NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #16/NN_1992_16.iso/spool/misc/handicap/5335

Internet Message Format | 1992-07-24 | 3.8 KB

Path: sparky!uunet!olivea!isc-br!bunker!hcap!hnews!167!136!Hugues.Blanchet
From: [e-mail] (Hugues Blanchet)
Newsgroups: misc.handicap
Subject: Re: Poll
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Date: 24 Jul 92 14:07:30 GMT
Sender: [e-mail]
Reply-To: [e-mail]
Organization: FidoNet node 1:167/136 - Ab.'s Place, Montreal PQ
Lines: 73
Approved: [e-mail]
X-Fidonet: Silent Talk Conference

Index Number: 23342

[This is from the Silent Talk Conference]

Hi Laurel,

LG>I don't understand the poll as to whether a Monitoring System should be
LG>installed in any relay service.  Of course I know what a Relay Service is --
LG>I use one.  But what is a monitoring system?  What does it monitor? And how
LG>does it work?

Very simple Laurel.  The "Remote Monitoring System" enables the
supervisors (who are hidden in a room somewhere, so the CA's aren't
aware of them) to see the private conversations that are relayed
y the CA and the two parties. In Canada, monitoring as such
is called "Ecoute electronique" because a private conversation that is
taking place between two parties is not ONLY seen on the CA's screen
(It's the ONLY one that should see our conversations because she relay's
it!), but ALSO on another monitor that is hidden in another room
somewhere so the supervisors could _evaluate_ the quality of the
service...

I'm the one that started this poll.  I was asking everybody if they
thought a monitoring system should be installed in ANY Relay Centers.

We have such a system here in Montreal and they (the phone company)
thought it would be kept under cover... but they were wrong and I knew
about it... So. I'm now fighting them and last week, I met a guy that
confirmed everything I thought.  He is a former Human Rights worker
(and also the person responsible of the Deaf group in the Advisory
Comitee of the BRS) and he told me that such a system is illegal and
even MORE if it concerns monitoring of the hearing impaired people in
Canada, for ANY reason, unless they have a very serious doubt that we
are a bunch of criminals...:-) in which case, they STILL need a warrant
from a juge... So that's it Laurel.  If they want to evaluate the
quality of the service, they will have to do it WITHOUT using US
(monitoring OUR conversations).

Karen had a very good alternative to this.  They should have the
supervisors call the Relay THEMSELVES and evaluate the CA's
DIRECTLY without having OUR privacy jeopardized.  They will then be
able to evaluate their responses (the CA's) to whatever they might tell
them (be it threatening calls, X-Rated calls, or what have you).

So, what do you think of the Remote Monitoring System Laurel?  Do you
think it should be there or that they should think of something else
(that would NOT affect our privacy) to evaluate their CA's?

Up to now, I got 8 NO's for one YES... (I wont say who it comes from
because the person didn't say NO openly but she isn't AGAINST it
neither (ahemmm....).

Voila! Operation Desert Storm is over... Operation BRS Tornado
is under way... And just like the last one... it will be
VERY short!

So the Director of the BRS in Montreal will have one hell of a showdown
when she comes back from vacation (she doesn't know yet what
will hit her when she'll come back...>;-) She'll be STUNNED by
all the people that NOW KNOW about her system) because I've met the
person responsible of the Deaf group in the Advisory Comitee of the BRS
and he told me that if this was true, that they would vote a knockdown
of the system.  And if THEY say NO, the remote monitoring system is OUT
of there FOREVER. Yippi yayayyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!!! :-)

Amicalement votre,

Hugues

 * SLMR 2.1a * BRS: Countdown to the annihilation of the Monitoring sys.
--
Uucp: ..!uunet!bunker!hcap!hnews!167!136!Hugues.Blanchet
Internet: [e-mail]