John Navas - Does Cingular pay you?

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

What is the amount of money that Cingular pays you,
John Navas?


The reason for the question is obvious.

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

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

In <EeYBd.7272$JC2.1450@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> on Sun, 02 Jan 2005
19:48:52 GMT, "torresD" <torresd30@hotmail.com> wrote:

>What is the amount of money that Cingular pays you,
>John Navas?

Zero. I have no connection to Cingular (or any other cellular company) other
than as a customer.

>The reason for the question is obvious.

Not to me.

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

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

On Sun, 02 Jan 2005 15:20:20 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
<elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:

>He just takes blowjobs from the streetcorner dealers.

Not helpful ... actually less than worthless and quit immature. If
you can't play nice, then take your ball and go home.

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:ru_Bd.16151$_3.188176@typhoon.sonic.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <EeYBd.7272$JC2.1450@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> on Sun, 02 Jan
> 2005
> 19:48:52 GMT, "torresD" <torresd30@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>>What is the amount of money that Cingular pays you,
>>John Navas?
>
> Zero. I have no connection to Cingular (or any other cellular company)
> other
> than as a customer.
>
>>The reason for the question is obvious.
>
> Not to me.
>
> --
> Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
> John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

So you consider what you do a public service, Navas?

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

I have found Mr Navas's posts to be very helpfull and informative. Unlike
the very uninfomative and head in the sewer comments made by others. The
idea that someone just likes to be helpfull is lost on a lot of the younger
generation.
"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:ru_Bd.16151$_3.188176@typhoon.sonic.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <EeYBd.7272$JC2.1450@newsread2.news.atl.earthlink.net> on Sun, 02 Jan
2005
> 19:48:52 GMT, "torresD" <torresd30@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >What is the amount of money that Cingular pays you,
> >John Navas?
>
> Zero. I have no connection to Cingular (or any other cellular company)
other
> than as a customer.
>
> >The reason for the question is obvious.
>
> Not to me.
>
> --
> Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
> John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

On Mon, 03 Jan 2005 12:55:23 GMT, Leo Curran wrote:

>I have found Mr Navas's posts to be very helpfull and informative. Unlike
>the very uninfomative and head in the sewer comments made by others. The
>idea that someone just likes to be helpfull is lost on a lot of the younger
>generation.

I have found *some* of his posts helpful too. At times, however, he is
arrogant and places himself out there as the be-all, end-all. While he
admits not being affiliated with Cingular, occasionally citing that
he's only a customer, he paints a picture of himself as the ultimate
cellular guru, quite often speaking as if he single-handedly founded
Cingular. When I started reading through this group several months
ago, I initially wondered why so many were "picking on him." The
reason is now quite obvious.

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

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

In <elmop-584210.17531602012005@text.usenetserver.com> on Sun, 02 Jan 2005
17:53:16 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:

>In article <ru_Bd.16151$_3.188176@typhoon.sonic.net>,
> John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> >The reason for the question is obvious.
>>
>> Not to me.
>
>Which tells all, John. Which tells all.

Indeed.

>You're oblivious.

Backwards again.

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

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

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

In <jzwick3-A3AF96.09471503012005@news1.west.earthlink.net> on Mon, 03 Jan
2005 15:48:42 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

>[John] is to be commended for founding this newsgroup, but he still
>thinks he can run it and control it, when as an unmoderated newsgroup,
>nothing is further from the truth.

Case in point: your behavior.

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

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

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

In <elmop-1F205A.15350503012005@text.usenetserver.com> on Mon, 03 Jan 2005
15:35:05 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:

>In article <10tj9imkjj4vode@corp.supernews.com>,
> John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> >So you consider what you do a public service, Navas?
>>
>> I do. Takes a fair amount of work to create a newsgroup like this.
>
>Tell us (a) how many hours you spent doing so, and (b) when that was.

Why?

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

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular, alt.cellular.verizon, alt.cellular, alt.cellular.motorola, alt.cellular.ericsson (More info?)

Winnie the Pooh started alt.cellular.verizon, and she says it took all
of the time to take the cookies out of the oven.

Who started the other "cellular" groups?

Starting a group is like smacking a fool in the face, it takes no time
at all!

Cheers!

ps: John Navas needs a real job and to get off of his knees in servile
submission to the cell phone dynasties. Or to get some knee pads and
find a few hobbies so he does not irritate so many other posters with
his poppycock.

