Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.mobile.ipad > #48712 > unrolled thread

Hey, Nospam

Back to article view | Back to comp.mobile.ipad

Contents

  Hey, Nospam Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-06-03 08:32 -0700
    Re: Hey, Nospam android <here@there.was> - 2015-06-03 17:44 +0200
    Re: Hey, Nospam "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-06-04 06:47 +1000
      Re: Hey, Nospam BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2015-06-03 17:01 -0500
        Re: Hey, Nospam "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-06-04 14:13 +1000
          Re: Hey, Nospam BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2015-06-04 06:44 -0500
            Re: Hey, Nospam "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-06-05 07:13 +1000
              Re: Hey, Nospam BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2015-06-04 17:55 -0500
                Re: Hey, Nospam "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-06-05 11:45 +1000
                  Re: Hey, Nospam BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2015-06-04 21:37 -0500
                    Re: Hey, Nospam "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-06-05 14:36 +1000
        Re: Hey, Nospam Aldo Raine <apache@scalpem.net> - 2015-06-04 08:55 -0400
        Re: Hey, Nospam gtr <xxx@yyy.zzz> - 2015-06-04 10:00 -0700
          Re: Hey, Nospam Lewis <g.kreme@gmail.com.dontsendmecopies> - 2015-06-05 07:51 +0000
        Re: Hey, Nospam George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2015-06-06 08:37 -0500
    Re: Hey, Nospam Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> - 2015-06-03 17:57 -0400
      Re: Hey, Nospam Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-06-03 16:12 -0700
        Re: Hey, Nospam nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-06-03 23:11 -0400
          Re: Hey, Nospam Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-06-03 20:42 -0700
            Re: Hey, Nospam "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-06-04 14:17 +1000
              Re: Hey, Nospam Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-06-03 21:34 -0700
                Re: Hey, Nospam jamiekg@wizardling.geek.nz (Jamie Kahn Genet) - 2015-06-04 16:41 +1200
                Re: Hey, Nospam "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-06-05 07:09 +1000
              Re: Hey, Nospam me@home.spamsucks.ca (Király) - 2015-06-04 13:12 +0000
            Re: Hey, Nospam News <News@Group.Post> - 2015-06-04 07:20 -0400
              Re: Hey, Nospam Aldo Raine <apache@scalpem.net> - 2015-06-04 09:00 -0400
        Re: Hey, Nospam "Lee Waun" <leewaun@telus.net> - 2015-06-05 20:04 -0700
      Re: Hey, Nospam nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-06-03 23:11 -0400
        Re: Hey, Nospam Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-06-03 20:41 -0700
          Re: Hey, Nospam nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-06-03 23:53 -0400
            Re: Hey, Nospam Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> - 2015-06-03 21:30 -0700
              Re: Hey, Nospam me@home.spamsucks.ca (Király) - 2015-06-04 13:14 +0000
                Re: Hey, Nospam nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-06-04 12:52 -0400
                  Re: Hey, Nospam Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-06-04 18:45 +0100
                    Re: Hey, Nospam nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-06-04 13:58 -0400
                      Re: Hey, Nospam Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> - 2015-06-04 21:20 +0100
                      Re: Hey, Nospam "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-06-05 07:24 +1000
                        Re: Hey, Nospam nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-06-04 18:09 -0400
                          Re: Hey, Nospam "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-06-05 11:37 +1000
                            Re: Hey, Nospam nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-06-04 22:02 -0400
                              Re: Hey, Nospam "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-06-05 14:19 +1000
                  Re: Hey, Nospam "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-06-05 07:18 +1000
                    Re: Hey, Nospam nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-06-04 18:09 -0400
                      Re: Hey, Nospam "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-06-05 11:39 +1000
                        Re: Hey, Nospam nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> - 2015-06-04 22:02 -0400
                          Re: Hey, Nospam BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2015-06-04 21:39 -0500
                            Re: Hey, Nospam "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-06-05 14:37 +1000
                              Re: Hey, Nospam BobbyK <bknight@Conramp.net> - 2015-06-05 08:07 -0500
                                Re: Hey, Nospam "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-06-06 13:04 +1000
                          Re: Hey, Nospam "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-06-05 14:21 +1000
                        Re: Hey, Nospam JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-06-04 22:13 -0400
                          Re: Hey, Nospam "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-06-05 14:36 +1000
                            Re: Hey, Nospam JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-06-05 01:07 -0400
                              Re: Hey, Nospam "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-06-05 15:49 +1000
                                Re: Hey, Nospam JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-06-05 16:46 -0400
                                  Re: Hey, Nospam "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-06-06 15:17 +1000
                Re: Hey, Nospam JF Mezei <jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca> - 2015-06-04 13:44 -0400
                  Re: Hey, Nospam "Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> - 2015-06-05 07:22 +1000
        Re: Hey, Nospam George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2015-06-06 08:38 -0500
      Re: Hey, Nospam George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2015-06-06 08:36 -0500
    Re: Hey, Nospam George Kerby <ghost_topper@hotmail.com> - 2015-06-06 08:35 -0500

