>>> They are already delivering on that with the 2.0m sq km vs 1.6m sq km reach of NextG vs CDMA
>> Easy to claim. Hell of a lot harder to actually substantiate that claim.
> Its piss-easy for Telstra to substantiate,
Nope.
> simply supply a list of all base stations and their coverage ranges.
Doesnt substantiate a damned thing.
>>> Considering that many wanker Telstra customers complain to the MPs office.
>> Because telstra just fobs them off.
> No,
Yep.
> the average bloke who whinges to their MP is someone who doesnt get what they want.
Easy to claim. Hell of a lot harder to actually substantiate that claim.
> Stamping their foot and bunching their fist gets them nowhere
It just got Coonan shafting telstra with a telephone pole.
>>>>> Responding to the Government's establishment of a 1800 number to take Next GT network
>>>>> complaints, Geoff said this was also
>>>>> unnecessary as Telstra had its own customer service lines where
>>>>> customers could actually fix problems they might be experiencing.
>>>> Presumably the govt wont be trying to fob the callers off, stupid.
>>> Nor is Telstra.
>> Plenty have had telstra fob them off on that.
> Nope.
Yep.
> Just dickheads who cant understand how a mobile network works
Easy to claim. Hell of a lot harder to actually substantiate that claim.
>>>>> "It's an unnecessary link in the chain
>>>> Nope.
>>> Yep.
>> Nope.
>>> How is your MP going to fix a handset fault, give coverage advice or advise where to buy a patch
>>> cable?
>> They get to record who has complained and telstra
>> wont be able to claim that no one who complained
>> didnt have their problem resolved to their satisfaction.
> Telstra already record such issues anyway,
Easy to claim. Hell of a lot harder to actually substantiate that claim.
> so whats the point?
Independant documentation of those who claim to have got a worse result, stupid.
On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 16:25:35 +1000 in aus.comms.mobile Rod Speed may have written:
> > I just bought myself a Nokiua 6120c (been waiting for something decent
> > to appear for NextG). Rather pleased with it and the coverage NextG
> > offers. Seems they've gone well beyond "every CDMA cell is now also a
> > NextG cell" as far as the NextG roll-out in the city is concerned.
>
> They city aint what they need to do to be allowed to turn the cdma
> system off.
Oh, absolutely agree. Wasn't suggesting otherwise. Was merely commenting
that the in-city reception alone is very impressive. Only had it a week
and it hasn't left the metro area yet.
"Michael J" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:U7Wui.17938$4A1.2969@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> Yep, you are right. Its a great network
Mmmm... not - drop-outs non-stop in many locations & with different
handsets. 'tis a sub-standard network rammed in with much haste & little
concern for consumers.
"Paul Day" <pauls@enigma.id.au> wrote in message
news:1186743316.239866@colossus.enigma.id.au...
> On Fri, 10 Aug 2007 09:19:51 GMT in aus.comms.mobile Michael J may have
> written:
>> What free phones? hardly!
>
> You're denying Telstra staff get free mobiles?
"Lance Lyon" <llyon@landover.NOSPAM.no-ip.com> wrote in message
news:46c0ba28$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
> "Michael J" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:dnXvi.19926$4A1.13582@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
>>>> What free phones? hardly!
>>>
>>> You're denying Telstra staff get free mobiles?
>>
>> Depends on your definition of free
>
> Let's see, free handset, unlimted calls (except 1900 & intl), unlimited
> music downloads - no charges - that's a pretty good definition of free.
I was talking about ownership - I thought you were suggest Telstra staff are
given free mobiles, which they arent
Use of a corporate mobile is a different story.
Re: music downloads - corporate mobile services should not be indulging in
such
"Craig Welch" <craig@pacific.net.sg> wrote in message
news:Wmuwi.20496$4A1.20195@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
> Michael J wrote:
>
>>>> What free phones? hardly!
>>> You're denying Telstra staff get free mobiles?
>>
>> Depends on your definition of free
>
> 'Free' means that you don't have to pay anything.
>
> Please answer the question.
See post from a minute ago
>
> --
> Craig http://www.wazu.jp/
> 1,238 Unicode fonts for 75 written language groups:
"Michael J" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Tqfxi.21993$4A1.14500@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "Lance Lyon" <llyon@landover.NOSPAM.no-ip.com> wrote in message
> news:46c0ba28$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>> "Michael J" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:dnXvi.19926$4A1.13582@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>
>>>>> What free phones? hardly!