Maybe he could go into business with Scott Stephenson, say earplugs or
something, for monks in Tibet? Or janitor at the US State Department,
or call taker for one of the cell phone customer service centers
outsourced to India.

JohnF wrote:
> "John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
> news:10tjbl694hk2nf5@corp.supernews.com...
> > [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
> >
> > In <elmop-1F205A.15350503012005@text.usenetserver.com> on Mon, 03
Jan 2005
> > 15:35:05 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
> >
> > >In article <10tj9imkjj4vode@corp.supernews.com>,
> > > John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> >So you consider what you do a public service, Navas?
> > >>
> > >> I do. Takes a fair amount of work to create a newsgroup like
this.
> > >
> > >Tell us (a) how many hours you spent doing so, and (b) when that
was.
> >
> > Why?
>
> Because you claim it takes so much time. Even if you did in fact
"create"
> this newsgroup you act as though someone else wouldn't have come up
wit
> hthis unique idea if you hadn't done it. Since you're patting
yourself on
> the back so hard please explain how much time it takes and what's
involved
> with "creating a newsgroup". I'm very interested.

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

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

In <CLjCd.63740$uM5.47317@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> on Mon, 03 Jan
2005 22:34:10 GMT, "JohnF" <u8721@yahoo.com> wrote:

>"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>news:10tjbl694hk2nf5@corp.supernews.com...
>>
>> In <elmop-1F205A.15350503012005@text.usenetserver.com> on Mon, 03 Jan 2005
>> 15:35:05 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
>>
>> >In article <10tj9imkjj4vode@corp.supernews.com>,
>> > John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> >So you consider what you do a public service, Navas?
>> >>
>> >> I do. Takes a fair amount of work to create a newsgroup like this.
>> >
>> >Tell us (a) how many hours you spent doing so, and (b) when that was.
>>
>> Why?
>
>Because you claim it takes so much time.

How would it be any more meaningful that what I've already said?

>Even if you did in fact "create"
>this newsgroup

I did. Check if you don't believe me.

>you act as though someone else wouldn't have come up wit
>hthis unique idea if you hadn't done it.

Nobody else had. Talk is cheap. Have you ever created a newsgroup? Have you
any idea what's involved? Get some experience before you presume to deprecate
others (unless you just enjoy making yourself look petty).

>Since you're patting yourself on
>the back so hard

I did nothing of the kind. I simply stated a fact for the benefit of those
(like you) that were unaware of it.

>please explain how much time it takes and what's involved
>with "creating a newsgroup". I'm very interested.

See:
http://www.visi.com/~barr/alt-creation-guide.html
http://nylon.net/alt/newgroup.htm
http://www.gweep.ca/~edmonds/usenet/good-newgroup.html

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

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

In article <10tjbl694hk2nf5@corp.supernews.com>,
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> >Tell us (a) how many hours you spent doing so, and (b) when that was.
>
> Why?

Context.

You made it sound like you spend lots of your time making the newsgroup
work--when you don't.

No, you spent a few hours a long time ago, and yet you're trying to milk
that for sympathy.

In the words of so many great ones: what have you done for me *lately*?

Nothing.

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

In article <IimCd.16330$_3.190640@typhoon.sonic.net>,
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> >You made it sound like you spend lots of your time making the newsgroup
> >work--when you don't.
>
> Nope. I said it "takes a fair amount of work to create a newsgroup like
> this"* -- and it did (past tense).

Let's put some context to that quote of yours. Here's the FULL exchange:

> >So you consider what you do a public service, Navas?
>
> I do. Takes a fair amount of work to create a newsgroup
> like this. And you?

Hmmmm. Someone asks you about something in the active present tense:
"so you consider what you DO a public service?" See how that works?
What you DO. Not what you DID. What you DO. As in, everything you
post here, all day long, every day. The whole "Navas blowhard" thing.
What you DO. Not what you *did*.

And you said that you DO consider it a public service--and as an
example, you say that "it TAKES (present tense) work to create a
newsgroup..."

Present tense there, Navas? "It TAKES"? What, are you spending lots of
time every day creating and managing things here?

See, we know what you meant. What you meant is that you think you own
this newsgroup, because you think that you are the be-all and end-all of
knowledge. You post to excess, and you think that what you do here is
somehow required of you.

