Virgin Media order staff that no maintenance work to be done.
o p @secret.com Gonz
LOL just shut up shop and be done with it!
Capn Jack Sparrow
"Gonz" <T o p @ S e c r e t . c o m> wrote in message
news:I3hZi.1677$I55....@fe103.usenetserver.com...
> all network maintenance work has stopped since 7th Nov.
>
> LOL just shut up shop and be done with it!
Is this planned Network Maintenance, which could be for a whole raft of
reasons, or of all maintenance, including faults, which is more worrying?
Well to Virgin Media customer that it.
Cap'n Jack
o p @secret.com Gonz
"Capn Jack Sparrow" <black...@the.end.of.the.eearth.com> wrote in
message news:L4mdncvs5bdxPKja...@bt.com...
From a Virgin Media employee...
"as of 10-30 wed 7/11/07 quote all network maintenance work will cease
and desist unquote ,staff will totally concentrate on cab clean ups,
this means no preventative maintenance at all which will seriously
affect the performance of tv and broadband , another bout of managerial
madness"
Capn Jack Sparrow
"Gonz" <T o p @ S e c r e t . c o m> wrote in message
<snip>
> ,staff will totally concentrate on cab clean ups,
Sounds like they have a lot of 'small' faults and problems they need to
clear, and they are concentrating on them for the moment.
Just a case of using your resource to the best advantage. To the end user
who has no TV / Phone / Broadband due to a CAB fault, they probably care
little about 'preventative maintenance' and just want their service back.
Maybe the briefing could have been worded a bit better, or there is more to
it that has not made it into the public domain.
Cap'n Jack
o p @secret.com Gonz
I think if it's 'preventative maintenance' then it's probly to let the
faults that cud have bin prevented from normal maintenance bein carried
out, mount up, and make people pay 25p a minute on the phone, to report
faults that shud have bin prevented from normal everyday maintenace :o)
Carl Waring
>
> Tom.
As per usual for certain people in this group :-D
--
Carl Waring
DigiGuide:
Full: http://getdigiguide.com/?p=1&r=1495
Freeview (free): http://getdigiguide.com/?p=4&r=1495
Web-based: http://getdigiguide.com/?p=3&r=1495
o p @secret.com Gonz
"Tom" <non...@noaddy.nospam.uk> wrote in message
news:25abj39pdmge3mssf...@4ax.com...
I wouldn't say so.
Even the bloke who's job role is the maintenance, doesn't think so.
Woody
news:tsAZi.21570$6v....@newsfe2-gui.ntli.net...
I think we should have a new newsgroup "uk.VirginMediaConspiracy"
--
Woody
Remove NOSPAM to reply.
TKelly
"Gonz" <T o p @ S e c r e t . c o m> wrote in message
I doubt you know anyone working for Virgin. Is everything you post your own
invention made to look like it was said by another person? It seems that
way to me. Either give names or stop it. If what the person said is true
then he will have no problem with you identifying him. If you can't then I
will say it is a total fabrication by one or two people to make Virgin look
bad.
No doubt Virgin have disconnected you or done something to annoy you - or
maybe you can't afford to be a customer? Who knows!
o p @secret.com Gonz
"TKelly" <k...@waitrose5.nospam.com> wrote in message
news:47375cae$1...@mk-nntp-2.news.uk.tiscali.com...
>>>>
>>>
>>> So! It's a panic about diddley squat?
>>
>> I wouldn't say so.
>> Even the bloke who's job role is the maintenance, doesn't think so.
>
> I doubt you know anyone working for Virgin.
I actually do.
They're just normal people you know.
> Is everything you post your own invention made to look like it was
> said by another person?
No.
It's just you.
> It seems that way to me.
See previous.
> Either give names or stop it.
Why shud I have to give names?
I'm not askin you to verify me for membership or summat.
I'm just tellin you... no names have to be given when I'm tellin you
summat.
> If what the person said is true then he will have no problem with you
> identifying him.
Daddy Smurf.
> If you can't then I will say it is a total fabrication by one or two
> people to make Virgin look bad.
See previous.
> No doubt Virgin have something to annoy you
Latest bein them claiming to be officialy the fastest broadband
supplier, when they're not,
> or maybe you can't afford to be a customer?
Too right... I only get £130 a day.
> Who knows!
Stewpid does.
Mike
If 'cab clean up' means a wash, prime, respray and wax with new locks
and seals fitted with a valet inside and a wiring rationalisation then
this might impact on service availability in the short term but long
term this will ultimately improve the QoS. If nothing is done then
the service will be as shit now as it was last week as it will be in
the future. Street cabinets with doors hanging off and covered in
graffiti hardly inspire confidence to potential customers, no do
cabinets with useless batteries and ratsnest wiring. Having call
centres offshore is just the final nail in the coffin.
When Virgin/ntl realise that their network hardware and their
customers are their most important assets and provide quality staff to
cater for them then I might possibly consider moving from BT. Until
then they are just a mildly amusing cowboy outfit financed by short
termism endemic in just about every country in the world.
