AT&T's iPhone Store Locator has been posted.

In article <[email protected]>,
Edwin <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Jul 4, 2:04 pm, Alan Baker <[email protected]> wrote:
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> >
> >
> >
> > Edwin <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Jun 27, 3:09 pm, Oxford <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > Okay, finally AT&T has posted the list of where you can (try) and get an
> > > > iPhone. Rumor is the highest volume sales stores will be allocated the
> > > > most, but there are only 3 million to be had over the first few days, so
> > > > it's going to be tough to get one.
> >
> > > > Good Luck!
> >
> > > >http://www.wireless.att.com/find-a-store/iphone/
> >
> > > >http://www.wireless.att.com/iphone/
> >
> > > Now get out there and jack up the price of Oxford's Apple stock. Do
> > > you think he spends all his time spamming for Apple just for his
> > > health?
> >
> > He hasn't posted spam.
>
> And the Sun rises in the West, and up is down, and black is white...

Post a definition of spam and then show how his post meets it...

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."

---

› See More: AT&T's iPhone Store Locator has been posted.

Alan Baker wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Alan Baker wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>> Now get out there and jack up the price of Oxford's Apple stock.
>>>> Do you think he spends all his time spamming for Apple just for his
>>>> health?
>>>
>>> He hasn't posted spam.
>>
>> Agreed, but he has proven himself to be either an Apple employee or a
>> liar. You want proof, you say? When I posted the work order number
>> from an old email from Apple for the iPOD Mini with which I had had
>> a bad service experience he verified that the number I posted was
>> correct and discussed it's content. Even I, as the logged in
>> customer, couldn't find the work order status on their site
>> (presumably they clear them after a year or so) so for him to have
>> access to their service order archives he must be an employee or
>> have some special status within Apple. However, his reference to
>> the content of the work order was dead wrong so that would indicate
>> that he's a liar. Either way, if not spamming for Apple he's
>> certainly a paid or unpaid cheerleader and making his opinions
>> irrelevent.
>
> And may we see this post of yours...

The post was made to this thread several days ago so it should still be
available. If not, I cam PM it to you.

In article <[email protected]>,
"BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Alan Baker wrote:
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > "BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> Alan Baker wrote:
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>> Now get out there and jack up the price of Oxford's Apple stock.
> >>>> Do you think he spends all his time spamming for Apple just for his
> >>>> health?
> >>>
> >>> He hasn't posted spam.
> >>
> >> Agreed, but he has proven himself to be either an Apple employee or a
> >> liar. You want proof, you say? When I posted the work order number
> >> from an old email from Apple for the iPOD Mini with which I had had
> >> a bad service experience he verified that the number I posted was
> >> correct and discussed it's content. Even I, as the logged in
> >> customer, couldn't find the work order status on their site
> >> (presumably they clear them after a year or so) so for him to have
> >> access to their service order archives he must be an employee or
> >> have some special status within Apple. However, his reference to
> >> the content of the work order was dead wrong so that would indicate
> >> that he's a liar. Either way, if not spamming for Apple he's
> >> certainly a paid or unpaid cheerleader and making his opinions
> >> irrelevent.
> >
> > And may we see this post of yours...
>
> The post was made to this thread several days ago so it should still be
> available. If not, I cam PM it to you.

Why not just give a google link?

Alan Baker wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Alan Baker wrote:
>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>> "BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Alan Baker wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Now get out there and jack up the price of Oxford's Apple stock.
>>>>>> Do you think he spends all his time spamming for Apple just for
>>>>>> his health?
>>>>>
>>>>> He hasn't posted spam.
>>>>
>>>> Agreed, but he has proven himself to be either an Apple employee
>>>> or a liar. You want proof, you say? When I posted the work order
>>>> number from an old email from Apple for the iPOD Mini with which I
>>>> had had a bad service experience he verified that the number I
>>>> posted was correct and discussed it's content. Even I, as the
>>>> logged in customer, couldn't find the work order status on their
>>>> site (presumably they clear them after a year or so) so for him to
>>>> have access to their service order archives he must be an employee
>>>> or have some special status within Apple. However, his reference
>>>> to the content of the work order was dead wrong so that would
>>>> indicate that he's a liar. Either way, if not spamming for Apple
>>>> he's certainly a paid or unpaid cheerleader and making his opinions
>>>> irrelevent.
>>>
>>> And may we see this post of yours...
>>
>> The post was made to this thread several days ago so it should still
>> be available. If not, I cam PM it to you.
>
> Why not just give a google link?

