- Messages sorted by: [ date ][ thread ][ subject ][ author ]
- Next message: Rose: "hardware guru advice sought"
- Previous message: Dr. J.R. Claesen-Finn: "DragonDictate Singles Problems"
- Maybe in reply to: Michel & Shawn Witherow: "Fw:"
- Next in thread: Alan Arfken: "Re: Fw:"
another list that I receive.
Subject: Re: per-minute phone-charge on ISP use?!?
Please don't forward this any further. Checking with the FCC's
"Fact Sheet on the FCC, Internet Service Providers, and access charges,
at http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Factsheets/ispfact.html,
we find the following good news. Please note that the cry for
comments to "isp@@fcc.gov" is specifically mentioned as inaccurate.
It's always wise to take a moment to check on the accuracy of information
before forwarding it around. I've included my three-point checklist for
spotting urban myths after the FCC comment.
from http://www.fcc.gov/Bureaus/Common_Carrier/Factsheets/ispfact.html,
>In December 1996, the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) requested
>public comment on issues relating to the charges that Internet Service
>Providers (ISPs) and similar companies pay to local telephone companies.
>On May 7, 1997, the FCC decided to leave the existing rate structure in
>place. In other words, the FCC decided not to allow local telephone
>companies to impose per-minute access charged on ISPs.
>Please Note: There is no open comment period in this proceeding. If you
>have recently seen a message on the Internet stating that in response to
>a request from local telephone companies, the FCC is requesting comments
>to <isp@@fcc.gov> by February 1998, be aware that this information is inaccurate.
Many people are taken in by hoaxes, rumors, and urban myths spread via email
on the Internet. You can protect youself from being fooled, by looking
for the following three items in any alarming or urgent email you receive:
-An urgent warning or call to action! Anything making you want to
type, "I know this is off-topic for the list, but I thought this was
so important I just had to forward it!" should NEVER be forwarded.
The more urgent a message looks, the more likely it is to be a hoax.
-No verifiable origin of the information. It may claim to be issued
by a government agency, or some authoritative source like MIT, but
if you try to find the source you will always fail. Don't forward
anything without verifying its source.
-No specific dates within the message. However, non-specific dates such
as "last month" or "Craig Shergold is 8 years old" abound. Note that
these offer no clues as to how long the myth has been circulating.
Dates on email headers DO NOT COUNT, since they get updated whenever
some new person forwards the myth.
If you receive email with these three characteristics, it's almost certainly
a hoax. If you forward it to your friends, you're making yourself look silly,
while giving the hoaxer the satisfaction of seeing his creation live.
Instead, send this message as a reply, and tell the originator that he or she's
spreading an urban myth. Thanks,
Andy Oakland
MIT Information Systems
sao@@mit.edu
------- End of forwarded message -------
- Next message: Rose: "hardware guru advice sought"
- Previous message: Dr. J.R. Claesen-Finn: "DragonDictate Singles Problems"
- Maybe in reply to: Michel & Shawn Witherow: "Fw:"
- Next in thread: Alan Arfken: "Re: Fw:"
 |  |