Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 42 of 42
  1. #31
    JohnF
    Guest

    Re: Cingular Nation coverage

    They don't though. He honestly feels like he's providing some service to
    everyone. It's like a mental disorder. Then one person comes along and says
    he provides useful information and his head grows one size bigger and
    suddenly it's justified his whole existance up to this point. How do you
    deal with someone like this in a forum where there are no rules? I would
    think simply asking would be enough? I'll stop if someone asks. Will Navas?

    "Joe Fabeitz" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > John,
    >
    > If you would totally ignore these personal attacks, they DO go away. It
    > may
    > take years, but they go away. IGNORE 'EM so the groups stays useful..
    > "John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    >> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
    >>
    >> In <[email protected]> on Sun, 09

    > Jan
    >> 2005 21:06:35 GMT, "JohnF" <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >> >No. A small percentage of your posts are informative.

    >>
    >> The majority are.
    >>
    >> >The rest are "not it's
    >> >not" and "search the Google groups".

    >>
    >> Informative.
    >>
    >> >What useful information did you
    >> >actually convey to the original poster of this thread?

    >>
    >> How to help himself.
    >>
    >> >My post was simply to
    >> >point out to your groupies that most of your posts are condescending and

    > are
    >> >typically just there to oppose whatever someone else posts.

    >>
    >> Your post was just an off-topic ad hominem.
    >>
    >> >I've never
    >> >claimed to be informative but my post was still more informative than

    > yours
    >> >was.

    >>
    >> Nope.
    >>
    >> >Of course it was a personal attack.

    >>
    >> And thus off-topic, a violation of the charter and Usenet guidelines, and
    >> utterly uninformative.
    >>
    >> >I'm glad you figured that out. I'm tired
    >> >of your trite flippant responses to peoples questions when you don't

    > really
    >> >have an answer.

    >>
    >> Tough luck.
    >>
    >> >If you have some useful information then by all means
    >> >provide it.

    >>
    >> I do.
    >>
    >> >If you don't have anything useful to add then just go on to the
    >> >next thread.

    >>
    >> Mind your own business.
    >>
    >> >Until then, be prepared to receive these types of responses
    >> >from myself and everyone else here who are tired of it.

    >>
    >> Until then, when you act like a jerk, be prepared to be called a jerk.
    >>
    >> >You can call it
    >> >hypocrisy if you like

    >>
    >> It is what it is.
    >>
    >> >but I'm just following your example.

    >>
    >> Nope.
    >>
    >> >Once you quit
    >> >posting usless threads everyone else will as well.

    >>
    >> Hardly.
    >>
    >> Have a nice day.
    >>
    >> >"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >> >news:[email protected]...
    >> >> My response here and the great majority of my other responses are far

    > more
    >> >> useful and informative than this posting of yours, a personal attack
    >> >> without
    >> >> any relevant content that violates both the charter and Usenet

    > guidelines.
    >> >> Can you say "hypocrisy?" Have a nice day.

    >>
    >> --
    >> Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
    >> John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

    >
    >






    See More: Cingular Nation coverage




  2. #32
    Jack Zwick
    Guest

    Re: Cingular Nation coverage

    In article <[email protected]>,
    "JohnF" <[email protected]> wrote:

    > Useless response #123,456. Exactly zero amount of new and useful information
    > contained in this post.

    Zero for Navas.

    >
    >
    > "John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > > [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
    > >
    > > In <[email protected]> on Sun, 09 Jan
    > > 2005 18:06:14 GMT, Jack "Chicken Little" Zwick <[email protected]>
    > > wrote:
    > >
    > >>When someone has appointed themselves manager of this newsgroup ...


    But he regularly acts like his self-written charter has any authority
    when in an unmoderated group it doesn't.

    > >
    > > No, just the creator. And you?
    > >
    > >>prove them wrong
    > >>whether it be Cingular's timing of buying AT&T Wireless,



    End of October he insisted it hadnt happened yet, despite all the news
    stories and Cingular press releases saying it had.


    > >
    > > Nope.
    > >
    > >>Cingular's easy
    > >>conversion of back office stuff (NOT),


    Thats what he said.

    > >
    > > Nope.
    > >
    > >>Cinular's conversion of all AT&T
    > >>Wirless stores (falsely claimed to have happened on Nov. 15)

    > >
    > > Nope.



    <http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/mi...8644&TICK=CING
    UL1&STORY=/www/story/11-16-2004/0002458939&EDATE=Nov+16,+2004>


    Cingular said so, Navas refuse to believe still.
    > >
    > >>or legal
    > >>issues on making and distributing ringtones.

    > >
    > > Nope.
    > >
    > > 0 for 4, even worse than your usual dismal average.



    4 for 4 his lying.


    We'll see what he says when RIAA calls him, I got an email from a lurker,
    telling me they reported him to RIAA.

