Cingular charges too much

Scott wrote:

> Where? All I see you posting is opinion. And when confronted, you run
> away. You lie by omission.

S.O.P for Navas. Never has any references or proof. When challenged, he
never responds, or claims that he has provided evidence in the past, but
is never able to provide even a link to it.

Funny-sad.

---

› See More: Cingular charges too much

"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <X9FOf.19871$n%[email protected]> on Sun, 05 Mar 2006
> 17:25:11
> GMT, "Austinman" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Why is there such a big difference between pre-paid and contract coverage?
>
> There isn't -- it's relatively small.
>

You are going to have to explain the above comment to me, John. I look at
the maps and there seems to be a lot more green on the one for people with
contracts, than there is for pre-paid. As an example, if you live in Vermont
you are pretty much out of luck with a pre-paid plan. Now I appreciate
Vermont is not the biggest state in the country, but to have practically no
coverage in a whole state is not "relatively small" to me.

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

In <[email protected]> on Mon, 06 Mar
2006 08:33:10 GMT, John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:

>In <X9FOf.19871$n%[email protected]> on Sun, 05 Mar 2006 17:25:11
>GMT, "Austinman" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Why is there such a big difference between pre-paid and contract coverage?
>
>There isn't -- it's relatively small.

Oops -- I was thinking of Cingular coverages, not T-Mobile coverages -- sorry
for the cockpit error and confusion.

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

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

In <[email protected]> on Sat, 04 Mar
2006 16:53:13 GMT, John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:

>In <[email protected]> on Sat, 04 Mar 2006
>06:20:17 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>(When you check TMobile's web site, be careful; their coverage map for
>>their contracted customers is much more extensive than their coverage
>>map for their prepaid, $100/year customers.)
>
>The difference is actually relatively small.

Oops -- I was thinking of Cingular coverages, not T-Mobile coverages -- sorry
for the cockpit error and confusion.

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

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

> >>Why is there such a big difference between pre-paid and contract coverage?
> >
> > There isn't -- it's relatively small.
> >
>
> You are going to have to explain the above comment to me, John. I look at
> the maps and there seems to be a lot more green on the one for people with
> contracts, than there is for pre-paid. As an example, if you live in Vermont
> you are pretty much out of luck with a pre-paid plan. Now I appreciate
> Vermont is not the biggest state in the country, but to have practically no
> coverage in a whole state is not "relatively small" to me.

That's twice now that John has claimed that the clearly-defined T-Mobile
discussion actually looked like a Cingular discussion to him, so he
responded with Cingular information.

I see a definite pattern here--and it centers around John not reading
the actual post, and responding with random Cingular-oriented
information where it's inappropriate.

John can't pass up an opportunity, ANY opportunity, to talk up Cingular
and try to make Cingular look good. For some reason, he's obssessed
with that concept, to the point where he just doesn't see the actual
posts that come through here.

He's like a frog; the frog literally doesn't see anything that doesn't
behave like a fly. John literally doesn't see anything that doesn't
look like a Cingular discussion.

I can just imagine John Navas at a party. Random partygoer: "I was in
the hospital for a week, and now I'm on antidepressants." John:
"Cingular Wireless can help you call your doctor and your pharmacy. Did
you know that Cingular Wireless is the largest cell phone provider for
depressed people?"

Yeah, John would be a real party animal.

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

In <[email protected]> on Tue, 07 Mar 2006
06:25:37 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <[email protected]> wrote:

>I see a definite pattern here--and it centers around John not reading
>the actual post, and responding with random Cingular-oriented
>information where it's inappropriate.

This is alt.cellular.CINGULAR [emphasis added].

>[SNIP inappropriate personal comments]

You need to grow up and get a life.

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

In article <[email protected]>,
John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:

> >I see a definite pattern here--and it centers around John not reading
> >the actual post, and responding with random Cingular-oriented
> >information where it's inappropriate.
>
> This is alt.cellular.CINGULAR [emphasis added].

And occasionally the discussion wanders into "yeah, but I want prepaid"
and then other carriers come into play as comparison, and someone
mentions T-Mobile as having the best price, but then coverage comes up--

--and then you pop in (twice now, within a couple of weeks) and don't
read ANY of the discussion and insert inappropriate and false
statements, because you can't be bothered to read the freaking
discussion.

Yes sir, to you, everything looks like an opportunity to shill for
Cingular. EVERYTHING. Even when the discussion is clearly marked
otherwise.



> >[SNIP inappropriate personal comments]

Oh, you mean this stuff?

He's like a frog; the frog literally doesn't see anything that doesn't
behave like a fly. John literally doesn't see anything that doesn't
look like a Cingular discussion.

I can just imagine John Navas at a party. Random partygoer: "I was in
the hospital for a week, and now I'm on antidepressants." John:
"Cingular Wireless can help you call your doctor and your pharmacy. Did
you know that Cingular Wireless is the largest cell phone provider for
depressed people?"

Yeah, John would be a real party animal.

Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>> I see a definite pattern here--and it centers around John not reading
>>> the actual post, and responding with random Cingular-oriented
>>> information where it's inappropriate.
>> This is alt.cellular.CINGULAR [emphasis added].
>
> And occasionally the discussion wanders into "yeah, but I want prepaid"
> and then other carriers come into play as comparison, and someone
> mentions T-Mobile as having the best price, but then coverage comes up--

Yes, threads often digress, legitimately, into competitive information
regarding cost and coverage.

> --and then you pop in (twice now, within a couple of weeks) and don't
> read ANY of the discussion and insert inappropriate and false
> statements, because you can't be bothered to read the freaking
> discussion.
>
> Yes sir, to you, everything looks like an opportunity to shill for
> Cingular. EVERYTHING. Even when the discussion is clearly marked
> otherwise.

Reminds me of Amsoil sales people. I remember discussing something with
someone about their property up in Montana, and someone in the room
popped in with, "well the weather's cold up there, you should be using
Amsoil."

>
>
>>(When you check TMobile's web site, be careful; their coverage map for
>>their contracted customers is much more extensive than their coverage
>>map for their prepaid, $100/year customers.)
>>
>>
>
>The difference is actually relatively small.
>
>
>

I'd have to say that the prepaid and contract coverage are normally
significantly different size with almost any company. Most companies do
not allow prepaid roaming, or if they do, it is at a greater cost than
regular prepay minutes.