Today is not a Holiday

All minutes used today count against your Peak minutes.
SprintPCS has no Holiday minutes.

---

› See More: Today is not a Holiday

In article <[email protected]>,=20
[email protected] says...
> All minutes used today count against your Peak minutes.=20
> SprintPCS has no Holiday minutes.
>=20

Phil? Is that you again? If it is, you never did answer where T-Mobile=20
does this, after claiming "all other (U.S.) carriers" do it.

--=20
-+-
R=D8=DF
O/Siris
I work for SprintPCS
I *don't* speak for them.

"O/Siris" <robjvargas@sprīntpcs.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> All minutes used today count against your Peak minutes.
> SprintPCS has no Holiday minutes.
>

Phil? Is that you again? If it is, you never did answer where T-Mobile
does this, after claiming "all other (U.S.) carriers" do it.


It's Phil.

"Al" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> All minutes used today count against your Peak minutes.
> SprintPCS has no Holiday minutes.

And the beat goes on ... #48 on Phillipe's ID hit parade.

Bob

In infinite wisdom Bob Smith answered:

> "Al" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>
>>All minutes used today count against your Peak minutes.
>>SprintPCS has no Holiday minutes.
>
>
> And the beat goes on ... #48 on Phillipe's ID hit parade.
>
> Bob
>
>
I coulda sworn he'd hit 50 by now.

"Bob Smith"

>> Sort of like your message I'm responding to right now. The "let me
>> get this straight" immediatly alerts me to the fact that you intend
>> to be rude.
>
> Not at all. You said certain things in your prior posts, which really
> don't track. I just wanted to be sure I wasn't misquoting you, as
> Phillipe has been well known to do here. You've said you've only been
> in here a week, read hundreds of posts and appear to support the
> newsgroup troll ...

I support anyone, everyone, or noone as my concience calls. Summarily
judging me in such a negative fashion as a troll supporter simply because
you disagree with an opinion I hold which may be similiar to someone you
routinely disagree with is rather small minded.


>> >
>> > If you had read all those posts, and I seriously doubt if you had,
>> > as it would take more than a week to read them all,
>>
>>
>> If you'll look back you'll see clearly that I never claimed to look
>> at "all" of them. In fact you've already acknowledged as much when
>> you stated that I stated I had read hundreds.
>
> Then what is your intreptation of reading? You take a peak at the
> subject line, and you know all there is?

I read and if I'm bored I move on. I read and if I see the post is going
nowhere I move on. I read and if I see the post amounts to a petty
attack I move on.


>>
>> >if you've only been
>> > on this board for a week, you should know what those bogus posts
>> > are, and the misinformation he's posted.
>>
>> Point is, and I think the anti-Phil crowd seems to keep missing it.
>> I don't care. When I read much of what he's posted when I suspected
>> it was him posting he's generally far more civil than the anti-phil
>> crowd, couple that with petty complaints about inaccuracies like the
>> holiday minutes thing and frankly in my books that gives him a little
>> more credibility.
>
> All he does here is try to create confusion by throwing out
> misstatements.

You should read some of what the anti-Phil crowd put out. Today for
example he's been posting about the confusing nature of the way that
Sprints advertising the 7 nights and weekends. He's right in that it's
really not morally speaking above board because, I believe anyway, that
they're intentionally designed to give that impression. I think saying
that they're lying is probably going to far. But I wouldn't necessarily
call someone who calls Sprint liars for the practice liars either.

The thing that gets me is that his (if it even was Phil) post was
streight forward the responses to it in defense of Sprint were what would
tend to confuse the issue.




>> For some reason this usenet newsgroup seems heavily weighted in
>> SprintPCS' favor. A lot of you don't like hearing negative things
>> about Sprint. Why that is I don't know. I don't much care either
>> frankly, but when I see the rude and obnoxious comments directed and
>> various posters supposedly Phil I tend to make harsh judgements on
>> the ones perpetrating it not the objects.
>
> Oh, jeez ... So, because everyone questions Phillipe and all his alter
> egos with all the bogus comments he makes, he needs a buddy like you
> to back him up?

