Hi folks, I am privately discussing the mess with Evan off list. Still I recall someone? here indicated being connected with bell's CEO? My situation basically is this. because Teksavvy contracts with bell I have spent the last five months being promised analog service, paying for some of it, only to have bell send techs over and over again some of whom engaged in retaliatory actions based on other complaints tied to accessibility. I do have a doctor's note documenting my medical need for analog service, something bell refused to read and Teksavvy refused to share even with permission. At the moment breech of contract and negligence cases feel reasonable. teksavvy does not monitor what the bell techs actually do, they get paid anyway, and I have different stories from the teksavy side, including that they do not provide analog service, something I know is untrue. The copper wiring is still here, I have photos, in spite of bell saying otherwise. Anyway, still need a solid analog landline door of any kind, service or creative electric wizard smiles. Thanks, Kare
On 2023-09-07 10:06, Karen Lewellen via talk wrote:
I do have a doctor's note documenting my medical need for analog service, something bell refused to read and Teksavvy refused to share even with permission.
Doctor's note or not, analog service, back to the central office, might not be available. These days, "analog" service is generally provided over IP. The old analog phone line is largely history. BTW, at some point, all phone service is carried over a digital connection and has been for many years. The only question is where the conversion takes place. For decades it was in the central office. Now, it could be in your home, as my home phone over Rogers is, or it could be out on the street somewhere.
may I ask what method of suicide will be best then? From what you say, in spite of the aquired brain injury I currently experience, and its medical documentation, my being able to use analog phone service until less than a year ago, and the like, my body is too much trouble to keep alive, no longer can communicate with the outside world safely, do my job, etc without the seizures all VOIp services cause me..with tests to support this. Seems like a fine time to go according to you, since according to you, I cannot achieve what I have done just fine, even with the physical resources for it here in my house, or existing analog customers being around On Thu, 7 Sep 2023, James Knott via talk wrote:
On 2023-09-07 10:06, Karen Lewellen via talk wrote:
I do have a doctor's note documenting my medical need for analog service, something bell refused to read and Teksavvy refused to share even with permission.
Doctor's note or not, analog service, back to the central office, might not be available. These days, "analog" service is generally provided over IP. The old analog phone line is largely history.
BTW, at some point, all phone service is carried over a digital connection and has been for many years. The only question is where the conversion takes place. For decades it was in the central office. Now, it could be in your home, as my home phone over Rogers is, or it could be out on the street somewhere.
--- Post to this mailing list talk@gtalug.org Unsubscribe from this mailing list https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
On 2023-09-07 10:35, Karen Lewellen wrote:
may I ask what method of suicide will be best then? From what you say, in spite of the aquired brain injury I currently experience, and its medical documentation, my being able to use analog phone service until less than a year ago, and the like, my body is too much trouble to keep alive, no longer can communicate with the outside world safely, do my job, etc without the seizures all VOIp services cause me..with tests to support this. Seems like a fine time to go according to you, since according to you, I cannot achieve what I have done just fine, even with the physical resources for it here in my house, or existing analog customers being around
First off, I cannot comment on your health issues. However, I can comment on telecom issues, having worked in the field for over half a century. The world is moving to IP for just about everything and that over fibre. Carriers, such as Bell or Rogers, run fibre out into the community, in some cases converting to copper in the neighbourhood and more and more often directly in the consumer's home or office. Second, I first came across digital audio, for phone service in 1975 and it's been growing ever since. A bit about me, I started working in telecom in 1972. I spent 23 years working for CN Telecommunications, CNCP and Unitel, as the company ownership changed. Most of that time I worked as a technician, but for my last 5 years, I was in planning, where I planned the installation of telecom equipment, both in the office at 151 Front St. W. as well as customer sites in downtown Toronto. Even back then, everything I worked on was 100% digital. That was almost 30 years ago. Since then, my work has been largely services provided over IP, including voice. It been years since I've seen voice provided over anything other than IP. Even some of the old Time Division Multiplex (TDM) services were emulated over IP. As someone with all that experience, I cannot conceive of anything that would contribute to your issues, other than possibly getting a CODEC that tries to minimize bandwidth to the point that it causes noticeable distortion. With the bandwidth available now, there's no reason for such CODECs to be used. Regardless, I wouldn't be surprised if Bell is unable to provide what you want. I know Rogers can't. Even if Bell were able to provide it, your calls would be analog only as far as their office, if that far. Everything beyond would be digital, likely over IP.
The key word is that you cannot conceive of what would cause my brain issues...you are not a medical professional. The ability to even capture auditory processing disorders, mine came via a slight stroke in a surgery, did not even exist ten years ago. I respect our professional background in your field..but that does not make you an expert in others. That you cannot conceive of my situation does not mean anything important here , because you are not a medical professional. Please stop trivializing my circumstance by outlining your expertise as if it carried any weight..it does not. I am personally very tired of hiving to defend explain and micromanage my body to techs who claim to know more than medical tests because they have never seen it before. On Thu, 7 Sep 2023, James Knott wrote:
On 2023-09-07 10:35, Karen Lewellen wrote:
may I ask what method of suicide will be best then? From what you say, in spite of the aquired brain injury I currently experience, and its medical documentation, my being able to use analog phone service until less than a year ago, and the like, my body is too much trouble to keep alive, no longer can communicate with the outside world safely, do my job, etc without the seizures all VOIp services cause me..with tests to support this. Seems like a fine time to go according to you, since according to you, I cannot achieve what I have done just fine, even with the physical resources for it here in my house, or existing analog customers being around
First off, I cannot comment on your health issues. However, I can comment on telecom issues, having worked in the field for over half a century. The world is moving to IP for just about everything and that over fibre. Carriers, such as Bell or Rogers, run fibre out into the community, in some cases converting to copper in the neighbourhood and more and more often directly in the consumer's home or office. Second, I first came across digital audio, for phone service in 1975 and it's been growing ever since. A bit about me, I started working in telecom in 1972. I spent 23 years working for CN Telecommunications, CNCP and Unitel, as the company ownership changed. Most of that time I worked as a technician, but for my last 5 years, I was in planning, where I planned the installation of telecom equipment, both in the office at 151 Front St. W. as well as customer sites in downtown Toronto. Even back then, everything I worked on was 100% digital. That was almost 30 years ago. Since then, my work has been largely services provided over IP, including voice. It been years since I've seen voice provided over anything other than IP. Even some of the old Time Division Multiplex (TDM) services were emulated over IP.
As someone with all that experience, I cannot conceive of anything that would contribute to your issues, other than possibly getting a CODEC that tries to minimize bandwidth to the point that it causes noticeable distortion. With the bandwidth available now, there's no reason for such CODECs to be used.
