Cingular Nation coverage

[Guest]

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

Hello all, I'm a newbie so please forgive if this is redundant.

I'm currently an ATTWS One Rate subscriber, contract long since
expired, and am in a group that will soon be dumped off to Alltel. I
love the plan and coverage I have now but am wasting no time crying
over losing it and Alltel's plans do not appeal to me. Moving to a
new plan on Cingular seems a viable option but I have questions about
coverage. Their map shows GSM coverage in some rural areas,
particularly in western Kansas and Nebraska to be rather spotty and my
work often takes me to rural areas in those and other southern and
central plains states. With ATTWS (sometimes with the help of an
external antenna) and an old Nokia 5160 I've had good coverage in
those areas, often managing to get a usable signal even where ATT's
maps show no coverage. Yes, I realize the maps are only guides but
compared to ATTWS maps of coverage in the same areas it appears I may
be giving up some areas I used to be able to work in and that is a
concern for me.

So my question is two fold. First, if I go with one of the Cingular
Nation plans what kind of coverage can I expect in the above mentioned
areas, And does "no roaming" mean exactly what it says, i.e. that if
I get a signal I can receive and make calls without facing roaming
charges. In other words if I got coverage in a certain area with my
old ATTWS plan can I expect coverage in the same area with Cingular
too?

And secondly, my new phone will need to be one that is better than
average at pulling in weak signals. Other features are secondary,
it's ability to work in fringe areas is of paramount importance. Any
recommendations will be greatly appreciated.

N.S.

 

[Guest]

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

> Their map shows GSM coverage in some rural areas,
> particularly in western Kansas and Nebraska to be rather spotty and my
> work often takes me to rural areas in those and other southern and
> central plains states. With ATTWS (sometimes with the help of an
> external antenna) and an old Nokia 5160 I've had good coverage in
> those areas, often managing to get a usable signal even where ATT's
> maps show no coverage. Yes, I realize the maps are only guides but
> compared to ATTWS maps of coverage in the same areas it appears I may
> be giving up some areas I used to be able to work in and that is a
> concern for me.
>
> So my question is two fold. First, if I go with one of the Cingular
> Nation plans what kind of coverage can I expect in the above mentioned
> areas, And does "no roaming" mean exactly what it says, i.e. that if
> I get a signal I can receive and make calls without facing roaming
> charges. In other words if I got coverage in a certain area with my
> old ATTWS plan can I expect coverage in the same area with Cingular
> too?
>
> And secondly, my new phone will need to be one that is better than
> average at pulling in weak signals. Other features are secondary,
> it's ability to work in fringe areas is of paramount importance. Any
> recommendations will be greatly appreciated.
>
> N.S.
>
External dual-band antenna like the Wilson trucker.
GSM nation plan with the "GAIT feature and TDMA/AMPS interoperbility"
SE tu62 phone.
A 3-watt amp is also useful but a little expensive.
You may have trouble finding the phone but it is cheap on ebay. If you look
on ebay the Nokia 6340i will also work.
AT&T "GAIT phones are locked to AT&TW"
The TDMA/AMPS mode should work in the Cingular/at&t aera that is without
GSM.
Some on this NG have reported problems that their GAIT phone would not work
properly, you may want to search old posts about "GAIT".

 

[Guest]

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

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

In <3pftt09i8cbqld275fpc2plj5v9bh52bh9@4ax.com> on Fri, 07 Jan 2005 11:02:14
-0600, Nathan S. <nate@nospam.com> wrote:

>Hello all, I'm a newbie so please forgive if this is redundant.

FYI, you can use Google Groups to search back articles and thus avoid
redundant postings.

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

 

[Guest]

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

In article <7eBDd.531$m31.6948@typhoon.sonic.net>,
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> >Hello all, I'm a newbie so please forgive if this is redundant.
>
> FYI, you can use Google Groups to search back articles and thus avoid
> redundant postings.

FYI, you can also use a killfile to avoid Navas's articles and thus
avoid...Navas.

 

[mark]

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

On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 19:16:19 GMT, John Navas
<spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

>[POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
>In <3pftt09i8cbqld275fpc2plj5v9bh52bh9@4ax.com> on Fri, 07 Jan 2005 11:02:14
>-0600, Nathan S. <nate@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>>Hello all, I'm a newbie so please forgive if this is redundant.
>
>FYI, you can use Google Groups to search back articles and thus avoid
>redundant postings.