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

#48730

In article <cta1q5FsmhfU1@mid.individual.net>, Rod Speed
<rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:

> > Right, just as it doesn't matter in the example text I sent you.  so go
> > help your uncle jack off a horse.
> 
> Its rather unlikely that he actually has an uncle jack, and even if
> he does, that he actually has a horse, and even if he has, that he
> needs to be assisted to get off that horse. 

Well, in the case of the quoted sentence, his uncle's name is
immaterial because with the lack of capitalization, I was telling him
to help his uncle to masturbate a horse, not to dismount it.  Also, I
didn't say whose horse it is; I wrote, "a horse", not "his horse." 
Please learn to read for comprehension.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#48731

Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> In article <cta1q5FsmhfU1@mid.individual.net>, Rod Speed
> <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> > > Right, just as it doesn't matter in the example text I sent you.  so go
> > > help your uncle jack off a horse.
> > 
> > Its rather unlikely that he actually has an uncle jack, and even if
> > he does, that he actually has a horse, and even if he has, that he
> > needs to be assisted to get off that horse. 
> 
> Well, in the case of the quoted sentence, his uncle's name is
> immaterial because with the lack of capitalization, I was telling him
> to help his uncle to masturbate a horse, not to dismount it.  Also, I
> didn't say whose horse it is; I wrote, "a horse", not "his horse." 
> Please learn to read for comprehension.

I wonder what Lewis makes of "learn to read for comprehension"? :-D
-- 
If you're not part of the solution, you're part of the precipitate.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#48744

Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote 
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
 
>>> Right, just as it doesn't matter in the example text 
>>> I sent you.  so go help your uncle jack off a horse.
 
>> It's rather unlikely that he actually has an uncle jack, and 
>> even if he does, that he actually has a horse, and even if 
>> he has, that he needs to be assisted to get off that horse. 
 
> Well, in the case of the quoted sentence, his uncle's name is immaterial 

It clearly isn't because there are few other names which end up 
with an ambiguous sentence without the name being capitalized. 

> because with the lack of capitalization, I was telling him
> to help his uncle to masturbate a horse, not to dismount it.  

Duh. 

> Also, I didn't say whose horse it is; 
> I wrote, "a horse", not "his horse." 

It's rather unlikely that he actually has an uncle jack, and even 
if he does, that he actually has access to a horse, and even if 
he has, that he needs to be assisted to get off that horse. 

> Please learn to read for comprehension.

Go and fuck yourself. No please, that's an order.  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#48736

In comp.sys.mac.system Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
> Its rather unlikely

You did that on purpose, didn't you?

-- 
K.

Lang may your lum reek.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#48732

On 6/3/2015 11:42 PM, Michelle Steiner wrote:
> In article <030620152311575701%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam
> <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
>>>>> Capitalization is important.  Most people would write, "...helping your
>>>>> Uncle Jack off a horse."  But you would write, "...helping your uncle
>>>>> jack off a horse."
>>>>
>>>> Are those of us who don't read every thread supposed to know what this
>>>> refers to? To me it seems to be totally out of the blue.
>>>
>>> Nospam never capitalizes anything he writes here.
>>
>> actually, i do once in a while if it's important, such as a case
>> sensitive unix command.
>>
>> otherwise, it doesn't matter.
>
> Right, just as it doesn't matter in the example text I sent you.  so go
> help your uncle jack off a horse.
>

