Paul, at 11:45 on May 05 1996, you wrote to Bill Grimsley...

BG> Certainly not all of those problems you detailed with the USR were modem 
BG> problems, but I can't speak for NetComm as I don't own one.  Nor am I 
BG> likely to at any time during the next 100 years.

PE> And all the problems anyone has ever complained about with the Netcomm, are 
PE> all user-errors too, right? 

If you count their actually buying one as a user-error, absolutely.

PE> Ostriches are here to stay!

Do you actually enjoy being an offensive cunt?

PE> BTW, yesterday I sent a message to Netcomm complaining that I wanted a 
PE> refund, because the modem was clearly unsuitable and they haven't fixed a 
PE> single one of my problems. 

BG> And what was their response to that?  Complete silence, I presume.

PE> He said he would see if he could get that done. 

What does he mean IF ?  Surely he should be saying WHEN.

PE> I've since sent him a message asking if a couple of weeks delay was OK.

And he hasn't replied yet, right?  So what else is new?

BG> Funny, no late model Supra has exhibited that problem, only Rod's 6-year 
BG> old V.32bis model (which was never released here anyway).  Would you be 
BG> selling off your Viper if say ONE old Maestro 2400-ZXR had problems 
BG> connecting?  And who would you be blaming for it?  I already have a pretty 
BG> fair idea...

PE> And what fair idea would that be?  Sorry, Bill, you have no idea.

Given the above, I would automatically blame the ONE old modem, especially
if everybody else was connecting just fine.  Sometimes it just isn't
feasible to be any more scientific than that.

Regards, Bill

--- Msgedsq/2 3.20