Results 1 to 6 of 6
  1. #1
    Joseph
    Guest
    On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 19:53:32 GMT, John Navas
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
    >
    >In <[email protected]> on Thu, 24 Jul 2003 11:10:50
    >-0700, Joseph <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >>On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 05:44:00 GMT, John Navas
    >><[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >>>In <[email protected]> on Thu, 24 Jul
    >>>2003 02:49:46 GMT, "Steven M. Scharf" <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>In Northern California AT&T GSM is
    >>>>better than Cingular's GSM ...
    >>>
    >>>Not true.

    >>
    >>Why is it that your experience is the only one that counts?

    >
    >My experience isn't the only one that counts -- what would make you think
    >that?


    Your two word reply.

    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    Replies are seldom read. Please reply in the group



    See More: Cingular Satisfaction & Coverage




  2. #2
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: Cingular Satisfaction & Coverage

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <[email protected]> on Thu, 24 Jul 2003 20:27:31
    -0700, Joseph <[email protected]> wrote:

    >On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 19:53:32 GMT, John Navas
    ><[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >>In <[email protected]> on Thu, 24 Jul 2003 11:10:50
    >>-0700, Joseph <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >>>On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 05:44:00 GMT, John Navas
    >>><[email protected]> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>In <[email protected]> on Thu, 24 Jul
    >>>>2003 02:49:46 GMT, "Steven M. Scharf" <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>In Northern California AT&T GSM is
    >>>>>better than Cingular's GSM ...
    >>>>
    >>>>Not true.
    >>>
    >>>Why is it that your experience is the only one that counts?

    >>
    >>My experience isn't the only one that counts -- what would make you think
    >>that?

    >
    >Your two word reply.


    You must have a powerful imagination.

    --
    Best regards,
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/> HELP PAGES FOR
    CINGULAR GSM + ERICSSON PHONES: <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>



  3. #3
    Joseph
    Guest

    Re: Cingular Satisfaction & Coverage

    On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 03:34:56 GMT, John Navas
    <[email protected]> wrote:

    >[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
    >
    >In <[email protected]> on Thu, 24 Jul 2003 20:27:31
    >-0700, Joseph <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >>On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 19:53:32 GMT, John Navas
    >><[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >>>In <[email protected]> on Thu, 24 Jul 2003 11:10:50
    >>>-0700, Joseph <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 05:44:00 GMT, John Navas
    >>>><[email protected]> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>In <[email protected]> on Thu, 24 Jul
    >>>>>2003 02:49:46 GMT, "Steven M. Scharf" <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>In Northern California AT&T GSM is
    >>>>>>better than Cingular's GSM ...
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Not true.
    >>>>
    >>>>Why is it that your experience is the only one that counts?
    >>>
    >>>My experience isn't the only one that counts -- what would make you think
    >>>that?

    >>
    >>Your two word reply.

    >
    >You must have a powerful imagination.


    You should read for comprehension. You cannot read the words *not
    true?* You give your little smug answers and with attitude for days.
    - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    Replies are seldom read. Please reply in the group



  4. #4
    John Navas
    Guest

    Re: Cingular Satisfaction & Coverage

    [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]

    In <[email protected]> on Fri, 25 Jul 2003 12:10:38
    -0700, Joseph <[email protected]> wrote:

    >On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 03:34:56 GMT, John Navas
    ><[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    >>[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
    >>
    >>In <[email protected]> on Thu, 24 Jul 2003 20:27:31
    >>-0700, Joseph <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>
    >>>On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 19:53:32 GMT, John Navas
    >>><[email protected]> wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>In <[email protected]> on Thu, 24 Jul 2003 11:10:50
    >>>>-0700, Joseph <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>>On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 05:44:00 GMT, John Navas
    >>>>><[email protected]> wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>In <[email protected]> on Thu, 24 Jul
    >>>>>>2003 02:49:46 GMT, "Steven M. Scharf" <[email protected]> wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>In Northern California AT&T GSM is
    >>>>>>>better than Cingular's GSM ...
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>Not true.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Why is it that your experience is the only one that counts?
    >>>>
    >>>>My experience isn't the only one that counts -- what would make you think
    >>>>that?
    >>>
    >>>Your two word reply.

    >>
    >>You must have a powerful imagination.

    >
    >You should read for comprehension. ...


    I do, but thanks for your concern.

    --
    Best regards,
    John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/> HELP PAGES FOR
    CINGULAR GSM + ERICSSON PHONES: <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>



  5. #5
    Jared Robinson
    Guest

    Re: Cingular Satisfaction & Coverage

    What's even funnier is that John lives in a bubble. Cingular is
    definitely superior.

    John Navas <[email protected]> wrote in article
    <[email protected]>:
    > [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
    >
    > In <[email protected]> on Fri, 25 Jul 2003 12:10:38
    > -0700, Joseph <[email protected]> wrote:
    >
    > >On Fri, 25 Jul 2003 03:34:56 GMT, John Navas
    > ><[email protected]> wrote:
    > >
    > >>[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
    > >>
    > >>In <[email protected]> on Thu, 24 Jul 2003 20:27:31
    > >>-0700, Joseph <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >>
    > >>>On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 19:53:32 GMT, John Navas
    > >>><[email protected]> wrote:
    > >>>
    > >>>>In <[email protected]> on Thu, 24 Jul 2003 11:10:50
    > >>>>-0700, Joseph <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >>>>
    > >>>>>On Thu, 24 Jul 2003 05:44:00 GMT, John Navas
    > >>>>><[email protected]> wrote:
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>>In <[email protected]> on Thu, 24 Jul
    > >>>>>>2003 02:49:46 GMT, "Steven M. Scharf" <[email protected]> wrote:
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>>In Northern California AT&T GSM is
    > >>>>>>>better than Cingular's GSM ...
    > >>>>>>
    > >>>>>>Not true.
    > >>>>>
    > >>>>>Why is it that your experience is the only one that counts?
    > >>>>
    > >>>>My experience isn't the only one that counts -- what would make you think
    > >>>>that?
    > >>>
    > >>>Your two word reply.
    > >>
    > >>You must have a powerful imagination.

    > >
    > >You should read for comprehension. You cannot read the words *not true?* You give your little smug answers and with attitude for days.

    >
    > I do, but thanks for your concern.
    >
    > --
    > Best regards,
    > John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/> HELP PAGES FOR
    > CINGULAR GSM + ERICSSON PHONES: <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>


    [posted via phonescoop.com - free web access to the alt.cellular groups]



  6. #6
    John S.
    Guest

    Re: Cingular Satisfaction & Coverage

    >What's even funnier is that John lives in a bubble. Cingular is
    >definitely superior.
    >
    >John Navas


    And what have oyu been smoking in that closed area that you call your
    "reality"????

    --
    John S.
    e-mail responses to - john at kiana dot net



  • Similar Threads