>>>>
>>>> You're denying Telstra staff get free mobiles?
>>>
>>> Depends on your definition of free
>>
>> Let's see, free handset, unlimted calls (except 1900 & intl), unlimited
>> music downloads - no charges - that's a pretty good definition of free.
>
> I was talking about ownership - I thought you were suggest Telstra staff
> are given free mobiles, which they arent
>
> Use of a corporate mobile is a different story.
>
> Re: music downloads - corporate mobile services should not be indulging in
> such
>
>
Telstra staff would not dare download music. Telstra have introduced such
draconian industrial policies such as tracking lines/tech staff vehicles
with GPS (subject to privacy lawas dispute with unions). Trujillo ordered
his senior executive to look at options to fire staff without need to pay
out redundacies - and they are doing just that.
"thegoons" <thegoons@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:46c58a90$0$16262$88260bb3@free.teranews.com.. .
>
> "Michael J" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:Tqfxi.21993$4A1.14500@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>
>> "Lance Lyon" <llyon@landover.NOSPAM.no-ip.com> wrote in message
>> news:46c0ba28$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>>> "Michael J" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>>> news:dnXvi.19926$4A1.13582@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>>
>>>>>> What free phones? hardly!
>>>>>
>>>>> You're denying Telstra staff get free mobiles?
>>>>
>>>> Depends on your definition of free
>>>
>>> Let's see, free handset, unlimted calls (except 1900 & intl), unlimited
>>> music downloads - no charges - that's a pretty good definition of free.
>>
>> I was talking about ownership - I thought you were suggest Telstra staff
>> are given free mobiles, which they arent
>>
>> Use of a corporate mobile is a different story.
>>
>> Re: music downloads - corporate mobile services should not be indulging
>> in such
>>
> Telstra staff would not dare download music. Telstra have introduced such
"Lance Lyon" <llyon@landover.NOSPAM.no-ip.com> wrote in message
news:46bae4fc$1@dnews.tpgi.com.au...
>
> "Michael J" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:qksui.17298$4A1.8838@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
>> Therre are already 2m 3G customers on Telstra, mostly on NextG. This is
>> more than CDMA EVER had.
>
> Yep & most of those are the free phones they gave to staff at the launch
> of the service!
"Most" of 2m? 1,000,001? Staff? That's some serious recruiting.
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5hv7r0F3j97e1U1@mid.individual.net...
> Its those that will determine when the govt allows telstra to turn the
> cdma system off.
It's not a case of "allow". As it stands Telstra is turning off CDMA on 28th
Jan. It does not need the Government's permission. The Government may
PREVENT this by passing a law, but that's different to Telstra needing to be
"allowed".
"Michael J" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:Tqfxi.21993$4A1.14500@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> Re: music downloads - corporate mobile services should not be indulging in
> such
Erm....staff are encouraged to use all the features of NextG.
"thegoons" <thegoons@bigpond.com> wrote in message
news:46c58a90$0$16262$88260bb3@free.teranews.com.. .
>>
> Telstra staff would not dare download music. Telstra have introduced such
> draconian industrial policies such as tracking lines/tech staff vehicles
> with GPS (subject to privacy lawas dispute with unions). Trujillo ordered
> his senior executive to look at options to fire staff without need to pay
> out redundacies - and they are doing just that.
Again, I hate to rain on your inane virtiol, but Telstra staff are
encouraged to use all the features of NextG.
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5k5q8uF28ubjU1@mid.individual.net...
> mattic <this@wontwork.com> wrote
>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>
>>> Its those that will determine when the govt allows telstra to turn
>>> the cdma system off.
>
>> It's not a case of "allow".
>
> Corse it is.
No, it is not. As it stands, Telstra does not need the Government's
permission to turn off CDMA.
>
>> As it stands Telstra is turning off CDMA on 28th Jan.
>
> No it aint, you watch.
Again, you are confusing what you think will happen, with the current facts.
>
>> It does not need the Government's permission.
>
> Yes it does when the govt adds that license condition.
If that occurs, sure, but it is not the current situation.
>
>> The Government may PREVENT this by passing a law,
>
> That aint the only way to do that.
