I an email from Flextel of their latest news release.  

This is the text: http://www.flextel.co.uk/press/news.html

What am I supposed to do?  Am I honestly supposed to compose a free 
format email answering the points raised by Flextel?  Doing that 
doesn't quite seem right.

What is that message all about?

jaakson wrote:
> I an email from Flextel of their latest news release.  
> 
> This is the text: http://www.flextel.co.uk/press/news.html
> 
> What am I supposed to do?  Am I honestly supposed to compose a free 
> format email answering the points raised by Flextel?  Doing that 
> doesn't quite seem right.
> 
> What is that message all about?

What's the problem? It's 100% clear on the webpage.

David

jaakson wrote:
> I an email from Flextel of their latest news release.  

I won't be responding to them, despite having had a flextel number for 
donkey's years.  In fact, I haven't used it for ages now, as I think 
it's a dead duck - first the charge to call a flextel number is 
prohibitive - 35p/min!! and secondly, many businesses and systems 
specifically bar their number range due to the cost, which means you 
risk being unable to be contacted by a caller if all they have is your 
flextel number.   Also has problems when calling overseas, too.

It's a shame really, as in principle it's an excellent facility; in the 
very early days, which was before inclusive-minute mobile contracts 
became the norm, it was only slightly more expensive to call via flextel 
than to a standard mobile.

David

On Fri, 16 May 2008 16:31:34 UTC, jaakson  wrote:

> I an email from Flextel of their latest news release.  
> 
> This is the text: http://www.flextel.co.uk/press/news.html
> 
> What am I supposed to do?  Am I honestly supposed to compose a free 
> format email answering the points raised by Flextel?  Doing that 
> doesn't quite seem right.
> 
> What is that message all about?

They obviously have only one customer, judging by the first sentence.
Must be desperate! :-)
-- 
Bob Eager
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

Bob Eager wrote:
> On Fri, 16 May 2008 16:31:34 UTC, jaakson  wrote:
> 
>> I an email from Flextel of their latest news release.  
>>
>> This is the text: http://www.flextel.co.uk/press/news.html
>>
>> What am I supposed to do?  Am I honestly supposed to compose a free 
>> format email answering the points raised by Flextel?  Doing that 
>> doesn't quite seem right.
>>
>> What is that message all about?
> 
> They obviously have only one customer, judging by the first sentence.
> Must be desperate! :-)

Well as I'm not helping, that's them screwed then!
David

Lobster wrote:
> jaakson wrote:
>> I an email from Flextel of their latest news release.  
> 
> I won't be responding to them, despite having had a flextel number for 
> donkey's years.  In fact, I haven't used it for ages now, as I think 
> it's a dead duck - first the charge to call a flextel number is 
> prohibitive - 35p/min!!

Yes, I was about to ressurect a similar PN service (YAC) that I had 
signed upto about 5 years ago. Same thing - very expensive to call. I 
would have liked something so that my mobile number change would be the 
last one I make (bit like my email address registration with someone 
other than my ISP) but err... no, I won't saddle callers with that cost!

-- 
Adrian C

Bob Eager wrote:
> On Fri, 16 May 2008 16:31:34 UTC, jaakson  wrote:
> 
>> I an email from Flextel of their latest news release.  
>>
>> This is the text: http://www.flextel.co.uk/press/news.html
>>
>> What am I supposed to do?  Am I honestly supposed to compose a free 
>> format email answering the points raised by Flextel?  Doing that 
>> doesn't quite seem right.
>>
>> What is that message all about?
> 
> They obviously have only one customer, judging by the first sentence.
> Must be desperate! :-)

I agree - I have several numbers, but they are just too expensive to 
use. I couldn't care less if they go.

regards, Ian

"Ian Smith"  wrote in message 
news:p9CdnT2MYY1HQrDVnZ2dnUVZ8s_inZ2d@posted.plusnet...

> I agree - I have several numbers, but they are just too expensive to use. 
> I couldn't care less if they go.

Disagree

It's useful when folks insist on a valid phone number on those web forms

Also useful to 'discourage' folks from ringing ,that you don't want to hear 
from!  :-)


-- 
J B

On Fri 16 May 2008 19:16:22, Bob Eager wrote:

> On Fri, 16 May 2008 16:31:34 UTC, jaakson  wrote:
> 
>> I an email from Flextel of their latest news release.  
>> 
>> This is the text: http://www.flextel.co.uk/press/news.html
>> 
>> What am I supposed to do?  Am I honestly supposed to compose a free 
>> format email answering the points raised by Flextel?  Doing that 
>> doesn't quite seem right.
>> 
>> What is that message all about?
> 
> They obviously have only one customer, judging by the first sentence.
> Must be desperate! :-)


Sorry about the missing word!
It should have said:

"I had an email from Flextel ... "

On Fri 16 May 2008 20:19:28, Adrian C wrote:

> Lobster wrote:
>> jaakson wrote:
>>> I an email from Flextel of their latest news release.  
>> 
>> I won't be responding to them, despite having had a flextel
>> number for donkey's years.  In fact, I haven't used it for ages
>> now, as I think it's a dead duck - first the charge to call a
>> flextel number is prohibitive - 35p/min!!
> 
> Yes, I was about to ressurect a similar PN service (YAC) that I
> had signed upto about 5 years ago. Same thing - very expensive to
> call. I would have liked something so that my mobile number change
> would be the last one I make (bit like my email address
> registration with someone other than my ISP) but err... no, I
> won't saddle callers with that cost! 
> 


Who else apart from Flextel and YAC are providing free portable numbers 
but at less cost for callers?