Virgin/ntl emphasize beyond any doubt that a long term monopoly
supplier like BT can always do things much better than any newcomer,
that's not to say that competition can't be effective it just need
financiers that aren't money grabbing morons.
--
Mark McIntyre
<k...@waitrose5.nospam.com> wrote:
>No doubt Virgin have disconnected you or done something to annoy you - or
>maybe you can't afford to be a customer? Who knows!
You're spot on with that guess, FWIW.
>
--
Mark McIntyre
Alex Brown
This is incorrect, plenty of proactive network maintenance is underway
as per normal, and the tecchies are also fixing faults when they occur
as per usual.
HTH
Alex
--
Alex Brown
Senior Product Manager
Product Management, Virgin Media
Mike Scott
...
> as per normal, and the tecchies are also fixing faults when they occur
or not, as the case may be.
Following your advice of some time ago I took a DNS problem to the vm
cable support group. That was on 14th Sept.
I'm still waiting. All I get (when I prompt, usually weekly) is that
tech support is looking into it, or it's been escalated or, last week,
zilch.
Ticket 559972 was given for this on 28th sept. Escalated on 3rd Nov. or
so I was told.
Very discouraging. My instinct is that tech support are so far out of
their depth, they haven't a clue where to start looking so just don't
bother. I hope I'm wrong.
--
Mike Scott (unet <at> scottsonline.org.uk)
Harlow Essex England
Alex Brown
<usen...@spam.stopper.scottsonline.org.uk> wrote:
>Alex Brown wrote:
>...
>> as per normal, and the tecchies are also fixing faults when they occur
>> as per usual....
>
>or not, as the case may be.
>
>Following your advice of some time ago I took a DNS problem to the vm
>cable support group. That was on 14th Sept.
Mike
I'll look into this.
Mike Scott
> On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 17:06:49 GMT, Mike Scott
> <usen...@spam.stopper.scottsonline.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> Alex Brown wrote:
>> ...
>>> as per normal, and the tecchies are also fixing faults when they occur
>>> as per usual....
>> or not, as the case may be.
>>
>> Following your advice of some time ago I took a DNS problem to the vm
>> cable support group. That was on 14th Sept.
>
> Mike
>
> I'll look into this.
>
>
>
> Alex
>
o p @secret.com Gonz
"Alex Brown" <alex_...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:4cpgj39pvbbb6cem8...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 10 Nov 2007 12:19:41 -0000, "Capn Jack Sparrow"
> <black...@the.end.of.the.eearth.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Gonz" <T o p @ S e c r e t . c o m> wrote in message
>>news:I3hZi.1677$I55....@fe103.usenetserver.com...
>>> all network maintenance work has stopped since 7th Nov.
>>>
>>> LOL just shut up shop and be done with it!
>>
>>Is this planned Network Maintenance, which could be for a whole raft
>>of
>>reasons, or of all maintenance, including faults, which is more
>>worrying?
>>Well to Virgin Media customer that it.
>
> This is incorrect, plenty of proactive network maintenance is underway
> as per normal, and the tecchies are also fixing faults when they occur
> as per usual.
One day you say I don't know, it's not my department.
Today, you know everything...
This was a memo sent to all staff, and was posted to a forum by a
certified staff member.
Thanks for takin that big banner that fools people into thinkin that
you're officially the Uk's fastest broadband supplier of the page, but
you still have the words statin that you are.
There's no key such as * ^ to tell us that it's based on something over
4 months ago.
It's misleadin and spelt all wrong.
Why couldn't the person who was told to take the big banner off the
page, do the spellin mistakes at the same time?
o p @secret.com Gonz
"Mark McIntyre" <markmc...@spamcop.net> wrote in message
news:lf6fj35k2qkse81lo...@4ax.com...
Err...
Virgin have disconnected me.
Done something to annoy me.
I Can't afford their prices.
What's so spot on about that, he's makin 3 guesses.
o p @secret.com Gonz
"Mike" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:LoydnVF_fpuWFKra...@pipex.net...
The state of some of their boxes are a disgrace.
They get reported, and are still untouched days and sometimes weeks
later, when another report is made complainin of the disinterest of the
company in their own property.
There's one report in the forum of where the public fixed a box
themselves, as Virgin made no attempt to go out to the box after
numerous reports.
Carl Waring
> This was a memo sent to all staff, and was posted to a forum by a
> certified staff member.
Then that member of staff should have been sacked for breaking the terms of
their contract.
Eeyore
Carl Waring wrote:
> Gonz wrote:
> > This was a memo sent to all staff, and was posted to a forum by a
> > certified staff member.
>
> Then that member of staff should have been sacked for breaking the terms of
> their contract.
Hang those whistleblowers HIGH !
Good to see you're always on the side of the consumer Carl. You wouldn't want
those nice friendly companies' profits messed up by having to deliver what they
say they will, would you ?
Graham
o p @secret.com Gonz
> Gonz wrote:
>> This was a memo sent to all staff, and was posted to a forum by a
>> certified staff member.
