First Invoice. Extra charge

"Bob Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news[email protected]...
> Free market price? Sure they can, by having a phone without Vision, and an
> aircard ...

A phone+aircard is not at all comparable to a phone that can do both. The
point of economics I was making is that whenever a seller bundles products
or services together and does not offer exactly those same products or
services separately, it becomes more difficult to say what the free-market
value of each would be. And indeed, That Is Exactly Why The Seller Does It!
The whole point of bundling, in economic terms, is to cloud the computation
of free-market values so that customers cannot easily and quickly price-shop
the individual components but instead tend to become more "loyal" (if only
for simplicity's sake) to the single seller of the bundle.

---

› See More: First Invoice. Extra charge

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

> On Thu, 01 Jan 2004 08:42:15 GMT, SprintingForService
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>"Thomas T. Veldhouse" <[email protected]> wrote in
>>news:[email protected]:
>>
>>> I Hate SprintPCS wrote:
>>>
>>> <snipped bull****>
>>>
>>> You are changing your name again ..? Give it a rest, we have heard
>>> your sob story.
>>>
>>> Tom Veldhouse
>>
>>Hello Tom,
>>
>>Might I ask what makes you think your angry complaints are any more
>>interesting to read?
>
>
> You read it? ID switching is both bad nettiquette (poor form) and in
> the case of Phillip at least, a trolling behavior. So, do you see any
> constructive purpose to name changing, the type that I was complaining
> about?
>
> Tom Veldhouse

Hello Thomas;

I have seen constructive purposes in name changing, especially for the sake
of humor.

In this particular case I don't see a need for either the id changing or
the complaints about them.

What makes you think that you control what Phil does?

If I had 100 opinions about Sprint and I posted them under 100 different
names would that invalidate any one of the opinions?

"Lawrence G. Mayka" <
>
> I agree that arguing over a single day's charge is nitpicking. I am
> more concerned about situations--that I have experienced myself!--in
> which data, or even voice, stays goofed up for days or weeks on end,
> yet Sprint has the chutzpah to demand payment for such nonservice.

Howdy Lawerence;

I agree that arguing over it is borderline nitpicking. I also think that
Sprint's customers should be prorated the difference if the service wasn't
active for that day.

On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 15:48:18 GMT, SprintingForService
<[email protected]> wrote:


>
>I have seen constructive purposes in name changing, especially for the sake
>of humor.
>
>In this particular case I don't see a need for either the id changing or
>the complaints about them.
>
>What makes you think that you control what Phil does?

I certainly DO NOT control what Phil does. If I did he would not be
using the Internet any longer.

>
>If I had 100 opinions about Sprint and I posted them under 100 different
>names would that invalidate any one of the opinions?

Yes, it would invalidate 99 of them. One being a truthful opinion and
the rest simply being used to support the first by changing the
identity. If one person has 100 different opinions, what is the point
of posting under 100 identities when in fact it is one person with the
opinions.

You can make all the defenses about Phillip you like, but he still is
not wanted or like around here (except perhaps by you) for the reasons
previously cited.

Tom Veldhouse

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

> On Fri, 02 Jan 2004 15:48:18 GMT, SprintingForService
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>>
>>I have seen constructive purposes in name changing, especially for the
>>sake of humor.
>>
>>In this particular case I don't see a need for either the id changing
>>or the complaints about them.
>>
>>What makes you think that you control what Phil does?
>
> I certainly DO NOT control what Phil does. If I did he would not be
> using the Internet any longer.

Hello Thomas,

This being the case, and you knowing it, what purpose does stalking his
responses serve?


>>If I had 100 opinions about Sprint and I posted them under 100
>>different names would that invalidate any one of the opinions?
>
> Yes, it would invalidate 99 of them. One being a truthful opinion and
> the rest simply being used to support the first by changing the
> identity.

That is your interpretation of it not the situation which I outlined. If
I have 100 opinions they would each be distinct opinions. It's the
opinions that are of import not the name I choose to post each different
one or each similiar one under.

You're simply choosing to ascribe negative motives for what you believe
Phil is doing. Try not to loose sight of that. In any event even if he
was doing what you suspect it serves little purpose to do what you're
doing when simply responding to what's mistaken about it makes far more
sense, takes less effort, and has a far better outcome.

> If one person has 100 different opinions, what is the point
> of posting under 100 identities when in fact it is one person with the
> opinions.

The point is what does it matter?

> You can make all the defenses about Phillip you like, but he still is
> not wanted or like around here (except perhaps by you) for the reasons
> previously cited.

Like or dislike doesn't really come into the picture with me on Phil. As
long as people remain civil with me I can maintain the same. I'm looking
more for content then fluff really. And yes I do appreiate hearing the
negatives of the different service providers, including Sprint. Because
with that information I can make far more informed decisions.

"SprintingForService" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:6pgJb.42822$a44.32128@okepread04...
<snipped>

> Hello Thomas;
>
> I have seen constructive purposes in name changing, especially for the
sake
> of humor.

That's not the case in this or the ATTW newsgroup, as I've notice Phillipe
has already moved to three different IDs over there.
>
> In this particular case I don't see a need for either the id changing or
> the complaints about them.
>
> What makes you think that you control what Phil does?

