Today is not a Holiday

Thomas T. Veldhouse <

>
> 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.

Hello Thomas,

No related agenda to whom? Phil? Does this indicate that you go on the attack of
people you percieve to have a similiar agenda to Phil's (whatever you may perceive
that to be)?

As for just showing up and starting to post that's how most people start posting on
usenet so I dont' see how that has any relavance.

---

› See More: Today is not a Holiday

"SprintingForService" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:dghJb.48546$PK3.36871@okepread01...
> "Bob Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in
<snipped>
> 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.
>
Oh, so it's the carrier's fault not putting in a tower where the population
can't support the expense of the lease, the cost for zoning, and the tower
via plan subscriptions? This is a business, first and foremost ... which has
to get the bang for the buck and for the shareholders of the company. It's
not a collective ...

As for the NIMBYs, guess again. There are places where they just don't want
the tower, even it's hidden in a church tower ... And then there are the
public ordinances that prohibit it as you mentioned.
>
> > 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.

Take another look at the Frat & Sorority commercials from SPCS's web site -
bottom of the page. In those commercials, SPCS says that they offer N & W at
7:00PM. There is no mention on the cost or the cost of the plans themselves.
All they've done is say ... "Hey, we offer N & W @ 7:00 PM" to interest the
public. Then, when one goes through the 7:00 PM promo on the web site, and
the plans, it shows there is an additional $5 expense to get your N & W @
7:00.

I haven't seen any brochures on this particular option, but I'm guessing
it's fully outlined in those as well.
>
> >> > 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.

You are the person who is judging everyone here based on a minimal time
here, and you are feeling sorry for poor old Phillipe, because everyone, I
mean everyone here, is tired of his crap. If you had been on this board
since July or August when he first showed up, you would have the same
opinion ...

Bob

Bob

"SprintingForService" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:YjhJb.48547$PK3.7082@okepread01...
> "Bob Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
> >
> > "SprintingForService" <[email protected]> wrote in
> > message news:6pgJb.42821$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.

Then don't blame us for the way we feel, if you are too damned lazy to read
all those prior posts to find out why we react as we do. BTW, I'm tired of
replying to your diatribe, as it's a huge waste of my time. You are going
into my filters now ...

Bob

You would do very well by going to this link on Phillipe on GOOGLE and
reading about this bufoon.

http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...ular.sprintpcs

There are 2750 posts that will give you some idea what he is about.

Chris
Please respond in the newsgroup


"SprintingForService" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:gmhJb.48548$PK3.24322@okepread01...
> Thomas T. Veldhouse <
>
> >
> > 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.
>
> Hello Thomas,
>
> No related agenda to whom? Phil? Does this indicate that you go on the
attack of
> people you percieve to have a similiar agenda to Phil's (whatever you may
perceive
> that to be)?
>
> As for just showing up and starting to post that's how most people start
posting on
> usenet so I dont' see how that has any relavance.

Chris Russell wrote:
>
> You would do very well by going to this link on Phillipe on GOOGLE and
> reading about this bufoon.
>
> http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...ular.sprintpcs
>
> There are 2750 posts that will give you some idea what he is about.

How 'bout a Phillipe FAQs?

Larry

On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 16:53:32 GMT, SprintingForService
<[email protected]> wrote:

>Thomas T. Veldhouse <
>
>>
>> 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.
>
>Hello Thomas,
>
>No related agenda to whom? Phil? Does this indicate that you go on the attack of
>people you percieve to have a similiar agenda to Phil's (whatever you may perceive
>that to be)?
>
>As for just showing up and starting to post that's how most people start posting on
>usenet so I dont' see how that has any relavance.


Fortunately, my killfile doesn't delete your posts, but simply marks
them as read. Others didn't answer your question.

You have no agenda as it pertains to Sprint PCS ... I do not know why
you came to this group. You have no questions and you have pretty
much offered up nothing. You actually have not done anything at all
but respond to others posts, nothing new of your own. Almost as if
you had been here for some time. Most people don't show up and
initially only respond to others posts, especially with a
condescending omniscient attitude ... as if you had been here awhile
and can pass judgement on what almost all others feel about this guy
Phillip. You quickly got on the wrong side of the fence with that.

