In alt.cellular.cingular james g. keegan jr. <jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote:
> In article <zNyfh.3503$Yy1.1876@textfe.usenetserver.com>,
> "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy71@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> In alt.cellular.sprintpcs james g. keegan jr. <jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > you apparently are new to usenet.
>> >
>>
>> Hardly.
>
> i was responding to your actions, not your actual longevity. you act
> like a newbie.
Why, because I don't prejudge unsupported suppositions as false?
>>
>> > the claims remain unsupported.
>>
>> That is EXACTLY what I just said. YOU said they were false by default,
>
> because they were unsuppported.
>
>> which I completely disagree with.
>
> you may accept unsupported allegations as fact. when i ask for claims
> to be supported, and they are not, i conclude that the claims are
> false.
You seem to read what you like. I don't accept unsupported allegations as
fact, and haven't once said that. I said I take unsupported allegations as
"unsupported". They are nothing more or less than that. Obviously, it
depends upon the author of those allegations as to whether you believe them to
be true or false, but that is an entirely different discussion.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
In article <1uhgh.3567$Yy1.1821@textfe.usenetserver.com>,
"Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy71@yahoo.com> wrote:
> In alt.cellular.cingular james g. keegan jr. <jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In article <zNyfh.3503$Yy1.1876@textfe.usenetserver.com>,
> > "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy71@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> In alt.cellular.sprintpcs james g. keegan jr. <jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > you apparently are new to usenet.
> >> >
> >>
> >> Hardly.
> >
> > i was responding to your actions, not your actual longevity. you act
> > like a newbie.
>
> Why, because I don't prejudge unsupported suppositions as false?
there is no prejudging about it.
had you been in usenet newsgroups for any length of time, you would
have known that.
>
> >>
> >> > the claims remain unsupported.
> >>
> >> That is EXACTLY what I just said. YOU said they were false by default,
> >
> > because they were unsuppported.
> >
> >> which I completely disagree with.
> >
> > you may accept unsupported allegations as fact. when i ask for claims
> > to be supported, and they are not, i conclude that the claims are
> > false.
>
> You seem to read what you like. I don't accept unsupported allegations as
> fact, and haven't once said that. I said I take unsupported allegations as
> "unsupported". They are nothing more or less than that. Obviously, it
> depends upon the author of those allegations as to whether you believe them to
> be true or false, but that is an entirely different discussion.
the unsupported allegations i responded to remain unsupported.
In alt.cellular.cingular james g. keegan jr. <jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> the unsupported allegations i responded to remain unsupported.
THAT IS WHAT IS SAID! You are the one that said if they are unsupported then
they are presumed to be false! That is an incorrect statement that YOU made
and now you back pedal?
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
In article <E6igh.3573$Yy1.1626@textfe.usenetserver.com>,
"Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy71@yahoo.com> wrote:
> In alt.cellular.cingular james g. keegan jr. <jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > the unsupported allegations i responded to remain unsupported.
>
> THAT IS WHAT IS SAID!
when you spend a few more months in newsgroups, you'll learn about
typing in all uppercase, i hope.
> You are the one that said if they are unsupported then
> they are presumed to be false!
which is accurate
> That is an incorrect statement
that is why it was never supported, and why i told you it was false.
you seem to be struggling with concepts.
In alt.cellular.cingular james g. keegan jr. <jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote:
> In article <E6igh.3573$Yy1.1626@textfe.usenetserver.com>,
> "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy71@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>> In alt.cellular.cingular james g. keegan jr. <jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > the unsupported allegations i responded to remain unsupported.
>>
>> THAT IS WHAT IS SAID!
>
> when you spend a few more months in newsgroups, you'll learn about
> typing in all uppercase, i hope.
>
Yes ... I was yelling at you. I know what I did. I also know that I have
fallen victim to a troll.
>
>> You are the one that said if they are unsupported then
>> they are presumed to be false!
>
>
> which is accurate
>
>
>> That is an incorrect statement
>
> that is why it was never supported, and why i told you it was false.
> you seem to be struggling with concepts.
Alright ... you can claim an unsupported arguement means that it is false if
you like ... that is bound to further your cause [whatever that may be].
But as for you, you are clearly trolling now and I will not follow you
further.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: D281 77A5 63EE 82C5 5E68 00E4 7868 0ADC 4EFB 39F0
In article <2tigh.3574$Yy1.2863@textfe.usenetserver.com>,
"Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy71@yahoo.com> wrote:
> In alt.cellular.cingular james g. keegan jr. <jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote:
> > In article <E6igh.3573$Yy1.1626@textfe.usenetserver.com>,
> > "Thomas T. Veldhouse" <veldy71@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >
> >> In alt.cellular.cingular james g. keegan jr. <jgkeegan@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > the unsupported allegations i responded to remain unsupported.
> >>
> >> THAT IS WHAT IS SAID!
> >
> > when you spend a few more months in newsgroups, you'll learn about
> > typing in all uppercase, i hope.
> >
>
> Yes ... I was yelling at you. I know what I did.
Re: Consumer Reports survey on Customer Service 
Linear Mode
