Can I transfer my old cellular telephone number after 30 day trial?

Paul Miner wrote:
> On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 12:51:09 -0600, "mikeyhsd" <mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com>
> wrote:
>
>> you can repeat yourself, 30,000,000,000 times a day.
>> still does not change the fact that if they decide to place road blocks they will do so.
>> only choice to get around them is to threaten law suit.
>
> Dead wrong, as usual. What Isaiah said is absolutely correct.

Actually, it's a game of semantics, Paul. You do know the difference
between "can" and "may" don't you?

I would NOT want to bet money that some idiot working for one of the
various cell providers doesn't screw with a customer seeking to port a
number. He CAN do it. He MAY NOT do it with impunity.

I think we can agree that pretty much universally, "Thou shalt not
kill!" is the law of whatever land you happen to be in. For some
strange reason, not everyone seems to have gotten the message after how
many thousands of years? You MAY not kill someone but there are a lot
of folks out there who CAN and DO do so each day.

So, bottom line is that Mikeyhsd is correct they CAN do so but they do
so at their peril for you (the consumer) has the law on your side.

Am I nitpicking? Yep, but so are you. You know damn well that Isaiah
meant they MAY not (by law) impede the porting but they certainly can if
they choose to violate the law.


>
>
>> "Isaiah Beard" <sacredpoet@sacredpoet.com> wrote in message news:12p597fqbs90h29@corp.supernews.com...
>> mikeyhsd wrote:
>>
>> > does not mean that they cannot delay and place road blocks.
>>
>> *sigh* I guess I have to repeat myself:
>>
>> The FCC requires all carriers to release a number if it's elligible for
>> porting and the porting request is valid.
>>
>> They can't put up any roadblocks, and they can't delay. They MUST port
>> the number and meet their stated obligation. The rules on this are very
>> specific, and were written with the potential for carrier stalling in mind.

On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 18:57:47 -0600, Unquestionably Confused
<puzzled2@ameritech.net> wrote:

>Paul Miner wrote:
>> On Wed, 27 Dec 2006 12:51:09 -0600, "mikeyhsd" <mikeyhsd@sport.rr.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> you can repeat yourself, 30,000,000,000 times a day.
>>> still does not change the fact that if they decide to place road blocks they will do so.
>>> only choice to get around them is to threaten law suit.
>>
>> Dead wrong, as usual. What Isaiah said is absolutely correct.
>
>Actually, it's a game of semantics, Paul. You do know the difference
>between "can" and "may" don't you?
<snip>

Your "thou shalt not kill" analogy was spot on. ;-)

--
Paul Miner

Unquestionably Confused wrote:

>> Dead wrong, as usual. What Isaiah said is absolutely correct.
>
> Actually, it's a game of semantics, Paul.

Actually, I think I made it pretty clear that it cannot happen. CANNOT.
Not "may" not.

> You do know the difference
> between "can" and "may" don't you?
>
> I would NOT want to bet money that some idiot working for one of the
> various cell providers doesn't screw with a customer seeking to port a
> number. He CAN do it. He MAY NOT do it with impunity.

This would be true IF all the ports were done manually. But they
aren't, unless ambiguous information is given, and then a neutral third
party like Neustar gets involved. The vast majority of ports aren't
touched by ANY human, except the human selling you the new service. And
they generally have a motive to make the port work, rather than stall it.


--
E-mail fudged to thwart spammers.
Transpose the c's and a's in my e-mail address to reply.