BT FICTION

Now many posters seemto think that the plaaned dates BT OPENREACH give are just place holders

I quote this piece of fiction from the BT Openreach Web Site

Quote". On my chosen Communications Provider�s line checker, the availability date for superfast fibre broadband has changed. Why is that?
A. On very rare occasions the deployment of a superfast fibre broadband cabinet can be effected by a number of issues . Typically these are : 1. Our underground duct routes are congested 2. There are utility cables where we want to lay ours 3. We have been unable to agree a suitable location with your local authority 4. The costs of providing electrical power have become excessive and meant the cabinet is no longer economic to deploy in that location."

BT have a very strange definition or rare. It does not tally with the dictionary definition

Perhaps they should change RARE to ON FREQUENT OCCASSIONS

If it upsets you so much, why, apparently, spend so much time and effort in hunting all this stuff down. You clearly have some beef with 'BT', so save your self upset, and stop looking in to these things and fretting about them.

As the ASA say any information should be "Honest, Accurate & Truefull"
Would you say that what BT states there fulfills that criteria?

{breeze}

If it breaches ASA rules, then it is your duty to report it

YAWN .......................

In reply to a post by Bob_s2:

As the ASA say any information should be "Honest, Accurate & Truefull"
Would you say that what BT states there fulfills that criteria?

Well if you think it doesn't don't come here there's nothing we can do about it, complaint to Openreach and the ASA.

Or alternatively, spend your time doing something pleasurable or constructive.

Go for a drive, or a swim, or the pub perhaps?

He clearly has nothing else to do in life, and if he is working I expect his productivity is a big fat zero!

Are you going to start a new thread on the same subject tomorrow, Bob?

lolz... don't listen to the bobby! keep going. I want a video documentary from you this time next week.

k thx bye.

The man can't even keep an argument straight when he starts the thread.

The first sentence is about placeholder dates.

The rest of the rant is about delays, and nothing to do with placeholders.

And... not a link in sight. Plus �a change, plus c�est la m�me chose.

reminds me of this guy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32swlxb053I

That had me in stitches. Brilliant!

Bob you are a BT hating bore.


Please find something else to do with your life

Me too!

I particularly liked the "superior" bits.

In reply to a post by GMAN98:

Bob you are a BT hating bore.


Please find something else to do with your life

He tried, but kept getting rejected.

I think his last job application was to the recruitment office for the new OR FTTC installation engineers. A major part of his CV was about his considerable experience with Kevlar, so he would be good at installing the fibre spines.

Maybe that particular rejection is the cause of the hate.

Remember discuss the points not the person

In reply to a post by Bob_s2:

As the ASA say any information should be "Honest, Accurate & Truefull"
Would you say that what BT states there fulfills that criteria?

Do you have any proof though?

If not it is an opinion not fact. Also Openreach are not a customer facing company, they do not sell any products to the consumer. You may find the ASA cannot rule against them as you cannot buy a product off them.

But put a complaint into the ASA and see what they say.

please seek psychiatric help

In reply to a post by Bob_s2:

As the ASA say any information should be "Honest, Accurate & Truefull" ...

Such a shame the same isn't true for the vast majority of your posts.

In reply to a post by MCM:

In reply to a post by Bob_s2:

As the ASA say any information should be "Honest, Accurate & Truefull" ...

Such a shame the same isn't true for the vast majority of your posts.

"Truefull"? Well, they're full of something...

In reply to a post by FRS_Plunderer:

reminds me of this guy:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=32swlxb053I

LOL, thats so Bob!

Are you suggesting that is acceptable to put out at the very best highly misleading information and in my view incorrect and inaccurate information. I suggest you consult a dictionary and look up the meaning of RARE

The ASA's remit has been widened considerable. It does not have to be a customer facing organisation nor does it specifically have to be an advert

So what is stopping you complaining Bob, you seem to dedicate most of your time to crunching rollout spreadsheets, making wild claims and complaining about BT where ever you can and as much as possible. Might as well vent to the ASA well?

In reply to a post by Bob_s2:

Are you suggesting that is acceptable to put out at the very best highly misleading information and in my view incorrect and inaccurate information. I suggest you consult a dictionary and look up the meaning of RARE

I have indeed looked up the meaning of rare in the OED and it is a very subjective definition, not one that actually susbtansiates any conditions and in fact it uses terms that are also subjective.

And as you say it is YOUR VIEW so actually no proof what so ever as usual.

In reply to a post by Bob_s2:

Are you suggesting that [...]?

I love this tactic of Bob's.

He never actually answers any direct question you ask. He always turns the question back on you *and* screws your words into the worst possible connotation, *and* demands that you answer him instead: "Are you suggesting that..."

It's very akin to this tactic I've taken from an article on Troll Tactics:

In reference to www.teamtechnology.co.uk/troll-tactics.html:

• They don't enter into the argument directly, but facilitate an argument between list members, e.g.: by highlighting points that one list member has made, perhaps in a way that is more confrontational than the original intention.

Not exactly, but very similar.

However, that's more of an advanced tactic, compared to these ones:

In reference to www.teamtechnology.co.uk/troll-tactics.html:

• the use of provocative language and sweeping generalisations about certain topics or categories of people
• a lack of in-depth understanding of the topic
• a lack of personal information
• a lack of a genuinely unique perspective on the topic
• a lack of humour
• restarting topics that have already been done
• use of language that encourages the dialogue to enter topics that are controversial and likely to upset some team members
• the use of an attention-seeking gimmick (e.g.: "I was once exploited by an XYZ")
• they follow up their own articles if the group doesn't respond to their posts

Ho Hum.

Until we see better responses, it's probably better to act on the side of caution, and treat as any troll. Just don't respond.