Regardless, I wouldn't be surprised if Bell is unable to provide what you want. I know Rogers can't. Even if Bell were able to provide it, your calls would be analog only as far as their office, if that far. Everything beyond would be digital, likely over IP.
this is a human rights issue. Contact the Bell Communications ombudsman first, but can't find a direct route: https://support.bell.ca/how-to-resolve-a-concern The next step is the CRTC: For regulated services, contact the CRTC at: Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Ottawa, Ontario Canada, K1A 0N2 On Thu, 7 Sept 2023 at 11:07, Karen Lewellen via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
The key word is that you cannot conceive of what would cause my brain issues...you are not a medical professional. The ability to even capture auditory processing disorders, mine came via a slight stroke in a surgery, did not even exist ten years ago. I respect our professional background in your field..but that does not make you an expert in others. That you cannot conceive of my situation does not mean anything important here , because you are not a medical professional. Please stop trivializing my circumstance by outlining your expertise as if it carried any weight..it does not. I am personally very tired of hiving to defend explain and micromanage my body to techs who claim to know more than medical tests because they have never seen it before.
On Thu, 7 Sep 2023, James Knott wrote:
On 2023-09-07 10:35, Karen Lewellen wrote:
may I ask what method of suicide will be best then? From what you say, in spite of the aquired brain injury I currently experience, and its medical documentation, my being able to use analog phone service until less than a year ago, and the like, my body is too much trouble to keep alive, no longer can communicate with the outside world safely, do my job, etc without the seizures all VOIp services cause me..with tests to support this. Seems like a fine time to go according to you, since according to you, I cannot achieve what I have done just fine, even with the physical resources for it here in my house, or existing analog customers being around
First off, I cannot comment on your health issues. However, I can comment on telecom issues, having worked in the field for over half a century. The world is moving to IP for just about everything and that over fibre. Carriers, such as Bell or Rogers, run fibre out into the community, in some cases converting to copper in the neighbourhood and more and more often directly in the consumer's home or office. Second, I first came across digital audio, for phone service in 1975 and it's been growing ever since. A bit about me, I started working in telecom in 1972. I spent 23 years working for CN Telecommunications, CNCP and Unitel, as the company ownership changed. Most of that time I worked as a technician, but for my last 5 years, I was in planning, where I planned the installation of telecom equipment, both in the office at 151 Front St. W. as well as customer sites in downtown Toronto. Even back then, everything I worked on was 100% digital. That was almost 30 years ago. Since then, my work has been largely services provided over IP, including voice. It been years since I've seen voice provided over anything other than IP. Even some of the old Time Division Multiplex (TDM) services were emulated over IP.
As someone with all that experience, I cannot conceive of anything that would contribute to your issues, other than possibly getting a CODEC that tries to minimize bandwidth to the point that it causes noticeable distortion. With the bandwidth available now, there's no reason for such CODECs to be used.
Regardless, I wouldn't be surprised if Bell is unable to provide what you want. I know Rogers can't. Even if Bell were able to provide it, your calls would be analog only as far as their office, if that far. Everything beyond would be digital, likely over IP.
--- Post to this mailing list talk@gtalug.org Unsubscribe from this mailing list https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
Bell faces human rights complaint over allegations of inaccessibility for blind customers https://globalnews.ca/news/9373449/bell-human-rights-complaint/ On Thu, 7 Sept 2023 at 11:25, Don Tai <dontai.canada@gmail.com> wrote:
this is a human rights issue. Contact the Bell Communications ombudsman first, but can't find a direct route: https://support.bell.ca/how-to-resolve-a-concern
The next step is the CRTC: For regulated services, contact the CRTC at: Canadian Radio-television and Telecommunications Commission Ottawa, Ontario Canada, K1A 0N2
On Thu, 7 Sept 2023 at 11:07, Karen Lewellen via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
The key word is that you cannot conceive of what would cause my brain issues...you are not a medical professional. The ability to even capture auditory processing disorders, mine came via a slight stroke in a surgery, did not even exist ten years ago. I respect our professional background in your field..but that does not make you an expert in others. That you cannot conceive of my situation does not mean anything important here , because you are not a medical professional. Please stop trivializing my circumstance by outlining your expertise as if it carried any weight..it does not. I am personally very tired of hiving to defend explain and micromanage my body to techs who claim to know more than medical tests because they have never seen it before.
On Thu, 7 Sep 2023, James Knott wrote:
On 2023-09-07 10:35, Karen Lewellen wrote:
may I ask what method of suicide will be best then? From what you say, in spite of the aquired brain injury I currently experience, and its medical documentation, my being able to use analog phone service until less than a year ago, and the like, my body is too much trouble to keep alive, no longer can communicate with the outside world safely, do my job, etc without the seizures all VOIp services cause me..with tests to support this. Seems like a fine time to go according to you, since according to you, I cannot achieve what I have done just fine, even with the physical resources for it here in my house, or existing analog customers being around
First off, I cannot comment on your health issues. However, I can comment on telecom issues, having worked in the field for over half a century. The world is moving to IP for just about everything and that over fibre. Carriers, such as Bell or Rogers, run fibre out into the community, in some cases converting to copper in the neighbourhood and more and more often directly in the consumer's home or office. Second, I first came across digital audio, for phone service in 1975 and it's been growing ever since. A bit about me, I started working in telecom in 1972. I spent 23 years working for CN Telecommunications, CNCP and Unitel, as the company ownership changed. Most of that time I worked as a technician, but for my last 5 years, I was in planning, where I planned the installation of telecom equipment, both in the office at 151 Front St. W. as well as customer sites in downtown Toronto. Even back then, everything I worked on was 100% digital. That was almost 30 years ago. Since then, my work has been largely services provided over IP, including voice. It been years since I've seen voice provided over anything other than IP. Even some of the old Time Division Multiplex (TDM) services were emulated over IP.
As someone with all that experience, I cannot conceive of anything that would contribute to your issues, other than possibly getting a CODEC that tries to minimize bandwidth to the point that it causes noticeable distortion. With the bandwidth available now, there's no reason for such CODECs to be used.
Regardless, I wouldn't be surprised if Bell is unable to provide what you want. I know Rogers can't. Even if Bell were able to provide it, your calls would be analog only as far as their office, if that far. Everything beyond would be digital, likely over IP.
--- Post to this mailing list talk@gtalug.org Unsubscribe from this mailing list https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
On 2023-09-07 11:29, Don Tai wrote:
Bell faces human rights complaint over allegations of inaccessibility for blind customers https://globalnews.ca/news/9373449/bell-human-rights-complaint/
This is about what Bell is not providing, even though other companies do. However, this is current technology, not obsolete, which Karen seems to need.
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 11:40 AM James Knott via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
Bell faces human rights complaint over allegations of inaccessibility for blind customers https://globalnews.ca/news/9373449/bell-human-rights-complaint/
This is about what Bell is not providing, even though other companies do. However, this is current technology, not obsolete, which Karen seems to need.
