|
Cellular forums Home > Archive > AT-T wireless service > August 2006 > CHARTER of alt.cellular.cingular
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
CHARTER of alt.cellular.cingular
|
|
| John Navas 2006-08-08, 3:33 pm |
| CHARTER:
This newsgroup is for discussion of topics directly related to Cingular
Wireless service, including voice, data (GPRS as well as GSM), and fax.
Non-commercial For Sale and Want To Buy notices for compatible products,
tagged in the subject line with "FS" and "WTB" respectively (without the
quote symbols), are permitted. All articles must be in plain text only,
in the English language, and human-readable.
Inappropriate (banned) articles:
* Off-topic (not directly related to Cingular Wireless service)
* Binaries (except for appended text-encoded digital signatures)
* Spam (including excessive cross-posting)
* Make-money-fast or other chain or fraudulent schemes
* Work-at-home or other scams
* Commercial advertisements, "infomercials," or announcements
* Auction notices (e.g., eBay)
* Forged articles (anonymous articles are allowed)
* Personal insults or repetitive flaming (attacks)
* Employment (help and/or position wanted) notices
MODERATOR INFO:
The group is unmoderated.
| |
| Elmo P. Shagnasty 2006-08-08, 10:33 pm |
| In article <F34Cg.227540$mF2.15515@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
John Navas < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote:
> CHARTER:
>
> This newsgroup is for discussion of topics directly related to Cingular
> Wireless service, including voice, data (GPRS as well as GSM), and fax.
> Non-commercial For Sale and Want To Buy notices for compatible products,
> tagged in the subject line with "FS" and "WTB" respectively (without the
> quote symbols), are permitted. All articles must be in plain text only,
> in the English language, and human-readable.
>
> Inappropriate (banned) articles:
> * Off-topic (not directly related to Cingular Wireless service)
> * Binaries (except for appended text-encoded digital signatures)
> * Spam (including excessive cross-posting)
> * Make-money-fast or other chain or fraudulent schemes
> * Work-at-home or other scams
> * Commercial advertisements, "infomercials," or announcements
> * Auction notices (e.g., eBay)
> * Forged articles (anonymous articles are allowed)
> * Personal insults or repetitive flaming (attacks)
> * Employment (help and/or position wanted) notices
>
> MODERATOR INFO:
>
> The group is unmoderated.
Hey, John--unmoderated groups don't use charters, AND--now this is where
it gets tricky--as much as you'd like to think so, the "charter" you
invented out of thin air for alt.cellular.cingular does not magically
apply to alt.cellular.attws.
You're so gung-ho about doing Usenet "the right way" when you want to,
as in this charter thing--but you're happy to throw those same rules
right in the trash when you want to, such as in trying to apply a
charter to a completely different newsgroup.
You are such an XXX.
| |
| St. John Smythe 2006-08-08, 10:33 pm |
| Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> Hey, John--unmoderated groups don't use charters,
Cite? (I believe you will find that they do.)
--
St. John
The average Ph.D thesis is nothing but the transference of bones from
one graveyard to another.
-J. Frank Dobie, "A Texan in England"
| |
| WindsorFox[SS] 2006-08-08, 10:33 pm |
| Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> Hey, John--unmoderated groups don't use charters,
>
Not real familiar with Usenet are you? Many unmoderated groups have
charters, most originally written by the person who first started the
group. When reporting abuse such as trolls like Cletus the ISP will most
times want you to forward the charter as well.
--
I used to have abs. Now, I've just got ab.
One big ol' Ab. - BigSkiff www.titanspot.com
Pyongyang sounds more like the sound effect an ACME catapult makes
as it goes off at precisely the wrong moment for Wile E. Coyote. -
Cadbury Moose
| |
| Scott 2006-08-08, 10:33 pm |
|
"John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
news:F34Cg.227540$mF2.15515@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
<snip>
This is yet another request to stop posting this to the ATTW newsgroup,
where it does not apply. Continued posting will result in a fully
documented span complaint to your ISP.
| |
| WindsorFox[SS] 2006-08-08, 10:33 pm |
| Scott wrote:
> "John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
> news:F34Cg.227540$mF2.15515@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> <snip>
>
> This is yet another request to stop posting this to the ATTW newsgroup,
> where it does not apply. Continued posting will result in a fully
> documented span complaint to your ISP.