What are some of the others?
>
>> but that's different to Telstra needing to be "allowed".
>
> Nope.
Having to pass a law to prevent something is different to not having to do
anything but give permission.
mattic <this@wontwork.com> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> mattic <this@wontwork.com> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> Its those that will determine when the govt allows telstra to turn the cdma system off.
>>> It's not a case of "allow".
>> Corse it is.
> No, it is not.
Corse it is.
> As it stands, Telstra does not need the Government's permission to turn off CDMA.
Wrong now that the govt has imposed the license condition.
>>> As it stands Telstra is turning off CDMA on 28th Jan.
>> No it aint, you watch.
> Again, you are confusing what you think will happen, with the current facts.
Nope, I know it wont, because there wouldnt be any point in the minister going
to the trouble of changing the license conditions if she didnt plan to use that.
With a bit of luck the govt will refuse to ever allow the cdma system to be turned off.
>>> It does not need the Government's permission.
>> Yes it does when the govt adds that license condition.
> If that occurs, sure, but it is not the current situation.
Yes it is.
>>> The Government may PREVENT this by passing a law,
>> That aint the only way to do that.
> What are some of the others?
Adding a license condition. That doesnt have to be done by passing a law.
>>> but that's different to Telstra needing to be "allowed".
>> Nope.
> Having to pass a law to prevent something is different to not having to do anything but give permission.
There never was any 'give permission' in the first place.
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5k68dlF2bf44U1@mid.individual.net...
> mattic <this@wontwork.com> wrote
>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>> mattic <this@wontwork.com> wrote
>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>
>>>>> Its those that will determine when the govt allows telstra to turn the
>>>>> cdma system off.
>
>>>> It's not a case of "allow".
>
>>> Corse it is.
>
>> No, it is not.
>
> Corse it is.
Anything to offer here apart from the automatic gain-saying of whatever
point is made?
>
>> As it stands, Telstra does not need the Government's permission to turn
>> off CDMA.
>
> Wrong now that the govt has imposed the license condition.
Have they? I must have missed that. Do you have a link or something to
substantiate your claim?
>
>>>> As it stands Telstra is turning off CDMA on 28th Jan.
>
>>> No it aint, you watch.
>
>> Again, you are confusing what you think will happen, with the current
>> facts.
>
> Nope, I know it wont, because there wouldnt be any point in the minister
> going
> to the trouble of changing the license conditions if she didnt plan to use
> that.
Ministers go to the trouble of things all the time and don't use them.
>
> With a bit of luck the govt will refuse to ever allow the cdma system to
> be turned off.
Why do you wish for that?
>
>>>> It does not need the Government's permission.
>
>>> Yes it does when the govt adds that license condition.
>
>> If that occurs, sure, but it is not the current situation.
>
> Yes it is.
As I said, cite.
>
>>>> The Government may PREVENT this by passing a law,
>
>>> That aint the only way to do that.
>
>> What are some of the others?
>
> Adding a license condition. That doesnt have to be done by passing a law.
>
>>>> but that's different to Telstra needing to be "allowed".
>
>>> Nope.
>
>> Having to pass a law to prevent something is different to not having to
>> do anything but give permission.
>
> There never was any 'give permission' in the first place.
mattic <this@wontwork.com> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> mattic <this@wontwork.com> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> mattic <this@wontwork.com> wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>> Its those that will determine when the govt allows telstra to turn the cdma system off.
>>>>> It's not a case of "allow".
>>>> Corse it is.
>>> No, it is not.
>> Corse it is.
> Anything to offer here apart from the automatic gain-saying of whatever point is made?
Thats precisely what you did yourself, you pathetic excuse for a lying bullshit artist.
>>> As it stands, Telstra does not need the Government's permission to turn off CDMA.
>> Wrong now that the govt has imposed the license condition.
> Have they?
Yep.
> I must have missed that.
No surprises there.
> Do you have a link or something to substantiate your claim?
Have a look at Coonan's press releases, fuckwit.
>>>>> As it stands Telstra is turning off CDMA on 28th Jan.
>>>> No it aint, you watch.
>>> Again, you are confusing what you think will happen, with the current facts.
>> Nope, I know it wont, because there wouldnt be any point in the minister going
>> to the trouble of changing the license conditions if she didnt plan to use that.