>
> Then that member of staff should have been sacked for breaking the
> terms of their contract.
Yeh, so typical of you Carl.
As he said... Good to see you're always on the side of the consumer.
At least now we know where you really stand now.
Carl Waring
Why do you always try to spin what people say to make it sound like what
*you* want? I made absolutely *no* comment on the content of what was leaked
by the employee in question. I couldn't really give a damn what it was they
leaked. The fact is that they were acting against the rules of their
employment contract and therefore should have been sacked. End of.
As to the matter itself, well that's already been answered by someone who
should know as he also works for the company.
o p @secret.com Gonz
> Gonz wrote:
>> "Carl Waring" <em...@carlDASHwaring.co.uk> wrote in message
>> news:5LV_i.37482$uH.3...@newsfe4-gui.ntli.net...
>>> Gonz wrote:
>>>> This was a memo sent to all staff, and was posted to a forum by a
>>>> certified staff member.
>>>
>>> Then that member of staff should have been sacked for breaking the
>>> terms of their contract.
>>
>> Yeh, so typical of you Carl.
>> As he said... Good to see you're always on the side of the consumer.
>>
>> At least now we know where you really stand now.
>
> Why do you always try to spin what people say to make it sound like
> what
> *you* want? I made absolutely *no* comment on the content of what was
> leaked
> by the employee in question. I couldn't really give a damn what it was
> they
> leaked. The fact is that they were acting against the rules of their
> employment contract and therefore should have been sacked. End of.
You didn't have to make a comment on what was leaked.
What was *leaked* isn't important even.
There is no spin, as my comment is not based on what was leaked, it was
based on your reply.
Infact, it's you that is tryin to put a spin on it now.
> As to the matter itself, well that's already been answered by someone
> who should know as he also works for the company.
Oh yeh, Alex Brown.
Isn't he the one that tells you one thing and it turns out to be
another?
He's even got a reputation for lyin, too :o)
Eeyore
mym...@hotmail.com wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 10:04:03 -0000, "Gonz" <T o p @ S e c r e t . c o
> m> wrote:
>
> >He's even got a reputation for lyin, too :o)
> Don't we know it the STM fiasco will never be forgotten by those he
> lied to when he was asked the direct question, just like the carry on
> with Lord West and Gordon Brown yesterday morning talk about
> saying one thing and meaning to opposite .
Today's politicians (especially) should be taken out, lined up against a wall
and shot. Every single one of them. They're an useless bunch of incompetent
lying wnackers.
Graham
Rob S
-It's misleadin and spelt all wrong.
-
-Why couldn't the person who was told to take the big banner off the
-page, do the spellin mistakes at the same time?
Oh Yeah?
-Rob
robatwork at mail dot com
Soruk
>On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 11:41:49 -0000, "Gonz" <T o p @ S e c r e t . c o m> wrote:
>
>-It's misleadin and spelt all wrong.
Like you said...
--
-- Michael "Soruk" McConnell Eridani Star System
MailStripper - http://www.MailStripper.eu/ - SMTP spam filter
Mail Me Anywhere - http://www.MailMeAnywhere.com/ - Mobile email
Second Number - http://secondnumber.matrixnetwork.co.uk/
Mark McIntyre
>> *you* want? I made absolutely *no* comment on the content of what was
>> leaked
>
> based on your reply.
Gonz, good to see you're full of shite as usual.
> Infact, it's you that is tryin to put a spin on it now.
Codswollop. The only spin here is from a bitter ex-customer who was
apparently kicked off for persistent abuse, and who now takes every
opportunity to have a pop.
>> As to the matter itself, well that's already been answered by someone
>> who should know as he also works for the company.
>
> Oh yeh, Alex Brown.
Who, unlike you, works for the company.
> Isn't he the one that tells you one thing and it turns out to be another?
No, that'd be Gonz.
> He's even got a reputation for lyin, too :o)
Your comment is a base falsehood, intended to deliberately smear Alex
Brown.
Mark McIntyre
>
> Today's politicians (especially) should be taken out, lined up against a wall
> and shot. Every single one of them. They're an useless bunch of incompetent
> lying wnackers.
I'm baffled as to why anyone thinks this is unique or special to today's
politicians. Did Lloyd George have a reputation for honesty (look up
Frances Stevenson)? Did Lord North? Was Cardinal Wolsey a paragon of
virtue? And more recently, the last Conservative cabinets were a
collection of convicted criminals and lying bastards (to paraphrase
their boss).
Mark McIntyre
>
> Mark, Alex Brown was denying that there was to be any kind of cut in
> speed for weeks and weeks before The Register found out about it and
> published the fact then he changed his tune completely .
Occam's razor anyone?
How about either
a) he actually was unaware of the STM plans - do you know everything
your company is planning to do?; or
b) he was contractually forbidden to reveal confidential plans - are you
allowed to talk to the general public about your company's plans?
> Before all this STM nonsense came to the for I always thought Alex
> Brown a decent and honest sort of chap not that I had ever had much to
> do with him but now I have him kill filed to be quite honest .
