"John Navas" <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in message
news:ui0pr31cjamk4bmqnuunrbjnbo9rqghda9@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 10:33:13 -0800, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
> wrote in <47bc71b5$0$36410$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:
>
>>Todd H. wrote:
>>
>>> As for a cite, anyone who visited news.cnet.com today would've tripped
>>> over the headline:
>>>
>>> http://www.news.com/Sprint-expected-...l?tag=nefd.top
>>
>>Actually I saw the "$60-80" from
>>"http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2008/02/20/ap4676170.html"
>>
>>It's always amusing to see "he who must not be named" demanding
>>citations for widely disseminated news stories, while at the same time
>>never providing citations for any of the claims he makes up, and never
>>providing any factual basis for disputing any of the citations that
>>others make.
>
> Total nonsense.

** Classic Navas response**
>
>>He's never provided a citation for extended GSM, despite repeated requests.
>
> Actually several of them.

**Nope John, not a single one**
>
>>He's never provided a citation disputing the accuracy of the network
>>quality surveys, despite repeated requests.
>
> Actually several of them.

**Nope John, not a single one**
>
>>He's never provided a citation disputing the USA Today story that Apple
>>approached Verizon with the iPhone prior to going to Cingular/AT&T,
>>despite repeated requests.
>
> There's no need to refute spin solely from Verizon.
> The other companies don't comment.
>
>>He complains that people treat him badly, but if he would change his
>>behavior he would be forgiven and perhaps he could make some useful
>>contributions.
>
> Total nonsense.

** Classic Navas response**
>
> --
> Best regards,
> John Navas <http:/navasgroup.com>
>
> "Usenet is like a herd of performing elephants with diarrhea - massive,
> difficult to redirect, awe inspiring, entertaining, and a source of mind
> boggling amounts of excrement when you least expect it." --Gene Spafford