> Ministers go to the trouble of things all the time and don't use them.
Bet you cant list Coonan doing anything like that with a license condition.
>> With a bit of luck the govt will refuse to ever allow the cdma system to be turned off.
> Why do you wish for that?
Because there is no good reason for those who are happy with cdma to change
their handset just because telstra has decided to force them to do that.
Telstra should be told to go and fuck itself instead.
>>>>> It does not need the Government's permission.
>>>> Yes it does when the govt adds that license condition.
>>> If that occurs, sure, but it is not the current situation.
>> Yes it is.
> As I said, cite.
As I said, check Coonan's press releases.
>>>>> The Government may PREVENT this by passing a law,
>>>> That aint the only way to do that.
>>> What are some of the others?
>> Adding a license condition. That doesnt have to be done by passing a law.
>>>>> but that's different to Telstra needing to be "allowed".
>>>> Nope.
>>> Having to pass a law to prevent something is different to not having to do anything but give permission.
>> There never was any 'give permission' in the first place.
"mattic" <this@wontwork.com> wrote in message
news:KdfDi.31038$4A1.18186@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "Michael J" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:Tqfxi.21993$4A1.14500@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>
>> Re: music downloads - corporate mobile services should not be indulging
>> in such
>
> Erm....staff are encouraged to use all the features of NextG.
"mattic" <this@wontwork.com> wrote in message
news:KdfDi.31036$4A1.1942@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:5hv7r0F3j97e1U1@mid.individual.net...
>
>> Its those that will determine when the govt allows telstra to turn the
>> cdma system off.
>
> It's not a case of "allow". As it stands Telstra is turning off CDMA on
> 28th Jan. It does not need the Government's permission. The Government may
> PREVENT this by passing a law, but that's different to Telstra needing to
> be "allowed".
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5k6u3sF2d09dU1@mid.individual.net...
> mattic <this@wontwork.com> wrote
>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>> mattic <this@wontwork.com> wrote
>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>> mattic <this@wontwork.com> wrote
>>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>
>>>>>>> Its those that will determine when the govt allows telstra to turn
>>>>>>> the cdma system off.
>
>>>>>> It's not a case of "allow".
>
>>>>> Corse it is.
>
>>>> No, it is not.
>
>>> Corse it is.
>
>> Anything to offer here apart from the automatic gain-saying of whatever
>> point is made?
>
> Thats precisely what you did yourself, you pathetic excuse for a lying
> bullshit artist.
You'll have to do a lot better than tu quoque.
>
>>>> As it stands, Telstra does not need the Government's permission to turn
>>>> off CDMA.
>
>>> Wrong now that the govt has imposed the license condition.
>
>> Have they?
>
> Yep.
Prove it.
>
>> I must have missed that.
>
> No surprises there.
No, seeing as how it has not happened.
>
>> Do you have a link or something to substantiate your claim?
>
> Have a look at Coonan's press releases, fuckwit.
Supply them. Link them. It's your claim. Prove it.
>
>>>>>> As it stands Telstra is turning off CDMA on 28th Jan.
>
>>>>> No it aint, you watch.
>
>>>> Again, you are confusing what you think will happen, with the current
>>>> facts.
>
>>> Nope, I know it wont, because there wouldnt be any point in the minister
>>> going
>>> to the trouble of changing the license conditions if she didnt plan to
>>> use that.
>
>> Ministers go to the trouble of things all the time and don't use them.
>
> Bet you cant list Coonan doing anything like that with a license
> condition.
I don't need to.
>
>>> With a bit of luck the govt will refuse to ever allow the cdma system to
>>> be turned off.
>
>> Why do you wish for that?
>
> Because there is no good reason for those who are happy with cdma to
> change
> their handset just because telstra has decided to force them to do that.
How did we get on to handsets all of a sudden? Is this tangent in mitigation
if your failure to address the actual point?
>
> Telstra should be told to go and fuck itself instead.
>
>>>>>> It does not need the Government's permission.
>
>>>>> Yes it does when the govt adds that license condition.
>
>>>> If that occurs, sure, but it is not the current situation.
>
>>> Yes it is.
>
>> As I said, cite.
>
> As I said, check Coonan's press releases.
Cite. You're the one making the claim.
>
>>>>>> The Government may PREVENT this by passing a law,
>
>>>>> That aint the only way to do that.
