G9 Proposal - why it is outrageous

"thegoons" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "Rod Speed" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> And Telecom/Telstra never ever offered anything that did
>> 75bpm so they cant have ever made that claim anyway.
>>
>
> Pity about VIATEL / Discovery.

That was 1200/75 UP, you dick
>
>
>
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
>

---

› See More: G9 Proposal - why it is outrageous

>> So, you are now saying that Rod Speed isn't your true name?
>
> Nope.
>
>>> And Telecom/Telstra never ever offered anything that did
>>> 75bpm so they cant have ever made that claim anyway.
>
>> False!
>
> Name the product. You cant, no such animal.

Name the brand and model number of the TV you had 30 odd years ago.


>>> It was always just another of your pathetic little drug crazed
>>> hallucinations.
>
>> As always, you have that knack of personally endearing yourself to
>> everyone you come into contact with.
>
> Never ever could bull**** and lie its way out of a wet paper bag.
>
>

>>>> Telstra/Telecom has always been the bottleneck as far as speed goes. I
>>>> remember when they said that 75bpm was quite sufficient, and they
>>>> wouldnt budge from that high speed even though everyone was screaming
>>>> for better speeds.
>
>>> And Telecom/Telstra never ever offered anything that did
>>> 75bpm so they cant have ever made that claim anyway.
>
>> Pity about VIATEL / Discovery.

Actually that was 1200/75

> That was nothing like the maximum rate it could do.
Yes with a faster modem it could go a heap faster, but telecom didnt have
the foresight to support the higher speeds.
>
> And that wasnt even the upstream speed of that anyway.
>
> That silly old fart has never ever had a ****ing clue, and thats obviously
> why even telecom gave it the bums rush, right out the door.

Other way around, I couldnt get out of there quick enough. I was dying of
bordom and lack of a decent wage. I went to a company who paid 3 times as
much and give you something to do when a contract was filled. In telecom if
we had a 4 month contract and we filled it in 4 weeks we had to sit on our
arse until the 4 months were over.

Two Bob <[email protected]> wrote:

>>> So, you are now saying that Rod Speed isn't your true name?

>> Nope.

>>>> And Telecom/Telstra never ever offered anything that did
>>>> 75bpm so they cant have ever made that claim anyway.

>>> False!

>> Name the product. You cant, no such animal.

> Name the brand and model number of the TV you had 30 odd years ago.

Trivial to name the PRODUCT, you pathetic excuse for a bull**** artist.

Black and White Pal TV.

>>>> It was always just another of your pathetic little drug crazed hallucinations.

>>> As always, you have that knack of personally endearing yourself to everyone you come into
>>> contact with.

>> Never ever could bull**** and lie its way out of a wet paper bag.

Two Bob <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>>> Telstra/Telecom has always been the bottleneck as far as speed
>>>>> goes. I remember when they said that 75bpm was quite sufficient,
>>>>> and they wouldnt budge from that high speed even though everyone
>>>>> was screaming for better speeds.

>>>> And Telecom/Telstra never ever offered anything that did
>>>> 75bpm so they cant have ever made that claim anyway.

>>> Pity about VIATEL / Discovery.

> Actually that was 1200/75

Nothing like your original pathetic excuse for bull**** and at that time they also
offered faster than that, for a higher prices, you pathetic excuse for a bull**** artist.

>> That was nothing like the maximum rate it could do.

> Yes with a faster modem it could go a heap faster, but telecom didnt have the foresight to support
> the higher speeds.

Pig ignorant lie. You were welcome to pay for
a faster service if you wanted one, and we did.

>> And that wasnt even the upstream speed of that anyway.

>> That silly old fart has never ever had a ****ing clue, and thats
>> obviously why even telecom gave it the bums rush, right out the door.

> Other way around, I couldnt get out of there quick enough. I was
> dying of bordom and lack of a decent wage. I went to a company who
> paid 3 times as much and give you something to do when a contract was filled. In telecom if we had
> a 4 month contract and we filled it in 4 weeks we had to sit on our arse until the 4 months were
> over.