No one controls Phillipe, save for Phillipe. No matter what you say, he's a
troll.
>
> If I had 100 opinions about Sprint and I posted them under 100 different
> names would that invalidate any one of the opinions?

That's not the point here. He has the same opinions and still changes his ID
to get around the kill filters everyone has set up. What's more, he creates
different IDs so that he can agree with one of his prior posts on an older
ID ...

About invalidating opinions, no ... if they are legit, and not made up. What
would detract from those opinions though would be changing IDs. The opinions
may be right on, but the poster has lost any respect previously earned from
the other posters because of the numerous changes in ID.

Bob

SprintingForService wrote:


> Hello Thomas;
>
> I have seen constructive purposes in name changing, especially for the sake
> of humor.
>
> In this particular case I don't see a need for either the id changing or
> the complaints about them.
>
> What makes you think that you control what Phil does?
>
> If I had 100 opinions about Sprint and I posted them under 100 different
> names would that invalidate any one of the opinions?

Of course not an opinion is neither universally valid nor universally
invalid. But an idea and the presentation of an idea are different
things. Ideas are embodied by their presentation. You can only move an
idea about by describing it, either through words, or speech, or text,
or really, any of myriad other media. Just as you wouldn't want to use
dance as a method for discussing a billing dispute, you would also not
wish to degrade your opinions by behaving in a way that undermines your
credibility. Consider the increasingly cliche "the media is the message"
quote. The person who posts with their full name tends to have more
weight than the person that posts with only their first name, or alias,
and the person that posts under multiple aliases and psudonyms is even
less credible.

This evolves further. The person that has the sense to recognise their
presentation is critical to the perception of their opinion by others is
often viewed as more likely to present a worthwhile opinion.

But who is to say what is worthwhile? Certainly, many have attempted to
do so for others in the past, and Usenet is certainly no exception.
Ultimately, after the trolls, antitrolls, metatrolls and even the
earnest posters, each of us has to judge for ourselves. This is a good
thing. We can add someone to our personal killfile if we choose.

So, no, posting 100 different opinions under 100 different aliases
doesn't make the opinions invalid. It makes them impotent.
-mike

Organization: T-Mobile Looks Like It's Got Some Good Deals!
User-Agent: Xnews/5.04.25
X-No-Archive: yes
Lines: 27
Message-ID: <h1kLb.44118$a44.18073@okepread04>
Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 21:34:05 GMT
NNTP-Posting-Host: 68.0.53.30
X-Complaints-To: [email protected]
X-Trace: okepread04 1073597645 68.0.53.30 (Thu, 08 Jan 2004 16:34:05 EST)
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2004 16:34:05 EST
Xref: news.newshosting.com alt.cellular.sprintpcs:130633

Mike <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> SprintingForService wrote:
>
>
>> Hello Thomas;
>>
>> I have seen constructive purposes in name changing, especially for
>> the sake of humor.
>>
>> In this particular case I don't see a need for either the id changing
>> or the complaints about them.
>>
>> What makes you think that you control what Phil does?
>>
>> If I had 100 opinions about Sprint and I posted them under 100
>> different names would that invalidate any one of the opinions?
>
> Of course not an opinion is neither universally valid nor universally
> invalid. But an idea and the presentation of an idea are different
> things. Ideas are embodied by their presentation.

Surely and just at there are countless ideas there can be countless
presentations. Don't see your point as you seem to be arguing in favor of
him changing ids for each new idea which perforce changes the presentation
Mike.

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

>
> "SprintingForService" <[email protected]> wrote in
> message news:6pgJb.42822$a44.32128@okepread04...
> <snipped>
>
>> Hello Thomas;
>>
>> I have seen constructive purposes in name changing, especially for
>> the
> sake
>> of humor.
>
> That's not the case in this or the ATTW newsgroup, as I've notice
> Phillipe has already moved to three different IDs over there.

Howdy Bob,

To argue that you've seen him with several ids on more than one newsgroup
doesn't proove lack of constructive purpose.


>>
>> In this particular case I don't see a need for either the id changing
>> or the complaints about them.
>>
>> What makes you think that you control what Phil does?
>
> No one controls Phillipe, save for Phillipe. No matter what you say,
> he's a troll.
>>
>> If I had 100 opinions about Sprint and I posted them under 100
>> different names would that invalidate any one of the opinions?
>
> That's not the point here.


Sure it is Bob. It's mine to make and I just did.


> He has the same opinions and still changes
> his ID to get around the kill filters everyone has set up.

You certainly don't know that's why he changes ids unless he's actually
told you that.

"Bob Smith" <[email protected]> wrote in news:G0iJb.5159
[email protected]:

>
> "Mike" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> <snipped>
>
>> So, no, posting 100 different opinions under 100 different aliases
>> doesn't make the opinions invalid. It makes them impotent.
>> -mike
>
> Well said Mike ...
>
> Bob

Not really Bob. If you go back you'll see that he argues against his
orginating premise in his argument. The agrument contradicts itself.

"SprintingForService" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:h1kLb.44117$a44.24140@okepread04...

