"David Floyd" <david@floyd.org.uk> wrote in message
news:tpp5rZCo9d0EFw8$@127.0.0.1
> In message of Thu, 3 Aug 2006, ŽStephen Hammond writes
> > I'm sure they offered it don't they any more or
> > something ?
>
> Who are you talking about?
> Who are 'they'
The age-old question. Who indeed are "they" or "them" as they're often
known. They're always watching, I know that..! They also have a lot to
answer for.
Ivor Jones wrote:
> "David Floyd" <david@floyd.org.uk> wrote in message
> news:tpp5rZCo9d0EFw8$@127.0.0.1
> > In message of Thu, 3 Aug 2006, ŽStephen Hammond writes
> > > I'm sure they offered it don't they any more or
> > > something ?
> >
> > Who are you talking about?
> > Who are 'they'
>
> The age-old question. Who indeed are "they" or "them" as they're often
> known. They're always watching, I know that..! They also have a lot to
> answer for.
>
>
To be fair the OP does name the company in the title.... internetcalls
OK - he didn't say internetcalls.com, but then a lot of people post
talking about sipgate... when they are talking about sipgate.co.uk or
whatever.
Don't know the answer Stephen, but I had wondered about that myself,
'cos a friend was thinking about taking the plunge with them.
In message of Thu, 3 Aug 2006, paul123 writes
>
>Ivor Jones wrote:
>> "David Floyd" <david@floyd.org.uk> wrote in message
>> news:tpp5rZCo9d0EFw8$@127.0.0.1
>> > In message of Thu, 3 Aug 2006, ŽStephen Hammond writes
>> > > I'm sure they offered it don't they any more or
>> > > something ?
>> >
>> > Who are you talking about?
>> > Who are 'they'
>>
>> The age-old question. Who indeed are "they" or "them" as they're often
>> known. They're always watching, I know that..! They also have a lot to
>> answer for.
>>
>>
>
>To be fair the OP does name the company in the title.... internetcalls
>
Not clear at all - I took it that a space was missed and that he was
referring to 'internet calls'. I didn't know there was a company called
'internetcalls' - How daft!
> Not clear at all - I took it that a space was missed and that he was
> referring to 'internet calls'.
Ok, I would respectfully suggest that you made a false assumption
then....
> I didn't know there was a company called
> 'internetcalls' - How daft!
Whether the name is daft, or not, it *has* been mentioned in at least
20 previous threads on this forum.... http://groups.google.com/group/uk.te...rch+this+group
.. As a regular with over 350 posts to this group, I would have thought
you might have seen the name before.....
paul123 pretended :
> David Floyd wrote:
>
>> Not clear at all - I took it that a space was missed and that he was
>> referring to 'internet calls'.
>
> Ok, I would respectfully suggest that you made a false assumption
> then....
>
>> I didn't know there was a company called
>> 'internetcalls' - How daft!
>
> Whether the name is daft, or not, it *has* been mentioned in at least
> 20 previous threads on this forum....
> http://groups.google.com/group/uk.te...rch+this+group
> . As a regular with over 350 posts to this group, I would have thought
> you might have seen the name before.....
Jono wrote:
> paul123 pretended :
> > David Floyd wrote:
[snip]
> >> I didn't know there was a company called
> >> 'internetcalls' - How daft!
> >
> > Whether the name is daft, or not, it *has* been mentioned in at least
> > 20 previous threads on this forum....
[snip]
> Perhaps he meant he was daft, not the name? :')
Aha! Must have been MY false ASSumption then! Whether or not we get to
the bottom of this, it really doesn't matter... :)
Back to the original question - there are a few posts on the voipbuster
forums in the general discussion section regarding this question.
basically they say (don't know if it's true or not) that they have no
further Voip-in numbers to give out - until further notice (however
long that is).
"paul123" <paul@redy.net> wrote in message
news:1154629749.133614.190880@p79g2000cwp.googlegr oups.com...
> Jono wrote:
>> paul123 pretended :
>> > David Floyd wrote:
> [snip]
>> >> I didn't know there was a company called
>> >> 'internetcalls' - How daft!
>> >
>> > Whether the name is daft, or not, it *has* been mentioned in at least
>> > 20 previous threads on this forum....
> [snip]
>> Perhaps he meant he was daft, not the name? :')
> Aha! Must have been MY false ASSumption then! Whether or not we get to
> the bottom of this, it really doesn't matter... :)
>
> Back to the original question - there are a few posts on the voipbuster
> forums in the general discussion section regarding this question.
> basically they say (don't know if it's true or not) that they have no
> further Voip-in numbers to give out - until further notice (however
> long that is).
>
I can't believe they've got /active/ accounts for how ever many numbers
they've given out. They could just reclaim a few.
In message of Thu, 3 Aug 2006, paul123 writes
>
>David Floyd wrote:
>
>> Not clear at all - I took it that a space was missed and that he was
>> referring to 'internet calls'.
>
>Ok, I would respectfully suggest that you made a false assumption
>then....
>
>> I didn't know there was a company called
>> 'internetcalls' - How daft!
>
>Whether the name is daft, or not, it *has* been mentioned in at least
>20 previous threads on this forum....
Do I have to write 100 lines 'I must pay attention to ALL postings to
uk.telecom.voip' Sir!
Jono wrote:
> "paul123" <paul@redy.net> wrote in message
{snip}
> > Back to the original question - there are a few posts on the voipbuster
> > forums in the general discussion section regarding this question.
> > basically they say (don't know if it's true or not) that they have no
> > further Voip-in numbers to give out - until further notice (however
> > long that is).
> >
>
> I can't believe they've got /active/ accounts for how ever many numbers
> they've given out. They could just reclaim a few.
Yes, I would have thought there'd be some numbers back in the pool from
accounts where the credit had expired, but....
I just logged into a voipdiscount account I setup and paid credit into
for a friend back in April. The account also had a voip-in number
associated with it. The credit has now run out, but the voip-in number
is still showing in the account. I thought you automatically lost the
number if you didn't top up the credit before it expired. Strange.
paul123 wrote:
> Back to the original question - there are a few posts on the voipbuster
> forums in the general discussion section regarding this question.
> basically they say (don't know if it's true or not) that they have no
> further Voip-in numbers to give out - until further notice (however
> long that is).
It seems an odd coincidence that stocks of numbers would run out for a
dozen countries at once. Maybe whoever they were getting the numbers
from changed the terms or charges.
andy wrote:
> paul123 wrote:
> > Back to the original question - there are a few posts on the voipbuster
> > forums in the general discussion section regarding this question.
> > basically they say (don't know if it's true or not) that they have no
> > further Voip-in numbers to give out - until further notice (however
> > long that is).
>
> It seems an odd coincidence that stocks of numbers would run out for a
> dozen countries at once.
Yes, I agree, it is somewhat odd, hence my "don't know if it's true"
comment.
> Maybe whoever they were getting the numbers
> from changed the terms or charges.
There was also speculation along those lines in the VB forums.
"paul123" <paul@redy.net> wrote in message
news:1154614673.991726.287750@m79g2000cwm.googlegr oups.com...
>
> David Floyd wrote:
>
>> Not clear at all - I took it that a space was missed and that he was
>> referring to 'internet calls'.
>
> Ok, I would respectfully suggest that you made a false assumption
> then....
I'd suggest that his typo assumption was well founded, based on the fact
that the OP can't spell and doesn't have a fucking clue what grammar is.
internetcalls incomming number 
Linear Mode
