NEWS: Sprint boots 200 American patriots for using their phones

<http://www.theregister.com/2007/07/19/sprint_accuses_soldiers_of_excessive_roaming/>

Shortly after they returned home from the war in Iraq, Sprint accused
200 American soldiers of excessive roaming and summarily canceled
their wireless service. At least, that's the word from one of these
embattled national heroes.

[MORE]

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

In <dvuv935mhnngad4hgill8dkj08bgkvo026@4ax.com> John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> writes:

><http://www.theregister.com/2007/07/19/sprint_accuses_soldiers_of_excessive_roaming/>

> Shortly after they returned home from the war in Iraq, Sprint accused
> 200 American soldiers of excessive roaming and summarily canceled
> their wireless service. At least, that's the word from one of these
> embattled national heroes.

> [MORE]

[no, that's LESS ]

THis story has been thrashed out up the kazoo, sir. You're
dredging up old news.

That being said, if the folk in DC would stop pretending
that our involvement is Iraq isn't just a weekend holiday,
and if they acknowledged that they've brought us into,
for better or worse, a real war, then shit like this
wouldn't happen to our troops.




--
__________________________________________________ ___
Knowledge may be power, but communications is the key
dannyb@panix.com
[to foil spammers, my address has been double rot-13 encoded]

That's old news John and Sprint has since said that any soldier who gets
the letter can simply call in and tell them that they're a soldier and
the roaming limits will be waived.

John Navas wrote:
> <http://www.theregister.com/2007/07/19/sprint_accuses_soldiers_of_excessive_roaming/>
>
> Shortly after they returned home from the war in Iraq, Sprint
> accused 200 American soldiers of excessive roaming and summarily
> canceled their wireless service. At least, that's the word from one
> of these embattled national heroes.
>
> [MORE]

John Navas wrote:
> <http://www.theregister.com/2007/07/19/sprint_accuses_soldiers_of_excessive_roaming/>
>
> Shortly after they returned home from the war in Iraq, Sprint accused
> 200 American soldiers of excessive roaming and summarily canceled
> their wireless service. At least, that's the word from one of these
> embattled national heroes.


Yawn...old news.

John Navas <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote in
news:dvuv935mhnngad4hgill8dkj08bgkvo026@4ax.com:

> <http://www.theregister.com/2007/07/1...diers_of_exces
> sive_roaming/>
>
> Shortly after they returned home from the war in Iraq, Sprint
> accused 200 American soldiers of excessive roaming and summarily
> canceled their wireless service. At least, that's the word from one
> of these embattled national heroes.
>
> [MORE]
>

When backed into a corner, Johnny Novice always tries to deflect attention
away by bashing the other carriers.

BTW, Zippy- the full story has already been proven to be a hoax.

On Fri, 20 Jul 2007 00:04:54 GMT, John Navas
<spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:

> Shortly after they returned home from the war in Iraq, Sprint accused
> 200 American soldiers of excessive roaming and summarily canceled
> their wireless service. At least, that's the word from one of these
> embattled national heroes.

I took a look at that news and I see problem with it. Sprint sent
notices for cancelation the phone service in July. As I understand,
they were redeployed just a month prior to the notice.

So how can Sprint be upset about excessive roaming in one month?? For
that matter, is it possible for Sprint to see "excessive" pattern from
other carriers in just one month?

Add to that the other round of service cancellation Sprint issued to
excessive complainers, they said it was a one time ONLY.

I call BS on this article. Obviously posted by an anti-Sprint fanboy.

On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 17:07:11 -1000, "BruceR"
<razrbruce@NOgmailSPAM.com> wrote:

>That's old news John and Sprint has since said that any soldier who gets
>the letter can simply call in and tell them that they're a soldier and
>the roaming limits will be waived.
>

But why should they have to call in and jump through hoops ?

> John Navas wrote:
>> <http://www.theregister.com/2007/07/19/sprint_accuses_soldiers_of_excessive_roaming/>
>>
>> Shortly after they returned home from the war in Iraq, Sprint
>> accused 200 American soldiers of excessive roaming and summarily
>> canceled their wireless service. At least, that's the word from one
>> of these embattled national heroes.
>>
>> [MORE]
>

["Followup-To:" header set to alt.cellular.sprintpcs.]
On 2007-07-20, karlkrandall@sbcglobal.net <karlkrandall@sbcglobal.net> wrote:

> But why should they have to call in and jump through hoops ?

How is Sprint going to automatically determine they're overseas? Do you think
they're all going to change their billing address to their APO?

Think about this. If you have someone at home paying the bills, you're
probably going to have the cellular bill going to that person, not coming to
you.

karlkrandall@sbcglobal.net wrote in
news:rlf1a3l3ep1v8eqheist2201dlkqb1mtp0@4ax.com:

> On Thu, 19 Jul 2007 17:07:11 -1000, "BruceR"
> <razrbruce@NOgmailSPAM.com> wrote:
>
>>That's old news John and Sprint has since said that any soldier who
>>gets the letter can simply call in and tell them that they're a
>>soldier and the roaming limits will be waived.
>>
>
> But why should they have to call in and jump through hoops ?
>


Using the phone may be considered "jumping through hoops" for the mentally
challenged like yourself, but for the rest of the world, it is an everyday
exercise.

clifto <clifto@gmail.com> wrote in news:eb38n4-8v.ln1@remote.clifto.com:

> Impmon wrote:
>> <spamfilter1@navasgroup.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Shortly after they returned home from the war in Iraq, Sprint
>>> accused 200 American soldiers of excessive roaming and summarily
>>> canceled their wireless service. At least, that's the word from
>>> one of these embattled national heroes.
>>
>> I took a look at that news and I see problem with it. Sprint sent
>> notices for cancelation the phone service in July. As I understand,
>> they were redeployed just a month prior to the notice.
>>
>> So how can Sprint be upset about excessive roaming in one month??
>> For that matter, is it possible for Sprint to see "excessive" pattern
>> from other carriers in just one month?
>
> You dismiss that as if it's impossible, so here comes the devil's
> advocate.
>
> Joe Grunt signs up for Sprint in Butte, Montana and enlists, goes to
> boot camp in Fort Leonard Wood in Missouri, makes "excessive roaming"
> calls because more than 50% of his calls are made from an area other
> than where he signed up; goes to advanced training in Fort Knox,
> Kentucky, and makes more "excessive roaming" calls because more than
> 50% of his calls are made from an area other than where he signed up;
> gets redeployed, then Sprint sends him a notice.
>

A very possible scenario, but the "facts" in this case are far different:

1. The soldiers were sent to West Point for a two-month temp assignment,
which is when their excessive roaming began.

2. Because the poster said that the cancellation date of July 31st
mentioned in the letter from Sprint would occur fifteen days before their
assignment ended, that would put their assignment date somewhere around
June 15th.

3. The letters sent out by Sprint were sent in the last couple of days in
June, or roughly two weeks after all of this "excessive" roaming began.


So Sprint would have two weeks worth of data available at best. And that
assumes that the roaming provider was providing Sprint with up-to-the-
minute usage data, which is unlikely. Another fact to consider is that
Sprint would only have two weeks of data to analyze if they chose the
customers up for cancellation at the very last second before sending
letters, which again is unlikely. That means that there was maybe a
weeks' worth of data available, if any at all.

The scenario is way too illogical. The story is crap.