Steven's Myth of Verizon AMPS coverage in the San Francisco Bay Area
Page 7 - Steven's Myth of Verizon AMPS coverage in the San Francisco Bay Area. Discuss Steven's Myth of Verizon AMPS coverage in the San Francisco Bay Area, on Wireless Forums.
Re: Steven's Myth of Verizon AMPS coverage in the San Francisco BayArea
Thanks for the plonk!
clifto wrote:
Kevin Weaver wrote:
[!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"] [html] [head] [meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type"] [title][/title] [/head] [body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"] Is this another one of those top post vs don't top post ?[br] Show me a law where it says no html.. Thought so.[br] [br] [br] John Navas wrote: [blockquote cite="midci7h039t8mfe180vgo6ifcn8oa5ie64s10@4ax.com " type="cite"] [pre wrap=""]On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 03:26:16 GMT, Kevin Weaver [a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href=[url="mailto:kevinkeithweaver@sbcglobal.net"]"mailto:kevinkeithweaver@sbcglobal.net"
Re: Steven's Myth of Verizon AMPS coverage in the San Francisco BayArea
Kevin Weaver wrote:
> Is this another one of those top post vs don't top post ?
> Show me a law where it says no html.. Thought so.
<snip>
Someone asks you, nicely ("Please turn off HTML when posting
to Usenet. Thanks."), to make it easier for everyone to read
your posts, and you come back with some childish response.
Re: Steven's Myth of Verizon AMPS coverage in the San Francisco BayArea
clifto wrote:
> Kevin Weaver wrote:
>> [!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"]
>>
HTML Code:
>> [head]
>> [meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1" http-equiv="Content-Type"]
>> [title][/title]
>> [/head]
>> [body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"]
>> Is this another one of those top post vs don't top post ?[br]
>> Show me a law where it says no html.. Thought so.[br]
>> [br]
>> [br]
>> John Navas wrote:
>> [blockquote cite="midci7h039t8mfe180vgo6ifcn8oa5ie64s10@4ax.com"
>> type="cite"]
>> [pre wrap=""]On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 03:26:16 GMT, Kevin Weaver
>> [a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:kevinkeithweaver@sbcglobal.net"]<kevinkeithweaver@sbcglobal.net>[/a] wrote in
>> [a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:s3HNh.1829$YL5.1742@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net"]<s3HNh.1829$YL5.1742@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>[/a]:
>>
>> [/pre]
>> [blockquote type="cite"]
>> [pre wrap=""][SNIP]
>> [/pre]
>> [/blockquote]
>> [pre wrap=""][!----]
>> Please turn off HTML when posting to Usenet. Thanks.
>>
>> [/pre]
>> [/blockquote]
>> [/body]
>>
>
> Here's what your article looked like before I plonked you. Asshole.
>
What newsreader are you using?
With Thunderbird, the only indication that someone is posting using HTML
is that the font looks a little different, and the ASCII emoticons turn
to a little picture of a face. I never get any all of the source displayed.
True, it's better to not post in HTML, but I don't think that it's all
that big a deal.
Re: Steven's Myth of Verizon AMPS coverage in the San Francisco BayArea
Thanks, I did that just to piss off Navas.
Other then that. I do use Thunderbird and can switch HTML On or off on
the fly.
I don't ever post in HTML, but when Navas brought it up, I just forgot
to turn it off.
Now, If everyone else wants to chime in. Let the love flow.
SMS wrote:
> clifto wrote:
>> Kevin Weaver wrote:
>>> [!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN"]
>>>
HTML Code:
>>> [head]
>>> [meta content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1"
>>> http-equiv="Content-Type"]
>>> [title][/title]
>>> [/head]
>>> [body bgcolor="#ffffff" text="#000000"]
>>> Is this another one of those top post vs don't top post ?[br]
>>> Show me a law where it says no html.. Thought so.[br]
>>> [br]
>>> [br]
>>> John Navas wrote:
>>> [blockquote cite="midci7h039t8mfe180vgo6ifcn8oa5ie64s10@4ax.com"
>>> type="cite"]
>>> [pre wrap=""]On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 03:26:16 GMT, Kevin Weaver
>>> [a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
>>> href="mailto:kevinkeithweaver@sbcglobal.net"]<kevinkeithweaver@sbcglobal.net>[/a]
>>> wrote in
>>> [a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E"
>>> href="mailto:s3HNh.1829$YL5.1742@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net"]<s3HNh.1829$YL5.1742@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net>[/a]:
>>>
>>>
>>> [/pre]
>>> [blockquote type="cite"]
>>> [pre wrap=""][SNIP]
>>> [/pre]
>>> [/blockquote]
>>> [pre wrap=""][!----]
>>> Please turn off HTML when posting to Usenet. Thanks.