>
> Howdy Bob,
>
> To argue that you've seen him with several ids on more than one newsgroup
> doesn't proove lack of constructive purpose.

True, but when the ID's start talking to each other, and posting the same
thing to make problems appear to larger than they are, all credibility is
lost.

SprintingForService wrote:
> Not really Bob. If you go back you'll see that he argues against his
> orginating premise in his argument. The agrument contradicts itself.
>
How so?
-mike

SprintingForService wrote:

> Mike <[email protected]> wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>
>>SprintingForService wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>>Hello Thomas;
>>>
>>>I have seen constructive purposes in name changing, especially for
>>>the sake of humor.
>>>
>>>In this particular case I don't see a need for either the id changing
>>>or the complaints about them.
>>>
>>>What makes you think that you control what Phil does?
>>>
>>>If I had 100 opinions about Sprint and I posted them under 100
>>>different names would that invalidate any one of the opinions?
>>
>>Of course not an opinion is neither universally valid nor universally
>>invalid. But an idea and the presentation of an idea are different
>>things. Ideas are embodied by their presentation.
>
>
> Surely and just at there are countless ideas there can be countless
> presentations. Don't see your point as you seem to be arguing in favor of
> him changing ids for each new idea which perforce changes the presentation
> Mike.

You certainly clipped my post aggressively.

I would hope that that isn't what you got from my post. I reread the
original, and I can't see how one would derive that. Instead of showing
how you derived such a thing from the original text, you've clipped
nearly all of it. Show your work.

It looks as if you're either a troll or your logic has failed to reject
a false dilemma.

(Yes, that was, in a way, a very small joke. I slay me.)

Let me try another way:

If you value a forum, and you wish to contribute, then you'll try to
make your posts useful. Your effort is wasted, however, if your posts do
not appear useful. Every bit of information we get has a weight we
assign it. A commercial that implores us to "call now!" has less weight
than a man writhing in pain, on the floor, clutching his chest, making
the same demand.

A person wishing to contribute value to a forum would wish to:
1) Submit posts that others would view as valuable.
2) View posts that appear to contain value.

There are a number of behaviors that diminish the perceived value of a
post. While certainly not universal, many view someone that deliberately
misleads people by changing their identity, occasionally replying to
their own posts, as someone that does not wish to add value to a forum.
Because many will reject any value remaining in a post crafted to appear
worthless, the poster fails to provide value to a forum.

Don't forget that the purpose of a newsgroup like this is to communicate
with other people. You can have a good statement, but if it fails to
reach an audience because of your name-changing, you lose.

Personally, I don't care much for the behavior. There appears to some
game of hide-n-seek, or perhaps peek-a-boo being carried out here. I'd
prefer to be able to avoid the whole lot.

Weren't we talking about SprintPCS?
-mike

SprintingForService wrote:


> Howdy Bob,
>
> To argue that you've seen him with several ids on more than one newsgroup
> doesn't proove lack of constructive purpose.

True, but other evidence does suggest a lack of contructive purpose. I
refer you to the archives at google.

> Sure it is Bob. It's mine to make and I just did.

I can't tell if you're arguing with Bob or simply near him.

> You certainly don't know that's why he changes ids unless he's actually
> told you that.

Perhaps, but the effect is the same.
-mike

On Thu, 08 Jan 2004 21:12:35 -0600, Mike <[email protected]> wrote:


>You certainly clipped my post aggressively.
>
>I would hope that that isn't what you got from my post. I reread the
>original, and I can't see how one would derive that. Instead of showing
>how you derived such a thing from the original text, you've clipped
>nearly all of it. Show your work.
>
>It looks as if you're either a troll or your logic has failed to reject
>a false dilemma.
>
>(Yes, that was, in a way, a very small joke. I slay me.)
>
>Let me try another way:
>
>If you value a forum, and you wish to contribute, then you'll try to
>make your posts useful. Your effort is wasted, however, if your posts do
>not appear useful. Every bit of information we get has a weight we
>assign it. A commercial that implores us to "call now!" has less weight
>than a man writhing in pain, on the floor, clutching his chest, making
>the same demand.
>
>A person wishing to contribute value to a forum would wish to:
>1) Submit posts that others would view as valuable.
>2) View posts that appear to contain value.
>
>There are a number of behaviors that diminish the perceived value of a
>post. While certainly not universal, many view someone that deliberately
>misleads people by changing their identity, occasionally replying to
>their own posts, as someone that does not wish to add value to a forum.
>Because many will reject any value remaining in a post crafted to appear
>worthless, the poster fails to provide value to a forum.
>
>Don't forget that the purpose of a newsgroup like this is to communicate
>with other people. You can have a good statement, but if it fails to
>reach an audience because of your name-changing, you lose.
>
>Personally, I don't care much for the behavior. There appears to some
>game of hide-n-seek, or perhaps peek-a-boo being carried out here. I'd
>prefer to be able to avoid the whole lot.
>
>Weren't we talking about SprintPCS?
>-mike


Very well put. However, SprintingForService seems to have disappeared
in the same manner that one of Phillip's identities does ... my kill
filter sees no new hits.


Tom Veldhouse