What a jerk. Why didn't you just answer the question.

 

[Guest]

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

> External dual-band antenna like the Wilson trucker.
> GSM nation plan with the "GAIT feature and TDMA/AMPS interoperbility"
> SE tu62 phone.

I think it that if this works for you (planwise), you should be able to
get the Nokia 6340i phone (check eBay) and use it, that way you would
already have extra chargers/accessories, I believe it would be
compatible with the external antenna you are already using, but not
positive, so you'd have to verify.

Another option, but I'm not sure if you could do it, would be to "move"
to another ATTW area that Cingular is taking over. You would have to
get a new phone number if you could, but then you'd be a Cingular customer.

TH

 

[Guest]

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

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

In <airtt0h6pkomp84nvh932is1asjc424sif@4ax.com> on Fri, 07 Jan 2005 20:14:38
GMT, Mark <tigerfan@neo.rr.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 19:16:19 GMT, John Navas
><spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>>In <3pftt09i8cbqld275fpc2plj5v9bh52bh9@4ax.com> on Fri, 07 Jan 2005 11:02:14
>>-0600, Nathan S. <nate@nospam.com> wrote:
>>
>>>Hello all, I'm a newbie so please forgive if this is redundant.
>>
>>FYI, you can use Google Groups to search back articles and thus avoid
>>redundant postings.
>
>What a jerk.

Referring to yourself?

>Why didn't you just answer the question.

Because:

1. I'm under no obligation to do so (last time I checked at least.

2. It serves him better to tell him what to do in the future.

3. The question was already answered.

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

 

[Guest]

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

Thanks to Stanley Reynolds and Tropical Haven for usable replies.

 

[johnf]

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

This must be one of those useful and informative posts people were touting
the other day.

I hope those people get this far into the thread to realize that John Navas
MIGHT occasionaly provide SOME useful insight into a subject but about 98%
of the time this is what we get. If John doesn't know the answer to
something I wish he'd just refrain from posting.

"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:BwODd.733$m31.8313@typhoon.sonic.net...
> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <airtt0h6pkomp84nvh932is1asjc424sif@4ax.com> on Fri, 07 Jan 2005
> 20:14:38
> GMT, Mark <tigerfan@neo.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 19:16:19 GMT, John Navas
>><spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>
>>>In <3pftt09i8cbqld275fpc2plj5v9bh52bh9@4ax.com> on Fri, 07 Jan 2005
>>>11:02:14
>>>-0600, Nathan S. <nate@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>Hello all, I'm a newbie so please forgive if this is redundant.
>>>
>>>FYI, you can use Google Groups to search back articles and thus avoid
>>>redundant postings.
>>
>>What a jerk.
>
> Referring to yourself?
>
>>Why didn't you just answer the question.
>
> Because:
>
> 1. I'm under no obligation to do so (last time I checked at least.
>
> 2. It serves him better to tell him what to do in the future.
>
> 3. The question was already answered.
>
> --
> Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
> John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

 

[Guest]

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

My response here and the great majority of my other responses are far more
useful and informative than this posting of yours, a personal attack without
any relevant content that violates both the charter and Usenet guidelines.
Can you say "hypocrisy?" Have a nice day.

In <IOUDd.83494$uM5.21546@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> on Sat, 08 Jan
2005 17:32:24 GMT, "JohnF" <u85721@yahoo.com> wrote:

>This must be one of those useful and informative posts people were touting
>the other day.
>
>I hope those people get this far into the thread to realize that John Navas
>MIGHT occasionaly provide SOME useful insight into a subject but about 98%
>of the time this is what we get. If John doesn't know the answer to
>something I wish he'd just refrain from posting.
>
>"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>news:BwODd.733$m31.8313@typhoon.sonic.net...
>>
>> In <airtt0h6pkomp84nvh932is1asjc424sif@4ax.com> on Fri, 07 Jan 2005
>> 20:14:38
>> GMT, Mark <tigerfan@neo.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 19:16:19 GMT, John Navas
>>><spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>In <3pftt09i8cbqld275fpc2plj5v9bh52bh9@4ax.com> on Fri, 07 Jan 2005
>>>>11:02:14
>>>>-0600, Nathan S. <nate@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Hello all, I'm a newbie so please forgive if this is redundant.
>>>>
>>>>FYI, you can use Google Groups to search back articles and thus avoid
>>>>redundant postings.
>>>
>>>What a jerk.
>>
>> Referring to yourself?
>>
>>>Why didn't you just answer the question.
>>
>> Because:
>>
>> 1. I'm under no obligation to do so (last time I checked at least.
>>
>> 2. It serves him better to tell him what to do in the future.
>>
>> 3. The question was already answered.

