Yes, I am going to RID, but only for one meeting on Monday. I only live a couple of hours away, and I cannot attend anything else. You may write to me and sitcomkid@comcast.net. If you prefer telephone, slip me your number.

I will continue to post issued from FCC. Altho I will be in VRS industry so I can’t say I’m not biased. What I can say, however, that Convo will be a stickler to FCC rules. That deaf/hoh persons are the most important ingredient of VRS industry.

eyes open & thumbs up,

Convo has its own call center so video interpreters have explicit instructions on which calls can be processed and which cannot.

By technical platform, I meant Convo uses CAC’s ACD – automatic call distributor. The “don’t ask, don’t tell”. May I suggest you check out
http://fjallfoss.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=6520221125

If you ask any of VRS providers – I mean all of them – they have heard in one form or another from me what I think ought to be permitted and what ought not to be permitted. Whether they follow my suggestions or not is another matter that I have no control over.

BTW, this week I will be posting quite a few from FCC and commentators. Very interesting to say the least.

eyes open & thumbs up…

Thank you for your message.

I see by calling that Convo uses the CAC interpreters, if that is what you mean by technical platform.

As for checking out CAC, sounds like a “Don’t ask, don’t tell” policy. Yes, perhaps the FFC will come out with more rules to clarify.

Be well.

Pat

However, I’m sorry to see the lone watchdog of the VRS industry (we all know that the FCC isn’t doing a very good job overseeing NECA and TRS proviers)
be sucked in by it..

I wish you’d stayed clear and continued to lend your words to
combat the wrong.

Anyway..
Best of luck to you.. See you at the conventions (or I will.. )

Mr. Anonymous

Very good question. Convo does use CACVRS to use its technical platform. However, we do not monitor their traffic nor do they monitor our traffic. All VRS providers have their own interpretation of the FCC regulations. CACVRS has its own interpretation as we do. At any rate, Convo processes only organic minutes.

So there you have it. I believe FCC will ultimately come out with ruling that will help VRS industry know what are allowed and what are not.

eyes open & thumbs up,

Congratulations on your new venture.

Can you clarify through which certified VRS provider you are billing minutes and
which interpreters you are using. I either heard or read somewhere that you are
using CAC out of Michigan. If that is the case, have you thoroughly vetted them
and made sure that they have not been involved with any “manufactured” minutes
at any point in their past? If they have been involved, how would you explain your
connection with them given that you are so concerned with ethical business practices?

Thank you.

Pat

This is an old one, and you’re right about actual reimbursement times which is an average of 35% to 45% of VI’s time. I understand one VRS provider managed to do about 70% to 75%. High call volume, minimizing start and wrap up times, and other program tools make it possible.

No argument with you on the idea of VRS becoming independent of public funding. Won’t work. England tried it and not too successful I might add. Sweden and South Korea governments fully subsidize VRS thus they work.

Ed

My concerned about VRS such as opening new provider and while there are another two center recent laid off by Purple.

My concerned—
* the call on hold could impact due several VRS provider could be longer to wait while FCC says allow up to 2 minutes on hold. If the fund is lower than we are expecting or the needs to cover that expense for interpreter/VRS. If the VRS fund isn’t enough due the amount large interpreter under VRS and it could affect slow service as new product, feature, and so on.
* I do not know if the VRS become two or three provider as not same as today. Again, it could increase on hold waiting.
* I don’t know if that VRS fund that has cause decision change base on abuse due cost is too high for only Sorenson getting approx 70 and 80 percents from fund.
* My other concerned about 10 digit numbers that not going be the FCC’s concerns?

I just want see VRS go crazy and keep marketing is fun thing to see success as show there are Deaf employee role to show Hearing people to see that we have ability!

I believe, if there are service that involved with device such as MVP, VP200, or VPAD+ . I don’t know if you agree or disagree that word “pay” their service instead have FCC pay more on that expense?

It just interesting how it will turn around but just my concerned not enough interpreter due provider doesn’t get enough met fund to keep VRS provider run and turn out laid off and not have enough interpreter with any VRS provider that we need to make call via VRS.

As only Sorenson shared the newsletter about FCC while the remain VRS provider doesn’t share the news, it make me wonder why…

And to the idiot that said VRS companies need to become independent of public funding. That would mean deaf people would have to pay for the service… ummm hello!?! Not a good idea!