Everything you said, put in CONTEXT, points to you thinking that you
MUST take daily action here, and that you consider that a "public
service".

Let me ask you again, since you so pointedly dodged the question: how
long did it take you to "create" this newsgroup (number of minutes,
hours, days, etc. over how many sessions) and how long ago was that?

Answer that simple question, and then tell us how hard you work TODAY.
And why.

Why would be a great thing to know. Better yet is your telling us just
why you think what you do here is a public service. Not what you DID in
one brief period many, many years ago; what you DO. NOW. TODAY. And
DAILY. EVERY DAY. Why do you consider that a public service?

And why can't you get over the fact that one time, you "created" a
newsgroup? I'll tell you why: because you think this is YOUR
newsgroup, that it belongs to YOU personally, and that if you keep
telling the world that you "created" it maybe the world will "give" it
to you to take home at night and sleep with.

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular,alt.cellular.verizon,alt.cellular,alt.cellular.motorola,alt.cellular.ericsson (More info?)

John Navas wrote:
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <1104795946.784029.18290@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> on 3 Jan 2005
> 15:45:46 -0800, "CHELSEA" <chelsea_57@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>>Winnie the Pooh started alt.cellular.verizon, and she says it took all
>>of the time to take the cookies out of the oven.
>>
>>Who started the other "cellular" groups?
>>
>>Starting a group is like smacking a fool in the face, it takes no time
>>at all!
>
>
> How many successful newsgroups have you created? Or are you just shooting off
> your mouth? ;-)
>
> The hard part is not in creating an alt newsgroup, but in doing it right.
> alt.cellular.cingular was successful from the beginning because I followed
> proper procedures and persuaded major news providers to carry it.
>
>
>>ps: John Navas needs a real job ...
>
>
> I have a real job. You need some real manners (unless you enjoy making
> yourself look childish).
>



I see SMARTASS John Navas is still acting like a jerk on yet ANOTHER
newsgroup. His reputation from comp.dcom.modems still carries on.

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

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

In <elmop-710783.22081903012005@text.usenetserver.com> on Mon, 03 Jan 2005
22:08:19 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:

>In article <IimCd.16330$_3.190640@typhoon.sonic.net>,
> John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> >You made it sound like you spend lots of your time making the newsgroup
>> >work--when you don't.
>>
>> Nope. I said it "takes a fair amount of work to create a newsgroup like
>> this"* -- and it did (past tense).
>
>Let's put some context to that quote of yours. Here's the FULL exchange:
>
> > >So you consider what you do a public service, Navas?
> >
> > I do. Takes a fair amount of work to create a newsgroup
> > like this. And you?
>
>Hmmmm. Someone asks you about something in the active present tense:
>"so you consider what you DO a public service?" See how that works?

Not "active present tense" (whatever you mean by that).

>What you DO. Not what you DID. What you DO.

What I "do" isn't necessarily time sensitive (except of course to you).

>And you said that you DO consider it a public service--and as an
>example, you say that "it TAKES (present tense) work to create a
>newsgroup..."

Not present tense (except of course to you).

>See, we know what you meant. ...

Would that be the "royal we" (or your multiple personalities?

>Let me ask you again, since you so pointedly dodged the question: how
>long did it take you to "create" this newsgroup (number of minutes,
>hours, days, etc. over how many sessions) and how long ago was that?

Let me tell you again, you don't deserve any answers.

>Answer that simple question, and then tell us how hard you work TODAY.
>And why.

Would that be the "royal us" (or your multiple personalities?

>Why would be a great thing to know. Better yet is your telling us just
>why you think what you do here is a public service. Not what you DID in
>one brief period many, many years ago; what you DO. NOW. TODAY. And
>DAILY. EVERY DAY. Why do you consider that a public service?

Has value (unlike your posts). Costs nothing. Simple really.

>And why can't you get over the fact that one time, you "created" a
>newsgroup?

I've gotten over it. It's you that hasn't. Jealousy? Resentment? Lack of
self worth? All of the above?

>I'll tell you why: because you think this is YOUR
>newsgroup, that it belongs to YOU personally, and that if you keep
>telling the world that you "created" it maybe the world will "give" it
>to you to take home at night and sleep with.

Nope. Only in your twisted imagination.