    > >
    > > --
    > > Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
    > > John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>




  3. #33
    Jack Zwick
    Guest

    Re: Cingular Nation coverage

    In article <[email protected]>,
    "Joe Fabeitz" <[email protected]> wrote:

    > John,
    >
    > If you would totally ignore these personal attacks, they DO go away. It may
    > take years, but they go away. IGNORE 'EM so the groups stays useful..
    > "John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...


    It's Navas that starts in with the personal attacks when he's proven to
    be wrong.



  4. #34
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: Cingular Nation coverage

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <[email protected]> on Mon, 10 Jan
    2005 15:23:53 GMT, "JohnF" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >... Exactly zero amount of new and useful information
    >contained in this post.


    Actually a correction of misinformation.

    p.s. Please don't switch posting styles (top vs bottom) in mid-thread -- it's
    confusing, and considered a bit rude. Thanks.

    >"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >news:[email protected]...
    >> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
    >>
    >> In <[email protected]> on Sun, 09 Jan
    >> 2005 18:06:14 GMT, Jack "Chicken Little" Zwick <[email protected]>
    >> wrote:
    >>
    >>>When someone has appointed themselves manager of this newsgroup ...

    >>
    >> No, just the creator. And you?
    >>
    >>>prove them wrong
    >>>whether it be Cingular's timing of buying AT&T Wireless,

    >>
    >> Nope.
    >>
    >>>Cingular's easy
    >>>conversion of back office stuff (NOT),

    >>
    >> Nope.
    >>
    >>>Cinular's conversion of all AT&T
    >>>Wirless stores (falsely claimed to have happened on Nov. 15)

    >>
    >> Nope.
    >>
    >>>or legal
    >>>issues on making and distributing ringtones.

    >>
    >> Nope.
    >>
    >> 0 for 4, even worse than your usual dismal average.
    >>
    >> --
    >> Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
    >> John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

    >


    --
    Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>



  5. #35
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: Cingular Nation coverage

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <[email protected]> on Mon, 10 Jan
    2005 15:50:11 GMT, Jack "FUDMEISTER" Zwick <[email protected]> wrote:

    >[John Navas] regularly acts like his self-written charter has any authority
    >when in an unmoderated group it doesn't.


    It has moral authority, except to those (like you) that don't respect it.
    It also has practical authority in cases of severe abuse.

    >End of October [John Navas] insisted [the merger] hadnt happened yet,
    >despite all the news
    >stories and Cingular press releases saying it had.


    Nope. I wrote that it wasn't a done deal until approved by the Court, and
    posted a citation proving that.

    >> >>Cingular's easy
    >> >>conversion of back office stuff (NOT),

    >
    >Thats what he said.


    Nope. What I actually wrote
    <http://groups.google.com/groups?as_umsgid=Iutgd.2064%24_3.27393%40typhoon.sonic.net>
    or <http://tinyurl.com/3mxd3>:

    From: John Navas
    Newsgroups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.attws
    Subject: Re: Going from ATTWS to Cingular
    Message-ID: <[email protected]>
    Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2004 15:39:20 GMT
    ...
    The number of users (subscribers) is largely irrelevant -- what matters is
    the number (one) and type of (compatible) back office systems. This
    integration actually looks to be easier than prior integrations.

    Which part of that don't you understand? Shall we start with "This"?

    >> >>Cinular's conversion of all AT&T
    >> >>Wirless stores (falsely claimed to have happened on Nov. 15)
    >> >
    >> > Nope.

    >
    ><http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/mi...8644&TICK=CING
    >UL1&STORY=/www/story/11-16-2004/0002458939&EDATE=Nov+16,+2004>
    >
    >Cingular said so, ...


    Nope. Not what it says.

    >We'll see what he says when RIAA calls him, I got an email from a lurker,
    >telling me they reported him to RIAA.


    LOL! I'm not holding my breath -- are you?

    --
    Best regards,
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/>

    "A little learning is a dangerous thing." [Alexander Pope]
    "It is better to sit in silence and appear ignorant,
    than to open your mouth and remove all doubt." [Mark Twain]



  6. #36
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: Cingular Nation coverage

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <[email protected]> on Mon, 10 Jan 2005
    07:19:21 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >In article <[email protected]>,
    > John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >> In <[email protected]> on Sun, 09 Jan
    >> 2005 21:06:35 GMT, "JohnF" <[email protected]> wrote:


    >> >What useful information did you
    >> >actually convey to the original poster of this thread?

    >>
    >> How to help himself.
    >>

    >How does this article of yours follow the charter and Usenet
    >conventions, John?


    By not violating them. ( Seems pretty obvious to me, but I'm happy to clear
    that up for you.

    >Oh, sorry. I caught you being a hypocrite again. Now come your forged
    >posts.
    >[SNIP]


    I don't forge (and haven't forged) posts.
    That's a pretty serious charge. Got any proof?

