Results 1 to 15 of 22
- 04-19-2006, 10:41 PM #1Phil SchumanGuest
it's now being carried by the SBC news servers
"Sven Golly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Ben Skversky" <[email protected]> wrote in news:2hC0g.2371$e55.2043
> @trnddc02:
>
> > So when are all of the TMO people coming over to the new newsgroup?
>
> Give it a few months. And x-post to both.
>
> --
› See More: alt.cellular.t-mobile - now available
- 04-19-2006, 11:27 PM #2SMSGuest
Re: alt.cellular.t-mobile - now available
Phil Schuman wrote:
> it's now being carried by the SBC news servers
I've requested it on sonic.net. It's incredible that it took so long for
this group to be created.
- 04-20-2006, 09:36 AM #3John NavasGuest
Re: alt.cellular.t-mobile - now available
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
In <[email protected]> on Wed, 19 Apr 2006 22:27:56
-0700, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
>Phil Schuman wrote:
>> it's now being carried by the SBC news servers
>
>I've requested it on sonic.net. It's incredible that it took so long for
>this group to be created.
Still a long way from making it, as it's not carried by the Worldnet part of
SBC, Google, and other big news providers I've checked.
--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
- 04-20-2006, 09:51 AM #4Thomas T. VeldhouseGuest
Re: alt.cellular.t-mobile - now available
In alt.cellular.sprintpcs John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <[email protected]> on Wed, 19 Apr 2006 22:27:56
> -0700, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Phil Schuman wrote:
>>> it's now being carried by the SBC news servers
>>
>>I've requested it on sonic.net. It's incredible that it took so long for
>>this group to be created.
>
> Still a long way from making it, as it's not carried by the Worldnet part of
> SBC, Google, and other big news providers I've checked.
>
It's carried by Supernews and Easynews. You don't consider them big?
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
- 04-20-2006, 10:24 AM #5John NavasGuest
Re: alt.cellular.t-mobile - now available
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
In <[email protected]> on 20 Apr 2006 15:51:05
GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <[email protected]> wrote:
>In alt.cellular.sprintpcs John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>>
>> In <[email protected]> on Wed, 19 Apr 2006 22:27:56
>> -0700, SMS <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>>Phil Schuman wrote:
>>>> it's now being carried by the SBC news servers
>>>
>>>I've requested it on sonic.net. It's incredible that it took so long for
>>>this group to be created.
>>
>> Still a long way from making it, as it's not carried by the Worldnet part of
>> SBC, Google, and other big news providers I've checked.
>
>It's carried by Supernews and Easynews. You don't consider them big?
Is that what I said? No.
--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
- 04-20-2006, 12:20 PM #6Thomas T. VeldhouseGuest
Re: alt.cellular.t-mobile - now available
John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>It's carried by Supernews and Easynews. You don't consider them big?
>
> Is that what I said? No.
>
No, you left it as an implication. I don't suppose you bothered to "check"
those large carriers.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
- 04-20-2006, 12:25 PM #7Thomas T. VeldhouseGuest
Re: alt.cellular.t-mobile - now available
In alt.cellular.gsm.carriers.voicestream John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>I've requested it on sonic.net. It's incredible that it took so long for
>>this group to be created.
>
> Still a long way from making it, as it's not carried by the Worldnet part of
> SBC, Google, and other big news providers I've checked.
>
OK ... I didn't post my response here that I did in alt.cellular.cingular.
So, I will rephrase it differently here. You didn't bother to check some of
the biggest carriers then like Easynews and Supernews. We know full well
Giganews will take it up soon.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
- 04-20-2006, 12:35 PM #8John NavasGuest
Re: alt.cellular.t-mobile - now available
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
In <[email protected]> on 20 Apr 2006 18:20:30
GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <[email protected]> wrote:
>John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>It's carried by Supernews and Easynews. You don't consider them big?
>>
>> Is that what I said? No.
>
>No, you left it as an implication.
Hardly.
>I don't suppose you bothered to "check"
>those large carriers.
I "bothered" to check some other large carriers, two of which I identified by
name. My apologies for not checking the ones you happened to think of.
Are you always so touchy?
Have a nice day.
--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
- 04-20-2006, 01:01 PM #9Thomas T. VeldhouseGuest
Re: alt.cellular.t-mobile - now available
John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>>I don't suppose you bothered to "check"
>>those large carriers.
>
> I "bothered" to check some other large carriers, two of which I identified by
> name. My apologies for not checking the ones you happened to think of.
>
> Are you always so touchy?
>
No. But you were greatly resistive to the idea of alt.cellular.t-mobile from
the get go and in fact, seem to nay say just about every attempt to justify it
.... and you seemed to do so based upon some alterior purpose (ok, that is my
read on it).
Let me ask you this? Did you send a message to AT&T requesting the group be
added?
> Have a nice day.
>
Same to you.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
- 04-20-2006, 01:20 PM #10John NavasGuest
Re: alt.cellular.t-mobile - now available
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
In <[email protected]> on 20 Apr 2006 19:01:28
GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <[email protected]> wrote:
>John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>I don't suppose you bothered to "check"
>>>those large carriers.
>>
>> I "bothered" to check some other large carriers, two of which I identified by
>> name. My apologies for not checking the ones you happened to think of.
>>
>> Are you always so touchy?
>
>No. But you were greatly resistive to the idea of alt.cellular.t-mobile from
>the get go and in fact, seem to nay say just about every attempt to justify it
>... and you seemed to do so based upon some alterior purpose (ok, that is my
>read on it).