She'll watch.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#48735

On 6/4/15 7:20 AM, News wrote:
> On 6/3/2015 11:42 PM, Michelle Steiner wrote:
>> In article <030620152311575701%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam
>> <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>>>>> Capitalization is important.  Most people would write, "...helping
>>>>>> your
>>>>>> Uncle Jack off a horse."  But you would write, "...helping your uncle
>>>>>> jack off a horse."
>>>>>
>>>>> Are those of us who don't read every thread supposed to know what this
>>>>> refers to? To me it seems to be totally out of the blue.
>>>>
>>>> Nospam never capitalizes anything he writes here.
>>>
>>> actually, i do once in a while if it's important, such as a case
>>> sensitive unix command.
>>>
>>> otherwise, it doesn't matter.
>>
>> Right, just as it doesn't matter in the example text I sent you.  so go
>> help your uncle jack off a horse.
>>
>
> She'll watch.

...but not help...

-- 
I think of myself as a man's man. I like my whiskey neat, my steaks 
rare, and my Pop-Tarts untoasted.
						- @patsajak

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#48774

"Michelle Steiner" <michelle@michelle.org> wrote in message 
news:030620151612361732%
>> Are those of us who don't read every thread supposed to know what this
>> refers to? To me it seems to be totally out of the blue.
>
> Nospam never capitalizes anything he writes here.

So?

 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#48719

In article <barmar-A718CF.17575903062015@88-209-239-213.giganet.hu>,
Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:

> > Capitalization is important.  Most people would write, "...helping your
> > Uncle Jack off a horse."  But you would write, "...helping your uncle
> > jack off a horse."
> 
> Are those of us who don't read every thread supposed to know what this 
> refers to? To me it seems to be totally out of the blue.

it's nothing more than a personal attack because i showed her to be
wrong about something.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#48723

In article <030620152311565661%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam
<nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> In article <barmar-A718CF.17575903062015@88-209-239-213.giganet.hu>,
> Barry Margolin <barmar@alum.mit.edu> wrote:
> 
> > > Capitalization is important.  Most people would write, "...helping your
> > > Uncle Jack off a horse."  But you would write, "...helping your uncle
> > > jack off a horse."
> > 
> > Are those of us who don't read every thread supposed to know what this 
> > refers to? To me it seems to be totally out of the blue.
> 
> it's nothing more than a personal attack 

No, it's not.  It's an attempt to show you why capitalization is
important.  But, of course since you are always in attack mode, you
think that anything other than abject agreement with you is an attack
on you.

> because i showed her to be
> wrong about something.

No, you didn't.  But I showed that you can't understand simple
arithmetic, and are a hypocrite.  (That's not an attack; it's a
statement of facts.)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#48725

In article <030620152041414126%michelle@michelle.org>, Michelle Steiner
<michelle@michelle.org> wrote:

> > > > Capitalization is important.  Most people would write, "...helping your
> > > > Uncle Jack off a horse."  But you would write, "...helping your uncle
> > > > jack off a horse."
> > > 
> > > Are those of us who don't read every thread supposed to know what this 
> > > refers to? To me it seems to be totally out of the blue.
> > 
> > it's nothing more than a personal attack 
> 
> No, it's not.  It's an attempt to show you why capitalization is
> important.  But, of course since you are always in attack mode, you
> think that anything other than abject agreement with you is an attack
> on you.

since there was no ambiguity in anything i said, yes it was an attack.

> > because i showed her to be
> > wrong about something.
> 
> No, you didn't. 

yes i most certainly did, as did others in that thread and numerous
threads before when the topic came up.

> But I showed that you can't understand simple
> arithmetic, and are a hypocrite.  (That's not an attack; it's a
> statement of facts.)

no you didn't. what you showed is that you have *no* clue about how the
cellular industry sells phones and hides the true cost. your arithmetic
is of the wrong equations with the wrong conclusions. worse, you refuse
to learn and insist you're correct. you're not.

as i said in the other thread, carriers *love* customers like you. they
see dollar signs when you walk in the door.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#48728

In article <030620152353033691%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam
<nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> as i said in the other thread, carriers *love* customers like you. they
> see dollar signs when you walk in the door.

You have said that about people paying full price without a contract,
and about people paying a subsidized price with a contract.  In other
words, you've said it about every customer.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#48737

In comp.sys.mac.system Michelle Steiner <michelle@michelle.org> wrote:
> You have said that about people paying full price without a contract,
> and about people paying a subsidized price with a contract.  In other
> words, you've said it about every customer.

There's also subsidized without a contract, which I'm on.

-- 
K.