I call shenanigans on that perspective. Given the nature of our group it is natural that some here will see the issue as merely one of choice and pace of technology, but IMO it must be seen as a broader issue of problem-solving. If Karen's accessibility needs require analog service in 2023, then that service is not obsolete merely because it's convenient for Bell to declare it so. In making a transition to digital it is Bell's responsibility to either: - provide a complete working solution to Karen's needs that can be accomplished purely digitally - use whatever means required internally to maintain (what is seen in her home as) analog service Given its regulated monopoly in last-mile connectivity, the onus is on Bell to provide a solution to the problem that it caused. - Evan
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 9:36 AM Evan Leibovitch via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 11:40 AM James Knott via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
Bell faces human rights complaint over allegations of inaccessibility for blind customers https://globalnews.ca/news/9373449/bell-human-rights-complaint/
This is about what Bell is not providing, even though other companies do. However, this is current technology, not obsolete, which Karen seems to need.
I call shenanigans on that perspective.
Given the nature of our group it is natural that some here will see the issue as merely one of choice and pace of technology, but IMO it must be seen as a broader issue of problem-solving.
Evan, I did not read James' response in that vein. I read it as genuine curiosity. Keep in mind that this group is primarily engineers/problem solvers. And I think it is an important question to answer. What is it that changes that it causes Karen issues? While we are not medical professionals, we are engineers and it is our job to solve the problem. In order to do that we do need to understand the problem. This doesn't mean that Karen needs to participate in that process. Maybe the medical professionals have an idea on what is getting affected physically, but they are not engineers and they cannot comment on how to answer the question on how to solve it.
If Karen's accessibility needs require analog service in 2023, then that service is not obsolete merely because it's convenient for Bell to declare it so.
The service is obsolete because the technology is no longer being actively maintained and all the development is happening elsewhere. This doesn't absolve Bell of the responsibility to ensure accessibility requirements are met. It just means the technology is obsolete. (For example, I would claim Linux 2.6.32 is obsolete, but I can also find millions of IoT devices running 2.6.32 which we probably want to secure). Thanks! Dhaval
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 12:50 PM Dhaval Giani <dhaval.giani@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 9:36 AM Evan Leibovitch via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 11:40 AM James Knott via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
Bell faces human rights complaint over allegations of inaccessibility for blind customers https://globalnews.ca/news/9373449/bell-human-rights-complaint/
This is about what Bell is not providing, even though other companies do. However, this is current technology, not obsolete, which Karen seems to need.
I call shenanigans on that perspective.
Given the nature of our group it is natural that some here will see the issue as merely one of choice and pace of technology, but IMO it must be seen as a broader issue of problem-solving.
Evan, I did not read James' response in that vein. I read it as genuine curiosity.
Forgive me for insisting that technical curiosity take a back seat to the real-world medical needs of people. But I will insist. This is a real problem, not an experiment nor a business decision.
Keep in mind that this group is primarily engineers/problem solvers.
So far the engineering-based problem-solving I've witnessed in this thread has amounted to "you can't get there from here". Explaining how Bell's system works now does zero to solve Karen's technical issues, let alone the quality of the customer-service response to her actions to date. And I think it is an important question to answer. What is it that changes
that it causes Karen issues?
Indeed, that is Bell's problem that it MUST solve. If the transition has broken backwards compatibility (to use our lingo), they must fix the breakage. Their current digital-to-analog solution may work for many users (such as my landline) but clearly isn't sufficient for Karen's needs. The best possible solution is to find something that addresses Karen's requirement with a purely digital connection. Maybe it's a latency issue; remember how sensitive faxes were to even slightly unstable connections? I don't have any clue on the technical issues, but simply insist that the onus is on Bell to address them since they broke compatibility. I care less about "how" than that it gets done.
While we are not medical professionals, we are engineers and it is our job to solve the problem. In order to do that we do need to understand the problem. This doesn't mean that Karen needs to participate in that process. Maybe the medical professionals have an idea on what is getting affected physically, but they are not engineers and they cannot comment on how to answer the question on how to solve it.
The medical professionals are required to define the problem, ie the specifications required for their instruments to work properly. The comms engineers then need to solve that problem by whatever means necessary. We know that an analog solution using POTS works. Karen cannot simply be left behind by the move to digital.
If Karen's accessibility needs require analog service in 2023, then that
service is not obsolete merely because it's convenient for Bell to declare it so.
The service is obsolete because the technology is no longer being actively maintained
I don't want to digress over semantics and definitions of "obsolete", see below. This doesn't absolve Bell of the responsibility to ensure accessibility
requirements are met. It just means the technology is obsolete.
If you agree that Bell has the responsibility to be backwards-compatible, then designations of "obsolete" are irrelevant. I am reminded (once again) of the brilliance of Jon Stewart's 2021 rant on the Colbert show <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSfejgwbDQ8>, talking mainly about the COVID lab leak "theory" but coming up with this general comment: *"We owe a great deal of gratitude to science. Science has, in many ways,
helped ease the suffering [...] which was more than likely caused by science."*
Bell broke it. They need to fix it. Full stop. No excuses. - Evan
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 10:27 AM Evan Leibovitch <evan@telly.org> wrote:
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 12:50 PM Dhaval Giani <dhaval.giani@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 9:36 AM Evan Leibovitch via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 11:40 AM James Knott via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
Bell faces human rights complaint over allegations of inaccessibility for blind customers https://globalnews.ca/news/9373449/bell-human-rights-complaint/
This is about what Bell is not providing, even though other companies do. However, this is current technology, not obsolete, which Karen seems to need.
I call shenanigans on that perspective.
Given the nature of our group it is natural that some here will see the issue as merely one of choice and pace of technology, but IMO it must be seen as a broader issue of problem-solving.
Evan, I did not read James' response in that vein. I read it as genuine curiosity.
Forgive me for insisting that technical curiosity take a back seat to the real-world medical needs of people. But I will insist. This is a real problem, not an experiment nor a business decision.
Then this is not the right venue to have this discussion. We cannot fix a "Bell needs to fix this" issue on this mailing list. Regardless, it does not excuse the name calling.
Keep in mind that this group is primarily engineers/problem solvers.
So far the engineering-based problem-solving I've witnessed in this thread has amounted to "you can't get there from here". Explaining how Bell's system works now does zero to solve Karen's technical issues, let alone the quality of the customer-service response to her actions to date.
No, a lot of the questioning has been about - this is what is happening. So where is the gap?
And I think it is an important question to answer. What is it that changes
that it causes Karen issues?
Indeed, that is Bell's problem that it MUST solve. If the transition has broken backwards compatibility (to use our lingo), they must fix the breakage. Their current digital-to-analog solution may work for many users (such as my landline) but clearly isn't sufficient for Karen's needs.