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

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

In article <cTnCd.16350$_3.190883@typhoon.sonic.net>,
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> >> Nobody else had. Talk is cheap. Have you ever created a newsgroup? Have
> >> you
> >> any idea what's involved?
> >
> >Since you won't tell us.....probably because there's about zero effort
> >involved, especially nowadays.....and your showing zero effort would
> >show you to be the blowhard you are, for the world to see...
>
> In other words, you have no clue (as usual).

I have more clue than you can ever know.



> Go crawl back under your rock.

You really don't like me, because I can expose you for the fraud you are.

Dancing with you is enjoyable--because everyone gets to see what a
stumblebum you really are.

Next time: newsgroup 101.

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

In article <a_nCd.16351$_3.190989@typhoon.sonic.net>,
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> >Let me ask you again, since you so pointedly dodged the question: how
> >long did it take you to "create" this newsgroup (number of minutes,
> >hours, days, etc. over how many sessions) and how long ago was that?
>
> Let me tell you again, you don't deserve any answers.

In other words, you know you've been outed on all of this, and you
refuse to answer based on the grounds that it may tend to incriminate
you.

What is it you do, anyway? Come here and be a blowhard?

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

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

In <elmop-8B4C27.23260403012005@text.usenetserver.com> on Mon, 03 Jan 2005
23:26:04 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:

>In article <cTnCd.16350$_3.190883@typhoon.sonic.net>,
> John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

>> In other words, you have no clue (as usual).
>
>I have more clue than you can ever know.

LOL

>> Go crawl back under your rock.
>
>You really don't like me, because I can expose you for the fraud you are.

I just don't respect you, because you lack manners and respect for the rights
of others. I neither like nor dislike you.

>Next time: newsgroup 101.

Hopefully you'll learn something, but I tend to doubt it.

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

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

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

In <elmop-2711F2.23281203012005@text.usenetserver.com> on Mon, 03 Jan 2005
23:28:12 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:

>In article <a_nCd.16351$_3.190989@typhoon.sonic.net>,
> John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> >Let me ask you again, since you so pointedly dodged the question: how
>> >long did it take you to "create" this newsgroup (number of minutes,
>> >hours, days, etc. over how many sessions) and how long ago was that?
>>
>> Let me tell you again, you don't deserve any answers.
>
>In other words, you know you've been outed on all of this, and you
>refuse to answer based on the grounds that it may tend to incriminate
>you.

No, 0 for 2.

>What is it you do, anyway? ...

Consulting. And you?

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

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

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

In <jzwick3-0FC3D4.03585804012005@news1.west.earthlink.net> on Tue, 04 Jan
2005 10:00:26 GMT, Jack Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

>Worse yet his his lame attempts to be an overbearing moderator enforcing
>a self-written charter which is meaningless in an unmoderated newsgroup
>as this is. He lambasts someone who once in their life mentions they are
>selling one phone on ebay; but lets slide without complaint Porno spam.

Wrong on all counts. Par for your course.

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

Archived from groups: alt.cellular.cingular (More info?)

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

In <KEyCd.66360$uM5.47087@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> on Tue, 04 Jan
2005 15:30:50 GMT, "JohnF" <u85721@yahoo.com> wrote:

>"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>news:jSlCd.16325$_3.190582@typhoon.sonic.net...
>> See:
>> http://www.visi.com/~barr/alt-creation-guide.html
>> http://nylon.net/alt/newgroup.htm
>> http://www.gweep.ca/~edmonds/usenet/good-newgroup.html
>
>Thank you for providing the references

You're welcome.

>(and proving my point).

I didn't (but you are of course free to claim whatever you want).

>Look pretty
>straight forward.

But then you've never actually done it.

>A new cell company starts up called "xyz cellular". People
>start talking about it on another group (or I generate discussion by
>blessing everyone with my wisdom on the subject). Since I can show there is
>already discussion (10 posts per day) and can provide a simple argument that
>because there is enough discussion and it makes sense that there should be a
>group for a new cellular company the group 'alt.cellular.xyz' gets created.

Just like that? That's not how it works.

>Since there are already 22 different 'alt.cellular' groups

On your news server. Others have less or more. That's the nature of alt,
where many created newsgroups fail to establish themselves.

>that argument
>can't be that intense.

That just shows lack of experience.

>If you spent hours on this you tried too hard.

You have no idea what you're talking about.

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