Lawrence Glasser <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> Chris Russell wrote:
>>
>> You would do very well by going to this link on Phillipe on GOOGLE
>> and reading about this bufoon.
>>
>> http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=e...q=phillipe&btn
>> G=Google+Search&meta=group%3Dalt.cellular.sprintpcs
>>
>> There are 2750 posts that will give you some idea what he is about.
>
> How 'bout a Phillipe FAQs?
>
> Larry


Excellent idea Larry. We can have someone repost the FAQ everytime someone
feels threatened by something they think Phil is posting. Hey if they use
the same subject line I could even filter that out to save some bandwidth
on my end.

"Bob Smith" <

> Oh, so it's the carrier's fault not putting in a tower where the
> population can't support the expense of the lease, the cost for
> zoning, and the tower via plan subscriptions? This is a business,
> first and foremost ...


Well Yeah Bob it is. They've made the decision not to. It's certainly
not a decision made by the customer who wants service in that area. This
seems a rather disengenous argument on your part Bob.

> which has to get the bang for the buck and for
> the shareholders of the company. It's not a collective ...

Whatever it's rationale the point is it is their fault because they've
made a concious decision not provide service there.



>
> As for the NIMBYs, guess again. There are places where they just don't
> want the tower, even it's hidden in a church tower ...

Why should this necessitate guessing on my part at all. This is fairly
common knowledge and I dont' recall ever stating anything to the
contrary.


> And then there
> are the public ordinances that prohibit it as you mentioned.

As I have already mentioned.

>>
>> 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.
>
> Take another look at the Frat & Sorority commercials from SPCS's web
> site - bottom of the page. In those commercials, SPCS says that they
> offer N & W at 7:00PM. There is no mention on the cost or the cost of
> the plans themselves. All they've done is say ... "Hey, we offer N & W
> @ 7:00 PM" to interest the public.


lol Please! They do what many businesses do they pique interest in the
service by intentionally not being specific about the additional charges
involved. The fact that they don't mention the added charge supports the
proposition that they were being misleading not that they were being
upfront about the details of the service.


> Then, when one goes through the
> 7:00 PM promo on the web site, and the plans, it shows there is an
> additional $5 expense to get your N & W @ 7:00.

I'll agree that hidden on it's web pages far more difficult to find than
it has to be or should be you can find the cost of the service. You're
arguing disengenuously again Bob.

from sprints front page.


http://www.sprintpcs.com/

Introducing unlimited night minutes starting at 7

Link to details

http://www1.sprintpcs.com/explore/Pa...der_id=1499753
&CURRENT_USER%3C%3EATR_SCID=ECOMM&CURRENT_USER%3C%
3EATR_PCode=None&CURRENT_USER%3C%3EATR_cartState=group&bmUID=
1073581591164

http://tinylink.com/?5uaxJS1S6P

Existing Customers
Existing PCS Customers can add 7pm start times for their Night Minutes
for an additional monthly charge - the same charge that new customers
will pay for this option. This offer is available with:

It's plain and simply misleading to new customers because it doesn't
mention the cost to new customers until the The Existing Customers
paragraph which almost no new customers would read since they're not
existing customers.


> I haven't seen any brochures on this particular option, but I'm
> guessing it's fully outlined in those as well.

the commericals aren't clear so why should we assume the brochures are
any clearer?


>>
>> >> > 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.
>
> You are the person who is judging everyone here based on a minimal
> time here, and you are feeling sorry for poor old Phillipe,

And with that you judge. Please try and stay away from indicting people
from engaging in a practice you yourself have engaged in. I never
claimed to feel sorry for Phil. In fact it's the people he helps make
look silly that I feel sorry for because they have brains enough to know
that's what he's helping them do to themselves but they're allowing
themselves to do it to themselves anyway.