The best possible solution is to find something that addresses Karen's requirement with a purely digital connection. Maybe it's a latency issue; remember how sensitive faxes were to even slightly unstable connections? I don't have any clue on the technical issues, but simply insist that the onus is on Bell to address them since they broke compatibility. I care less about "how" than that it gets done.
Well, then when someone who has a sense is trying to make sense of it, don't attack them. The question being asked is "What is the gap?". All the other things, we cannot do anything about, they need to be fixed by Bell.
While we are not medical professionals, we are engineers and it is our job
to solve the problem. In order to do that we do need to understand the problem. This doesn't mean that Karen needs to participate in that process. Maybe the medical professionals have an idea on what is getting affected physically, but they are not engineers and they cannot comment on how to answer the question on how to solve it.
The medical professionals are required to define the problem, ie the specifications required for their instruments to work properly. The comms engineers then need to solve that problem by whatever means necessary. We know that an analog solution using POTS works. Karen cannot simply be left behind by the move to digital.
Have the medical professionals defined it? No one is saying Karen should be left behind. What folks are constantly asking for is to understand what the gap is. There are defintions that are being met, standards that are being met. This tells there is a gap. We need to identify the gap. But - you cannot insist on providing technology for which spares do not exist. Is your expectation that Bell manufacturer spares that are no longer available? Who pays for it? Is it bell, is it our taxes, is it Karen? So while I sympathize with where you are coming from, there may be real constraints there.
If Karen's accessibility needs require analog service in 2023, then that
service is not obsolete merely because it's convenient for Bell to declare it so.
The service is obsolete because the technology is no longer being actively maintained
I don't want to digress over semantics and definitions of "obsolete", see below.
This doesn't absolve Bell of the responsibility to ensure accessibility
requirements are met. It just means the technology is obsolete.
If you agree that Bell has the responsibility to be backwards-compatible, then designations of "obsolete" are irrelevant.
I am reminded (once again) of the brilliance of Jon Stewart's 2021 rant on the Colbert show <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSfejgwbDQ8>, talking mainly about the COVID lab leak "theory" but coming up with this general comment:
*"We owe a great deal of gratitude to science. Science has, in many ways,
helped ease the suffering [...] which was more than likely caused by science."*
Bell broke it. They need to fix it. Full stop. No excuses.
And at this point in time I say, go to Bell. Complaining here doesn't help and cannot help. Dhaval
On 2023-09-07 13:35, Dhaval Giani via talk wrote:
So far the engineering-based problem-solving I've witnessed in this thread has amounted to "you can't get there from here". Explaining how Bell's system works now does zero to solve Karen's technical issues, let alone the quality of the customer-service response to her actions to date.
No, a lot of the questioning has been about - this is what is happening. So where is the gap?
As someone with a lot of experience in telecom, I do not understand what her problem is. If I can't understand it, I can't fix it. I can understand CODECs that might cause distortion, I can understand having a crappy phone, but I cannot understand why she thinks an analog line is what she needs, when it's unlikely she's had a real analog line for many years.
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 1:36 PM Dhaval Giani <dhaval.giani@gmail.com> wrote:
Forgive me for insisting that technical curiosity take a back seat to the
real-world medical needs of people. But I will insist. This is a real problem, not an experiment nor a business decision.
Then this is not the right venue to have this discussion. We cannot fix a "Bell needs to fix this" issue on this mailing list. Regardless, it does not excuse the name calling.
Who did I call a name? What did I call them? I've been around this block enough times to WELL know the difference between confronting the speaker and confronting what's been said. No, a lot of the questioning has been about - this is what is happening. So
where is the gap?
It is highly unlikely that enough information has been supplied in this thread to enable a full diagnosis of the gap.
Well, then when someone who has a sense is trying to make sense of it, don't attack them. The question being asked is "What is the gap?". All the other things, we cannot do anything about, they need to be fixed by Bell.
My main thesis here is that technical speculation based on insufficient input is doing little to solve Karen's problem. But since we're all speculating, mine is that an all-digital solution exists but that Bell does not want to spend the money to do it.
Have the medical professionals defined it? No one is saying Karen should be left behind. What folks are constantly asking for is to understand what the gap is.
Without knowing the specification of Karen's device or the quality of Bell's service to her, it's unlikely that a solution can be derived here. GIGO. I am saying that Bell needs to fix it because a) its technicians are likely the only ones with enough information to fully identify the gap b) it's a regulated body with a federally-mandated Duty to Accommodate IMO the solution here is bureaucratic and legal. Any technical speculation is unlikely to be sufficiently informed to help Karen now. There are defintions that are being met, standards that are being met.
I won't assume that. If Karen's device meets compatibility standards and Bell can't support it, then Bell is not fully compliant. I don't know enough to make a judgment if this is the case, but neither does anyone else here.
This tells there is a gap. We need to identify the gap. But - you cannot insist on providing technology for which spares do not exist.
OK, but then the onus is on Bell to find an all-digital solution that meets Karen's needs. Since we know that everything intenal to Bell is digital, it is logical that a fully digital instrument should actually have less latency (etc) than a path that requires a D-to-A transition. It's implausible (but possible) that no all-digital solution to Karen's needs exist, in which case this is purely a matter of Bell's willingness to pay.
Bell broke it. They need to fix it. Full stop. No excuses.
And at this point in time I say, go to Bell. Complaining here doesn't help and cannot help.
Karen has well-documented the futility resulting from "going to Bell". That's why we're here. And it's also why I am suggesting the best path for Karen is to treat this as a human-rights accessibility issue. We may be at a point where Bell won't fix the issue unless being compelled to do so. - Evan
On 2023-09-07 14:11, Evan Leibovitch via talk wrote:
My main thesis here is that technical speculation based on insufficient input is doing little to solve Karen's problem. But since we're all speculating, mine is that an all-digital solution exists but that Bell does not want to spend the money to do it.
That seems to fall into the wishful thinking category, from someone who doesn't understand the technology.
On 2023-09-07 13:27, Evan Leibovitch via talk wrote:
Forgive me for insisting that technical curiosity take a back seat to the real-world medical needs of people. But I will insist. This is a real problem, not an experiment nor a business decision.
Doesn't Bell have a department for helping people with medical issues? Seems to me they used to.
Indeed, that is Bell's problem that it MUST solve. If the transition has broken backwards compatibility (to use our lingo), they must fix the breakage. Their current digital-to-analog solution may work for many users (such as my landline) but clearly isn't sufficient for Karen's needs.
How do you know it's Bell's problem. All we know is something changed when she moved. I defy anyone to listen to a good analog line and compare it to a digital line and tell me what the difference is, other than perhaps better quality audio on the digital line. You can consider things like level, frequency response, phase shift, noise, distortion and more. Incidentally, when digital trunks started to be used, people complained they were too quiet! They were used to all the noise that accompanied analog calls. BTW, many years ago, I used to measure those things on various circuits, including the CBC radio feed in Northern Ontario.