Thats your prerogative, but you've now cut off one of the few channels
you had into VM.
Carl Waring
> On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 10:04:03 -0000, "Gonz" <T o p @ S e c r e t . c o
> m> wrote:
>
>
>> He's even got a reputation for lyin, too :o)
> lied to when he was asked the direct question, just like the carry on
> with Lord West and Gordon Brown yesterday morning talk about
> saying one thing and meaning to opposite .
If I recall correctly (which I admit I might not) was he not asked "are vm
introducing traffic shaping?" and he, rightly, said "no." ?If that is what
happened, then he didn't lie as STM is NOT the same thing as TS, despite
what those who don't know about it think it might be.
Carl Waring
> On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 09:48:14 GMT, "Carl Waring"
> <em...@carlDASHwaring.co.uk> wrote:
>
>
>> Why do you always try to spin what people say to make it sound like
>> what *you* want? I made absolutely *no* comment on the content of
>> what was leaked by the employee in question. I couldn't really give
>> a damn what it was they leaked. The fact is that they were acting
>> against the rules of their employment contract and therefore should
>> have been sacked. End of.
>
> do and say you MUST be in their employ , it is a good job they do have
> a few employees who will let the cats out of the bags because the
> company will not tell its customers anything .
> In fact two high ranking employees have actually resorted to lies over
> the years in order to try to hide what the no good company had in
> mind to rob its customers of what they are entitled to .
> END OF.
Right. Because I defend VM and FUD, mis-understandings, mis-information and,
occasionally, complete BS I *must* work for the company? Well, as a
long-term unemployed person it really is news to me!
Mark McIntyre
> On Sat, 17 Nov 2007 00:16:53 GMT, Mark McIntyre
> <markmc...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
>
>> a) he actually was unaware of the STM plans - do you know everything
>> your company is planning to do?;
> that there was no plans regarding capping or any other speed curbing
> measures at the time
Thats incorrect. He was asked a specific question about traffic shaping,
which he answered honestly.
>> Thats your prerogative, but you've now cut off one of the few channels
>> you had into VM.
> No I haven't because there are plenty more here who will be very quick
> to report any other untrue statements he makes .
Oh, I understand - you're not interested in getting help, you only want
to insult VM staff. Fair enough.
Alex Brown
>>No, that'd be Gonz.
>>
>>> He's even got a reputation for lyin, too :o)
>>
>>Your comment is a base falsehood, intended to deliberately smear Alex
>>Brown.
>Mark, Alex Brown was denying that there was to be any kind of cut in
>speed for weeks and weeks before The Register found out about it and
>published the fact then he changed his tune completely .
>Before all this STM nonsense came to the for I always thought Alex
>Brown a decent and honest sort of chap not that I had ever had much to
>do with him but now I have him kill filed to be quite honest .
Hi Ron
The statements you make are incorrect.
Shame you've KF'd me, as always happy to help - and if you do need any
in the future, you know where I am.
Cheers
Alex Brown
<markmc...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>mym...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
>> Mark, Alex Brown was denying that there was to be any kind of cut in
>> speed for weeks and weeks before The Register found out about it and
>> published the fact then he changed his tune completely .
>
>Occam's razor anyone?
>
>How about either
>
>a) he actually was unaware of the STM plans - do you know everything
>your company is planning to do?; or
>
>b) he was contractually forbidden to reveal confidential plans - are you
>allowed to talk to the general public about your company's plans?
Or
c) The statements Ron makes are not correct.
HTH
Alex Brown
>On Sat, 17 Nov 2007 00:16:53 GMT, Mark McIntyre
><markmc...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
>
>>a) he actually was unaware of the STM plans - do you know everything
>>your company is planning to do?;
>What I do not know anything about I neither deny or confirm ,he stated
>that there was no plans regarding capping or any other speed curbing
>measures at the time and repeated this answer in several ways over
>a week two weeks later STM was announced.
>>Thats your prerogative, but you've now cut off one of the few channels
>>you had into VM.
>No I haven't because there are plenty more here who will be very quick
>to report any other untrue statements he makes .
Hi Ron
Again these statements are incorrect.
o p @secret.com Gonz
> mym...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 10:04:03 -0000, "Gonz" <T o p @ S e c r e t . c o
>> m> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> He's even got a reputation for lyin, too :o)
>> Don't we know it the STM fiasco will never be forgotten by those he
>> lied to when he was asked the direct question, just like the carry on
>> with Lord West and Gordon Brown yesterday morning talk about
>> saying one thing and meaning to opposite .
>
> If I recall correctly (which I admit I might not) was he not asked
> "are vm introducing traffic shaping?"
You're always guessin... you never know the facts to anything, but still
feel the need to come into it claimin that everyone else is wrong.
o p @secret.com Gonz
> Gonz wrote:
>>
>> "Carl Waring" <em...@carlDASHwaring.co.uk> wrote in message
>>> Why do you always try to spin what people say to make it sound like
>>> what
>>> *you* want? I made absolutely *no* comment on the content of what
>>> was leaked
>>
>> There is no spin, as my comment is not based on what was leaked, it
>> was based on your reply.