> because
> everyone, I mean everyone here, is tired of his crap. If you had been
> on this board since July or August when he first showed up, you would
> have the same opinion ...

Well Bob, first off I don't much care what others opinions are before I
make up my own and I seriously doubt that mine would be any different had
I been around from the beginning.

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

>
> "SprintingForService" <[email protected]> wrote in
> message news:YjhJb.48547$PK3.7082@okepread01...
>> "Bob Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in
>> news:[email protected]:
>>
>> >
>> > "SprintingForService" <[email protected]> wrote in
>> > message news:6pgJb.42821$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.
>
> Then don't blame us for the way we feel,

I dont' blame you for the way you feel Bob. Don't know whatever gave you
that idea. You're entittled to feel anyway you like.

> if you are too damned lazy to
> read all those prior posts to find out why we react as we do.


This is what I blame you for Bob. While you can feel any way you like
you're not entittled to take your feelings out on anyone you happen to
disagree with.

Do you understand the difference now Bob. It's your actions not your
feelings that indict you Bob.

|BTW, I'm
> tired of replying to your diatribe, as it's a huge waste of my time.
> You are going into my filters now ...


Good bye Bob and I hope you get your act together enough to stop treating
people as though you owned them and are entitltled to treat them in any
manner you see fit.

"Chris Russell" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:8DlJb.20255$P%[email protected]:

> You would do very well by going to this link on Phillipe on GOOGLE and
> reading about this bufoon.

Thanks Chris but I'm not really interested. I'm far more interested in the
intent of this newsgroup not what people allow to sidetrack it.

Thomas T. Veldhouse <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 16:53:32 GMT, SprintingForService
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>Thomas T. Veldhouse <
>>
>>>
>>> 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.
>>
>>Hello Thomas,
>>
>>No related agenda to whom? Phil? Does this indicate that you go on
>>the attack of people you percieve to have a similiar agenda to Phil's
>>(whatever you may perceive that to be)?
>>
>>As for just showing up and starting to post that's how most people
>>start posting on usenet so I dont' see how that has any relavance.
>
>
> Fortunately, my killfile doesn't delete your posts, but simply marks
> them as read. Others didn't answer your question.

And yet below you assert that i've asked now questions.

> You have no agenda as it pertains to Sprint PCS ... I do not know why
> you came to this group.

In the absence of that would it not be the most prudent thing to assume
that it's the same reason everyone else would seek out and post here?
Namely to read about and post about sprintpcs service?

> You have no questions and you have pretty
> much offered up nothing.

I certainly have had questions and I certainly have offered my opinion on
both some of the more objectionable posters here and on services provided
by both sprint and other service providers. You have not been paying
attention.

>You actually have not done anything at all
> but respond to others posts, nothing new of your own.

False.

> Almost as if
> you had been here for some time.

I lurked for a while I've already made that clear.

> Most people don't show up and
> initially only respond to others posts, especially with a
> condescending omniscient attitude ...

I wouldn't say that I'm condescending at all. In fact I was downright
friendly until the condescending attitutdes and rediculous accusations
came my way. For example Thomas your responses including this one.

> as if you had been here awhile
> and can pass judgement on what almost all others feel about this guy
> Phillip.

You're not getting it Thomas. Just because you feel a certain way about
Phil doesn't obligate anyone else to feel the same way. And If I should
feel in any way differently about this subject it shouldn't, but has,
subjected me to some pretty outrageous posts by a few of you from the
anti-phil crowd.


>You quickly got on the wrong side of the fence with that.

Not really Thomas. You and several others quickly placed me there and
responded accordingly. That indicts you not me.

"SprintingForService" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:i1kLb.44122$a44.16566@okepread04...

Yo, Einstein- if you are going to respond to Bob, attach your message to
Bob's post.

"Scott Stephenson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "SprintingForService" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:i1kLb.44122$a44.16566@okepread04...
>
> Yo, Einstein- if you are going to respond to Bob, attach your message to
> Bob's post.
>

I'd have a hard time seeing it Scott. I filtered him a week ago, as I was
tired of wasting my time on his posts ...

Bob