OK. Browse this thread:
http://groups.google.com/group/alt.c...70a63abcce87d9

In article <[email protected]>,
"BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Alan Baker wrote:
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > "BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >> Alan Baker wrote:
> >>> In article <[email protected]>,
> >>> "BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Alan Baker wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Now get out there and jack up the price of Oxford's Apple stock.
> >>>>>> Do you think he spends all his time spamming for Apple just for
> >>>>>> his health?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> He hasn't posted spam.
> >>>>
> >>>> Agreed, but he has proven himself to be either an Apple employee
> >>>> or a liar. You want proof, you say? When I posted the work order
> >>>> number from an old email from Apple for the iPOD Mini with which I
> >>>> had had a bad service experience he verified that the number I
> >>>> posted was correct and discussed it's content. Even I, as the
> >>>> logged in customer, couldn't find the work order status on their
> >>>> site (presumably they clear them after a year or so) so for him to
> >>>> have access to their service order archives he must be an employee
> >>>> or have some special status within Apple. However, his reference
> >>>> to the content of the work order was dead wrong so that would
> >>>> indicate that he's a liar. Either way, if not spamming for Apple
> >>>> he's certainly a paid or unpaid cheerleader and making his opinions
> >>>> irrelevent.
> >>>
> >>> And may we see this post of yours...
> >>
> >> The post was made to this thread several days ago so it should still
> >> be available. If not, I cam PM it to you.
> >
> > Why not just give a google link?
>
> OK. Browse this thread:
> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.c...ad/thread/bff5
> f6426fffba83/9e70a63abcce87d9#9e70a63abcce87d9

Nope. Sorry.

If you know this post exists, post a link directly to it.

Why should I have to go looking for what you claim exists.

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."

Alan Baker wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Alan Baker wrote:
>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>> "BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Alan Baker wrote:
>>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>>>> "BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Alan Baker wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Now get out there and jack up the price of Oxford's Apple
>>>>>>>> stock. Do you think he spends all his time spamming for Apple
>>>>>>>> just for his health?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He hasn't posted spam.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Agreed, but he has proven himself to be either an Apple employee
>>>>>> or a liar. You want proof, you say? When I posted the work order
>>>>>> number from an old email from Apple for the iPOD Mini with which
>>>>>> I had had a bad service experience he verified that the number I
>>>>>> posted was correct and discussed it's content. Even I, as the
>>>>>> logged in customer, couldn't find the work order status on their
>>>>>> site (presumably they clear them after a year or so) so for him
>>>>>> to have access to their service order archives he must be an
>>>>>> employee or have some special status within Apple. However, his
>>>>>> reference to the content of the work order was dead wrong so
>>>>>> that would indicate that he's a liar. Either way, if not
>>>>>> spamming for Apple he's certainly a paid or unpaid cheerleader
>>>>>> and making his opinions irrelevent.
>>>>>
>>>>> And may we see this post of yours...
>>>>
>>>> The post was made to this thread several days ago so it should
>>>> still be available. If not, I cam PM it to you.
>>>
>>> Why not just give a google link?
>>
>> OK. Browse this thread:
>> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.c...ad/thread/bff5
>> f6426fffba83/9e70a63abcce87d9#9e70a63abcce87d9
>
> Nope. Sorry.
>
> If you know this post exists, post a link directly to it.
>
> Why should I have to go looking for what you claim exists.

Because you want to read it. If you don't - don't. I offered to PM it to
you and you declined. It was just posted yesterday (7/3). In any case
this was the important paragraph:

From my post: In case you'd like to research it further, it was an
IPOD MINI repair
> order: Apple Repair D5229302 and the time frame was summer 2005. Oh,
> and by the way, you have STILL failed to answer my questions.


From Oxford's reply: So this was back in 2005, that helps. Your number
is valid, but your
complaint seems to be tied to your PC, not the iPod mini."

So, if I can no longer track the number, how can he? And, his statement
regarding the nature of the complaint is just dead wrong.