>
>>>> What are some of the others?
>
>>> Adding a license condition. That doesnt have to be done by passing a
>>> law.
>
>>>>>> but that's different to Telstra needing to be "allowed".
>
>>>>> Nope.
>
>>>> Having to pass a law to prevent something is different to not having to
>>>> do anything but give permission.
>
>>> There never was any 'give permission' in the first place.
>
>> No, because it wasn't needed.
>
> Pity about your original claim/lie.
"Michael" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:aDtDi.31519$4A1.17247@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
> "mattic" <this@wontwork.com> wrote in message
> news:KdfDi.31038$4A1.18186@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>
>> "Michael J" <michael@yahoo.com> wrote in message
>> news:Tqfxi.21993$4A1.14500@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>>>
>>> Re: music downloads - corporate mobile services should not be indulging
>>> in such
>>
>> Erm....staff are encouraged to use all the features of NextG.
>
> Not ones which incur third party charges
I see what you mean. Kicking the arse out of 3rd party stuff would not be
good. But occasional useage is fine. It does get grey here, though.
mattic <this@wontwork.com> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>> mattic <this@wontwork.com> wrote
>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>> mattic <this@wontwork.com> wrote
>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>> mattic <this@wontwork.com> wrote
>>>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>>>> Its those that will determine when the govt allows telstra to turn the cdma system off.
>>>>>>> It's not a case of "allow".
>>>>>> Corse it is.
>>>>> No, it is not.
>>>> Corse it is.
>>> Anything to offer here apart from the automatic gain-saying of whatever point is made?
>> Thats precisely what you did yourself, you pathetic excuse for a lying bullshit artist.
> You'll have to do a lot better than tu quoque.
Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.
>>>>> As it stands, Telstra does not need the Government's permission to turn off CDMA.
>>>> Wrong now that the govt has imposed the license condition.
>>> Have they?
>> Yep.
> Prove it.
Have a look at Coonan's press releases, fuckwit.
>>> I must have missed that.
>> No surprises there.
> No, seeing as how it has not happened.
Just another or your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys.
>>> Do you have a link or something to substantiate your claim?
>> Have a look at Coonan's press releases, fuckwit.
> Supply them. Link them.
Go and fuck yourself.
> It's your claim. Prove it.
Go and fuck yourself.
I told you where to find what you want.
>>>>>>> As it stands Telstra is turning off CDMA on 28th Jan.
>>>>>> No it aint, you watch.
>>>>> Again, you are confusing what you think will happen, with the current facts.
>>>> Nope, I know it wont, because there wouldnt be any point in the minister going
>>>> to the trouble of changing the license conditions if she didnt plan to use that.
>>> Ministers go to the trouble of things all the time and don't use them.
>> Bet you cant list Coonan doing anything like that with a license condition.
> I don't need to.
Corse you do.
YOU made that stupid claim.
YOU get to do the proving on that stupid claim.
THATS how it works.
>>>> With a bit of luck the govt will refuse to ever allow the cdma system to be turned off.
>>> Why do you wish for that?
>> Because there is no good reason for those who are happy with cdma to change
>> their handset just because telstra has decided to force them to do that.
> How did we get on to handsets all of a sudden?
Thats why anyone with a clue doesnt want the cdma system turned off, fuckwit.
> Is this tangent in mitigation if your failure to address the actual point?
Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.
>> Telstra should be told to go and fuck itself instead.
>>>>>>> It does not need the Government's permission.
>>>>>> Yes it does when the govt adds that license condition.
>>>>> If that occurs, sure, but it is not the current situation.
>>>> Yes it is.
>>> As I said, cite.
>> As I said, check Coonan's press releases.
> Cite.
I told you where to find it. You dont get to demand just one response.
> You're the one making the claim.
I told you where to find it.
>>>>>>> The Government may PREVENT this by passing a law,
>>>>>> That aint the only way to do that.
>>>>> What are some of the others?
>>>> Adding a license condition. That doesnt have to be done by passing a law.
>>>>>>> but that's different to Telstra needing to be "allowed".
>>>>>> Nope.
>>>>> Having to pass a law to prevent something is different to not
>>>>> having to do anything but give permission.
>>>> There never was any 'give permission' in the first place.