>>>
>>> [/pre]
>>> [/blockquote]
>>> [/body]
>>>
>>
>> Here's what your article looked like before I plonked you. Asshole.
>>
>
> What newsreader are you using?
>
> With Thunderbird, the only indication that someone is posting using
> HTML is that the font looks a little different, and the ASCII
> emoticons turn to a little picture of a face. I never get any all of
> the source displayed.
>
> True, it's better to not post in HTML, but I don't think that it's all
> that big a deal.
Re: Steven's Myth of Verizon AMPS coverage in the San Francisco BayArea
No problem dude.
Notan wrote:
> Kevin Weaver wrote:
>> Thanks, I did that just to piss off Navas.
>
> <snip>
>
> In the future, if you want to piss him off, just point out
> the inaccuracies of his posts, or ask him to back them up
> with facts (not opinions).
>
> Sorry for the "asshole" comment!
>
Re: Steven's Myth of Verizon AMPS coverage in the San Francisco BayArea
Notan wrote:
> Kevin Weaver wrote:
>> Thanks, I did that just to piss off Navas.
>
> <snip>
>
> In the future, if you want to piss him off, just point out
> the inaccuracies of his posts, or ask him to back them up
> with facts (not opinions).
You could spend your entire life pointing out his inaccuracies. Asking
for him to back up his statements with facts has been tried by many
posters, to no avail of course because there are never any facts
available to back up his statements. This thread alone is ample proof of
that!
The best solution is to kill-file him. He thrives on the attention and
responses that his fabrications and spamming provoke. Deny him the
attention and he might change his ways. There are people like him on
virtually every unmoderated Usenet group, they exist to be disruptive
and annoying. You learn to work around these people using filters.
Kill-filing helps to resist the temptation to respond to every lie that
he posts.
[Copied to alt.cellular.attws. Please post all alt.cellular.cingular
posts to alt.cellular.attws as well. The Cingular name is going away,
and alt.cellular.attws is the proper venue for posts regarding AT&T's
Wireless Service.]
Re: Steven's Myth of Verizon AMPS coverage in the San Francisco Bay Area
John Navas <spamfilter0@navasgroup.com> wrote in
news:7g7h031koovc5ri70ghbjiehpcn606mir5@4ax.com:
> On Mon, 26 Mar 2007 10:27:26 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
> wrote in <46080281$0$27200$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:
>
>>Scott wrote:
>>
>>> Sure it is- he backed it up just like you do. He typed it- on Navas
>>> World that constitutes unrefutable fact.
>>
>>Actually the citation is statements from the carriers to some of their
>>corporate customers that rely on AMPS coverage in some areas.
>
> Still no citations. Why am I not surprised.
>
His citations matched yours about your little trip to the park- therefore
you have no basis to question their validity, pinhead.
Re: Steven's Myth of Verizon AMPS coverage in the San Francisco Bay Area
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 14:56:47 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in <46099321$0$27253$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:
>The best solution is to kill-file him. He thrives on the attention and
>responses that his fabrications and spamming provoke. Deny him the
>attention and he might change his ways. There are people like him on
>virtually every unmoderated Usenet group, they exist to be disruptive
>and annoying. You learn to work around these people using filters.
>Kill-filing helps to resist the temptation to respond to every lie that
>he posts.
You're described yourself very well.
At least you've got something right.
--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>
Re: Steven's Myth of Verizon AMPS coverage in the San Francisco BayArea 
Linear Mode