    --
    Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>



  7. #37
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: Cingular Nation coverage

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <[email protected]> on Mon, 10 Jan 2005 09:57:28
    -0500, "Joe Fabeitz" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >John,
    >
    >If you would totally ignore these personal attacks, they DO go away. It may
    >take years, but they go away. IGNORE 'EM so the groups stays useful..


    Thanks for the advice (seriously), but my (long experience on Usenet is that
    ignoring personal attacks unfortunately just serves to (a) actually embolden
    those making them and (b) mislead lurkers, many of whom think there must be at
    least some merit in attacks left unchallenged.

    --
    Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>



  8. #38
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: Cingular Nation coverage

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <[email protected]> on Mon, 10 Jan
    2005 15:22:03 GMT, "JohnF" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >news:[email protected]...


    >> The majority [of my posts] are [informative].

    >
    >Umm.... No. Sorry to break it to you but they're not.


    We'll just have to agree to disagree.

    >At least not to anyone
    >but you. That's what everyone is trying to tell you.


    You presume to speak for "everyone?" I think not. (How arrogant and silly.)

    >> Informative.

    >
    >Telling someone to go look it up somewhere else is not being informative.


    Telling someone where to go look it up is being informative.

    >... Why does this group
    >even exists if everyone should just look somewhere else?


    Mostly for new material.

    >It doesn't matter
    >if it's been asked before. ...


    Actually it does, as Dear Emily Postnews makes clear:

    Q: What about other important questions? How should I know when to post?

    A: Always post them. It would be a big waste of your time to find a
    knowledgeable user in one of the groups and ask through private mail if the
    topic has already come up. Much easier to bother thousands of people with
    the same question.

    Hint: That's sarcasm. See also "Rules for posting to Usenet":

    Before posting a question to the net (especially one that you think
    will be easy for experts to answer), consider carefully whether
    posting is the most appropriate way to get the answer. There are
    many ways to find answers without using up network resources and
    forcing thousands of people to read your question (and several
    helpful volunteers to spend time responding). ...

    >>>What useful information did you
    >>>actually convey to the original poster of this thread?

    >>
    >> How to help himself.

    >
    >He was trying to by coming here and asking a question. You're response was
    >to simply tell him to look elsewhere.


    I actually told him where to look, something he clearly didn't know.

    >... Let someone who does know answer the question.


    I'm not stopping others from respond, and in fact there were other responses.

    >> Your post was just an off-topic ad hominem.

    >
    >As was our original response.


    Nope.

    >Hence the followup off-topic responses.


    Not a good excuse. "Two wrongs don't make a right."

    >> Mind your own business.

    >
    >My business is trying to learn more about Cingular. So I'm having to weed
    >through your responses to EVERY thread in this group. That effects me.


    That's Usenet. If you don't like my posts, filter them out.

    >... My goal is just to get you to stop responding
    >to every thread when you have nothing to add.


    Surely you have better things to do with your time.

    --
    Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>



  9. #39
    JohnF
    Guest

    Re: Cingular Nation coverage


    "John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > That's Usenet. If you don't like my posts, filter them out.


    Done! You all have fun reading Navas' asinine responses.





  10. #40
    JohnF
    Guest

    Re: Cingular Nation coverage


    "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]...
    > In article <[email protected]>,
    > John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > > >Hello all, I'm a newbie so please forgive if this is redundant.

    > >
    > > FYI, you can use Google Groups to search back articles and thus avoid
    > > redundant postings.

    >
    > FYI, you can also use a killfile to avoid Navas's articles and thus
    > avoid...Navas.
    >


    Did this yesterday. I would recommend it for everyone. It's like a fresh of
    breath air coming here and not seeing any posts from Navas.





  11. #41
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: Cingular Nation coverage

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <[email protected]> on Wed, 12 Jan 2005
    00:28:23 GMT, "JohnF" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >news:[email protected]...
    >> In article <[email protected]>,
    >> John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >> > >Hello all, I'm a newbie so please forgive if this is redundant.
    >> >
    >> > FYI, you can use Google Groups to search back articles and thus avoid
    >> > redundant postings.

    >>
    >> FYI, you can also use a killfile to avoid Navas's articles and thus
    >> avoid...Navas.

    >
    >Did this yesterday. I would recommend it for everyone. It's like a fresh of
    >breath air coming here and not seeing any posts from Navas.


    Let me guess ... you're 12? 10?

    --
    Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>



  12. #42
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: Cingular Nation coverage

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <[email protected]> on Wed, 12 Jan
    2005 00:26:17 GMT, "JohnF" <[email protected]> wrote:

    >"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    >news:[email protected]...
    >> That's Usenet. If you don't like my posts, filter them out.

    >
    >Done! ...


    Works for me too!

    --
    Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>



  • Similar Threads




  • Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123