| Author |
AT&T Marketing Shame
|
|
| aRKay 2006-07-14, 10:33 pm |
| I have the standard AT&T Yahoo! High Speed Internet Express that has
been fast enough up until recently. I think AT&T recently clamped down
on the bandwidth to force the legacy SBC Yahoo customers in paying $5 a
month more for the higher speed we used to get.
Anyone else being slammed with all kinds threatening mail from AT&T
Yahoo Marketing?
| |
| John Navas 2006-07-14, 10:33 pm |
| On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 22:28:17 GMT, aRKay <REMOVEarkay@qsl.net> wrote in
<REMOVEarkay-DBFCFF. 17281714072006@newsc
lstr02.news.prodigy.com>:
>I have the standard AT&T Yahoo! High Speed Internet Express that has
>been fast enough up until recently. I think AT&T recently clamped down
>on the bandwidth to force the legacy SBC Yahoo customers in paying $5 a
>month more for the higher speed we used to get.
>
>Anyone else being slammed with all kinds threatening mail from AT&T
>Yahoo Marketing?
Let me guess: You're running a peer-to-peer sharing server? ;)
--
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ Cingu...less_FA
Q>
| |
|
| In article < a6ggb211v4t0b2j04v05
3afvnckd2m8o87@4ax.com>,
John Navas < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 14 Jul 2006 22:28:17 GMT, aRKay <REMOVEarkay@qsl.net> wrote in
> <REMOVEarkay-DBFCFF. 17281714072006@newsc
lstr02.news.prodigy.com>:
>
>
> Let me guess: You're running a peer-to-peer sharing server? ;)
I don't even know what peer-to-peer sharing is all about?
| |
| Scott 2006-07-15, 10:33 pm |
|
"aRKay" <REMOVEarkay@qsl.net> wrote in message
news:REMOVEarkay-2D0F64. 03160115072006@newsc
lstr02.news.prodigy.com...
> In article < a6ggb211v4t0b2j04v05
3afvnckd2m8o87@4ax.com>,
> John Navas < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote:
>
>
> I don't even know what peer-to-peer sharing is all about?
You'll have to excuse John- he assumes that all problems are the customer's
fault.
AT&T wouldn't be the first one to cap speeds in an attempt to get more
money. They're probably trying to shore up the financials of their
soon-to-own poorly performing cellular operation.
|
|
|
|