>
>
Which will of course, do diddley squat....
--
I used to have abs. Now, I've just got ab.
One big ol' Ab. - BigSkiff www.titanspot.com
Pyongyang sounds more like the sound effect an ACME catapult makes
as it goes off at precisely the wrong moment for Wile E. Coyote. -
Cadbury Moose
| |
|
| Scott wrote:
> "John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
> news:F34Cg.227540$mF2.15515@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net...
> <snip>
>
> This is yet another request to stop posting this to the ATTW newsgroup,
> where it does not apply. Continued posting will result in a fully
> documented span complaint to your ISP.
Oh please, the last thing an ISP is going to worry about is someone
posting a charter for the wrong newsgroup. He does it to be obnoxious
and to annoy people. Best option is to kill-file him, then you don't
have to see it.
| |
| Elmo P. Shagnasty 2006-08-08, 10:33 pm |
| In article <TA8Cg.106626$IZ2.77969@dukeread07>,
"WindsorFox[SS]" <windsorfox@NOSPAM.cox.net> wrote:
>
> Not real familiar with Usenet are you? Many unmoderated groups have
> charters, most originally written by the person who first started the
> group.
Very familiar with newsgroups--going back to the mid-80s, anyway.
But the Usenet has evolved beyond what it was...
| |
| Todd Allcock 2006-08-09, 4:33 am |
| At 08 Aug 2006 18:09:24 -0400 Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <F34Cg.227540$mF2.15515@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
> John Navas < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote:
>
Cingular[color=darkr
ed]
[color=darkred]
products,[color=dark
red]
the[color=darkred]
only,[color=darkred]
>
> Hey, John--unmoderated groups don't use charters, AND--now this is
where
> it gets tricky--as much as you'd like to think so, the "charter" you
> invented out of thin air for alt.cellular.cingular does not magically
> apply to alt.cellular.attws.
>
> You're so gung-ho about doing Usenet "the right way" when you want to,
> as in this charter thing--but you're happy to throw those same rules
> right in the trash when you want to, such as in trying to apply a
> charter to a completely different newsgroup.
>
> You are such an XXX.
>
But when SBC acquired AT&T, they gave John alt.cellular.attws as part of
the deal, didn't they? ;-)
Sorry, I couldn't resist...
Funny, I've been away from the alt.cellular groups for a couple of years.
In that time the industry has gone through many changes but these groups
haven't... Elmo, Veldhouse and Scharf still go at it with Navas and vice-
versa, and Zwick/Phillipe is still grinding his axe about Sprint.
Who knew... apparently you CAN go home again... ;-)
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
| |
| Thomas T. Veldhouse 2006-08-09, 3:33 pm |
| In alt.cellular.cingular Todd Allcock < elecconnec@americaon
line.com> wrote:
> But when SBC acquired AT&T, they gave John alt.cellular.attws as part of
> the deal, didn't they? ;-)
>
>
There is no AT&T Wireless. Even if there was, this charter does not apply to
the alt.cellular.attws newsgroup .. PERIOD.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
| |
| Scott 2006-08-09, 10:33 pm |
|
"SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
news:44d9395d$0$9615
4$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
> Scott wrote:
>
> Oh please, the last thing an ISP is going to worry about is someone
> posting a charter for the wrong newsgroup. He does it to be obnoxious and
> to annoy people. Best option is to kill-file him, then you don't have to
> see it.
Easy Steve- it was partially intended as a joke. I was simply pointing out
that he violates his own charter. I would assume that reporting to the ISP
would be his only enforceable action to enforce the worthless thing.
| |
| WindsorFox[SS] 2006-08-09, 10:33 pm |
| Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
> In article <TA8Cg.106626$IZ2.77969@dukeread07>,
> "WindsorFox[SS]" <windsorfox@NOSPAM.cox.net> wrote:
>
>
> Very familiar with newsgroups--going back to the mid-80s, anyway.
>
> But the Usenet has evolved beyond what it was...
>
Well most of the unmoderated groups I've read all the way back to
1989 or 90 all had charters, especially the non-alt hierarchy groups.
--
I used to have abs. Now, I've just got ab.
