Personal cell tower?

John Navas wrote:

> Or must we take your personal word for it?
>

Seems to work with you alot...

---

› See More: Personal cell tower?

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

In <[email protected]> on Sat, 26 Nov 2005
22:30:48 GMT, DecTxCowboy <[email protected]> wrote:

>John Navas wrote:
>
>> Or must we take your personal word for it?
>
>Seems to work with you alot...

In other words, you don't really have anything to back up that claim.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Sat, 26 Nov 2005
> 18:54:48 GMT, DecTxCowboy <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>>>Satellite dish might be the best way to go and use VoIP with some
>>>>Engenius www.engeniustech.com phones.
>>>>
>>>>John Navis claims a whole second in latency. No idea how he came up with
>>>>that number.
>>
>>John Navas replied:
>>> Me either, since I made no such claim. You do get confused easily.
>>
>>http://navasgrp.home.att.net/
>>Follow the link for Three Myths of Satellite Internet (April 25, 2001)
>>
>>Take you to page 2 of:
>>http://www.g4tv.com/techtvvault/feat...ernet_pg2.html
>>2. Watch out for latency.
>>It takes a long time, in Internet time, for a signal to travel up to a
>>satellite and back down to the ground. This increases latency --
>>particularly when the satellite is used for upstream as well as
>>downstream transmission (where total latency approaches a full second).
>
> That's approximate ("approaches"), a different context, and not a part of
> this
> thread.
>

It is now a part of this thread, and even in a different context quite on
point.

Does your ass get chapped from getting caught with your pants down so much?

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Sat, 26 Nov 2005
> 22:30:48 GMT, DecTxCowboy <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>John Navas wrote:
>>
>>> Or must we take your personal word for it?
>>
>>Seems to work with you alot...
>
> In other words, you don't really have anything to back up that claim.
>
Actually, it would appear that he has one thing to back up his claim that
you don't- professional experience. I know how you try to cloud that with
your personal 'opinions'- I don't think it will work here.

You'll have to do better than that.

John Navas wrote:
> In other words, you don't really have anything to back up that claim.

Nope, but then...you appear to get a lot of mileage doing the same
thing. Don't make me sort all my NG posts by Sender > Navis. You might
get caught with yer pants down.