R. P. wrote:
> <Ira.Kovac@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> great news, now how long is it going to take before the usa goes in
>> same direction
>
>
> I am just dying for sitting next to some teenager chatting on her phone
> all through the flight.
>
> R. P.
>
For an extra $50 they'll offer to assign you a seat in the no-cell zone.
R. P. wrote:
> "News" <News@Group.name> wrote:
>
>> For an extra $50 they'll offer to assign you a seat in the no-cell zone.
>
>
> I think it should be the other way around.
>
They'll figure to charge both sides, then let people who won't pay up
suffer in the middle.
On Apr 8, 10:39*pm, "R. P." <r_pol12...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> "News" <N...@Group.name> wrote:
> > For an extra $50 they'll offer to assign you a seat in the no-cell
> > zone.
>
> I think it should be the other way around.
>
> R. P.
Actually, I can see their point in charging extra for the no cell
zone. I personally cannot stand
being stuck in a place where I am surrounded by people using cell
phones indescrimentally and
especially when they are not in the least being descreet about their
conversations. If I am on a
flight that is going to take more than an hour, I am going to be
wanting some peace and quite
for reading, or sleeping. Personally, I hope that the US never o.k.'s
the use of cells on planes.
On Wed, 9 Apr 2008 04:03:58 -0700 (PDT), dafydd wrote:
> Actually, I can see their point in charging extra for the no cell
> zone. I personally cannot stand
> being stuck in a place where I am surrounded by people using cell
> phones indescrimentally and
> especially when they are not in the least being descreet about their
> conversations. If I am on a
> flight that is going to take more than an hour, I am going to be
> wanting some peace and quite
> for reading, or sleeping. Personally, I hope that the US never o.k.'s
> the use of cells on planes.
I totally agree with you, but fear many business travelers, who make up a
large percentage of the revenue the airlines get, will want to do business
while flying. Between them and the screaming kids I may go back to Amtrak
<G>.
> I totally agree with you, but fear many business travelers, who make up a
> large percentage of the revenue the airlines get, will want to do business
> while flying. Between them and the screaming kids I may go back to Amtrak
I'd think nitwits yammering endlessly about stupid crap would be far more
annoying than a business conversation. At least then I can make burping and
farting noises to discourage them from trying to talk to a client.
Bill Kearney wrote:
>
>> I totally agree with you, but fear many business travelers, who make up a
>> large percentage of the revenue the airlines get, will want to do
>> business
>> while flying. Between them and the screaming kids I may go back to
>> Amtrak
>
> I'd think nitwits yammering endlessly about stupid crap would be far
> more annoying than a business conversation. At least then I can make
> burping and farting noises to discourage them from trying to talk to a
> client.
It all depends on how self centered and rude the person is. Last week I
was at a seminar. The presenter had a slide up at the beginning
requesting that everyone check their cellphones and turn them off. He
also made the request verbally.
The presenter had reach a key point and had everyones attention and a
loud ringtone suitable for any 12 year old started blaring in front of
me. Instead of reaching in his pocket and silencing it the 12 year old
answered in a loud voice and engaged the caller continuing to speak
loudly going on and on about some project they were bidding on. If
stares could generate heat this goof would have burst into flames. It
continued for quite a while and I gave the chair a strong kick about the
same time the person next to me whacked the back. It got his attention
and he simply gave us a dirty look and stormed out of the room.
NEWS: Europe clears mobiles on aircraft 
Linear Mode