No. I stated that because quite frankly you and a few others come off as
asses when responding to people whether Phil or not. And it's normally
after people have made a negative comment about Sprint. As for Phil
needing back-up. I'd say, judging from the number and intensity of the
posting by the anti-phil crowd he doesn't need any help at all.

As for me, I post as I choose, when I choose, for whatever reason I
choose.


>>
>> As you've seen someone's already tagged me as Phil. I'm begining to
>> wonder now just how many other individuals not Phil have been tagged
>> as Phil.
>
> No, I said you are starting to sound like him. I didn't say you were
> him.

I didn't say you were the one that tagged me as Phil. Whether or not you
think I sound like Phil doesn't really concern me. When I post you will
hear my opinions just as I see yours when you post. Comparing them with
someone's I don't like for the simple expedient of undermining the
opinions is frankly petty.

"Mark E. Daniel" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> SprintingForService <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I tend to agree with you that if he's doing it, it's perhaps not the
>> best move he could make. Personally, if he does have multiple ids, I
>> wish he would stick to one so I know what I'm reading is from him
>> and not somebody someone else thinks is him.
>
> Would be nice, but my lungs aren't strong enough to hold my breath
> that long.
>

;0)

I suppose we could ask him nicely?

"Bob Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

>
> "SprintingForService" <[email protected]> wrote in
> message news:nlRIb.39605$PK3.30121@okepread01...
> <snipped>
>> I take your meaning but it seems to me that there a quite a few
>> people
> here
>> that dont' take kindly to negative comments about Sprint. Frankly
>> it's been my experiences that I frequently learn far more from
>> negative
> comments
>> than I do from positive ones.
>
> Negative comments don't bother us. Folks do have some problems and
> legitimate complaints, or have misconceptions on what they expect with
> the service.

Yes people have opinions which is as it should be. It's not realy your
place or anyone elses place for that matter to judge their conceptions as
misconceptions. People may be mistaken in their beliefs but that doesn't
invalidate their beliefs.

Many people hold beleifs about their service with Sprint based on how
Sprint advertises itself and the intentionally obfuscatory way in which it
words it's descriptions of the specifics of some of the services it
provides. That's certainly not the customers fault.


> All of us have had a minor problem now and then, and in
> most cases, were able to get the problem fixed, save for getting a new
> tower put in down the street ...
>
> When someone pipes in with a legit complaint here, one of us is
> hopefully going to provide some answers and suggestions to correct the
> problem.

Bob, It's not your place to judge what is and isn't a legit complaint.
You're not this newsgroups God.

Cooper <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> In article <nlRIb.39605$PK3.30121@okepread01>,
> SprintingForService <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> I can see how this might be a legitimate complaint. The problem is
>> the constant trolling of someone considered a troll. The rude and
>> obnoxious comments are tiresome. There are several issues I'll be
>> bringing up in the not to distant future and I'd hate to think the
>> discussion will get side tracked because some trifling individuals
>> take it into their head that I'm a troll and they're the newsgroups
>> guardians.
>
> Y'know, while it's irritating that someone fairly new to this group
> comes along and makes the judgement calls you've made without knowing
> the history of what you're talking about (in this case, Phil and his
> destructive behavior here), you've hit the nail on the head with that
> last part. Phil couldn't be nearly as destructive as he has, without
> the aid of all those "newsgroups guardians" who have only served to
> make themselves look worse by comparison. Frankly, it's hard to tell
> the difference between the trolls and the troll-trollers these days.
> If *both sides* would just STFU about who said what when where how,
> this newsgroup would be vastly improved.

Howdy Cooper;

First, I think it was you maybe that made similiar comments to the anti-
phil crowd and I agreed with them as I read the debacle. I would like to
point out that it doesn't take much time to see the utter futility of the
anti-phil crowd. They can't control Phil or what he does but they're
constant attempts at it are a major part of this newsgroup which one can
make a judgement on almost immediatly. Do I know all of the specifics of
the Phil "thing". But I don't need to know it to know that by comparison
to the anti-phil crowd he's coming of a saint.


> Besides, you yourself are proof against what the "guardians" claim to
> want to protect the newsgroup against: new people who come here
> believing whatever Phil tosses out. Their protective efforts being
> for naught, maybe they'll stop feeding Phil and get on with debating
> the pros and cons of Sprint on its own merits without all the
> excessive noise.
>

Concured.