You were clearly so stupid that you didnt even notice that you could
have faster than 1200/75 if you wanted it, and that that aint 75bpm anyway.

Michael J <[email protected]> wrote:
> "thegoons" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>>
>> "Rod Speed" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>> And Telecom/Telstra never ever offered anything that did
>>> 75bpm so they cant have ever made that claim anyway.
>>>
>>
>> Pity about VIATEL / Discovery.
>
> That was 1200/75 UP, you dick

And aint 75bpm either.

"Two Bob" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>>> So, you are now saying that Rod Speed isn't your true name?
>>
>> Nope.
>>
>>>> And Telecom/Telstra never ever offered anything that did
>>>> 75bpm so they cant have ever made that claim anyway.
>>
>>> False!
>>
>> Name the product. You cant, no such animal.
>
> Name the brand and model number of the TV you had 30 odd years ago.

YOU are making the claim, YOU get to prove it. THATS how it works.

>>>> So, you are now saying that Rod Speed isn't your true name?
>>>
>>> Nope.
>>>
>>>>> And Telecom/Telstra never ever offered anything that did
>>>>> 75bpm so they cant have ever made that claim anyway.
>>>
>>>> False!
>>>
>>> Name the product. You cant, no such animal.
>>
>> Name the brand and model number of the TV you had 30 odd years ago.
>
> YOU are making the claim, YOU get to prove it. THATS how it works.

If you used to work where a few ppl say, you will be able to back me up,
instead of critisising. Unlike our mate Rod, I havent worked in every single
field of telecommunications, but this is one I HAVE worked in.

>
>>>>> And Telecom/Telstra never ever offered anything that did
>>>>> 75bpm so they cant have ever made that claim anyway.
>
>>>> Pity about VIATEL / Discovery.
>
>> Actually that was 1200/75
>
> Nothing like your original pathetic excuse for bull**** and at that time
> they also
> offered faster than that, for a higher prices, you pathetic excuse for a
> bull**** artist.

As I have said in the past, comprehension is lacking with a few ppl around
here. My above speed comment (1200/75) was in relation to Viatel. My
original claim was nearly 20 years before that, when modems were the size of
suitcases and had half a dozen cards in them. Do you remember those days?? I
do, cause I attended one of the first schools in modems. Oh, thats right,
you were sitting at the back of the class using a false name. After all,
someone said you were with the PMG for 40 years )

>>> That was nothing like the maximum rate it could do.
>
>> Yes with a faster modem it could go a heap faster, but telecom didnt have
>> the foresight to support the higher speeds.
>
> Pig ignorant lie. You were welcome to pay for
> a faster service if you wanted one, and we did.
>
>>> And that wasnt even the upstream speed of that anyway.
>
>>> That silly old fart has never ever had a ****ing clue, and thats
>>> obviously why even telecom gave it the bums rush, right out the door.
>
>> Other way around, I couldnt get out of there quick enough. I was
>> dying of bordom and lack of a decent wage. I went to a company who
>> paid 3 times as much and give you something to do when a contract was
>> filled. In telecom if we had a 4 month contract and we filled it in 4
>> weeks we had to sit on our arse until the 4 months were over.
>
> You were clearly so stupid that you didnt even notice that you could
> have faster than 1200/75 if you wanted it, and that that aint 75bpm
> anyway.
>

Two Bob <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>> So, you are now saying that Rod Speed isn't your true name?
>>>>
>>>> Nope.
>>>>
>>>>>> And Telecom/Telstra never ever offered anything that did
>>>>>> 75bpm so they cant have ever made that claim anyway.
>>>>
>>>>> False!
>>>>
>>>> Name the product. You cant, no such animal.
>>>
>>> Name the brand and model number of the TV you had 30 odd years ago.
>>
>> YOU are making the claim, YOU get to prove it. THATS how it works.

> If you used to work where a few ppl say, you will be able to back me up, instead of critisising.
> Unlike our mate Rod, I havent worked in every single field of telecommunications, but this is one
> I HAVE worked in.

Didnt help you to grasp that it wasnt at 75bpm. Just another pig ignorant
clown that never did manage to get even the most basic stuff right.

