermarket could get away with advertising a big
They could get away with advertising Joe's Brand Spaghetti at $0.10/lb
>> Making a payphone call is not a right. Your "need" to make a call
> Interesting how you put it. Let's be clear about something. Until
It was a _goal_, not a _right_. And even then, payphones weren't part
[TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: It is impossible to prove something
|Post Followup Article||Use your browser's quoting feature to quote article into reply|
|Go to Next message: Bob Goudreau: "RE: Another Year, Another Volume of the Digest"|
|Go to Previous message: NOTvalid@Queensbridge.us: "Re: Cell Phone Extenders?"|
|TELECOM Digest: Home Page|