One big ol' Ab. - BigSkiff www.titanspot.com
Pyongyang sounds more like the sound effect an ACME catapult makes
as it goes off at precisely the wrong moment for Wile E. Coyote. -
Cadbury Moose
| |
| WindsorFox[SS] 2006-08-09, 10:33 pm |
| Scott wrote:
> "SMS" <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in message
> news:44d9395d$0$9615
4$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net...
>
> Easy Steve- it was partially intended as a joke. I was simply pointing out
> that he violates his own charter. I would assume that reporting to the ISP
> would be his only enforceable action to enforce the worthless thing.
>
>
It just hit me that theoretically the charter would be roughly the
same since Cingular now owns ATT who now owns Cingular.
--
I used to have abs. Now, I've just got ab.
One big ol' Ab. - BigSkiff www.titanspot.com
Pyongyang sounds more like the sound effect an ACME catapult makes
as it goes off at precisely the wrong moment for Wile E. Coyote. -
Cadbury Moose
| |
| John Navas 2006-08-09, 10:33 pm |
| On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 20:25:01 -0500, "WindsorFox[SS]"
<windsorfox@NOSPAM.cox.net> wrote in <GVvCg.27$xk3.5@dukeread07>:
>Scott wrote:
>
> It just hit me that theoretically the charter would be roughly the
>same since Cingular now owns ATT who now owns Cingular.
Give that man a cigar! :)
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ Cingu...less_FA
Q>
| |
| Scott 2006-08-09, 10:33 pm |
|
"John Navas" < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote in message
news:dh5ld2t9prok6nd
43hf362bb1jm3kgibo8@
4ax.com...
> On Wed, 09 Aug 2006 20:25:01 -0500, "WindsorFox[SS]"
> <windsorfox@NOSPAM.cox.net> wrote in <GVvCg.27$xk3.5@dukeread07>:
>
>
> Give that man a cigar! :)
>
For what? Neither newsgroup has any affiliation with Cingular/ ATT. If
John's twisted logic is that his beloved charter automatically transfers to
the ATTW group because of a corporate name change, he's more of an idiot
than I've given him credit for. The charter is worthless to begin with.
Novice is having problems realizing that his fifteen minutes of fame
occurred almost a generation and a half ago, and he has no current
experience that has any value to anyone. The age of the computer dinosaur
has passed.
| |
| Elmo P. Shagnasty 2006-08-10, 7:33 am |
| In article <GVvCg.27$xk3.5@dukeread07>,
"WindsorFox[SS]" <windsorfox@NOSPAM.cox.net> wrote:
>
> It just hit me that theoretically the charter would be roughly the
> same since Cingular now owns ATT who now owns Cingular.
But that's now how the Usenet works, and Navas knows it.
He twists things to his own desires. He quotes "that's how Usenet
works" when it suits him, and he ignores that when it doesn't suit him.
| |
| Thomas T. Veldhouse 2006-08-10, 10:33 am |
| In alt.cellular.cingular WindsorFox[SS] <windsorfox@nospam.cox.net> wrote:
>
> It just hit me that theoretically the charter would be roughly the
> same since Cingular now owns ATT who now owns Cingular.
>
The charter pertains to the newsgroup itself and not the company that is the
subject matter of said newsgroup. Each and every newsgroups has its own
charter and each charter applies to only one newsgroup. .... I should
rephrase and say that each and every newsgroup MAY have its own charter.
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
| |
| Thomas T. Veldhouse 2006-08-10, 10:33 am |
| In alt.cellular.cingular John Navas < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote:
>
> Give that man a cigar! :)
>
John ... you know where to stick that cigar too.
In fact, as you well know, there is no charter for alt.cellular.attws
what-so-ever! As is the case with many alt.* groups. In fact, the control
message sent for alt.cellular.attws does not even appear to be archived at
isc:
ftp://ftp.isc.org/pub/usenet/contro...llular.attws.gz
Where as the control message that you sent for Cingular is:
ftp://ftp.isc.org/pub/usenet/contro...lar.cingular.gz
Clearly there is a charter for that group ... and you post it to the wrong
group every week!
--
Thomas T. Veldhouse
Key Fingerprint: 2DB9 813F F510 82C2 E1AE 34D0 D69D 1EDC D5EC AED1
| |
|
| Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
> Clearly there is a charter for that group ... and you post it to the wrong
> group every week!