I had one of you clowns show up to replace a modem leased from Telecom
who proclaimed that the replacement wasnt compatible when he held the
RS232 connector upside down and couldnt plug it into the modem.

Two Bob <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>>>>> Telstra/Telecom has always been the bottleneck as far as speed goes. I remember when they
>>>>>>> said that 75bpm was quite sufficient, and they wouldnt budge from that high speed even
>>>>>>> though everyone was screaming for better speeds.

>>>>>> And Telecom/Telstra never ever offered anything that did
>>>>>> 75bpm so they cant have ever made that claim anyway.

>>>>> Pity about VIATEL / Discovery.

>>> Actually that was 1200/75

>> Nothing like your original pathetic excuse for bull**** and at that time they also
>> offered faster than that, for a higher prices, you pathetic excuse for a bull**** artist.

> As I have said in the past, comprehension is lacking with a few ppl around here.

You in spades.

> My above speed comment (1200/75) was in relation to Viatel.

Pity that your original stupid claim is just plain wrong with 1200/75
which was ALREADY faster than 75bpm even on the uplink.

AND if you wanted faster than 1200/75 it was available
to anyone prepared to pay for that anyway.

> My original claim was nearly 20 years before that, when modems were the size of suitcases and had
> half a dozen cards in them. Do you remember those days??

Yep, and they were ALREADY faster than 75bpm,
you pathetic excuse for a bull**** artist.

> I do, cause I attended one of the first schools in modems.

Pity you couldnt even manage to work out what speed
they were running at, or anything else at all, either.

> Oh, thats right, you were sitting at the back of the class using a false name. After all, someone
> said you were with the PMG for 40 years )

Only a fool like you buys the bull**** the stupid kids in here spew.

>>>> That was nothing like the maximum rate it could do.

>>> Yes with a faster modem it could go a heap faster, but telecom
>>> didnt have the foresight to support the higher speeds.

>> Pig ignorant lie. You were welcome to pay for
>> a faster service if you wanted one, and we did.

>>>> And that wasnt even the upstream speed of that anyway.

>>>> That silly old fart has never ever had a ****ing clue, and thats
>>>> obviously why even telecom gave it the bums rush, right out the door.

>>> Other way around, I couldnt get out of there quick enough. I was
>>> dying of bordom and lack of a decent wage. I went to a company who
>>> paid 3 times as much and give you something to do when a contract
>>> was filled. In telecom if we had a 4 month contract and we filled
>>> it in 4 weeks we had to sit on our arse until the 4 months were over.

>> You were clearly so stupid that you didnt even notice that you could
>> have faster than 1200/75 if you wanted it, and that that aint 75bpm
>> anyway.

> Didnt help you to grasp that it wasnt at 75bpm. Just another pig ignorant
> clown that never did manage to get even the most basic stuff right.

Actually, the one I'm thinking of was 50, but they had a 75 for companies
who were willing to part with the big bucks.

> I had one of you clowns show up to replace a modem leased from Telecom
> who proclaimed that the replacement wasnt compatible when he held the
> RS232 connector upside down and couldnt plug it into the modem.

At the time, there was no such thing as an RS232, so it couldnt possibly be
one of our clowns. But you were there with ALL the know how why did you have
to get anyones clown to do the work. Oh, I know, you didnt want the clowns
to know that you are not really Rod Speed.

Rod, why dont you tell us which tech you went to so we can all attend. Maybe
we will all have the knowledge about everything technical and all be as
smart as you.

>>>>>>>> Telstra/Telecom has always been the bottleneck as far as speed
>>>>>>>> goes. I remember when they said that 75bpm was quite sufficient,
>>>>>>>> and they wouldnt budge from that high speed even though everyone
>>>>>>>> was screaming for better speeds.
>
>>>>>>> And Telecom/Telstra never ever offered anything that did
>>>>>>> 75bpm so they cant have ever made that claim anyway.
>
>>>>>> Pity about VIATEL / Discovery.
>
>>>> Actually that was 1200/75
>
>>> Nothing like your original pathetic excuse for bull**** and at that time
>>> they also
>>> offered faster than that, for a higher prices, you pathetic excuse for a
>>> bull**** artist.
>
>> As I have said in the past, comprehension is lacking with a few ppl
>> around here.
>
> You in spades.
>
>> My above speed comment (1200/75) was in relation to Viatel.
>
> Pity that your original stupid claim is just plain wrong with 1200/75
> which was ALREADY faster than 75bpm even on the uplink.