Alan Baker wrote:
> In article <[email protected]>,
> "BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Alan Baker wrote:
>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>> "BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Alan Baker wrote:
>>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>>>> "BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Alan Baker wrote:
>>>>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
>>>>>>> "BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Alan Baker wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Now get out there and jack up the price of Oxford's Apple
>>>>>>>>>> stock. Do you think he spends all his time spamming for Apple
>>>>>>>>>> just for his health?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> He hasn't posted spam.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Agreed, but he has proven himself to be either an Apple
>>>>>>>> employee or a liar. You want proof, you say? When I posted
>>>>>>>> the work order number from an old email from Apple for the
>>>>>>>> iPOD Mini with which I had had a bad service experience he
>>>>>>>> verified that the number I posted was correct and discussed
>>>>>>>> it's content. Even I, as the logged in customer, couldn't
>>>>>>>> find the work order status on their site (presumably they
>>>>>>>> clear them after a year or so) so for him to have access to
>>>>>>>> their service order archives he must be an employee or have
>>>>>>>> some special status within Apple. However, his reference to
>>>>>>>> the content of the work order was dead wrong so that would
>>>>>>>> indicate that he's a liar. Either way, if not spamming for
>>>>>>>> Apple he's certainly a paid or unpaid cheerleader and making
>>>>>>>> his opinions irrelevent.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And may we see this post of yours...
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The post was made to this thread several days ago so it should
>>>>>> still be available. If not, I cam PM it to you.
>>>>>
>>>>> Why not just give a google link?
>>>>
>>>> OK. Browse this thread:
>>>> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.c...hread/thread/b
>>>> ff5
>>>> f6426fffba83/9e70a63abcce87d9#9e70a63abcce87d9
>>>
>>> Nope. Sorry.
>>>
>>> If you know this post exists, post a link directly to it.
>>>
>>> Why should I have to go looking for what you claim exists.
>>
>> Because you want to read it. If you don't - don't. I offered to PM
>> it to you and you declined. It was just posted yesterday (7/3). In
>> any case this was the important paragraph:
>
> No. This is where you're wrong. I don't want to read it for its own
> sake.
>
> I'm merely telling you that if you want to provide evidence that what
> you've said is true, you should provide it and not expect others to go
> looking for it.

I'm not trying to provide evidence of anything. You asked and I
answered. If you don't want to believe my posts, don't.
>>
>> From my post: In case you'd like to research it further, it was an
>> IPOD MINI repair
>>> order: Apple Repair D5229302 and the time frame was summer 2005.
>>> Oh, and by the way, you have STILL failed to answer my questions.
>>
>>
>> From Oxford's reply: So this was back in 2005, that helps. Your
>> number is valid, but your
>> complaint seems to be tied to your PC, not the iPod mini."
>>
>> So, if I can no longer track the number, how can he? And, his
>> statement regarding the nature of the complaint is just dead wrong.
>
> How do you know from that that he tracked the number?
>
> He says "your number is valid", but maybe that just means he
> recognizes the format of an Apple repair number.

He goes on to say that "your complaint seems to be tied to your PC"
which it wasn't." He is telling us what he read in the work order.
Again, if you want the full context, click on the link above and scroll
to July 3, 6:39pm. BTW, the work order was for a dead battery.

At 04 Jul 2007 23:13:09 -1000 BruceR wrote:

> He goes on to say that "your complaint seems to be tied to your PC"
> which it wasn't." He is telling us what he read in the work order.


Oh for the love of God, Bruce, he wasn't telling us what he read- he was
making yet another foolish comment that Apple is so superior to all other
computing products that your PC HAD to be at fault because the iPod was
Apple and your PC wasn't- earier in the thread he blamed your USB ports
because PCs were made of "junk."

He's just a troll and was baiting you. You bit; end of story.

> Again, if you want the full context, click on the link above and scroll
> to July 3, 6:39pm. BTW, the work order was for a dead battery.

You told him that plenty of times, and he told you (I'm paraphrasing) it
would've been impossible for Apple to sell you a defective product
because they were Apple. It'd have been impossible for them to have
failed to repair it correctly because they were Apple. And if you were
dissatisfied with the product it was your fault obviously, because, after
all, it was an Apple.

There is nothing else to read into his postings!

You can't argue using scientific meathod with a Zealot. He's an Apple
zealot.



