Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 16
  1. #1
    Nebby00007
    Guest
    They may show Santa Barabra, but the maps are still way too small scale and
    brush over **known** deadspots.

    SprintPCS and other carriers still ignore their own indistries "Consumer Code",
    and invite dissatisfied customers by having maps drawn by their marketing
    departments thatomit holes in ocverage.



    See More: web site maps for CA still unacceptable




  2. #2
    O/Siris
    Guest

    Re: web site maps for CA still unacceptable

    In article <[email protected]>, nebby00007
    @aol.com says...
    >=20
    > SprintPCS and other carriers still ignore their own indistries "Consumer =

    Code",
    > and invite dissatisfied customers by having maps drawn by their marketing
    > departments thatomit holes in ocverage.
    >=20
    >=20


    Such a map as you expect is physically impossible, Phill. But you've=20
    been told before, and you simply cease to discuss it.

    --=20
    R=D8=DF
    O/Siris
    I work for Sprint PCS
    I *don't* speak for them



  3. #3
    Nebby00007
    Guest

    Re: web site maps for CA still unacceptable


    > Such a map as you expect is physically impossible,


    Thats new lame excuse.

    The current maps are basicly lies. They are too small a scall to use, and they
    paint over known dead zones. Both of which **ARE** physically possible to
    include on a map.

    But that might be customer friendly.




  4. #4
    O/Siris
    Guest

    Re: web site maps for CA still unacceptable

    In article <[email protected]>, nebby00007
    @aol.com says...
    > The current maps are basicly lies. They are too small a scall to use, and=

    they
    > paint over known dead zones. Both of which **ARE** physically possible to
    > include on a map.
    >=20


    Not at the level you expect, Phill. You expect block-level detail. =20
    And that's not physically possible. Coverage at that small a scale=20
    can change, and pretty radically, within 24 hours. For something=20
    like that, we have to rely on customer reports.

    --=20
    R=D8=DF
    O/Siris
    I work for Sprint PCS
    I *don't* speak for them



  5. #5
    Nebby00007
    Guest

    Re: web site maps for CA still unacceptable

    > You expect block-level detail.

    Thank you for proving yoiu are the LIAr in trying to apologize for Sprint PCS
    and its unacceptable maps.

    You find me a post where I asked for block level detail. And when you can't
    I'll expect an apology, otherwise, I complain to KC.

    All I ask is that known dead zones. Like Little Elm Texas be represented.



  6. #6
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Guest

    Re: web site maps for CA still unacceptable

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    Phillip <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > You find me a post where I asked for block level detail. And when you can't
    > I'll expect an apology, otherwise, I complain to KC.
    >


    Who are YOU to demain an APOLOGY Phillip? You lied about me and
    misquoted a posting where you attributed all the foul language to me and
    not a single word of it was mine ... and you NEVER APOLOGIZED. That
    indeed makes you a hypocrite on a very grand scale indeed!

    - --

    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD)

    iD8DBQFAq7cn1p0e3NXsrtERAuO+AKCq9mhiDveRIZ3Thi99ktDja7TKMgCfUc1Z
    gG90S1T58Zv9F0WXXzNHQiY=
    =OVwj
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



  7. #7
    O/Siris
    Guest

    Re: web site maps for CA still unacceptable

    In article <[email protected]>, nebby00007
    @aol.com says...
    > You find me a post where I asked for block level detail.
    >=20


    Time and again, Phill, you've responded to people with specific=20
    address complaints that the maps are inadequate. What inference=20
    should one draw from that if *not* a demand for block-level detail?

    --=20
    R=D8=DF
    O/Siris
    I work for Sprint PCS
    I *don't* speak for them



  8. #8
    Bob Smith
    Guest

    Re: web site maps for CA still unacceptable


    "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <[email protected]> wrote in message
    news:[email protected]
    > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    > Hash: SHA1
    >
    > Phillip <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >
    > > You find me a post where I asked for block level detail. And when you

    can't
    > > I'll expect an apology, otherwise, I complain to KC.
    > >

    >
    > Who are YOU to demain an APOLOGY Phillip? You lied about me and
    > misquoted a posting where you attributed all the foul language to me and
    > not a single word of it was mine ... and you NEVER APOLOGIZED. That
    > indeed makes you a hypocrite on a very grand scale indeed!


    My sentiments as well ... He's done all that ... and more to yours truly ...

    Bob





  9. #9
    Steven J Sobol
    Guest

    Re: web site maps for CA still unacceptable

    Nebby00007 <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> You expect block-level detail.