It really is easy to comprehend. Start at the top and work your way down. It
is all in plain English and quite easy to follow. Anyone can twist anything
around to distort the subject, but that isnt the objective here. Unless, of
course, you want to win your imaginary contest with your imaginary intelect.

> AND if you wanted faster than 1200/75 it was available
> to anyone prepared to pay for that anyway.
>
>> My original claim was nearly 20 years before that, when modems were the
>> size of suitcases and had half a dozen cards in them. Do you remember
>> those days??
>
> Yep, and they were ALREADY faster than 75bpm,
> you pathetic excuse for a bull**** artist.
>
>> I do, cause I attended one of the first schools in modems.
>
> Pity you couldnt even manage to work out what speed
> they were running at, or anything else at all, either.
>
>> Oh, thats right, you were sitting at the back of the class using a false
>> name. After all, someone said you were with the PMG for 40 years )
>
> Only a fool like you buys the bull**** the stupid kids in here spew.
>
>>>>> That was nothing like the maximum rate it could do.
>
>>>> Yes with a faster modem it could go a heap faster, but telecom
>>>> didnt have the foresight to support the higher speeds.
>
>>> Pig ignorant lie. You were welcome to pay for
>>> a faster service if you wanted one, and we did.
>
>>>>> And that wasnt even the upstream speed of that anyway.
>
>>>>> That silly old fart has never ever had a ****ing clue, and thats
>>>>> obviously why even telecom gave it the bums rush, right out the door.
>
>>>> Other way around, I couldnt get out of there quick enough. I was
>>>> dying of bordom and lack of a decent wage. I went to a company who
>>>> paid 3 times as much and give you something to do when a contract
>>>> was filled. In telecom if we had a 4 month contract and we filled
>>>> it in 4 weeks we had to sit on our arse until the 4 months were over.
>
>>> You were clearly so stupid that you didnt even notice that you could
>>> have faster than 1200/75 if you wanted it, and that that aint 75bpm
>>> anyway.
>
>

"Two Bob" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...

> At the time, there was no such thing as an RS232, so it couldnt possibly
> be one of our clowns.

Incorrect, RS232-C has been around since 1969.

cheers,

Lance


--
// http://www.commodore128.org
Commodore 128 forums & more! //

Two Bob <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>>>>>> And Telecom/Telstra never ever offered anything that did
>>>>>>>> 75bpm so they cant have ever made that claim anyway.

>>>>>>> False!

>>>>>> Name the product. You cant, no such animal.

>>>>> Name the brand and model number of the TV you had 30 odd years ago.

>>>> YOU are making the claim, YOU get to prove it. THATS how it works.

>>> If you used to work where a few ppl say, you will be able to back me up, instead of critisising.
>>> Unlike our mate Rod, I havent worked in every single field of telecommunications, but this is
>>> one I HAVE worked in.

>> Didnt help you to grasp that it wasnt at 75bpm. Just another pig ignorant clown that never did
>> manage to get even the most basic stuff right.

> Actually, the one I'm thinking of was 50, but they had a 75 for companies who were willing to part
> with the big bucks.

Nope, you've STILL ****ed that up totally.

NOTHING ever worked at 75bpm.

>> I had one of you clowns show up to replace a modem leased from Telecom who proclaimed that the
>> replacement wasnt compatible when he held the RS232 connector upside down and couldnt plug it
>> into the modem.

> At the time, there was no such thing as an RS232,

Wrong, as always.

> so it couldnt possibly be one of our clowns. But you were there with ALL the know how why did you
> have to get anyones clown to do the work.

It was their modem, leased from them, ****wit. That was all that was legal at that time.