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Jul 5, 4:13 am, "BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Alan Baker wrote:
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> > "BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >> Alan Baker wrote:
> >>> In article <[email protected]>,
> >>> "BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >>>> Alan Baker wrote:
> >>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
> >>>>> "BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >>>>>> Alan Baker wrote:
> >>>>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
> >>>>>>> "BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>> Alan Baker wrote:
>
> >>>>>>>>>> Now get out there and jack up the price of Oxford's Apple
> >>>>>>>>>> stock. Do you think he spends all his time spamming for Apple
> >>>>>>>>>> just for his health?
>
> >>>>>>>>> He hasn't posted spam.
>
> >>>>>>>> Agreed, but he has proven himself to be either an Apple
> >>>>>>>> employee or a liar. You want proof, you say? When I posted
> >>>>>>>> the work order number from an old email from Apple for the
> >>>>>>>> iPOD Mini with which I had had a bad service experience he
> >>>>>>>> verified that the number I posted was correct and discussed
> >>>>>>>> it's content. Even I, as the logged in customer, couldn't
> >>>>>>>> find the work order status on their site (presumably they
> >>>>>>>> clear them after a year or so) so for him to have access to
> >>>>>>>> their service order archives he must be an employee or have
> >>>>>>>> some special status within Apple. However, his reference to
> >>>>>>>> the content of the work order was dead wrong so that would
> >>>>>>>> indicate that he's a liar. Either way, if not spamming for
> >>>>>>>> Apple he's certainly a paid or unpaid cheerleader and making
> >>>>>>>> his opinions irrelevent.
>
> >>>>>>> And may we see this post of yours...
>
> >>>>>> The post was made to this thread several days ago so it should
> >>>>>> still be available. If not, I cam PM it to you.
>
> >>>>> Why not just give a google link?
>
> >>>> OK. Browse this thread:
> >>>>http://groups.google.com/group/alt.c...owse_thread/th...
> >>>> ff5
> >>>> f6426fffba83/9e70a63abcce87d9#9e70a63abcce87d9
>
> >>> Nope. Sorry.
>
> >>> If you know this post exists, post a link directly to it.
>
> >>> Why should I have to go looking for what you claim exists.
>
> >> Because you want to read it. If you don't - don't. I offered to PM
> >> it to you and you declined. It was just posted yesterday (7/3). In
> >> any case this was the important paragraph:
>
> > No. This is where you're wrong. I don't want to read it for its own
> > sake.
>
> > I'm merely telling you that if you want to provide evidence that what
> > you've said is true, you should provide it and not expect others to go
> > looking for it.
>
> I'm not trying to provide evidence of anything. You asked and I
> answered. If you don't want to believe my posts, don't.
>
>
>
>
>
> >> From my post: In case you'd like to research it further, it was an
> >> IPOD MINI repair
> >>> order: Apple Repair D5229302 and the time frame was summer 2005.
> >>> Oh, and by the way, you have STILL failed to answer my questions.
>
> >> From Oxford's reply: So this was back in 2005, that helps. Your
> >> number is valid, but your
> >> complaint seems to be tied to your PC, not the iPod mini."
>
> >> So, if I can no longer track the number, how can he? And, his
> >> statement regarding the nature of the complaint is just dead wrong.
>
> > How do you know from that that he tracked the number?
>
> > He says "your number is valid", but maybe that just means he
> > recognizes the format of an Apple repair number.
>
> He goes on to say that "your complaint seems to be tied to your PC"
> which it wasn't." He is telling us what he read in the work order.
> Again, if you want the full context, click on the link above and scroll
> to July 3, 6:39pm. BTW, the work order was for a dead battery.

Demanding quotes is Alan's way of discrediting others. But it's a
different story when you ask him for references. Put him to the
test: ask for a reference to the Mayor of R'lyeh saying Apple is
going out of business. Alan claimed there was more of those posts
than anybody could count, yet he can't produce a reference to even one.

In article <[email protected]>,
Edwin <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Jul 4, 3:36 pm, Alan Baker <[email protected]> wrote:
> > In article <[email protected]>,
> >
> >
> >
> > Edwin <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Jul 4, 2:04 pm, Alan Baker <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > In article <[email protected]>,
> >
> > > > Edwin <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > On Jun 27, 3:09 pm, Oxford <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > > > Okay, finally AT&T has posted the list of where you can (try) and
> > > > > > get an
> > > > > > iPhone. Rumor is the highest volume sales stores will be allocated
> > > > > > the
> > > > > > most, but there are only 3 million to be had over the first few
> > > > > > days, so
> > > > > > it's going to be tough to get one.
> >
> > > > > > Good Luck!
> >
> > > > > >http://www.wireless.att.com/find-a-store/iphone/
> >
> > > > > >http://www.wireless.att.com/iphone/
> >
> > > > > Now get out there and jack up the price of Oxford's Apple stock.
> > > > > Do
> > > > > you think he spends all his time spamming for Apple just for his
> > > > > health?
> >
> > > > He hasn't posted spam.
> >
> > > And the Sun rises in the West, and up is down, and black is white...
> >
> > Post a definition of spam and then show how his post meets it...
>
> How am I going to put on a puppet show for you over Usenet?