    >
    > Thank you for proving yoiu are the LIAr in trying to apologize for Sprint PCS
    > and its unacceptable maps.
    >
    > You find me a post where I asked for block level detail. And when you can't
    > I'll expect an apology, otherwise, I complain to KC.


    Hey Rob, if Phillipe complains you can use me as a reference - I know he's
    full of crap.

    --
    JustThe.net Internet & New Media Services, Apple Valley, CA PGP: 0xE3AE35ED
    Steven J. Sobol, Geek In Charge / 888.480.4NET (4638) / [email protected]
    Domain Names, $9.95/yr, 24x7 service: http://DomainNames.JustThe.net/
    "someone once called me a sofa, but i didn't feel compelled to rush out and buy
    slip covers." -adam brower * Hiroshima '45, Chernobyl '86, Windows 98/2000/2003



  10. #10
    O/Siris
    Guest

    Re: web site maps for CA still unacceptable

    In article <[email protected]>, [email protected]=20
    says...
    > Nebby00007 <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >> You expect block-level detail.

    > >=20
    > > Thank you for proving yoiu are the LIAr in trying to apologize for Spri=

    nt PCS
    > > and its unacceptable maps.
    > >=20
    > > You find me a post where I asked for block level detail. And when you c=

    an't
    > > I'll expect an apology, otherwise, I complain to KC.

    >=20
    > Hey Rob, if Phillipe complains you can use me as a reference - I know he'=

    s
    > full of crap.
    > =20
    >=20


    Thanks, Steve.

    Hey, did you get that TAP number? Looks like someone found a source=20
    for you.

    Just in case: 888-656-1727

    7-E-1, TAP protocol version 1.5 (not to be confused with TAPI).

    I've got some info on our TAP software, too, if you're interested.

    --=20
    R=D8=DF
    O/Siris
    I work for Sprint PCS
    I *don't* speak for them



  11. #11
    Nebby
    Guest

    Re: Web site maps for CA still unacceptable

    > Who are YOU to demain an APOLOGY

    When the apologists continue to spread the lie that SprintPCS coverage maps are
    acceptable.

    They are too small scale (i.e. 1" = 50 miles) and
    paint over known dead zones.



  12. #12
    Nebby
    Guest

    Re: web site maps for CA still unacceptable

    > Time and again, you've responded to people with
    > specific address complaints that the maps are
    > inadequate. What inference should one draw from > that if *not* a demand for

    block-level detail?

    Someone asking for known deadzones in Houston or
    New York City is a little different some saying maps paint over known deadzones
    and are inadequate.
    AGAIN you find a post where I said maps should be at block level detail...
    You can't...
    So you invent a phoney conclusion.

    Rob J vargas. The disgrace of SPrint PCS



    I have some extra email to write today.



  13. #13
    Nebby
    Guest

    Re: web site maps for CA still unacceptable

    Dont you love apologists congratulating each other for using bad langiuage in
    their lame attempts to excuse the unaccepotable maps of Sprint PCS??

    Rob J vargas - disgrace of Sprint PCS



  14. #14
    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Guest

    Re: Web site maps for CA still unacceptable

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
    Hash: SHA1

    Phillip <[email protected]> wrote:
    >> Who are YOU to demain an APOLOGY

    >
    > When the apologists continue to spread the lie that SprintPCS coverage maps are
    > acceptable.
    >
    > They are too small scale (i.e. 1" = 50 miles) and
    > paint over known dead zones.


    So, you can't apologize for something you did and you expect somebody
    else to apologize for something that they didn't do? Good one pea
    brain.

    - --

    Thomas T. Veldhouse
    Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1

    -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
    Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (FreeBSD)

    iD8DBQFArMEZ1p0e3NXsrtERAh6KAKClUM5O/ndP+uIG6XceLsMG9HwWYwCeNk64
    siPj3W6Ia/Tmo1zT7kdx2VI=
    =GVpv
    -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----



  15. #15
    O/Siris
    Guest

    Re: web site maps for CA still unacceptable

    In article <[email protected]l.com>, nebby00007
    @aol.compants says...
    > Dont you love apologists congratulating each other for using bad langiuag=

    e in
    > their lame attempts to excuse the unaccepotable maps of Sprint PCS??
    >=20
    > Rob J vargas - disgrace of Sprint PCS
    >=20


    You didn't answer my question, Phill. What other inference is there=20
    to draw when people complain of address-specific problems and you=20
    claim that illustrates how inadequate the coverage maps are?

    --=20
    R=D8=DF
    O/Siris
    I work for Sprint PCS
    I *don't* speak for them



  • Similar Threads




  • Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast