Yes, I stalk Rob. I do.

In article <[email protected]>,=20
[email protected] says...
> Again, the evidence speaks for itself.
>=20
> 2 posts before I posted.
>=20

You make my case for me. I was already there. How is that "following"=20
you?

If that doesn't prove it, how many posts was I "supposed" to make?

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

---

› See More: Yes, I stalk Rob. I do.

"O/Siris" <robjvargas@sprîntpcs.com> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> Again, the evidence speaks for itself.
>
> 2 posts before I posted.
>

>You make my case for me. I was already there. How is that "following"
>you?

You weren't actively posting there until I went and posted there. Look,
mental midget, it's obvious to anyone who goes to read there that you
started posting in September there just to argue with me. Before then - 2
posts. Afterwards - at least 11.

>If that doesn't prove it, how many posts was I "supposed" to make?

Again, Rob, you're being assinine now. Enough is enough. You're just
trolling now. And it's been stupid for a long time. Either discuss the
damned topic or shut the hell up. Anyone can go and look and see that it
was YOU who tried to start crap over there.

"Moonraker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Justin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > Anyone can go and look and see that it
> > was YOU who tried to start crap over there.
> >
> Just a wild guess on my part:
>
> "You" two are the only ones who give a **** about it?
>
> I thought so.
>

Apparently you do, you responded. I do think it's relevant to point out
that Rob is full of crap, since he claims to work for Sprint and is giving
out advice based on people believing this.

"Justin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> Anyone can go and look and see that it
> was YOU who tried to start crap over there.
>
Just a wild guess on my part:

"You" two are the only ones who give a **** about it?

I thought so.

"Moonraker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Justin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > "Moonraker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > >
> > > "Justin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > > >
> > > > Anyone can go and look and see that it
> > > > was YOU who tried to start crap over there.
> > > >
> > > Just a wild guess on my part:
> > >
> > > "You" two are the only ones who give a **** about it?
> > >
> > > I thought so.
> > >
> >
> > Apparently you do, you responded.
>
> See, there you go. Making assumptions. I don't care who started what or
> who's pee-pee is bigger. I came around here to learn some stuff about
this
> crappy cell service, not to watch a pair of adolescents in a flame war.

And to think that your post was so much more mature.
I thought so.


> >I do think it's relevant to point out
> > that Rob is full of crap,
>
> And what, if anything, could you point out that would convince me (or
> others) that "you" aren't full of crap, also? What makes your brand of
crap
> better than his?

Go look at the threads for yourself? If you don't care, don't. I could
care less. Several instances where I've joined a discussion to actually
discuss the topic, I'm attacked by the Mental Midget himself, Rob. This is
no less the case in the ATTWS forum.


> since he claims to work for Sprint and is giving
> > out advice based on people believing this.
>
> And you have hard evidence that he works "where", exactly? Not that I
care
> if he has a job, or not.

I have no hard evidence that he has a job. I could care less. It's just
that he posts as a Sprint employee, so people should know not to take
everything he says at face value. Much of it is worth far less.

"Justin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Moonraker" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> > "Justin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > >
> > > Anyone can go and look and see that it
> > > was YOU who tried to start crap over there.
> > >
> > Just a wild guess on my part:
> >
> > "You" two are the only ones who give a **** about it?
> >
> > I thought so.
> >
>
> Apparently you do, you responded.

See, there you go. Making assumptions. I don't care who started what or
who's pee-pee is bigger. I came around here to learn some stuff about this
crappy cell service, not to watch a pair of adolescents in a flame war.

>I do think it's relevant to point out
> that Rob is full of crap,

And what, if anything, could you point out that would convince me (or
others) that "you" aren't full of crap, also? What makes your brand of crap
better than his?

since he claims to work for Sprint and is giving
> out advice based on people believing this.

And you have hard evidence that he works "where", exactly? Not that I care
if he has a job, or not.
>
>

In article <[email protected]>,=20
[email protected] says...
>=20
> "O/Siris" <robjvargas@spr=EEntpcs.com> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> In article <[email protected]>,
> [email protected] says...
> > Again, the evidence speaks for itself.
> >
> > 2 posts before I posted.
> >
>=20
> >You make my case for me. I was already there. How is that "following"
> >you?
>=20
> You weren't actively posting there until I went and posted there. Look,
> mental midget, it's obvious to anyone who goes to read there that you
> started posting in September there just to argue with me. Before then - =
2
> posts. Afterwards - at least 11.
>=20
> >If that doesn't prove it, how many posts was I "supposed" to make?
>=20
> Again, Rob, you're being assinine now. Enough is enough. You're just
> trolling now. And it's been stupid for a long time. Either discuss the
> damned topic or shut the hell up. Anyone can go and look and see that it
> was YOU who tried to start crap over there.

Let's see, you complain about being followed, and then it's assinine to=20
point out the FACT that I was already there?

I hope you're not eating what you're shoveling. It's not good for you.

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

Let's see, you complain about being followed, and then it's assinine to
point out the FACT that I was already there?

I hope you're not eating what you're shoveling. It's not good for you.

--
-+-
RØß
O/Siris
I work for SprintPCS
I *don't* speak for them.

Yes, it is. You came over in September there with the sole intention of
starting a fight. Furthermore, you're a complete idiot who can't
intelligently post about that topic. You didn't even discuss the topic of
the thread, which was the frequency debate. You went off on a tangent,
which you obviously don't know much about.

Did they have physics in your GED classes?

In article <[email protected]>,=20
[email protected] says...
> You came over in September there with the sole intention of
> starting a fight.=20
>=20

Prove it. I agreed with your overall point. That's starting a fight?

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

"O/Siris" <robjvargas@sprîntpcs.côm> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> You came over in September there with the sole intention of
> starting a fight.
>

Prove it. I agreed with your overall point. That's starting a fight?

--
-+-
RØß
O/Siris
I work for SprintPCS
I *don't* speak for them.


No you didn't, liar. Here's the PROOF:

"True on relative penetration. But radio waves affect electrons? Ever
heard of gamma waves? Wave-particle duality? Radio waves travel on
their own.

Radio waves affect electrons only because we set up complex electronics
designed to respond to them. OK, sometimes *not* so complex, either."

You spouted off, obviously NOT knowing what you were talking about. Then
later you kept arguing after I educated you.

In article <[email protected]>,=20
[email protected] says...
> No you didn't, liar. Here's the PROOF:
>=20
> "True on relative penetration.=20
>=20

Interesting. "True" means I didn't.

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

"O/Siris" <robjvargas@sprîntpcs.côm> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> No you didn't, liar. Here's the PROOF:
>
> "True on relative penetration.
>

Interesting. "True" means I didn't.

--
-+-
RØß
O/Siris
I work for SprintPCS
I *don't* speak for them.


Here Rob goes again, picking PIECES of a conversation to twist into what he
wants.