>
> Gonz, good to see you're full of shite as usual.
What's so shite about it?
>> Infact, it's you that is tryin to put a spin on it now.
>
> Codswollop. The only spin here is from a bitter ex-customer who was
> apparently kicked off for persistent abuse, and who now takes every
> opportunity to have a pop.
You probably want to be careful making libellous remarks in a recorded
and public forum.
Ah, you said apparently... appearing as such but not necessarily so.
You can't have both, which is it?
>>> As to the matter itself, well that's already been answered by
>>> someone who should know as he also works for the company.
>>
>> Oh yeh, Alex Brown.
>
> Who, unlike you, works for the company.
Point?
Is there one?
>> Isn't he the one that tells you one thing and it turns out to be
>> another?
>
> No, that'd be Gonz.
Is my name Alex Brown, now?
>> He's even got a reputation for lyin, too :o)
>
> Your comment is a base falsehood, intended to deliberately smear Alex
> Brown.
Shut up stewpid.
Everybody knows that Alex is well known for lyin about the STM fiasco.
Don't you read the broadband forums?
o p @secret.com Gonz
> mym...@hotmail.com wrote:
> >
>> Mark, Alex Brown was denying that there was to be any kind of cut in
>> speed for weeks and weeks before The Register found out about it and
>> published the fact then he changed his tune completely .
>
> Occam's razor anyone?
>
> How about either
>
> a) he actually was unaware of the STM plans - do you know everything
> your company is planning to do?; or
LOL
Alex knows everything.
The only time he doesn't know anything. is when he doesn't want you to
know.
> b) he was contractually forbidden to reveal confidential plans - are
> you allowed to talk to the general public about your company's plans?
He chose to answer at the time.
He shud have kept quiet.
If he can't tell the truth, then keep quiet.
o p @secret.com Gonz
"Alex Brown" <alex_...@blueyonder.co.uk> wrote in message
news:of30k39u1a4ubo43d...@4ax.com...
Alex, you know he's KF'd you.
So why do you persistantly try to antogonise the situation, by
constantly askin him "hope you are well" ?
It's silly and very unproffesional of you, especially considerin your
position in the company.
I suggest you rise above it, and stop the childish banter.
Thanks for not sayin that any of my statements are incorrect.
Carl won't be happy, but at least he knows I'm right and he's wrong.
You still haven't bothered to correct that page.
The days are mountin up...
o p @secret.com Gonz
> mym...@hotmail.com wrote:
>> On Fri, 16 Nov 2007 09:48:14 GMT, "Carl Waring"
>> <em...@carlDASHwaring.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Why do you always try to spin what people say to make it sound like
>>> what *you* want? I made absolutely *no* comment on the content of
>>> what was leaked by the employee in question. I couldn't really give
>>> a damn what it was they leaked. The fact is that they were acting
>>> against the rules of their employment contract and therefore should
>>> have been sacked. End of.
>>
>> And you Carl always take the side and defend everything VM employees
>> do and say you MUST be in their employ , it is a good job they do
>> have
>> a few employees who will let the cats out of the bags because the
>> company will not tell its customers anything .
>> In fact two high ranking employees have actually resorted to lies
>> over
>> the years in order to try to hide what the no good company had in
>> mind to rob its customers of what they are entitled to .
>> END OF.
>
> Right. Because I defend VM and FUD, mis-understandings,
> mis-information and, occasionally, complete BS I *must* work for the
> company? Well, as a long-term unemployed person it really is news to
> me!
"Mis-understandings" "mis-information" and "bullshit"
That's you!
You're always sayin "If I recall correctly (which I admit I might not)"
o p @secret.com Gonz
"Rob S" <robatworkDelet...@mail.com> wrote in message
news:537rj3d2fkss5df0t...@4ax.com...
> On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 11:41:49 -0000, "Gonz" <T o p @ S e c r e t . c o
> m> wrote:
>
> -It's misleadin and spelt all wrong.
> -
> -Why couldn't the person who was told to take the big banner off the
> -page, do the spellin mistakes at the same time?
>
> Oh Yeah?
Yeh.
Carl Waring
> You're always sayin "If I recall correctly (which I admit I might
> not)"
"ALWAYS?" No. I said it once just then as I was not 100% certain of the
facts. If I am ever not certain of something I will readily admit it. What's
wrong with that? At least I don't go spouting lies/made-up stuff/whatever
as fact.
Carl Waring
> Alex, you know he's KF'd you.
> So why do you persistantly try to antogonise the situation, by
> constantly askin him "hope you are well" ?
Why should he not remain polite, even though certain people are abusing him?
It's very decent (not to say professional) of him, I think.
Carl Waring
> You probably want to be careful making libellous remarks in a recorded
> and public forum.
Yet you constantly libel Mr Alex Brown by calling him a liar? How very
double-standards of you.
Carl Waring
> You're always guessin... you never know the facts to anything, but
> still feel the need to come into it claimin that everyone else is
> wrong.