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

 

[Guest]

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

In article <47VDd.780$m31.8175@typhoon.sonic.net>,
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> My response here and the great majority of my other responses are far more
> useful and informative than this posting of yours, a personal attack without
> any relevant content that violates both the charter and Usenet guidelines.

So, John, tell us: when are YOU going to abide by the charter and
Usenet guidelines?

Never. We know that. We just want to hear you try to justify yourself.

 

[Guest]

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

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

In <elmop-3B3E09.16495008012005@text.usenetserver.com> on Sat, 08 Jan 2005
16:49:50 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:

>In article <47VDd.780$m31.8175@typhoon.sonic.net>,
> John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>
>> My response here and the great majority of my other responses are far more
>> useful and informative than this posting of yours, a personal attack without
>> any relevant content that violates both the charter and Usenet guidelines.
>
>So, John, tell us: when are YOU going to abide by the charter and
>Usenet guidelines?

I always have. When are YOU going to do so?

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

 

[Guest]

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

In article <RNZDd.795$m31.9362@typhoon.sonic.net>,
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> >So, John, tell us: when are YOU going to abide by the charter and
> >Usenet guidelines?
>
> I always have.

You mean, like this post of yours?

 

[Dave]

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

Boys, boys, do I sense someone needs some quiet time

John Navas wrote:

> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <elmop-3B3E09.16495008012005@text.usenetserver.com> on Sat, 08 Jan 2005
> 16:49:50 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
>
>
>>In article <47VDd.780$m31.8175@typhoon.sonic.net>,
>>John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>My response here and the great majority of my other responses are far more
>>>useful and informative than this posting of yours, a personal attack without
>>>any relevant content that violates both the charter and Usenet guidelines.
>>
>>So, John, tell us: when are YOU going to abide by the charter and
>>Usenet guidelines?
>
>
> I always have. When are YOU going to do so?
>

 

[Guest]

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

In article <BjdEd.2063$KJ2.1905@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net>,
Dave <davids1955@earthlink.net> wrote:

> Boys, boys, do I sense someone needs some quiet time
>
> John Navas wrote:
>
> > [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
> >
> > In <elmop-3B3E09.16495008012005@text.usenetserver.com> on Sat, 08 Jan 2005
> > 16:49:50 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:
> >
> >
> >>In article <47VDd.780$m31.8175@typhoon.sonic.net>,
> >>John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>My response here and the great majority of my other responses are far more
> >>>useful and informative than this posting of yours, a personal attack
> >>>without
> >>>any relevant content that violates both the charter and Usenet guidelines.
> >>
> >>So, John, tell us: when are YOU going to abide by the charter and
> >>Usenet guidelines?
> >
> >
> > I always have. When are YOU going to do so?
> >

When someone has appointed themselves manager of this newsgroup (a
nonexistant position for an unmoderated newsgroup), they are free to run
roughshod over others who might disagree with them, or prove them wrong
whether it be Cingular's timing of buying AT&T Wireless, Cingular's easy
conversion of back office stuff (NOT), Cinular's conversion of all AT&T
Wirless stores (falsely claimed to have happened on Nov. 15) or legal
issues on making and distributing ringtones.

Navas can be proved wrong, but you'll be violating some of his rules for
pointing out same.

 

[Guest]

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

Jack Zwick answered:

> Navas can be proved wrong, but you'll be violating some of his rules for
> pointing out same.

I forgot to add, you must be anally bobbing on a carrot, just as I am,
when you try to prove Navas wrong.

 

[johnf]

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

No. A small percentage of your posts are informative. The rest are "not it's
not" and "search the Google groups". What useful information did you
actually convey to the original poster of this thread? My post was simply to
point out to your groupies that most of your posts are condescending and are
typically just there to oppose whatever someone else posts. I've never
claimed to be informative but my post was still more informative than yours
was.

Of course it was a personal attack. I'm glad you figured that out. I'm tired
of your trite flippant responses to peoples questions when you don't really
have an answer. If you have some useful information then by all means
provide it. If you don't have anything useful to add then just go on to the
next thread. Until then, be prepared to receive these types of responses
from myself and everyone else here who are tired of it. You can call it
hypocrisy if you like but I'm just following your example. Once you quit
posting usless threads everyone else will as well.

"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:47VDd.780$m31.8175@typhoon.sonic.net...
> My response here and the great majority of my other responses are far more
> useful and informative than this posting of yours, a personal attack
> without
> any relevant content that violates both the charter and Usenet guidelines.
> Can you say "hypocrisy?" Have a nice day.
>
> In <IOUDd.83494$uM5.21546@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> on Sat, 08
> Jan
> 2005 17:32:24 GMT, "JohnF" <u85721@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>>This must be one of those useful and informative posts people were touting
>>the other day.
>>
>>I hope those people get this far into the thread to realize that John
>>Navas
>>MIGHT occasionaly provide SOME useful insight into a subject but about 98%
>>of the time this is what we get. If John doesn't know the answer to
>>something I wish he'd just refrain from posting.
>>
>>"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>>news:BwODd.733$m31.8313@typhoon.sonic.net...
>>>
>>> In <airtt0h6pkomp84nvh932is1asjc424sif@4ax.com> on Fri, 07 Jan 2005
>>> 20:14:38
>>> GMT, Mark <tigerfan@neo.rr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 19:16:19 GMT, John Navas
>>>><spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>In <3pftt09i8cbqld275fpc2plj5v9bh52bh9@4ax.com> on Fri, 07 Jan 2005
>>>>>11:02:14
>>>>>-0600, Nathan S. <nate@nospam.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>Hello all, I'm a newbie so please forgive if this is redundant.
>>>>>
>>>>>FYI, you can use Google Groups to search back articles and thus avoid
>>>>>redundant postings.
>>>>
>>>>What a jerk.
>>>
>>> Referring to yourself?
>>>
>>>>Why didn't you just answer the question.
>>>
>>> Because:
>>>
>>> 1. I'm under no obligation to do so (last time I checked at least.
>>>
>>> 2. It serves him better to tell him what to do in the future.
>>>
>>> 3. The question was already answered.
>
> --
> Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
> John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>

 

[Guest]

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

In article <v1hEd.10510$c13.4305@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"JohnF" <u85721@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Of course it was a personal attack. I'm glad you figured that out. I'm tired
> of your trite flippant responses to peoples questions when you don't really
> have an answer. If you have some useful information then by all means
> provide it. If you don't have anything useful to add then just go on to the
> next thread.

I predict John Navas will ignore this advice completely. Further, he
will insist that anything he writes by definition follows the charter
and the accepted conventions of Usenet.

 

[Guest]

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

"Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote in message
news:elmop-8B47AC.18470609012005@text.usenetserver.com...
> In article <v1hEd.10510$c13.4305@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
> "JohnF" <u85721@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Of course it was a personal attack. I'm glad you figured that out. I'm
tired
> > of your trite flippant responses to peoples questions when you don't
really
> > have an answer. If you have some useful information then by all means
> > provide it. If you don't have anything useful to add then just go on to
the
> > next thread.
>
> I predict John Navas will ignore this advice completely. Further, he
> will insist that anything he writes by definition follows the charter
> and the accepted conventions of Usenet.


Oooooohhhh Boy!!! You guys are in BIG trouble now!!! He'll throw you off his
newsgroup.

--
SS

 

[Guest]

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

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

In <jzwick3-CAE8A5.12060709012005@news1.west.earthlink.net> on Sun, 09 Jan
2005 18:06:14 GMT, Jack "Chicken Little" Zwick <jzwick3@mindspring.com> wrote:

>When someone has appointed themselves manager of this newsgroup ...

No, just the creator. And you?

>prove them wrong
>whether it be Cingular's timing of buying AT&T Wireless,

Nope.

>Cingular's easy
>conversion of back office stuff (NOT),

Nope.

>Cinular's conversion of all AT&T
>Wirless stores (falsely claimed to have happened on Nov. 15)

Nope.

>or legal
>issues on making and distributing ringtones.

Nope.

0 for 4, even worse than your usual dismal average.

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

 

[Guest]

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

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

In <v1hEd.10510$c13.4305@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> on Sun, 09 Jan
2005 21:06:35 GMT, "JohnF" <u85721@yahoo.com> wrote:

>No. A small percentage of your posts are informative.

The majority are.

>The rest are "not it's
>not" and "search the Google groups".

Informative.

>What useful information did you
>actually convey to the original poster of this thread?

How to help himself.

>My post was simply to
>point out to your groupies that most of your posts are condescending and are
>typically just there to oppose whatever someone else posts.

Your post was just an off-topic ad hominem.

>I've never
>claimed to be informative but my post was still more informative than yours
>was.

Nope.

>Of course it was a personal attack.

And thus off-topic, a violation of the charter and Usenet guidelines, and
utterly uninformative.

>I'm glad you figured that out. I'm tired
>of your trite flippant responses to peoples questions when you don't really
>have an answer.

Tough luck.

>If you have some useful information then by all means
>provide it.

I do.

>If you don't have anything useful to add then just go on to the
>next thread.

Mind your own business.

>Until then, be prepared to receive these types of responses
>from myself and everyone else here who are tired of it.

Until then, when you act like a jerk, be prepared to be called a jerk.

>You can call it
>hypocrisy if you like

It is what it is.

>but I'm just following your example.

Nope.

>Once you quit
>posting usless threads everyone else will as well.

Hardly.

Have a nice day.

>"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
>news:47VDd.780$m31.8175@typhoon.sonic.net...
>> My response here and the great majority of my other responses are far more
>> useful and informative than this posting of yours, a personal attack
>> without
>> any relevant content that violates both the charter and Usenet guidelines.
>> Can you say "hypocrisy?" Have a nice day.

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

 

[Guest]

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

In article <XZqEd.1014$m31.12791@typhoon.sonic.net>,
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> [POSTED TO alt.cellular.cingular - REPLY ON USENET PLEASE]
>
> In <v1hEd.10510$c13.4305@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> on Sun, 09 Jan
> 2005 21:06:35 GMT, "JohnF" <u85721@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >No. A small percentage of your posts are informative.
>
> The majority are.
>
> >The rest are "not it's
> >not" and "search the Google groups".
>
> Informative.
>
> >What useful information did you
> >actually convey to the original poster of this thread?
>
> How to help himself.
>
How does this article of yours follow the charter and Usenet
conventions, John?

Oh, sorry. I caught you being a hypocrite again. Now come your forged
posts.

> >My post was simply to
> >point out to your groupies that most of your posts are condescending and are
> >typically just there to oppose whatever someone else posts.
>
> Your post was just an off-topic ad hominem.
>
> >I've never
> >claimed to be informative but my post was still more informative than yours
> >was.
>
> Nope.
>
> >Of course it was a personal attack.
>
> And thus off-topic, a violation of the charter and Usenet guidelines, and
> utterly uninformative.
>
> >I'm glad you figured that out. I'm tired
> >of your trite flippant responses to peoples questions when you don't really
> >have an answer.
>
> Tough luck.
>
> >If you have some useful information then by all means
> >provide it.
>
> I do.
>
> >If you don't have anything useful to add then just go on to the
> >next thread.
>
> Mind your own business.
>
> >Until then, be prepared to receive these types of responses
> >from myself and everyone else here who are tired of it.
>
> Until then, when you act like a jerk, be prepared to be called a jerk.
>
> >You can call it
> >hypocrisy if you like
>
> It is what it is.
>
> >but I'm just following your example.
>
> Nope.
>
> >Once you quit
> >posting usless threads everyone else will as well.
>
> Hardly.
>
> Have a nice day.
>
> >"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
> >news:47VDd.780$m31.8175@typhoon.sonic.net...
> >> My response here and the great majority of my other responses are far more
> >> useful and informative than this posting of yours, a personal attack
> >> without
> >> any relevant content that violates both the charter and Usenet guidelines.
> >> Can you say "hypocrisy?" Have a nice day.