On Fri, 16 May 2008 21:20:26 UTC, jaakson  wrote:

> On Fri 16 May 2008 19:16:22, Bob Eager wrote:
> 
> > On Fri, 16 May 2008 16:31:34 UTC, jaakson  wrote:
> > 
> >> I an email from Flextel of their latest news release.  
> >> 
> >> This is the text: http://www.flextel.co.uk/press/news.html
> >> 
> >> What am I supposed to do?  Am I honestly supposed to compose a free 
> >> format email answering the points raised by Flextel?  Doing that 
> >> doesn't quite seem right.
> >> 
> >> What is that message all about?
> > 
> > They obviously have only one customer, judging by the first sentence.
> > Must be desperate! :-)
> 
> 
> Sorry about the missing word!
> It should have said:
> 
> "I had an email from Flextel ... "

That wasn't what I meant. I was referring to the first sentence on the 
Flextel site:

  "Ofcom, the communications regulator, has approached FleXtel to ask 
for our customer's help."
-- 
Bob Eager
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

On Fri, 16 May 2008 22:21:53 +0100, jaakson  wrote:
>On Fri 16 May 2008 20:19:28, Adrian C wrote:
>
>> Lobster wrote:
>>> jaakson wrote:
>>>> I an email from Flextel of their latest news release.  
>>> 
>>> I won't be responding to them, despite having had a flextel
>>> number for donkey's years.  In fact, I haven't used it for ages
>>> now, as I think it's a dead duck - first the charge to call a
>>> flextel number is prohibitive - 35p/min!!
>> 
>> Yes, I was about to ressurect a similar PN service (YAC) that I
>> had signed upto about 5 years ago. Same thing - very expensive to
>> call. I would have liked something so that my mobile number change
>> would be the last one I make (bit like my email address
>> registration with someone other than my ISP) but err... no, I
>> won't saddle callers with that cost! 
>
>Who else apart from Flextel and YAC are providing free portable numbers 
>but at less cost for callers?

This may surprise you - but Flextel do. They now allow their 0871 
(10p/min) numbers to be forwarded to mobiles, except for 3UK.

In some circumstances this might even make it cheaper to call a mobile via 
an 0871 than by dialling its actual number.

-- 
-- Michael "Soruk" McConnell         Eridani Star System
   MailStripper - http://www.MailStripper.eu/ - SMTP spam filter
   Second Number - http://secondnumber.matrixnetwork.co.uk/

In article ,
	"Bob Eager"  writes:
> On Fri, 16 May 2008 21:20:26 UTC, jaakson  wrote:
> 
>> On Fri 16 May 2008 19:16:22, Bob Eager wrote:
>> 
>> > On Fri, 16 May 2008 16:31:34 UTC, jaakson  wrote:
>> > 
>> >> I an email from Flextel of their latest news release.  
>> >> 
>> >> This is the text: http://www.flextel.co.uk/press/news.html
>> >> 
>> >> What is that message all about?
>> > 
>> > They obviously have only one customer, judging by the first sentence.
>> > Must be desperate! :-)
>> 
>> Sorry about the missing word!
>> It should have said:
>> 
>> "I had an email from Flextel ... "
> 
> That wasn't what I meant. I was referring to the first sentence on the 
> Flextel site:
> 
>   "Ofcom, the communications regulator, has approached FleXtel to ask 
> for our customer's help."

The problem of confusing singular/plural and their possessive forms is
no longer confined to just greengrocers. Unfortunately, it is no longer
considered important. So when Flextel write seeking help from their
customer, one is no longer expected to take what they say at face value,
and wonder why they only have one customer. Instead the reader is meant
to be concentrating on any flashy surrounding graphics. The
recipients of these communications are expected to be as illiterate as
the sender. Pretty pictures are therefore considered far more
important in any announcement.

-- 
Tim Clark

In article ,
	"Tim Clark"  writes:
> 
> The problem of confusing singular/plural and their possessive forms is
> no longer confined to just greengrocers. Unfortunately, it is no longer
> considered important. So when Flextel write seeking help from their
> customer, one is no longer expected to take what they say at face value,
> and wonder why they only have one customer. Instead the reader is meant
> to be concentrating on any flashy surrounding graphics. The
> recipients of these communications are expected to be as illiterate as
> the sender. Pretty pictures are therefore considered far more
> important in any announcement.

I wonder if schools even bother teaching this anymore?