No I'm not *ALWAYS* guesing. It is simply that, as I said just said in my
other reply, if I don't know for certain I'm at least good enough to admit
it.
o p @secret.com Gonz
> Gonz wrote:
>> You're always guessin... you never know the facts to anything, but
>> still feel the need to come into it claimin that everyone else is
>> wrong.
>
> No I'm not *ALWAYS* guesing. It is simply that, as I said just said in
> my other reply, if I don't know for certain I'm at least good enough
> to admit it.
But in the meantime, before you find out whether the person is right or
wrong, you'll say that he or she is wrong.
Based on your guessin, and mis-information.
o p @secret.com Gonz
> Gonz wrote:
>> Alex, you know he's KF'd you.
>> So why do you persistantly try to antogonise the situation, by
>> constantly askin him "hope you are well" ?
>
> Why should he not remain polite, even though certain people are
> abusing him? It's very decent (not to say professional) of him, I
> think.
He has admitted that he knows that the OP can't see his posts, so why
does he constantly say to him "hope you are well"?
Is he bein sarcastic, is it for comedy value for the others?
It's not proffesional at all, and I can't see his bosses thinkin the
same either.
o p @secret.com Gonz
> Gonz wrote:
>> You probably want to be careful making libellous remarks in a
>> recorded
>> and public forum.
>
> Yet you constantly libel Mr Alex Brown by calling him a liar? How very
> double-standards of you.
I don't constantly libel *Mr Alex Brown*
Stop doin the exaggeration thing again.
You cud call it libellous if it wasn't true, and I was makin it up about
him lyin.
But from readin the many forums statin the same opinion, I fail to see
how it can be.
Mark McIntyre
>
> But in the meantime, before you find out whether the person is right or
> wrong, you'll say that he or she is wrong.
Hello? Pot, meet Kettle? From Mister "shoot first, ask questions later"
Gonz, thats really a humorous remark.
Mark McIntyre
>
> I don't constantly libel
Falsely calling someone a liar in a communication is libel.
> You cud call it libellous if it wasn't true, and I was makin it up about
> him lyin.
> But from readin the many forums statin the same opinion, I fail to see
> how it can be.
Newsflash: opinion != fact
Also, your G key is still broken.
o p @secret.com Gonz
Why are you quotin something that shouldn't be quoted?
See, this is why I can never take you seriously enuff.
You're either just spoutin rubbish as if it's fact, or you're quotin
something, so it looks like I said it.
o p @secret.com Gonz
> Gonz wrote:
>>
>> I don't constantly libel
>
> Falsely calling someone a liar in a communication is libel.
It has to be false though, doesn't it?
>> You cud call it libellous if it wasn't true, and I was makin it up
>> about him lyin.
>> But from readin the many forums statin the same opinion, I fail to
>> see how it can be.
>
> Newsflash: opinion != fact
Opinion is not fact.
Gawd...
> Also, your G key is still broken.
GGGGGGGGGGGgggggggggg
No it isn't.
Mark McIntyre
>
> "Mark McIntyre" <markmc...@spamcop.net> wrote in message
> news:13k0cjb...@corp.supernews.com...
>> Gonz wrote:
>>>
>>> But in the meantime, before you find out whether the person is right
>>> or wrong, you'll say that he or she is wrong.
>>
>> Hello? Pot, meet Kettle? From Mister "shoot first, ask questions
>> later" Gonz, thats really a humorous remark.
>
> Why are you quotin something that shouldn't be quoted?
Since when did you get to decide what shouldn't be quoted?
> You're either just spoutin rubbish as if it's fact, or you're quotin
> something, so it looks like I said it.
Try not to be too pathetic - Google Groups will find you out. You wrote
the above in Message-ID: <RmV%i.10574$cc2....@fe091.usenetserver.com>
o p @secret.com Gonz
> Gonz wrote:
>>
>> "Mark McIntyre" <markmc...@spamcop.net> wrote in message
>> news:13k0cjb...@corp.supernews.com...
>>> Gonz wrote:
>>>>
>>>> But in the meantime, before you find out whether the person is
>>>> right or wrong, you'll say that he or she is wrong.
>>>
>>> Hello? Pot, meet Kettle? From Mister "shoot first, ask questions
>>> later" Gonz, thats really a humorous remark.
>>
>> Why are you quotin something that shouldn't be quoted?
>
> Since when did you get to decide what shouldn't be quoted?
I'm not decidin what you can and can't quote.
I'm tellin you that it shouldn't be quoted as if someone had said it.
ie: me.
Cuz I didn't say it.
>> You're either just spoutin rubbish as if it's fact, or you're quotin
>> something, so it looks like I said it.
>
> Try not to be too pathetic - Google Groups will find you out. You
> wrote the above in Message-ID:
> <RmV%i.10574$cc2....@fe091.usenetserver.com>
Ok, so now tell me where I said "shoot first, ask questions later"
exactly as you have quoted me as sayin.
Not how you interpret it, but as exactly as you have quoted me as sayin
it.
I have 10 apples, is not the same as I have more than 7 apples.