On 2023-09-07 14:19, James Knott wrote:
Doesn't Bell have a department for helping people with medical issues? Seems to me they used to.
There's this: https://www.bell.ca/Accessibility_services They might be able to help better than the average Bell tech.
Doesn't Bell have a department for helping people with medical issues? Seems to me they used to.
Reading the original post would remind one that Karen has already had multiple interactions with Bell. Most have been negative, and she has referred to some as "retaliatory". In other words, these paths have been tried and failed. How do you know it's Bell's problem. All we know is something changed when
she moved.
Did Karen's equipment change? No. What is different is the analog signal that worked in her old environment but not the new. This issue is beyond Karen's ability to solve on her own. If not her, then who else? I have fibre in my neighborhood (less than 20 years old), and yet I still have a supported POTS line wired through my house that works with old phones. So we know Bell is able to supply a D-to-A facility in at least some modern locations. If Karen's new location cannot do this then IMO they're breaking backwards capability. Maybe it's Bell, maybe it's the wiring in her building, but it's not Karen. In any case this situation arguably contravenes Canadian laws on accessibility IMO unless Bell can find an all-digital solution that addresses Karen's needs. - Evan
On 2023-09-07 15:13, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
I have fibre in my neighborhood (less than 20 years old), and yet I still have a supported POTS line wired through my house that works with old phones. So we know Bell is able to supply a D-to-A facility in at least some modern locations. If Karen's new location cannot do this then IMO they're breaking backwards capability. Maybe it's Bell, maybe it's the wiring in her building, but it's not Karen. In any case this situation arguably contravenes Canadian laws on accessibility IMO unless Bell can find an all-digital solution that addresses Karen's needs.
Yep, this is a point I have been making. Bell will have fibre to somewhere in your neighbourhood and copper from there. This has been done for years. What difference do you expect between this and a copper pair all the way back to the CO? It still goes back to how connections are made and the bandwidth etc.. Bell has to provide a standard toll quality circuit. That used to be over copper all the way from the CO. Now it could be from a terminal in a home, as I have with Rogers. Either way, it's still a toll quality connection. Here's an article about the G.711 CODEC, which describes what's expected from a phone circuit, no matter who provides it and how. Even ancient analog systems provided similar. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G.711
On 2023-09-07 15:13, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
Reading the original post would remind one that Karen has already had multiple interactions with Bell. Most have been negative, and she has referred to some as "retaliatory". In other words, these paths have been tried and failed.
How do you know it's Bell's problem. All we know is something changed when she moved.
She has had multiple interactions, but were they with that department and not just the normal help(?) line?
We know its bell's problem because. 1. In spite of my order for analog land line service, noted in writing by Bell accessibility, on March 15, a bell technician installed VoIP here, getting permission from a sighted moving helper, and not speaking with me as the account owner. 2. bell stated in writing that since other disabled customers can use certain technology, I should use the same. 3. Bell first told Teksavy the analog service could be installed, then sent again and again people intent on installing VOIP, because the first tech insisted I could not be living alone, I am blind I could Go on with more examples, like the different stories bell told Teksavy to keep the money flowing until they pulled the plug, but I have likely made my point Karen On Thu, 7 Sep 2023, James Knott via talk wrote:
On 2023-09-07 15:13, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
Reading the original post would remind one that Karen has already had multiple interactions with Bell. Most have been negative, and she has referred to some as "retaliatory". In other words, these paths have been tried and failed.
How do you know it's Bell's problem. All we know is something changed when she moved.
She has had multiple interactions, but were they with that department and not just the normal help(?) line?
On 2023-09-07 17:57, Karen Lewellen wrote:
In spite of my order for analog land line service, noted in writing by Bell accessibility, on March 15, a bell technician installed VoIP here, getting permission from a sighted moving helper, and not speaking with me as the account owner
Do you use a cell phone? If so, do you have any problem with it?
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 1:19 PM James Knott via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
On 2023-09-07 13:27, Evan Leibovitch via talk wrote:
Forgive me for insisting that technical curiosity take a back seat to the real-world medical needs of people. But I will insist. This is a real problem, not an experiment nor a business decision.
Doesn't Bell have a department for helping people with medical issues? Seems to me they used to.
Indeed, that is Bell's problem that it MUST solve. If the transition has broken backwards compatibility (to use our lingo), they must fix the breakage. Their current digital-to-analog solution may work for many users (such as my landline) but clearly isn't sufficient for Karen's needs.
How do you know it's Bell's problem. All we know is something changed when she moved. I defy anyone to listen to a good analog line and compare it to a digital line and tell me what the difference is, other than perhaps better quality audio on the digital line. You can consider things like level, frequency response, phase shift, noise, distortion and more. Incidentally, when digital trunks started to be used, people complained they were too quiet! They were used to all the noise that accompanied analog calls.
BTW, many years ago, I used to measure those things on various circuits, including the CBC radio feed in Northern Ontario.
We were on a party line a lot later than 1975. I can hear the difference between a 12 bit AD conversion and a 16 bit one. (Its the difference between listing to a solo soprano recorder and a full Wanger or Mahler orchestra. I remember hearing the discussion between the differences on instruments and different materials in their manufacturer (just in case others think I'm totally crackers!) if you want detail.) There are are audible differences between CODECS - - - likely few people can tell the difference. To most engineers - - - - well - - - the mythical 'average' numbers get trotted out. (Something like the average sized human when talking about airplane seats - - - another pet peeve of mine.) I would suggest not being quite so arbitrary on human capabilities. HTH
On 2023-09-07 18:10, o1bigtenor via talk wrote:
There are are audible differences between CODECS - - - likely few people can tell the difference.
If you can't tell the difference between some CODECs there's something wrong with your ears. As I mentioned, some are designed to squeeze as many voice channels as possible out of a given bandwidth. They are quite noticeable, compared to the standard G.711 CODEC and the wider ones can provide a noticeable improvement. Even with CODECs for music, you can sometimes catch an artifact of the compression. One example of this I have come across is the Beatles "A day in the life.". There is one soft stretch where the audio is dead centre between the left & right tracks, which I can hear on the CD, but not with the MP3 version.