On the contrary. I've just pointed out the arguments against it, the
alternatives to it, and the practical difficulties of promulgating it. What I
actually said, way back in the beginning, was:
3. Why not just keep trying to get it started yourself? The best way to
do that is to get one or more major news carriers on your side.
>Let me ask you this? Did you send a message to AT&T requesting the group be
>added?
No. I have no interest in the group, so why should I? Have you done that?
--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
- 04-21-2006, 06:38 AM #11Thomas T. VeldhouseGuest
Re: alt.cellular.t-mobile - now available
John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> 3. Why not just keep trying to get it started yourself? The best way to
> do that is to get one or more major news carriers on your side.
>
Actually, you specifically indicated that there was a lack of need and several
people took exception to it.
>>Let me ask you this? Did you send a message to AT&T requesting the group be
>>added?
>
> No. I have no interest in the group, so why should I? Have you done that?
>
I sent the control message and had the group added locally. Easynews picked
it up from its peer shortly after. Supernews as well. Why would I ask AT&T
to pick it up ... I am not their customer.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
- 04-21-2006, 08:07 AM #12John NavasGuest
Re: alt.cellular.t-mobile - now available
[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
In <[email protected]> on 21 Apr 2006 12:38:27
GMT, "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <[email protected]> wrote:
>John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> 3. Why not just keep trying to get it started yourself? The best way to
>> do that is to get one or more major news carriers on your side.
>
>Actually, you specifically indicated that there was a lack of need
True, but that's not what you claimed.
>and several
>people took exception to it.
Actually a very few.
So why are you so annoyed at me? Do you get pissed off at everyone that
doesn't agree with you.
>>>Let me ask you this? Did you send a message to AT&T requesting the group be
>>>added?
>>
>> No. I have no interest in the group, so why should I? Have you done that?
>
>I sent the control message and had the group added locally. Easynews picked
>it up from its peer shortly after. Supernews as well.
Some do that; some don't.
>Why would I ask AT&T
>to pick it up ... I am not their customer.
Because you're trying to promulgate it. If you don't get a critical mass of
news providers, then it may not take off. [shrug] Up to you.
--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
- 04-21-2006, 10:01 AM #13Thomas T. VeldhouseGuest
Re: alt.cellular.t-mobile - now available
John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>>Actually, you specifically indicated that there was a lack of need
>
> True, but that's not what you claimed.
>
What I claimed was " But you were greatly resistive to the idea of
alt.cellular.t-mobile from the get go". Your resistance came in the form a
brain storming arguments against the formation of alt.cellular.t-mobile, not
excluding what I just mentioned.
>>and several
>>people took exception to it.
>
> Actually a very few.
Semantics. If you must argue ... we can define sex as not being oral while we
are at it.
>
> So why are you so annoyed at me? Do you get pissed off at everyone that
> doesn't agree with you.
>
No. In fact, I rarely have had issue with your (in fact never until now). My
only annoyance with you is as mentioned, your resistance to
alt.cellular.t-mobile. If I thought you had given valid reasons, or straight
opinion, I would not care, but it seems to me that your "reasons" are
generated from an emotional response. The "confusion" you cited that would be
caused by creating the group as opposed to continuing to use the voicestream
group seems about ludicrous to me. I think "several" other people agree.
>>>>Let me ask you this? Did you send a message to AT&T requesting the group be
>>>>added?
>>>
>>> No. I have no interest in the group, so why should I? Have you done that?
>>
>>I sent the control message and had the group added locally. Easynews picked
>>it up from its peer shortly after. Supernews as well.
>
> Some do that; some don't.
>
Some do what?
>>Why would I ask AT&T
>>to pick it up ... I am not their customer.
>
> Because you're trying to promulgate it. If you don't get a critical mass of
> news providers, then it may not take off. [shrug] Up to you.
>
As a non-customer, I can not ask a provider to carry a group ... correction,
most providers will ignore requests from non-customers.
BTW ... I don't like to nit-pick *****ing, grammar or word choice, but I am
curious about your choice of promulgate; you have used it twice now. Making
the group known is an announcement. I think propagate is a much better choice
here. I am just curious as to the reason you chose that word.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
- 04-21-2006, 02:35 PM #14SMSGuest
Re: alt.cellular.t-mobile - now available
Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
> John Navas <[email protected]> wrote:
>>> Actually, you specifically indicated that there was a lack of need
>> True, but that's not what you claimed.
>>
>
> What I claimed was " But you were greatly resistive to the idea of
> alt.cellular.t-mobile from the get go". Your resistance came in the form a
> brain storming arguments against the formation of alt.cellular.t-mobile, not
> excluding what I just mentioned.
<snip>
It's up on sonic.net.
Can anyone figure out why Navas went so non-linear over
alt.cellular.t-mobile?
It's pretty clear why he lies so much about Cingular, but why was he so
adamantly against alt.cellular.t-mobile?
The only plausible reason that I could come up with, is that he doesn't
want new newsgroups when a carrier changes names because if the AT&T
acquisition of BellSouth goes through, then Cingular will become AT&T
Wireless, and alt.cellular.attws, which has become pretty dormant since
Cingular acquired AT&T Wireless, might take the place of
alt.cellular.cingular (which is a group that Navas originally proposed).
- 04-21-2006, 07:11 PM #15ScottGuest
Re: alt.cellular.t-mobile - now available
"John Navas" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> So why are you so annoyed at me? Do you get pissed off at everyone that
> doesn't agree with you.
If it were true, it would be a step higher than you. You simply avoid those
who don't agree with you- generally because they are much better informed
than you.
Similar Threads
- alt.cellular.verizon
- alt.cellular
- alt.cellular.cingular
- alt.cellular.nextel
Desnudar fotos
in General Cell Phone Forum