You can't keep puttin words into peoples mouths, and expect others to
think that what you quoted them as sayin, is exactly what they said.
Cuz, for one it's not fair.
And for two, it means that you haven't got a valid point to make so
you'll carry on makin it up as you go along, as usual.
Mark McIntyre
>
>>> "Mark McIntyre" <markmc...@spamcop.net> wrote in message
>>> news:13k0cjb...@corp.supernews.com...
>>>> Gonz wrote:
>>>>>
>>>> Hello? Pot, meet Kettle? From Mister "shoot first, ask questions
>>>> later" Gonz, thats really a humorous remark.
>
That is /not/ a quote, you complete plonker!
> You can't keep puttin words into peoples mouths, and expect others to
> think that what you quoted them as sayin, is exactly what they said.
Since I've never done that, I don't need to worry.
o p @secret.com Gonz
> Gonz wrote:
>>
>>>> "Mark McIntyre" <markmc...@spamcop.net> wrote in message
>>>> news:13k0cjb...@corp.supernews.com...
>>>>> Gonz wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>> Hello? Pot, meet Kettle? From Mister "shoot first, ask questions
>>>>> later" Gonz, thats really a humorous remark.
>>
>> Ok, so now tell me where I said "shoot first, ask questions later"
>
> That is /not/ a quote, you complete plonker!
Gawd... I'm in conversation with someone who thinks he's Del Boy.
Put Uncle Albert on!
Mark McIntyre
<T o p @ S e c r e t . c o m> wrote:
>
>"Mark McIntyre" <markmc...@spamcop.net> wrote in message
>news:13k0k2s...@corp.supernews.com...
>> Gonz wrote:
>>>
>>>>> "Mark McIntyre" <markmc...@spamcop.net> wrote in message
>>>>> news:13k0cjb...@corp.supernews.com...
>>>>>> Gonz wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Hello? Pot, meet Kettle? From Mister "shoot first, ask questions
>>>>>> later" Gonz, thats really a humorous remark.
>>>
>>> Ok, so now tell me where I said "shoot first, ask questions later"
>>
>> That is /not/ a quote, you complete plonker!
>
>Gawd... I'm in conversation with someone who thinks he's Del Boy.
>Put Uncle Albert on!
And I'm in conversation with someone who can't distinguish between
quoting and a moniker.
--
Mark "Just another C Hacker" McIntyre
CLC FAQ <http://c-faq.com/>
CLC readme: <http://www.ungerhu.com/jxh/clc.welcome.txt>
o p @secret.com Gonz
> On Sun, 18 Nov 2007 14:59:44 -0000, in uk.telecom.broadband , "Gonz"
> <T o p @ S e c r e t . c o m> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Mark McIntyre" <markmc...@spamcop.net> wrote in message
>>news:13k0k2s...@corp.supernews.com...
>>> Gonz wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> "Mark McIntyre" <markmc...@spamcop.net> wrote in message
>>>>>> news:13k0cjb...@corp.supernews.com...
>>>>>>> Gonz wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hello? Pot, meet Kettle? From Mister "shoot first, ask questions
>>>>>>> later" Gonz, thats really a humorous remark.
>>>>
>>>> Ok, so now tell me where I said "shoot first, ask questions later"
>>>
>>> That is /not/ a quote, you complete plonker!
>>
>>Gawd... I'm in conversation with someone who thinks he's Del Boy.
>>Put Uncle Albert on!
>
> And I'm in conversation with someone who can't distinguish between
> quoting and a moniker.
You're just driftin with it now.
Can't stick to the original thing, so we just randomly pluck the word
moniker out of the air, and pretend this is what we were originally
talkin about.
If it wasn't a quote, then why did you reply with "Since when did you
get to decide what shouldn't be quoted?" to my "Why are you quotin
something that shouldn't be quoted?
Don't bother replyin, you're just makin a fool of yourself whilst provin
my remark about you always makin it up as you go along.
o p @secret.com Gonz
> Gonz wrote:
>>
>> I don't constantly libel
>
> Falsely calling someone a liar in a communication is libel.
>
>> You cud call it libellous if it wasn't true, and I was makin it up
>> about him lyin.
>> But from readin the many forums statin the same opinion, I fail to
>> see how it can be.
I was lookin for summat else, and came across this.
Just thought it was of interest and slightly amusin, now.
It's when Alex says "Not aware of any issues"
He cud have said, 'erm... that might be us testin and trialin'
http://groups.google.co.uk/group/uk.telecom.broadband/msg/d4c1dbf24cea98c7
Mark McIntyre
>
> You're just driftin with it now.
I've no idea what that means,
> Can't stick to the original thing, so we just randomly pluck the word
> moniker out of the air, and pretend this is what we were originally
> talkin about.
What you were stupidly calling a quote was a completly normal way of
inserting someone's nickname into their name. If you seriously haven't
seen that style before, I'm utterly amazed. Here's some examples
Jimmy "whirlwind" White.
Alex "hurricane" Higgins
Michael "tarzan" Heseltine
Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson
> If it wasn't a quote, then why did you reply with "Since when did you
> get to decide what shouldn't be quoted?"