He's terrified that once the acquisition and name change is complete,
that alt.cellular.cingular will become inactive, with all discussion
taking place on alt.cellular.attws. Since he had nothing to do with the
creation of alt.cellular.attws, this is highly undesirable to him.
Hence, he is trying to extend his "control" to alt.cellular.attws.
For better or for worse, there is little control in Usenet in
non-moderated groups. John has been spamming other groups lately as
well. He's been asked to stop by many individuals, but he continues,
because his goal is not to educate, it's to annoy.
| |
| John Navas 2006-08-10, 10:33 am |
| On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 06:49:33 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in < 44db396f$0$96189$742
ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:
>Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
>
>
>He's terrified that once the acquisition and name change is complete,
>that alt.cellular.cingular will become inactive, with all discussion
>taking place on alt.cellular.attws. Since he had nothing to do with the
>creation of alt.cellular.attws, this is highly undesirable to him.
>Hence, he is trying to extend his "control" to alt.cellular.attws.
I actually couldn't care less.
>For better or for worse, there is little control in Usenet in
>non-moderated groups. John has been spamming other groups lately as
>well. He's been asked to stop by many individuals, but he continues,
>because his goal is not to educate, it's to annoy.
'Those who have evidence will present their evidence,
those who do not have evidence will attack the man.'
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ Cingu...less_FA
Q>
| |
| Elmo P. Shagnasty 2006-08-10, 10:33 am |
| In article < 4lhmd2pjeqfpodqftjg8
a5k8r86pkettcp@4ax.com>,
John Navas < spamfilter0@navasgro
up.com> wrote:
>
> I actually couldn't care less.
Then prove it. Stop posting your "charter" to entirely inappropriate
newsgroups, INCLUDING alt.cellular.attws.
Until and unless you stop, your actions will be all the proof anyone
needs to see that SMS is right.
| |
| Kevin K 2006-08-10, 10:33 pm |
| On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 13:49:33 UTC, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote:
> Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote:
>
>
> He's terrified that once the acquisition and name change is complete,
> that alt.cellular.cingular will become inactive, with all discussion
> taking place on alt.cellular.attws.
What happens if it is just called att? Not attws? That would make a
new group possible.
--
| |
| WindsorFox[SS] 2006-08-10, 10:33 pm |
| Scott wrote:
>
>
> For what? Neither newsgroup has any affiliation with Cingular/ ATT. If
> John's twisted logic is that his beloved charter automatically transfers to
> the ATTW group because of a corporate name change, he's more of an idiot
> than I've given him credit for. The charter is worthless to begin with.
>
What looks really stupid is your total disdain for anything he
posts. You're off the mark on that one.
--
I used to have abs. Now, I've just got ab.
One big ol' Ab. - BigSkiff www.titanspot.com
Pyongyang sounds more like the sound effect an ACME catapult makes
as it goes off at precisely the wrong moment for Wile E. Coyote. -
Cadbury Moose
| |
| Scott 2006-08-10, 10:33 pm |
|
"WindsorFox[SS]" <windsorfox@NOSPAM.cox.net> wrote in message
news:cEPCg.87$xk3.50@dukeread07...
> Scott wrote:
>
> What looks really stupid is your total disdain for anything he posts.
> You're off the mark on that one.
>
You need to examine that first statement a little closer. I respond to
anything inaccurate that he posts and end up only responding to less than
10% of his posts. MANY of his posts never see a reply from me. To say that
I show disdain for everything he posts is not true.
| |
|
| Kevin K wrote:
> On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 13:49:33 UTC, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
> What happens if it is just called att? Not attws? That would make a
> new group possible.
It's possible, but unlikely. It's not like Voicestream changing to
T-Mobile, a major name change.
| |
| John Navas 2006-08-11, 12:33 pm |
| On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 19:18:42 -0700, SMS <scharf.steven@geemail.com>
wrote in < 44dbe903$0$96150$742
ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:
>Kevin K wrote:
>
>It's possible, but unlikely. ...
I'd say it's actually more likely for Cingular to be rebranded as just
AT&T. ATTWS was invented for the spin-off from AT&T. If the merger
goes through (as it probably will), there's no further need for a
different name.
--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/ Cingu...less_FA
Q>
|
|
|
|
|