The interesting thing about David Leopasty's bell complaint is that David is seeking what I sought from bell, an accessible set top satellite box...starting in 2018. Bell's solution? we will just not charge you. When Fibe tv came along, bell did not, has not insured that audio description will work there either. Bell's solution? we will just not charge you, or we will give you equipment for free that itself is not accessible. For the engineering record, latency is not the problem with digital, the problem is frequencies used on the VOIp connections tested...and that is another part of the problem. I went to an entirely different company...who must use bell, because bell owns the floor. Due to my other conflict with bell, they simply said no. The copper infrastructure is here, has not been removed, nothing needs upgrading. Connecting the inside wire to the outside, which ought to be achievable via one of those so called digital options, was not even tried. And yes, I tested bell's VoIP modem, and fainted from the effort. All bell had to do was complete an order from a contracted company, instead they racked up fees, without doing a single thing Teksavy paid them to do. Analog is more sound rich than VOIP too, which is only as solid as the connection involved. We have an aging population that still needs even 911, something lost with bell's VOIP too, before you get to what can happen with aging ears. Could I visit a teksavy location to see how their equipment works? no, likely they do not even have their own anymore. what really bothers me is that all the infrastructure is in the hands of a company who gets to decide that if you are not disabled by their definition, you cannot connect with the world..no matter t how modern the technology. Karen On Thu, 7 Sep 2023, Evan Leibovitch via talk wrote:
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 12:50 PM Dhaval Giani <dhaval.giani@gmail.com> wrote:
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 9:36 AM Evan Leibovitch via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 11:40 AM James Knott via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
Bell faces human rights complaint over allegations of inaccessibility for blind customers https://globalnews.ca/news/9373449/bell-human-rights-complaint/
This is about what Bell is not providing, even though other companies do. However, this is current technology, not obsolete, which Karen seems to need.
I call shenanigans on that perspective.
Given the nature of our group it is natural that some here will see the issue as merely one of choice and pace of technology, but IMO it must be seen as a broader issue of problem-solving.
Evan, I did not read James' response in that vein. I read it as genuine curiosity.
Forgive me for insisting that technical curiosity take a back seat to the real-world medical needs of people. But I will insist. This is a real problem, not an experiment nor a business decision.
Keep in mind that this group is primarily engineers/problem solvers.
So far the engineering-based problem-solving I've witnessed in this thread has amounted to "you can't get there from here". Explaining how Bell's system works now does zero to solve Karen's technical issues, let alone the quality of the customer-service response to her actions to date.
And I think it is an important question to answer. What is it that changes
that it causes Karen issues?
Indeed, that is Bell's problem that it MUST solve. If the transition has broken backwards compatibility (to use our lingo), they must fix the breakage. Their current digital-to-analog solution may work for many users (such as my landline) but clearly isn't sufficient for Karen's needs.
The best possible solution is to find something that addresses Karen's requirement with a purely digital connection. Maybe it's a latency issue; remember how sensitive faxes were to even slightly unstable connections? I don't have any clue on the technical issues, but simply insist that the onus is on Bell to address them since they broke compatibility. I care less about "how" than that it gets done.
While we are not medical professionals, we are engineers and it is our job to solve the problem. In order to do that we do need to understand the problem. This doesn't mean that Karen needs to participate in that process. Maybe the medical professionals have an idea on what is getting affected physically, but they are not engineers and they cannot comment on how to answer the question on how to solve it.
The medical professionals are required to define the problem, ie the specifications required for their instruments to work properly. The comms engineers then need to solve that problem by whatever means necessary. We know that an analog solution using POTS works. Karen cannot simply be left behind by the move to digital.
If Karen's accessibility needs require analog service in 2023, then that
service is not obsolete merely because it's convenient for Bell to declare it so.
The service is obsolete because the technology is no longer being actively maintained
I don't want to digress over semantics and definitions of "obsolete", see below.
This doesn't absolve Bell of the responsibility to ensure accessibility
requirements are met. It just means the technology is obsolete.
If you agree that Bell has the responsibility to be backwards-compatible, then designations of "obsolete" are irrelevant.
I am reminded (once again) of the brilliance of Jon Stewart's 2021 rant on the Colbert show <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sSfejgwbDQ8>, talking mainly about the COVID lab leak "theory" but coming up with this general comment:
*"We owe a great deal of gratitude to science. Science has, in many ways,
helped ease the suffering [...] which was more than likely caused by science."*
Bell broke it. They need to fix it. Full stop. No excuses.
- Evan
It's such a messy situation. Karen has been using a service that from her perspective has been copper/analog for years and this has been compatible with her condition. It's likely that this service has been described to her by her previous service providers using words such as copper and/or analog. To be clear, copper and analog are not interchangeable terms here. In reality, it has been copper to her phone for only a certain number of meters, depending on the how modern the network at her location was at any given time. Without question, after certain distance that copper has been plugging into a digital network for past 30+ years. Karen now turns to the service provider asking for a copper/analog connection but the provider doesn't know what that means to Karen. Because the providers are generally the devil and don't give a rat's butt about anything the client wants, they just talk BS and provide whatever they want to provide. To cut some slack to the providers, not that they deserve it, probably good 99%+ of clients really don't know what they are talking about. The reality is, that even if Karen found a well meaning individual at the provider who would be willing to go above and beyond for her, they would not be able to help her because 1) Karen doesn't know what was the nature of the service she has been using for the past 30+ years that has worked for her, other than it was a copper twisted pair coming out of the wall. 2) Even if there was a way to exactly identify the technical specs of her past connection that worked for her, it might be nearly impossible to deliver that to her at her current address in the year 2023.
On Sep 7, 2023, at 12:35, Evan Leibovitch via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 11:40 AM James Knott via talk <talk@gtalug.org <mailto:talk@gtalug.org>> wrote:
Bell faces human rights complaint over allegations of inaccessibility for blind customers https://globalnews.ca/news/9373449/bell-human-rights-complaint/
This is about what Bell is not providing, even though other companies do. However, this is current technology, not obsolete, which Karen seems to need.
I call shenanigans on that perspective.
Given the nature of our group it is natural that some here will see the issue as merely one of choice and pace of technology, but IMO it must be seen as a broader issue of problem-solving. If Karen's accessibility needs require analog service in 2023, then that service is not obsolete merely because it's convenient for Bell to declare it so. In making a transition to digital it is Bell's responsibility to either: provide a complete working solution to Karen's needs that can be accomplished purely digitally use whatever means required internally to maintain (what is seen in her home as) analog service Given its regulated monopoly in last-mile connectivity, the onus is on Bell to provide a solution to the problem that it caused.
- Evan
--- Post to this mailing list talk@gtalug.org Unsubscribe from this mailing list https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
On 2023-09-07 12:35, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
This is about what Bell is not providing, even though other companies do. However, this is current technology, not obsolete, which Karen seems to need.
I call shenanigans on that perspective.
Given the nature of our group it is natural that some here will see the issue as merely one of choice and pace of technology, but IMO it must be seen as a broader issue of problem-solving. If Karen's accessibility needs require analog service in 2023, then that service is not obsolete merely because it's convenient for Bell to declare it so. In making a transition to digital it is Bell's responsibility to either:
* provide a complete working solution to Karen's needs that can be accomplished purely digitally * use whatever means required internally to maintain (what is seen in her home as) analog service
Given its regulated monopoly in last-mile connectivity, the onus is on Bell to provide a solution to the problem that it caused.