"SprintingForService" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:5pgJb.42818$a44.35786@okepread04...
> "Mark E. Daniel" <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
> > SprintingForService <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> I tend to agree with you that if he's doing it, it's perhaps not the
> >> best move he could make. Personally, if he does have multiple ids, I
> >> wish he would stick to one so I know what I'm reading is from him
> >> and not somebody someone else thinks is him.
> >
> > Would be nice, but my lungs aren't strong enough to hold my breath
> > that long.
> >
>
> ;0)
>
> I suppose we could ask him nicely?

Won't work. Been tried, and no matter how much honey was tried, it always
turned to vinegar, and always on his side first.

Bob

"SprintingForService" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:6pgJb.42820$a44.19760@okepread04...
> "Bob Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
<snipped>
> Negative comments don't bother us. Folks do have some problems and
> > legitimate complaints, or have misconceptions on what they expect with
> > the service.
>
> Yes people have opinions which is as it should be. It's not realy your
> place or anyone elses place for that matter to judge their conceptions as
> misconceptions. People may be mistaken in their beliefs but that doesn't
> invalidate their beliefs.

The misconceptions that I'm talking about are:

1) People posting here, complaining because they don't understand this is a
two way radio communications, and expect it to be good as landline service
when it can't be.

2) That there will be dead spots, not because the wireless providers were
lacksidasical in putting up towers, but because it was either deemed as not
cost effective, or the NIMBYs in a particular area.

3) That radio signals can be blocked, by buildings, land depressions etc. I
could go on, but you get my drift.

>
> Many people hold beleifs about their service with Sprint based on how
> Sprint advertises itself and the intentionally obfuscatory way in which it
> words it's descriptions of the specifics of some of the services it
> provides. That's certainly not the customers fault.

All companies have to do it that way in the primary advertising, to catch
the user's eye. They go further in depth, with follow up explanations, and
in the small print.
>
> > All of us have had a minor problem now and then, and in
> > most cases, were able to get the problem fixed, save for getting a new
> > tower put in down the street ...
> >
> > When someone pipes in with a legit complaint here, one of us is
> > hopefully going to provide some answers and suggestions to correct the
> > problem.
>
> Bob, It's not your place to judge what is and isn't a legit complaint.
> You're not this newsgroups God.

I never said I was ... Who are you to judge me and place those types of tags
on yours truly?

Bob

"SprintingForService" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:6pgJb.42821$a44.17060@okepread04...

<snipped>

> Howdy Cooper;
>
> First, I think it was you maybe that made similiar comments to the anti-
> phil crowd and I agreed with them as I read the debacle. I would like to
> point out that it doesn't take much time to see the utter futility of the
> anti-phil crowd. They can't control Phil or what he does but they're
> constant attempts at it are a major part of this newsgroup which one can
> make a judgement on almost immediatly. Do I know all of the specifics of
> the Phil "thing". But I don't need to know it to know that by comparison
> to the anti-phil crowd he's coming of a saint.

See ... this proves you haven't read many of his posts, or the follow ups,
where he outright lies, or misquotes other folks here. It's happened more
times than one cares to count ...

Bob

On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 16:22:09 GMT, "Bob Smith"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>"SprintingForService" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:6pgJb.42821$a44.17060@okepread04...
>
><snipped>
>
>> Howdy Cooper;
>>
>> First, I think it was you maybe that made similiar comments to the anti-
>> phil crowd and I agreed with them as I read the debacle. I would like to
>> point out that it doesn't take much time to see the utter futility of the
>> anti-phil crowd. They can't control Phil or what he does but they're
>> constant attempts at it are a major part of this newsgroup which one can
>> make a judgement on almost immediatly. Do I know all of the specifics of
>> the Phil "thing". But I don't need to know it to know that by comparison
>> to the anti-phil crowd he's coming of a saint.
>
>See ... this proves you haven't read many of his posts, or the follow ups,
>where he outright lies, or misquotes other folks here. It's happened more
>times than one cares to count ...
>
>Bob
>

Forget it Bob. This guy has no related agenda here and it is not
clear to me why he came to this newsgroup in the first place. He just
showed up here and started responding to posts.