 

[Guest]

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

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

In <elmop-8B47AC.18470609012005@text.usenetserver.com> on Sun, 09 Jan 2005
18:47:06 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty" <elmop@nastydesigns.com> wrote:

>In article <v1hEd.10510$c13.4305@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
> "JohnF" <u85721@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> Of course it was a personal attack. I'm glad you figured that out. I'm tired
>> of your trite flippant responses to peoples questions when you don't really
>> have an answer. If you have some useful information then by all means
>> provide it. If you don't have anything useful to add then just go on to the
>> next thread.
>
>I predict John Navas will ignore this advice completely. ...

For once you are right. But only this once.

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

 

[Guest]

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

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

In <34e47aF49k9qpU1@individual.net> on Sun, 9 Jan 2005 19:30:31 -0600,
"Shaolin Superfly" <shaolinsuperfly@yinyang.com> wrote:

>Oooooohhhh Boy!!! You guys are in BIG trouble now!!! He'll throw you off his
>newsgroup.

I'll actually just point how out how childish you both are.

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

 

[Guest]

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

"...stay on target.....stay on target"
"JohnF" <u85721@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:v1hEd.10510$c13.4305@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> No. A small percentage of your posts are informative. The rest are "not
it's
> not" and "search the Google groups". What useful information did you
> actually convey to the original poster of this thread? My post was simply
to
> point out to your groupies that most of your posts are condescending and
are
> typically just there to oppose whatever someone else posts. I've never
> claimed to be informative but my post was still more informative than
yours
> was.
>
> Of course it was a personal attack. I'm glad you figured that out. I'm
tired
> of your trite flippant responses to peoples questions when you don't
really
> have an answer. If you have some useful information then by all means
> provide it. If you don't have anything useful to add then just go on to
the
> next thread. Until then, be prepared to receive these types of responses
> from myself and everyone else here who are tired of it. You can call it
> hypocrisy if you like but I'm just following your example. Once you quit
> posting usless threads everyone else will as well.
>
> "John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
> news:47VDd.780$m31.8175@typhoon.sonic.net...
> > My response here and the great majority of my other responses are far
more
> > useful and informative than this posting of yours, a personal attack
> > without
> > any relevant content that violates both the charter and Usenet
guidelines.
> > Can you say "hypocrisy?" Have a nice day.
> >
> > In <IOUDd.83494$uM5.21546@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net> on Sat, 08
> > Jan
> > 2005 17:32:24 GMT, "JohnF" <u85721@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >>This must be one of those useful and informative posts people were
touting
> >>the other day.
> >>
> >>I hope those people get this far into the thread to realize that John
> >>Navas
> >>MIGHT occasionaly provide SOME useful insight into a subject but about
98%
> >>of the time this is what we get. If John doesn't know the answer to
> >>something I wish he'd just refrain from posting.
> >>
> >>"John Navas" <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
> >>news:BwODd.733$m31.8313@typhoon.sonic.net...
> >>>
> >>> In <airtt0h6pkomp84nvh932is1asjc424sif@4ax.com> on Fri, 07 Jan 2005
> >>> 20:14:38
> >>> GMT, Mark <tigerfan@neo.rr.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>On Fri, 07 Jan 2005 19:16:19 GMT, John Navas
> >>>><spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>In <3pftt09i8cbqld275fpc2plj5v9bh52bh9@4ax.com> on Fri, 07 Jan 2005
> >>>>>11:02:14
> >>>>>-0600, Nathan S. <nate@nospam.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>>Hello all, I'm a newbie so please forgive if this is redundant.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>FYI, you can use Google Groups to search back articles and thus avoid
> >>>>>redundant postings.
> >>>>
> >>>>What a jerk.
> >>>
> >>> Referring to yourself?
> >>>
> >>>>Why didn't you just answer the question.
> >>>
> >>> Because:
> >>>
> >>> 1. I'm under no obligation to do so (last time I checked at least.
> >>>
> >>> 2. It serves him better to tell him what to do in the future.
> >>>
> >>> 3. The question was already answered.
> >
> > --
> > Best regards, HELP FOR CINGULAR GSM & SONY ERICSSON PHONES:
> > John Navas <http://navasgrp.home.att.net/#Cingular>
>
>