giffgaff: thieving, lying, scum
in [UK Mobile]
|
Prev: How to be a power agent in real estate
Next: PAYG dongle that can send & receive text messages.
From: Steve Terry on 28 Mar 2010 22:10 "andy" <andy.ggrps(a)googlemail.com> wrote in message news:94a7fe78-cba0-430e-a0bb-a276adb01620(a)e7g2000yqf.googlegroups.com... > On 28 Mar, 02:56, "Steve Terry" <gfour...(a)tesco.net> wrote: >> "andy" <andy.gg...(a)googlemail.com> wrote in message >> news:c19a508a-c0ba-4f2e-911b-2c59fedc9471(a)33g2000yqj.googlegroups.com... >> > On 27 Mar, 19:02, "Brian Gregory [UK]" <n...(a)bgdsv.co.uk> wrote: >> >> "andy" <andy.gg...(a)googlemail.com> wrote in message >> >>news:69e19e9f-da4b-4e4f-ab3d-fa801523d10a(a)j21g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... <snip> >> > Not all such providers are necessarily like that. >> >> As i said which one do you work for? > > You don't need to make this sneering false insinuation twice, > especially now I have already answered > I don't work for any of them > Rather than smugly sit back and sneer, which is all you've managed on > this thread so far, > > If you'd bothered to read my posts, you'd see i've more than sneered at this long term problem created by non opt out networks. I find your efforts bizarre at trying to make an inherently corrupt system work, only someone working in the "industry" would even try Steve Terry -- O2 Simplicity Sim up to �160 cashback at: http://www.topcashback.co.uk/o2/ If you use top cashback please use my referral: http://www.topcashback.co.uk/ref/G4WWK
From: andy on 29 Mar 2010 03:38 On 29 Mar, 03:10, "Steve Terry" <gfour...(a)tesco.net> wrote: > "andy" <andy.gg...(a)googlemail.com> wrote in message > > news:94a7fe78-cba0-430e-a0bb-a276adb01620(a)e7g2000yqf.googlegroups.com... > > > > > On 28 Mar, 02:56, "Steve Terry" <gfour...(a)tesco.net> wrote: > >> "andy" <andy.gg...(a)googlemail.com> wrote in message > >>news:c19a508a-c0ba-4f2e-911b-2c59fedc9471(a)33g2000yqj.googlegroups.com... > >> > On 27 Mar, 19:02, "Brian Gregory [UK]" <n...(a)bgdsv.co.uk> wrote: > >> >> "andy" <andy.gg...(a)googlemail.com> wrote in message > >> >>news:69e19e9f-da4b-4e4f-ab3d-fa801523d10a(a)j21g2000yqh.googlegroups.com... > <snip> > >> > Not all such providers are necessarily like that. > > >> As i said which one do you work for? > > > You don't need to make this sneering false insinuation twice, > > especially now I have already answered > > I don't work for any of them > > Rather than smugly sit back and sneer, which is all you've managed on > > this thread so far, > > If you'd bothered to read my posts, you'd see i've more than sneered > at this long term problem created by non opt out networks. > > I find your efforts bizarre at trying to make an inherently corrupt system > work, only someone working in the "industry" would even try > I find your accusation that I'm defending it, and your doubled suggestion that I work in it, false and defamatory There are plenty of premium text services without problems, but undoubtedly there is also sharp practice. When the latter occurs, people need to do something about it, instead of this supine whingeing embellished with made-up falsehoods against the wrong target. The OP has been given plenty of advice, but has turned on and lied about and insulted the people trying to help him But I'm repeating myself ...
From: Gwyn on 29 Mar 2010 04:34 On Sun, 28 Mar 2010 06:52:41 -0700 (PDT), andy <andy.ggrps(a)googlemail.com> wrote: >On 28 Mar, 13:32, "Brian Gregory [UK]" <n...(a)bgdsv.co.uk> wrote: >> >> I don't see how a single text that costs �5 can be anything other than a >> con, that they're hoping you won't realize is so expensive until it's too >> late. What information can possibly be worth that much to anybody other than >> an exceedingly rich person who just doesn't care about money. >> > >All of them by definition anyway, you mean? > >It depends what it's for. <snipped informative discussion> Im with Steve on this one every time someone questions you, you come up with another informative answer so I repeat him which one do you work for? Come on now dont be coy....
From: andy on 29 Mar 2010 04:53 On 29 Mar, 09:34, Gwyn <gwynde...(a)btinternet.com> wrote: > On Sun, 28 Mar 2010 06:52:41 -0700 (PDT), andy > > <andy.gg...(a)googlemail.com> wrote: > >On 28 Mar, 13:32, "Brian Gregory [UK]" <n...(a)bgdsv.co.uk> wrote: > > >> I don't see how a single text that costs 5 can be anything other than a > >> con, that they're hoping you won't realize is so expensive until it's too > >> late. What information can possibly be worth that much to anybody other than > >> an exceedingly rich person who just doesn't care about money. > > >All of them by definition anyway, you mean? > > >It depends what it's for. > > <snipped informative discussion> > > Im with Steve on this one every time someone questions you, you come > up with another informative answer so I repeat him which one do you > work for? Come on now dont be coy.... I have said more than once that I have no connection with any phone company, except as customer I'm sorry that you find my answers informative, and thus out of context amongst the half-baked guesswork rumour and innuendo that forms much of the rest of the material on here. If you take all of my answers here, you'd know as much as me by know, that is not a lot (i.e. using up easyMobile credit to get Voipcheap credit was my main direct experience, without problems), but that is still apparently more than people who can't be arsed to make a simple phone call to the provider on a Manchester number and ask to be unsubscribed and how to obtain a refund, or people who want to categorise the whole lot as in the same vein as wheel-clampers and nightclub bouncers. If people want some reform of this sector, then do something snsible about abuses which are found, rather than post meaningless character assassination of people who don't even work in it, or fabricate paranoid innuendo that networks are secretly running dodgy operations themselves.
From: Martin Jay on 29 Mar 2010 09:15
On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 00:38:00 -0700 (PDT), andy <andy.ggrps(a)googlemail.com> wrote: >There are plenty of premium text services without problems, but >undoubtedly there is also sharp practice. When the latter occurs, >people need to do something about it, instead of this supine whingeing >embellished with made-up falsehoods against the wrong target. Unfortunately giffgaff have done nothing, other than push the problem and blame on to someone else. >The OP has been given plenty of advice, but has turned on and lied >about and insulted the people trying to help him You keep saying I've lied, but fail to back up that accusation. Oddly, you are totally blind to the lies from Vincent and giffgaff. -- con-con giffgaff: <http://www.spam-free.org.uk/giffgaff/> |