IOW, you're not willing to support your empty assertion.

Why didn't you just say so?

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."

In article <[email protected]>,
Edwin <[email protected]> wrote:

> On Jul 5, 4:13 am, "BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Alan Baker wrote:
> > > In article <[email protected]>,
> > > "BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > >> Alan Baker wrote:
> > >>> In article <[email protected]>,
> > >>> "BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > >>>> Alan Baker wrote:
> > >>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
> > >>>>> "BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > >>>>>> Alan Baker wrote:
> > >>>>>>> In article <[email protected]>,
> > >>>>>>> "BruceR" <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > >>>>>>>> Alan Baker wrote:
> >
> > >>>>>>>>>> Now get out there and jack up the price of Oxford's Apple
> > >>>>>>>>>> stock. Do you think he spends all his time spamming for Apple
> > >>>>>>>>>> just for his health?
> >
> > >>>>>>>>> He hasn't posted spam.
> >
> > >>>>>>>> Agreed, but he has proven himself to be either an Apple
> > >>>>>>>> employee or a liar. You want proof, you say? When I posted
> > >>>>>>>> the work order number from an old email from Apple for the
> > >>>>>>>> iPOD Mini with which I had had a bad service experience he
> > >>>>>>>> verified that the number I posted was correct and discussed
> > >>>>>>>> it's content. Even I, as the logged in customer, couldn't
> > >>>>>>>> find the work order status on their site (presumably they
> > >>>>>>>> clear them after a year or so) so for him to have access to
> > >>>>>>>> their service order archives he must be an employee or have
> > >>>>>>>> some special status within Apple. However, his reference to
> > >>>>>>>> the content of the work order was dead wrong so that would
> > >>>>>>>> indicate that he's a liar. Either way, if not spamming for
> > >>>>>>>> Apple he's certainly a paid or unpaid cheerleader and making
> > >>>>>>>> his opinions irrelevent.
> >
> > >>>>>>> And may we see this post of yours...
> >
> > >>>>>> The post was made to this thread several days ago so it should
> > >>>>>> still be available. If not, I cam PM it to you.
> >
> > >>>>> Why not just give a google link?
> >
> > >>>> OK. Browse this thread:
> > >>>>http://groups.google.com/group/alt.c...owse_thread/th...
> > >>>> ff5
> > >>>> f6426fffba83/9e70a63abcce87d9#9e70a63abcce87d9
> >
> > >>> Nope. Sorry.
> >
> > >>> If you know this post exists, post a link directly to it.
> >
> > >>> Why should I have to go looking for what you claim exists.
> >
> > >> Because you want to read it. If you don't - don't. I offered to PM
> > >> it to you and you declined. It was just posted yesterday (7/3). In
> > >> any case this was the important paragraph:
> >
> > > No. This is where you're wrong. I don't want to read it for its own
> > > sake.
> >
> > > I'm merely telling you that if you want to provide evidence that what
> > > you've said is true, you should provide it and not expect others to go
> > > looking for it.
> >
> > I'm not trying to provide evidence of anything. You asked and I
> > answered. If you don't want to believe my posts, don't.
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > >> From my post: In case you'd like to research it further, it was an
> > >> IPOD MINI repair
> > >>> order: Apple Repair D5229302 and the time frame was summer 2005.
> > >>> Oh, and by the way, you have STILL failed to answer my questions.
> >
> > >> From Oxford's reply: So this was back in 2005, that helps. Your
> > >> number is valid, but your
> > >> complaint seems to be tied to your PC, not the iPod mini."
> >
> > >> So, if I can no longer track the number, how can he? And, his
> > >> statement regarding the nature of the complaint is just dead wrong.
> >
> > > How do you know from that that he tracked the number?
> >
> > > He says "your number is valid", but maybe that just means he
> > > recognizes the format of an Apple repair number.
> >
> > He goes on to say that "your complaint seems to be tied to your PC"
> > which it wasn't." He is telling us what he read in the work order.
> > Again, if you want the full context, click on the link above and scroll
> > to July 3, 6:39pm. BTW, the work order was for a dead battery.
>
> Demanding quotes is Alan's way of discrediting others. But it's a
> different story when you ask him for references. Put him to the
> test: ask for a reference to the Mayor of R'lyeh saying Apple is
> going out of business. Alan claimed there was more of those posts
> than anybody could count, yet he can't produce a reference to even one.