Tom Veldhouse

"Bob Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

>
> "SprintingForService" <[email protected]> wrote in
> message news:6pgJb.42820$a44.19760@okepread04...
>> "Bob Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in
>> news:[email protected]:
> <snipped>
> > Negative comments don't bother us. Folks do have some problems and
>> > legitimate complaints, or have misconceptions on what they expect
>> > with the service.
>>
>> Yes people have opinions which is as it should be. It's not realy
>> your place or anyone elses place for that matter to judge their
>> conceptions as misconceptions. People may be mistaken in their
>> beliefs but that doesn't invalidate their beliefs.
>
> The misconceptions that I'm talking about are:
>
> 1) People posting here, complaining because they don't understand this
> is a two way radio communications, and expect it to be good as
> landline service when it can't be.

Howdy Bob,

I don't think too many people believe that it should and those that might
might just beleive that way based on how good it can be as opposed to
their perception of how poor their current level of service is.


> 2) That there will be dead spots, not because the wireless providers
> were lacksidasical in putting up towers, but because it was either
> deemed as not cost effective, or the NIMBYs in a particular area.

The first reason is certainly the carriers fault and the NIMBY problem is
certainly an issue that does come up but usually enough money thrown at
it makes it go away. In both cases the carier would tend to make the
decision unless it's some type of public ordinance prohibiting it.


> 3) That radio signals can be blocked, by buildings, land depressions
> etc. I could go on, but you get my drift.


I think people generally understand this for the most part. Certainly
anyone who's listend to radio from a car stereo would be aware of it.

In any event if this were truly a huge problem the cariers could easily
handle the issue by being more forward about the quality of their service
and the extent of any problem areas. Unfortunatley you're not going to
see too many cariers going out of their way to do that.

>>
>> Many people hold beleifs about their service with Sprint based on how
>> Sprint advertises itself and the intentionally obfuscatory way in
>> which it words it's descriptions of the specifics of some of the
>> services it provides. That's certainly not the customers fault.
>
> All companies have to do it that way in the primary advertising, to
> catch the user's eye. They go further in depth, with follow up
> explanations, and in the small print.

If by followup explanations and small print you mean those in a radio or
TV ad, a quick audio blurb or ultra fine print held on screen for a few
seconds isn't really proper follow-up. If you're refering to them doing
it on their websites. I suppose one could make the argument that they do
but you would be hardpressed to convince most people that they make it an
easy process to wade through the particulars of most of the plans and
addons and fees and real costs associated.

>> > All of us have had a minor problem now and then, and in
>> > most cases, were able to get the problem fixed, save for getting a
>> > new tower put in down the street ...
>> >
>> > When someone pipes in with a legit complaint here, one of us is
>> > hopefully going to provide some answers and suggestions to correct
>> > the problem.
>>
>> Bob, It's not your place to judge what is and isn't a legit
>> complaint. You're not this newsgroups God.
>
> I never said I was ... Who are you to judge me and place those types
> of tags on yours truly?

I'm the person reading what you have said. Comments like your above
about ligit complaints which of necesity entails it's opposite or
illegitimate complaints.

"Bob Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

>
> "SprintingForService" <[email protected]> wrote in
> message news:6pgJb.42821$a44.17060@okepread04...
>
> <snipped>
>
>> Howdy Cooper;
>>
>> First, I think it was you maybe that made similiar comments to the
>> anti- phil crowd and I agreed with them as I read the debacle. I
>> would like to point out that it doesn't take much time to see the
>> utter futility of the anti-phil crowd. They can't control Phil or
>> what he does but they're constant attempts at it are a major part of
>> this newsgroup which one can make a judgement on almost immediatly.
>> Do I know all of the specifics of the Phil "thing". But I don't need
>> to know it to know that by comparison to the anti-phil crowd he's
>> coming of a saint.
>
> See ... this proves you haven't read many of his posts, or the follow
> ups,

Hello Bob;

It proves no such thing. It indicates that if a response looked like it
was going to be an anti-phil futile attack, which far too many were, I
didn't waste my time with them farther then the length of time it took to
see it for what it was, after reading through too many of them.