I think the plural possessive trailing apostropie is now so
rarely used correctly that a significant proportion of
readers who notice it would think it was a typing error. I
do still instinctively use it, but I then find myself doing a
double take on what I've written, and asking myself if that
apostrophie is likely to help most of my readership comprehend
the sentence, and deciding it probably doesn't. On that basis,
I reluctantly suspect it's a piece of punctuation best left 
behind in the 20th century.

-- 
Andrew Gabriel
[email address is not usable -- followup in the newsgroup]

J B wrote:
> "Ian Smith"  wrote in message 
> news:p9CdnT2MYY1HQrDVnZ2dnUVZ8s_inZ2d@posted.plusnet...
> 
>> I agree - I have several numbers, but they are just too expensive to 
>> use. I couldn't care less if they go.
> 
> Disagree

Disagree!

> It's useful when folks insist on a valid phone number on those web forms

I use either a 'dead' number from the 'drama range' 
<http://www.ofcom.org.uk/telecoms/ioi/numbers/num_drama>

or, if it's for something where there's a small chance I might want to 
be contacted but don't want to risk my ordinary number ending up on a 
spammer's list, then I use my otherwise unused but working VOIP number, 
which would send me any voicemail message left as an email.

> Also useful to 'discourage' folks from ringing ,that you don't want to 
> hear from!  :-)

See above! much more effective...

David

"jaakson"  wrote in message 
news:Xns9AA0B249317DE451E7A@127.0.0.1...
>I an email from Flextel of their latest news release.
>
> This is the text: http://www.flextel.co.uk/press/news.html
>
> What am I supposed to do?

Do you have an adult to ask, or do you turn to a newsgroup each time
a decision is to be made?  No wonder there are so many helpless, useless
people in this country that demand everyone else thinks for them.

On Sat 17 May 2008 10:33:28, Andrew Gabriel wrote:

> In article ,
>      "Tim Clark"  writes:
>> 
>> The problem of confusing singular/plural and their possessive
>> forms is no longer confined to just greengrocers. Unfortunately,
>> it is no longer considered important. So when Flextel write
>> seeking help from their customer, one is no longer expected to
>> take what they say at face value, and wonder why they only have
>> one customer. Instead the reader is meant to be concentrating on
>> any flashy surrounding graphics. The recipients of these
>> communications are expected to be as illiterate as the sender.
>> Pretty pictures are therefore considered far more important in
>> any announcement. 
> 
> I wonder if schools even bother teaching this anymore?
> 
> I think the plural possessive trailing apostropie is now so
> rarely used correctly that a significant proportion of
> readers who notice it would think it was a typing error. I
> do still instinctively use it, but I then find myself doing a
> double take on what I've written, and asking myself if that
> apostrophie is likely to help most of my readership comprehend
> the sentence, and deciding it probably doesn't. On that basis,
> I reluctantly suspect it's a piece of punctuation best left 
> behind in the 20th century.
> 

I think the sweetest error is to use "asterix" for "asterisk".

On Sun, 18 May 2008 00:47:50 UTC, Larousse  wrote:

> I think the sweetest error is to use "asterix" for "asterisk".

Yes, I love that one. They'll be saying that Cleopatra's Needle is an 
obelix next...

-- 
Bob Eager
Use the BIG mirror service in the UK:
http://www.mirrorservice.org

Rob wrote:
> Do you have an adult to ask, or do you turn to a newsgroup each time
> a decision is to be made?  No wonder there are so many helpless, useless
> people in this country that demand everyone else thinks for them.
> 

You are not a very good troll, are you Tiscali Idiot?!

-- 
Adrian C

jaakson wrote:

> Who else apart from Flextel and YAC are providing free portable numbers 
> but at less cost for callers?

viop.co.uk, sipgate.co.uk - not intended as portable numbers, of course.

Andrew Gabriel wrote:

> I wonder if schools even bother teaching this anymore?

Very definitely, some do. The literacy hour had a huge impact on some 
schools, and the results are now beginning to reach school leaving age. 
Children leaving school able to write grammatically correct English - 
something we've not seen for decades!

In message <482ea668$0$658$5a6aecb4@news.aaisp.net.uk>, Andrew Gabriel 
 writes
>
>I think the plural possessive trailing apostropie is now so
>rarely used correctly that a significant proportion of
>readers who notice it would think it was a typing error. I
>do still instinctively use it, but I then find myself doing a
>double take on what I've written, and asking myself if that
>apostrophie is likely to help most of my readership comprehend
>the sentence, and deciding it probably doesn't. On that basis,
>I reluctantly suspect it's a piece of punctuation best left
>behind in the 20th century.

1.
So, are the following best left behind?
"The parents' intentions for their children to have a good education..."
"The voters' opinions were clear in the election results."

2.
Each of the above sentences contains an apostrophe, not an apostropie or 
an apostrophie.
  (Yes, I know, nothing to do with telecomms.)
-- 
Oliver
(replies to the "Reply-to:" address will reach me;
unless spam is sent to it, after which all its mail will
be discarded}.