Because I erroneously assumed you were talking about an actual real
quote in my post, ie some text written by yourself or someone else.
Foolishly, I assumed you had a clue.
> Don't bother replyin, you're just makin a fool of yourself whilst provin
> my remark about you always makin it up as you go along.
*sigh*
Still, at least I can spell.
Mark McIntyre
>
> It's when Alex says "Not aware of any issues"
> He cud have said, 'erm... that might be us testin and trialin'
He couldn't have done that for two reasons:
a) he presumably wasn't AWARE OF ANY ISSUES; and
b) he's able to spell.
o p @secret.com Gonz
> Gonz wrote:
>>
>> You're just driftin with it now.
>
> I've no idea what that means,
>
>> Can't stick to the original thing, so we just randomly pluck the word
>> moniker out of the air, and pretend this is what we were originally
>> talkin about.
>
> What you were stupidly calling a quote was a completly normal way of
> inserting someone's nickname into their name. If you seriously haven't
> seen that style before, I'm utterly amazed. Here's some examples
>
> Jimmy "whirlwind" White.
> Alex "hurricane" Higgins
> Michael "tarzan" Heseltine
> Dwayne "The Rock" Johnson
Arnold "I'll Be Back" Schwarzenegger
>> If it wasn't a quote, then why did you reply with "Since when did you
>> get to decide what shouldn't be quoted?"
>
> Because I erroneously assumed you were talking about an actual real
> quote in my post, ie some text written by yourself or someone else.
> Foolishly, I assumed you had a clue.
Again, I ask you... if it's not a quote, wasn't meant to be a quote,
then why did reply with "Since when did you get to decide what shouldn't
be quoted?" instead of questionin what wasn't a quote, wasn't meant to
be a quote?
>> Don't bother replyin, you're just makin a fool of yourself whilst
>> provin my remark about you always makin it up as you go along.
>
> *sigh*
> Still, at least I can spell.
And that's about it.
o p @secret.com Gonz
a) Balls!
b) Sigh...
Mark McIntyre
>
> Again, I ask you... if it's not a quote, wasn't meant to be a quote,
> then why did reply with "Since when did you get to decide what shouldn't
> be quoted?" instead of questionin what wasn't a quote, wasn't meant to
> be a quote?
Again I answer... because I assumed you were talking about a REAL quote
in the message. It did not occur to me you might be as gormless as all
that.
Time to killfile you again, I think. I have better things to do than to
exchange mail with fools.
o p @secret.com Gonz
> Gonz wrote:
>>
>> Again, I ask you... if it's not a quote, wasn't meant to be a quote,
>> then why did reply with "Since when did you get to decide what
>> shouldn't be quoted?" instead of questionin what wasn't a quote,
>> wasn't meant to be a quote?
>
> Again I answer... because I assumed you were talking about a REAL
> quote in the message. It did not occur to me you might be as gormless
> as all that.
So says Mr "always assuming" McIntyre.
> Time to killfile you again, I think. I have better things to do than
> to exchange mail with fools.
This isn't mail, you fool.
Killfilin me, just tells me that you know I'm right and you have given
up.
Mark McIntyre
>> Again I answer... because I assumed you were talking about a REAL
>> quote in the message. It did not occur to me you might be as gormless
>> as all that.
>
> So says Mr "always assuming" McIntyre.
So you acknowledge you screwed up.
>> Time to killfile you again, I think. I have better things to do than
>> to exchange mail with fools.
>
> This isn't mail, you fool.
> Killfilin me, just tells me that you know I'm right and you have given up.
No, it tells everyone else that I've given up hope of persuading you to
admit you're wrong.
Feel free to post replies saying "yeah I won I won, nyanya I'm teh
greatest", because a) I won't be listening and b) everyone with half a
brain will already know you're blowing it out your &^&+++ CARRIER LOST
o p @secret.com Gonz
> Gonz wrote:
>
>>> Again I answer... because I assumed you were talking about a REAL
>>> quote in the message. It did not occur to me you might be as
>>> gormless as all that.
>>
>> So says Mr "always assuming" McIntyre.
>
> So you acknowledge you screwed up.
How is me tellin you that you're always guessin, mean I screwed up?
>>> Time to killfile you again, I think. I have better things to do than
>>> to exchange mail with fools.
>>
>> This isn't mail, you fool.
>> Killfilin me, just tells me that you know I'm right and you have
>> given up.
>
> No, it tells everyone else that I've given up hope of persuading you
> to admit you're wrong.
"Persuading"
You can't persuade me, you have to convince me.
> Feel free to post replies saying "yeah I won I won, nyanya I'm teh
> greatest",
LOL, I'm a big boy now, Mark.
> because a) I won't be listening
I believe you...
> and b) everyone with half a brain will already know you're blowing it
> out your &^&+++ CARRIER LOST
I get the feelin you treat it like a competition...
Is that what it was, is that why you've given up?
I win then?
Nyanya I'm teh greatest!
Nyanya?