And if Bell is no longer able to provide the service she wants. When I started in telecom, I was a bench tech and spent my days overhauling Teletype machines. Suppose Karen needed a Teletype machine? She will not find anyone able to provide that service, as it's been obsolete for a long time. I chose that example, because deaf people would often use Teletypes to communicate, using the old 300 baud modems. Teletype machines are long gone and dial up modems aren't used much these days. So how would anyone get that service? They wouldn't. Technology has moved on and there are now better ways for blind people to communicate. Getting back to phones, in electrical engineering there's something called transfer function. With this, you assume you have a black box and measure the input vs output and compare things like level, frequency response, distortion and more. If 2 black boxes produce identical response, they will sound identical, regardless of what they're made with (this is a concept that audiofools have a problem with). In an earlier message, I discussed a bit about the technology and CODECs, specifically the G.711 CODEC. If 2 devices have that CODEC, they should sound identical. This leads me to what I've been struggling with all along. That is what is she hearing that causes the problem?
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 1:12 PM James Knott <james.knott@jknott.net> wrote:
And if Bell is no longer able to provide the service she wants.
Wants? WANTS?!? We're not talking about call-display here. This is about connectivity for medically-necessary equipment. Sigh. Bell broke it. Bell needs to fix it. Full stop. - Evan
On 2023-09-07 13:31, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
And if Bell is no longer able to provide the service she wants.
Wants? WANTS?!?
We're not talking about call-display here. This is about connectivity for medically-necessary equipment.
See my comments about blind people and Teletypes. The same may apply here.
I thought what is going on here is that she moved to a new location where the service is different for her needs compared to what it was at the previous location. Also, as someone who has been following this topic for past 6 months, there is no clear definition as to what connection property it is that makes it not cause potentially life threatening issues for Karen. So clearly the medical professionals have not defined the problem. Karen is also, understandably, not willing to test different connections being offered because of the risk of medical issues.
On Sep 7, 2023, at 13:31, Evan Leibovitch via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 1:12 PM James Knott <james.knott@jknott.net <mailto:james.knott@jknott.net>> wrote:
And if Bell is no longer able to provide the service she wants.
Wants? WANTS?!?
We're not talking about call-display here. This is about connectivity for medically-necessary equipment.
Sigh.
Bell broke it. Bell needs to fix it. Full stop.
- Evan
--- Post to this mailing list talk@gtalug.org Unsubscribe from this mailing list https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
On 2023-09-07 13:41, Alex Kink wrote:
I thought what is going on here is that she moved to a new location where the service is different for her needs compared to what it was at the previous location.
I'd forgotten about the move. There might be some other factor that hasn't been mentioned.
On 2023-09-07 12:35, Evan Leibovitch via talk wrote:
On Thu, Sep 7, 2023 at 11:40 AM James Knott via talk <talk@gtalug.org> wrote:
> Bell faces human rights complaint over allegations of inaccessibility for blind customers > https://globalnews.ca/news/9373449/bell-human-rights-complaint/
This is about what Bell is not providing, even though other companies do. However, this is current technology, not obsolete, which Karen seems to need.
I call shenanigans on that perspective.
Given the nature of our group it is natural that some here will see the issue as merely one of choice and pace of technology, but IMO it must be seen as a broader issue of problem-solving. If Karen's accessibility needs require analog service in 2023, then that service is not obsolete merely because it's convenient for Bell to declare it so. In making a transition to digital it is Bell's responsibility to either:
* provide a complete working solution to Karen's needs that can be accomplished purely digitally * use whatever means required internally to maintain (what is seen in her home as) analog service
Given its regulated monopoly in last-mile connectivity, the onus is on Bell to provide a solution to the problem that it caused.
I hate sticking up for Bell or Rogers. REALLY REALLY hate it. But James is right our phone system has been digital for decades now and likely over 5 decades. So the problem that Karen is facing is likely not an issue with the signal being digital but is an issue with the way the signal gets attenuated and modified by the up to several KM of twisted pair cable. Think of this a bit like the difference between vinyl records and CDs. Some people really dislike the much better quality and swear that their old LPs sound "warmer". Likely Karen's problem can be cured by some appropriate signal conditioning and I would not be surprised if there were not some products out there for the hearing impaired that could to that task. I believe that Bell/Rogers et al can be forced to keep providing existing services like my party line but they are not likely going to be forced to provide the old services to new installations. Karen is kind of caught between a rock and a hard place. She has moved into a new location and is trying to get an old service which Bell may not be obliged to provide. I get the impression that Karen is also not rolling in cash so that any kind of solution that will be a major expense will be a problem. The conversation has become stuck in the mode where some say Bell should fix everybodies problems no mater what and others are saying new tech is good no mater what. Clearly Karen has a problem with the newer digital phones but she does not have the same problem with her old location where she was on a phone at the end of several KM of copper cable. The question is what are the differences and how can the signal quality, or lack there of, be recreated in a digital phone line. -- Alvin Starr || land: (647)478-6285 Netvel Inc. || Cell: (416)806-0133 alvin@netvel.net ||
On 2023-09-07 11:25, Don Tai wrote:
The next step is the CRTC:
Do you honestly believe they can force Bell to bring back obsolete technology? First off, they'd have to provide a copper pair back to the office, when everything else is fibre. Then, they'd need the equipment that can handle it, which may have been scrapped already, etc. Maybe someone from Bell can clarify this, but I doubt that will happen.
Karen is not alone. Accommodations are needed for the good of the greater society. I also see this in our election system as well. We must not leave anyone behind. We are smart, we just need to find an adequate solution. On Thu, 7 Sept 2023 at 11:41, James Knott <james.knott@jknott.net> wrote:
On 2023-09-07 11:25, Don Tai wrote:
The next step is the CRTC:
Do you honestly believe they can force Bell to bring back obsolete technology? First off, they'd have to provide a copper pair back to the office, when everything else is fibre. Then, they'd need the equipment that can handle it, which may have been scrapped already, etc.
Maybe someone from Bell can clarify this, but I doubt that will happen.
On 2023-09-07 11:51, Don Tai wrote:
Karen is not alone. Accommodations are needed for the good of the greater society. I also see this in our election system as well. We must not leave anyone behind. We are smart, we just need to find an adequate solution.