Lang may your lum reek.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#48738

In article <mkpj03$vkc$2@dont-email.me>, Király <me@home.spamsucks.ca>
wrote:

> There's also subsidized without a contract, which I'm on.

what's to stop you from defaulting if there is no contract?

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#48741

In article <040620151252138177%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam
<nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

>In article <mkpj03$vkc$2@dont-email.me>, Király <me@home.spamsucks.ca>
>wrote:
>
>> There's also subsidized without a contract, which I'm on.
>
>what's to stop you from defaulting if there is no contract?

It's PAYG, presumably.

-- 
"Once you adopt the unix paradigm, the variants cease to be a problem - you
bitch, of course, but that's because bitching is fun, unlike M$ OS's, where 
bitching is required to keep your head from exploding." - S Stremler in afc

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#48742

In article <040620151845565720%timstreater@greenbee.net>, Tim Streater
<timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:

> >> There's also subsidized without a contract, which I'm on.
> >
> >what's to stop you from defaulting if there is no contract?
> 
> It's PAYG, presumably.

paygo is not subsidized.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#48743

In article <040620151358427413%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam
<nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

>In article <040620151845565720%timstreater@greenbee.net>, Tim Streater
><timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote:
>
>> >> There's also subsidized without a contract, which I'm on.
>> >
>> >what's to stop you from defaulting if there is no contract?
>> 
>> It's PAYG, presumably.
>
>paygo is not subsidized.

My phone cost £13. That's, what, $20 in Monopoly money? I then started
buying my PAYG minutes. IIRC I put £15 on it first time round. Paying
more than that sort of money for a mobile phone is lunacy.

-- 
"Please stop telling us what you feel. Please stop telling us what your 
intuition is. Your intuitive feelings are of no interest whatsoever, 
and nor are mine. I don't give a bugger what you feel, or what I feel. 
I want to know what the evidence shows."             -- Richard Dawkins

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#48748

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote 
> Tim Streater <timstreater@greenbee.net> wrote
 
>>>> There's also subsidized without a contract, which I'm on.

>>> what's to stop you from defaulting if there is no contract?
 
>> It's PAYG, presumably.
 
> paygo is not subsidized.

It can be when the phone is locked to that carrier. 

In fact normally is with most systems.  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#48750

In article <ctbtvtFdbbbU1@mid.individual.net>, Rod Speed
<rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:

> >>>> There's also subsidized without a contract, which I'm on.
> 
> >>> what's to stop you from defaulting if there is no contract?
>  
> >> It's PAYG, presumably.
>  
> > paygo is not subsidized.
> 
> It can be when the phone is locked to that carrier. 

paygo is not subsidized.

in some cases the phone may be financed, in which case there is a
contract to repay it.

> In fact normally is with most systems.  

nope.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#48752

nospam <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote 
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote
 
>>>>>> There's also subsidized without a contract, which I'm on.
 
>>>>> what's to stop you from defaulting if there is no contract?
  
>>>> It's PAYG, presumably.
  
>>> paygo is not subsidized.
 
>> It can be when the phone is locked to that carrier. 
 
> paygo is not subsidized.

Wrong when the locked phone is sold for a much 
lower price than the unlocked exact same phone. 
 
> in some cases the phone may be financed, 

And most of the time with paygo the phone is sold locked 
at a lower price than the same phone which isn't locked. 

> in which case there is a contract to repay it.
 
>> In fact normally is with most systems.  
 
> nope.

Yep, with paygo phones.  

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#48755

In article <ctccqoFgnc1U1@mid.individual.net>, Rod Speed
<rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:

> >>>>>> There's also subsidized without a contract, which I'm on.
>  
> >>>>> what's to stop you from defaulting if there is no contract?
>   
> >>>> It's PAYG, presumably.
>   
> >>> paygo is not subsidized.
>  
> >> It can be when the phone is locked to that carrier. 
>  
> > paygo is not subsidized.
> 
> Wrong when the locked phone is sold for a much 
> lower price than the unlocked exact same phone. 

phones here have always been locked, prepaid or postpaid, until
recently.

prepaid phones are not subsidized. you own it outright unless it's
financed. the lower cost is because they're low end phones. a prepaid
iphone is going to be its normal unsubsidized price.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 4 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4  Next page →

Back to top | Article view | comp.mobile.ipad

csiph-web