Actually, I admitted I couldn't produce a reference (with one later
exception "rats leaving the sinking ship") and I don't expect anyone to
just take my word for it.

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."

Todd Allcock wrote:
> At 04 Jul 2007 23:13:09 -1000 BruceR wrote:
>
>> He goes on to say that "your complaint seems to be tied to your PC"
>> which it wasn't." He is telling us what he read in the work order.
>
>
> Oh for the love of God, Bruce, he wasn't telling us what he read- he
> was making yet another foolish comment that Apple is so superior to
> all other computing products that your PC HAD to be at fault because
> the iPod was Apple and your PC wasn't- earier in the thread he blamed
> your USB ports because PCs were made of "junk."
>
> He's just a troll and was baiting you. You bit; end of story.
>
>> Again, if you want the full context, click on the link above and
>> scroll to July 3, 6:39pm. BTW, the work order was for a dead battery.
>
> You told him that plenty of times, and he told you (I'm paraphrasing)
> it would've been impossible for Apple to sell you a defective product
> because they were Apple. It'd have been impossible for them to have
> failed to repair it correctly because they were Apple. And if you
> were dissatisfied with the product it was your fault obviously,
> because, after all, it was an Apple.
>
> There is nothing else to read into his postings!
>
> You can't argue using scientific meathod with a Zealot. He's an Apple
> zealot.

Thanks Todd, you're absolutly correct.

In article <[email protected]>, News <[email protected]> wrote:

> References in this thread are self-evident from context.
>
> Not to mention YOUR evidence is ... oops, none offered.
My argument was that your message was nonsensical and poorly written.
My evidence was your message. It is the most appropriate and accurate
evidence possible.

> And YOUR prior posting history is ... darn, none.
>
> Pot, kettle, etc. ???
I've participated in this group for many years.
I have used only two names.

> Don't even bother on the top/bottom issue. You got the message.
I did. I could. That's not true of many others.

What I wrote to you is reasons for you to change for YOUR benefit.
It would make it possible for YOUR messages to reach and be understood
by other people. Any sensible person would be trying to do that, since
posting is rather pointless without those qualities.



> Mitch wrote:
> > In article <[email protected]>, Kevin
> > Weaver <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Yes it is.
> >>
> >>If I were to say that it did not suck. Then what be posted then ?
> >>The company sucks. Can't paint it any brighter.
> >
> >
> > Well, let's see:
> > no reference to which company you mean
> > poor grammar
> > broken sentences
> > poor word choice
> >
> > and more importantly:
> > no evidence for the statement, which means it has no value at all.
> > None. Readers assign a value to your statements based on either your
> > reputation in previous writings or the evidence/arguments you present
> > in this one.
> >
> > You seem to have neither one, so whatever you say is just meaningless
> > until evidence is offered.

In article <[email protected]>, Kevin
Weaver <[email protected]> wrote:

> I'll top post every time. Don't like it, don't read it.


If you don't care for anyone to read your message, why bother posting?

Since the purpose of writing these and posting them is for others to
see them, why not participate in such a very simple way?
Why be combative, difficult, and childish?

This is how you have been taught to read and write ALL YOUR LIFE -- it
is acceptable and intelligent. Why fight that?

In article <[email protected]>,
Edwin <[email protected]> wrote:

> > He goes on to say that "your complaint seems to be tied to your PC"
> > which it wasn't." He is telling us what he read in the work order.
> > Again, if you want the full context, click on the link above and scroll
> > to July 3, 6:39pm. BTW, the work order was for a dead battery.
>
> Demanding quotes is Alan's way of discrediting others. But it's a
> different story when you ask him for references. Put him to the
> test: ask for a reference to the Mayor of R'lyeh saying Apple is
> going out of business. Alan claimed there was more of those posts
> than anybody could count, yet he can't produce a reference to even one.

I pointed to several such references at the time.

"All Of Macdom, Even Apple, Inc, Whistles Past The Graveyard"
<http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...lee8d1bor936at
1%404ax.com>

"...another Cube could put Apple''s credibility on life support"
<http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...3%24a05e1490%4
0news.netdirect.net>

"It looks like the ol'marketshare is set to slip again."
<http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...4pmvhov44qirj2
6%404ax.com>

"Apple Sales Go Down"
<http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...%24272ea4a1%40
news.execpc.com>

"they're still going out of business"
<http://groups.google.com/groups?selm...ajrepcbtp239je
4%404ax.com>

Not "more than can be counted" of course, but that's just a figure of
speech.


--
Sandman[.net]