I am having trouble understanding what her issue is. She complains about whatever service is provided, claiming that she has to have an analog phone line. As I mentioned, the entire phone network has been digital for decades, more recently over IP. The basic "toll quality" digital call uses a G.711 CODEC, which has been in use for over 50 years. This provides a standard voice channel, with specified frequency response and noise level, etc.. She has no doubt had many, many calls using it. There is no difference in G.711, whether delivered via TDM or IP. It's a standard CODEC. Why is she hearing something different? As I mentioned, other CODECs have been used. The 2G and 3G phones used CODECs designed to squeeze multiple channels into the bandwidth of an analog cell call. These could cause audio distortion. These days, the trend is in the opposite direction, with the CODECs providing better than toll quality calls. You may see terms such as HD Voice with them. This provides greater bandwidth than toll quality, over both "land line" and cell phone calls, which means more life like and natural call quality. Now, assuming she is able to get an analog line. It is unlikely to go back to the Bell office and will terminate somewhere near her home. There is absolutely no difference in what is delivered, as it will be copper to the point where the call is converted to digital with G.711 or better CODEC. Same with services that are digital to the hojme, either over fibre or coax cable. Digital is digital is digital, with the only difference being IP or the old TDM. So, where is her problem occurring?
Hi Karen, The CRTC is a cruel joke for consumers. It's far too industry-friendly and has allowed Robellus to get away with awful shenanigans and anti-competitive behavior for decades. While it offers a path to complain, <https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/phone/plaint.htm> I would not expect such a complaint to be answered in a timely manner or to your satisfaction. I fully agree with Don that this is a human rights issue, and following that path will likely achieve better results than fighting Bell on their turf. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms <https://www.justice.gc.ca/eng/csj-sjc/rfc-dlc/ccrf-ccdl/rfcp-cdlp.html> is pretty explicit about prohibiting penalizing people because of physical disability: *Equality rights are at the core of the Charter. They are intended to
ensure that everyone is treated with the same respect, dignity and consideration (i.e. without discrimination), regardless of personal characteristics such as race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age, or mental or physical disability, sexual orientation, residency, marital status or citizenship. *
You are receiving neither respect, dignity nor consideration from Bell (and in this case, Teksavvy acting as Bell's reseller). As such I think you have a strong case, but IANAL. You have two channels to go, the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Accessible Canada Act. I think the latter offers a better and faster process here; the Accessible Canada Act explicitly applies to regulated telcos, of which Bell certainly is one. The Canadian Human Rights Commission maintains (and is supposed to enforce) a Duty to Accommodate <https://www.chrc-ccdp.gc.ca/en/about-human-rights/what-the-duty-accommodate> that I believe applies here completely. And it provides a PDF called "Tools for Individuals" <https://www.chrc-ccdp.gc.ca/sites/default/files/publication-pdfs/discrimination_2020_eng.pdf> that detail forms of non-compliance with the two Acts and how to proceed with formal complaints. Ontario also has its own human rights commission, but the federal path is likely recommended since Bell is a federally-regulated entity. However, Ontario offers a benefit in the Human Rights Legal Support Centre, <https://hrlsc.on.ca/homepage/> that may assist with your complaints process and give infinitely better advice than I have offered above. Apologies if I have stated the obvious or indicated paths that have already been tried unsuccessfully. Evan Leibovitch, Toronto Canada @el56
On 2023-09-07 12:13, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
The CRTC is a cruel joke for consumers. It's far too industry-friendly and has allowed Robellus to get away with awful shenanigans and anti-competitive behavior for decades. While it offers a path to complain, <https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/phone/plaint.htm> I would not expect such a complaint to be answered in a timely manner or to your satisfaction.
I fully agree with Don that this is a human rights issue, and following that path will likely achieve better results than fighting Bell on their turf.
Again, can the CRTC force Bell to provide obsolete service? What if Bell has abandoned or removed the copper cable to her neighborhood? What if they've removed the necessary equipment from their office? How are they supposed to provide the service? I am no fan of Bell however, expecting them to provide an analog phone line back to their office, when everything is moving to IP over fibre may amount to nothing more than wishful thinking. BTW, here's something I worked on around 15 years ago. There is a hydro control centre, located in Mississauga at the corner of Lakeshore Rd. and Winston Churchill Blvd. They had a need for multiple analog phone lines, to connect dial up modems to. Bell could not supply those lines, so the company I worked for provided the equipment to do it, connected to a T1 line and I was the one who installed the equipment to provide those analog lines. Even then, some special equipment was needed, as Bell's DMS 250 switch wasn't configured to provide the type of analog lines required.
On 2023-09-07 12:48, James Knott via talk wrote:
On 2023-09-07 12:13, Evan Leibovitch wrote:
The CRTC is a cruel joke for consumers. It's far too industry-friendly and has allowed Robellus to get away with awful shenanigans and anti-competitive behavior for decades. While it offers a path to complain, <https://crtc.gc.ca/eng/phone/plaint.htm> I would not expect such a complaint to be answered in a timely manner or to your satisfaction.
I fully agree with Don that this is a human rights issue, and following that path will likely achieve better results than fighting Bell on their turf.
Again, can the CRTC force Bell to provide obsolete service? What if Bell has abandoned or removed the copper cable to her neighborhood? What if they've removed the necessary equipment from their office? How are they supposed to provide the service? Well..... They actually can.
I have a rural cottage with a pulse dial phone on a party line. The CRTC forced Bell to keep providing that service in rural Ontario(Canada?) -- Alvin Starr || land: (647)478-6285 Netvel Inc. || Cell: (416)806-0133 alvin@netvel.net ||
On 2023-09-07 13:00, Alvin Starr via talk wrote:
I have a rural cottage with a pulse dial phone on a party line.
I can pulse dial over my Rogers connection. Yep, I actually tried it, with the box that provides my Internet connection and home phone. Also, what's available in cottage country might be years behind what's in the city.
On 2023-09-07 13:18, James Knott via talk wrote:
On 2023-09-07 13:00, Alvin Starr via talk wrote:
I have a rural cottage with a pulse dial phone on a party line.
I can pulse dial over my Rogers connection. Yep, I actually tried it, with the box that provides my Internet connection and home phone.
Also, what's available in cottage country might be years behind what's in the city. --- Post to this mailing list talk@gtalug.org Unsubscribe from this mailing list https://gtalug.org/mailman/listinfo/talk
You should see the fun when you get connected to the off shore support people trying to diagnose a problem with a party line. I bet you 75% of the people on this list don't even know what that is. -- Alvin Starr || land: (647)478-6285 Netvel Inc. || Cell: (416)806-0133 alvin@netvel.net ||
On 2023-09-07 13:21, Alvin Starr via talk wrote:
You should see the fun when you get connected to the off shore support people trying to diagnose a problem with a party line. I bet you 75% of the people on this list don't even know what that is.
This is one reason I prefer Rogers. All their support people are in Canada. I remember party lines, as we were on one when I was a young kid. I also remember when 7 digit dialing came in. Incidentally, back in 1975, the first time I went to Armstrong, Ont. in my work, it was just after they switched from 2 to 5 digit dialing!
participants (8)
-
Alex Kink -
Alvin Starr -
Dhaval Giani -
Don Tai -
Evan Leibovitch -
James Knott -
Karen Lewellen -
o1bigtenor