Oh, dear, Rodney. You've ceased to bring anything even amusing to the
conversation, let alone informative. I think I'll just leave you to your
inane observations about things in your immediate vicinity.
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:5kb34hF2unigU1@mid.individual.net...
> mattic <this@wontwork.com> wrote
>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>> mattic <this@wontwork.com> wrote
>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>> mattic <this@wontwork.com> wrote
>>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>>>>>>> mattic <this@wontwork.com> wrote
>>>>>>>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
>
>>>>>>>>> Its those that will determine when the govt allows telstra to turn
>>>>>>>>> the cdma system off.
>
>>>>>>>> It's not a case of "allow".
>
>>>>>>> Corse it is.
>
>>>>>> No, it is not.
>
>>>>> Corse it is.
>
>>>> Anything to offer here apart from the automatic gain-saying of whatever
>>>> point is made?
>
>>> Thats precisely what you did yourself, you pathetic excuse for a lying
>>> bullshit artist.
>
>> You'll have to do a lot better than tu quoque.
>
> Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.
>
>>>>>> As it stands, Telstra does not need the Government's permission to
>>>>>> turn off CDMA.
>
>>>>> Wrong now that the govt has imposed the license condition.
>
>>>> Have they?
>
>>> Yep.
>
>> Prove it.
>
> Have a look at Coonan's press releases, fuckwit.
>
>>>> I must have missed that.
>
>>> No surprises there.
>
>> No, seeing as how it has not happened.
>
> Just another or your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys.
>
>>>> Do you have a link or something to substantiate your claim?
>
>>> Have a look at Coonan's press releases, fuckwit.
>
>> Supply them. Link them.
>
> Go and fuck yourself.
>
>> It's your claim. Prove it.
>
> Go and fuck yourself.
>
> I told you where to find what you want.
>
>>>>>>>> As it stands Telstra is turning off CDMA on 28th Jan.
>
>>>>>>> No it aint, you watch.
>
>>>>>> Again, you are confusing what you think will happen, with the current
>>>>>> facts.
>
>>>>> Nope, I know it wont, because there wouldnt be any point in the
>>>>> minister going
>>>>> to the trouble of changing the license conditions if she didnt plan to
>>>>> use that.
>
>>>> Ministers go to the trouble of things all the time and don't use them.
>
>>> Bet you cant list Coonan doing anything like that with a license
>>> condition.
>
>> I don't need to.
>
> Corse you do.
>
> YOU made that stupid claim.
>
> YOU get to do the proving on that stupid claim.
>
> THATS how it works.
>
>>>>> With a bit of luck the govt will refuse to ever allow the cdma system
>>>>> to be turned off.
>
>>>> Why do you wish for that?
>
>>> Because there is no good reason for those who are happy with cdma to
>>> change
>>> their handset just because telstra has decided to force them to do that.
>
>> How did we get on to handsets all of a sudden?
>
> Thats why anyone with a clue doesnt want the cdma system turned off,
> fuckwit.
>
>> Is this tangent in mitigation if your failure to address the actual
>> point?
>
> Never ever could bullshit its way out of a wet paper bag.
>
>>> Telstra should be told to go and fuck itself instead.
>
>>>>>>>> It does not need the Government's permission.
>
>>>>>>> Yes it does when the govt adds that license condition.
>
>>>>>> If that occurs, sure, but it is not the current situation.
>
>>>>> Yes it is.
>
>>>> As I said, cite.
>
>>> As I said, check Coonan's press releases.
>
>> Cite.
>
> I told you where to find it. You dont get to demand just one response.
>
>> You're the one making the claim.
>
> I told you where to find it.
>
>>>>>>>> The Government may PREVENT this by passing a law,
>
>>>>>>> That aint the only way to do that.
>
>>>>>> What are some of the others?
>
>>>>> Adding a license condition. That doesnt have to be done by passing a
>>>>> law.
>
>>>>>>>> but that's different to Telstra needing to be "allowed".
>
>>>>>>> Nope.
>
>>>>>> Having to pass a law to prevent something is different to not
>>>>>> having to do anything but give permission.
>
>>>>> There never was any 'give permission' in the first place.
>
>>>> No, because it wasn't needed.
>
>>> Pity about your original claim/lie.
>
>> non-sequitur.
>
> Bare faced lie.
>
Re: Minister's licence condition unnecessary 