WHINERS!!! Really!! What makes you think that you're an
authority on other people's ISP and phone company relations?!
Every ISP I've tried can only supply a 26,400-28,800 connection
in my area even though I use an excellent 56K external hardware
modem. The phone company has explained time after time when
I've complained about a poor or slow connection that the switch
is over 9 miles away from my neighborhood by wire run distance,
and physically there is nothing that can be done to improve
transmission.
Alan Shoemaker
Jaguar wrote:
>
> Wow...a bunch of whiner's!!! (although a 2 MB file is quite large)
>
> If your ISP connect is so bad ie: crappy ISP, worse phone lines, or a 28.8
> modem...all of these can be fixed fairly easily...the easiest would be to but
> a $40.00 hardware modem from Cirrus Logic or some other Co., and probably sign
> with a new ISP...even the phone lines can be upgraded if you complain to your
> TelCO enuff.
> But some of you even complain about a 1 or 2 K HTML/business card attachment,
> as a "waste of bandwidth"....do some of you have 2400 modems still???? When I
> think that excessively (4 lines of text or more) long sig files or
> advertisments for web pages NOT even your own, or people that add "Ya me too"
> or some such thing to an already long thread, is in reality a total waste of
> everyone's time. I don't really care to see 4 or more lines in a sig file as
> it is usually a banal quote from someone long dead, or even worse...unheard
> of. Some of the sig's I have seen make NO sense what so ever?????
> Well I am done my ranting...I hope I reached one or two of you...:)
> my 0.02 worth
> Jaguar
>
> Donny <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > U must be a moron to send an attachment to a list!! Im stuck out here on a
>
> > 28.8 and it took forever to download. But dont suspend the guy. Just uhh,
>
> > dont do it no more :-)
> >
> > At 06:27 PM 3/19/00 +0000, you wrote:
> > >On Sun, 19 Mar 2000, you wrote:
> > > > John....don't overreact, everyone deserves a second chance and
> > > > I'm sure there was no malicious intent.
> > > >
> > > > Alan
> > >
> > >I'll accept your point Alan - perhaps the penalty I requested was rather
> harsh
> > >and the perpetrator is not usually guilty of such faux pas.
> > >
> > >I feel that Denis's email closes the subject.
> > >
> > >--
> > >Regards
> > >
> > >John the Nadger
> > >
> > >http://mklinux.cjb.net
> > >
> > >http://www.nadger.uklinux.net
> > >
>
> ____________________________________________________________________
> Get your own FREE, personal Netscape WebMail account today at
>http://webmail.netscape.com.
