🚀 go-pugleaf

On 5 Dec 1997 22:52:01 -0700, bennett@primenet.com (John Bennett)
wrote:

>In article <3487f5d3.24447403@news.primenet.com>, robert@arizonainternet.com wrote:
>>>>Rob Hoffmann <robster@primenet.com> wrote:
>>>>: A simple question was asked.  May I have the courtesy of a
>>>>: simple answer?
>>>>
>>>>Nathan Raciborski <nathan@primenet.com>wrote:
>>>>It isn't such a simple answer.
>>>
>>>robert@arizonainternet.com (Robert Basil) wrote:
>>>Ok, I'll settle for the hard answer then. Or are you going to dodge
>>>this question like you do *so* many others?
>>
>>I wonder how many days Nathan is going to completly ignore this
>>thread. I KNOW! I bet it will be his normal "2 Weeks (tm)" =)
>>
>><yawn>
>
>I think Nathan has been pretty damn polite in response to inflammatory 
>questions from a piss-ant representative of a competitor.  

1. We do not compete with Primenet. In fact we refer about 20+ people
each month *to* Primenet. (Just as long as they do not place any
importance on Usenet).

>Personally, I'd 
>have told you to sod off more than Two Weeks (tm) ago... 

2. And that is your right.

>But I'm sure he 
>appreciates your maintaining an account here to bitch him out in front of 
>his *real* customers.

3. I would think the money we pay Primenet (which by the way is about
30 TIMES what you pay) would at *least* make us a *real* customer.

>I, on the other hand, think it's pretty tired.

4. And so do I. In fact I did not ask the original question. Someone
else did. I just thought it was funny that Nathan could not (or will
not?) answer it. The way he tells it, the answer is just to
*complicated* for us normal people to comprehend.


---
Nathan Raciborski, President Telecom Services: 11/27/97
"FOR THE RECORD:  News in general isn't perfect here GC, we desire to
deliver the best possible service and we believe we have done a 'B' job in
doing that."