The first person every week who guesses the location of where Dr. Z correctly will receive a $5 Starbucks or Target gift card. We will post the name of the winner every week on this site. There was no correct guess for Episode #13. The place was Denver, Colorado. For this episode, you need to name just the city it is located in.
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Numbering 101-Lesson #1
Did you register your number with your VRS provider?
How do you know you registered?
1-For VP-100/200 only, did your VRS provider change your old local number with a new number?
2-For other videophones, did you get a local number for your videophone? (You should have a separate number for each videophone.)
3-Did your VRS provider ask for your home address?
4-Did your VRS provider update the national data base? (ask your friend to call you on your VP with the new local number–if your VP rings, then it is good.) If it doesn’t ring and your friend gets a interpreter instead, inform your videophone provider and ask them to put your local number on the national data base.
5-If you have not registered, your videophone WILL NOT work after November 12th!!!
Dr. Z is here to help you. We want you to communicate happily ever after!
Starting next week and continuing for several months, there will be a series of articles and vlogs on numbering issues (Numbering 101). As we all know, a lot of consumers and people who use videophones continue to be confused with numbering issues. Dr. Z and his associates want to set the record straight and make sure everyone is on the same page. In the end, we all will have a pleasant videophone experience with no obstacles and no hiccups when it comes to numbering issues. It requires an industry effort, not the effort of one person or one company to make all this happen. Dr. Z is taking on this challenge and is asking the industry to do likewise. The objective is for the deaf and hard of hearing person to have a functionally equivalent communication experience. Let’s do it! If you do not want to miss the series, you are welcome to subscribe to the website by filling out the form at the upper right hand site of the Dr. Z website (www.drzvrs.com.)
1 Seattle Trial
2 Minneapolis None
3 San Antonio Kathy-Houston, Texas
4 Glacier National Park None
5 Miami David-Oakland, California
6 Boston Rick-Lincolnwood, IL
7 Copenhagen, Denmark Jennifer-Palm Harbor, FL
8 Waikiki Beach, Hawaii David-Oakland, California
9 Victoria Falls, Zambia Samuel-Silver Spring, MD
10 Paris, France Nancy-Herndon, VA
11 Tokyo, Japan None
12 Moscow, Russia John
13 Denver, CO None
14 Jerusalem Mary-Lakeland, FL
15 Machu Picchu David
16 Florence, Italy Jeanne-Silver Spring, MD
17 Yosemite, California None
18 Dallas, TX Phil
19 Ayers Rock, Australia Karen-Suffern, NY
20 Mt. Everest, Nepal Sonny-Sioux Falls, SD
21 St. Basil’s Cathedral Mary-Lakeland, FL
22 London Bridge Kathy-Indianapolis, IN
23 Bryce Canyon Nancy-Herndon, VA
FCC Clarifies Rule to Transition Away from the Use of 800 Numbers for Point to Point and Dial Around Calls
An Op-Ed Editorial from Dr. Z
On August 11, 2009, the FCC issued a Public Notice on clarifying the use of 800 numbers in a TRS/VRS setting. While the notice is a bit hard to digest–it basically discourages the use of 800 numbers for point to point calls and asks that we transition away from the use of 800 numbers. At the same time, they are saying this action makes this functionally equivalent. I happen not to agree. We live in a world full of 800 numbers and geographically appropriate numbers. Thousands of 800 numbers have been issued to deaf and hard of hearing TRS/VRS users. Business owners have printed business cards and accompanying literature listing their 800 numbers. And for return calls, 800 number callbacks will be routed to the default provider, presenting a lack of choice and does not make the service interoperable. We need to ask the FCC to allow freer use of 800 numbers like hearing people have. They issued this in the form of a “clarification”, not a rulemaking process where people have the right to express their thoughts and allow the FCC to review and consider all opinions before making an order. A “clarification” in this context amounts to some decision without a process taking place. This is rather unusual. The link to this “clarification” is as follows: (link to FCC document). If you do not think this is appropriate, you should file your thoughts and comments with the FCC using this link and mention Proceeding 03-123/DA09-1787.
The first person every week who guesses the location of where Dr. Z correctly will receive a $5 Starbucks or Target gift card. We will post the name of the winner every week on this site. There was a correct guess for Episode #12. The place was Moscow, Russia. (misspelling not accepted) The winner is in the process of being contacted. For this episode, you need to name the place and the state it is located in.
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
1. Conversations are in real time, with little or no lag time
2. You can call a deaf person directly with a ten-digit number
3. There will be no confusion regarding gender (if the deaf person requests an interpreter with the same gender)
4. For unannounced calls, it makes it easier for the deaf/hard of hearing person to explain that he/she is talking through an interpreter
5. For VCO calls, the calls are handled with just one line (with certain providers such as ZVRS)
6. The service is available 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year
7. Most calls are answered within 20 seconds
8. The deaf/hard of hearing person can participate in conference calls.
9. Certain devices (such as the Z-150) have no problems with firewalls (they can traverse firewalls.)
10. You may not realize you are talking to a person who is deaf/hard of hearing!
Missed Calls with a VP-200
An Op-Ed Editorial from Dr. Z
When hearing people call other hearing people using their cellphones, they all can communicate with one another. In cases where a phone is not answered, a cell phone can call back with a missed call feature like many videophones have. But—in the case of videophones, the VP-200 has a nonstandard feature when it comes to missed calls. When the VP-200 user sees a missed call and clicks on it to redial–if the call came from a VP-200, there is no problem. But if the call came from a non-VP 200 phone, it often does not work. This is because Sorenson is using a non-standard protocol for this. We need to file a complaint to the FCC to ask them to make all videophones compatible with one another. This is Sorenson again treating deaf and hard of hearing people like second-class citizens. They are not making the VP-200 functionally equivalent. Here’s the link to make a complaint to the FCC: complaint form. When you write the complaint, you should indicate that the VP-200 has features that are not functionally equivalent, such as missed calls and caller-ID processing. Be sure to indicate 03-123 as the proceeding number and leave the Law Firm name and Attorney Name blank.
–
–
–
–
–
Link to filing a complaint with the FCC
Weird News – But Interesting…