plusnet refer a friend

Im with plusnet and I want to refer a friend and whoever joins gets 3
months free before march 28




--
hack206

hack206 wrote:

> Im with plusnet and I want to refer a friend

Do you have a friend?

Bitte Scheite;196853 Wrote:
> hack206 wrote:
> -
> Im with plusnet and I want to refer a friend-
>
> Do you have a friend?

no i dont have any friends so im here to ask if anyone here is gona joi
with plusnet so that I can refer them and get 3 months free for both o
u


--
hack206

In article
<042a4226-b05c-46d2-9796-(E-Mail Removed)>
, les <(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>Don't know what happened to my original post but if anyone wants to be referred
>here is the link and my details:
>
>http://www.plus.net/refer/?WT.mc_id=...PY1&link=refer
>
>You will need my username which is lesnort
>and then a promo code: which is refe
>
>This gives you 3 months free and gives me the same

If Bob Pullen or any other Plusnet support staff are monitoring this
group, could they please comment on whether they view referrer
solicitation as acceptable or abusive for this group.

TIA
--
fred
FIVE TV's superbright logo - not the DOG's, it's bollocks

On Jan 21, 11:44*pm, fred <n...@for.mail> wrote:

> If Bob Pullen or any other Plusnet support staff are monitoring this
> group, could they please comment on whether they view referrer
> solicitation as acceptable or abusive for this group.

I know nothing of Plusnet or their support staff or their
monitoring however I can assure you that this usenet
newsgroup operates independently of any view of
acceptance or of abuse on the behalf of Plusnet.

I am not an expert on the matter however I believe that each
usenet newsgroup has a charter which defines "acceptable use".
Please note though that this group (uk.telecom.broadband)
is unmoderated and that as a consequence there is exactly
no enforcement of the charter. In practise anyone can post
anything that they want and no one can do anything about it.
AT ALL.

In article
<0403f00b-8f1d-4220-9a46-(E-Mail Removed)>
, les <(E-Mail Removed)> writes
>Personally I think nothing is wrong with offering out a discount on a signup (I wish
>someone had done it when I signed up)
>The newsgroup is relevant to the postings.
>There are loads of things that should be banned in newsgroups but don't deem this
>as being inappropriate.
>
Before posting anything like this my own approach is, "would it f'ck up
the group if everybody did it?". If the answer is yes, then I don't do
it.

Clearly if everybody on Plusnet or any other provider with a referral
scheme posted referral solicitations here then the group would be
flooded with posts advertising referral opportunities. To my view that
would be spam and unacceptable.

But hey, if it's only you that does it then that would be ok?
--
fred
FIVE TV's superbright logo - not the DOG's, it's bollocks

On Sat, 22 Jan 2011 12:21:37 +0000, just as I was about to take a
herb, fred <(E-Mail Removed)> disturbed my reverie and wrote:

>Before posting anything like this my own approach is, "would it f'ck up
>the group if everybody did it?". If the answer is yes, then I don't do
>it.

That is why I get hacked off when idiots drive at well below the speed
limit without reason!
--

Cheers,

DrT

** Stress - the condition brought about by having to
** resist the temptation to beat the living daylights
** out of someone who richly deserves it.

DrTeeth <no-(E-Mail Removed)> considered Sat, 22 Jan 2011 13:27:21
+0000 the perfect time to write:

>On Sat, 22 Jan 2011 12:21:37 +0000, just as I was about to take a
>herb, fred <(E-Mail Removed)> disturbed my reverie and wrote:
>
>>Before posting anything like this my own approach is, "would it f'ck up
>>the group if everybody did it?". If the answer is yes, then I don't do
>>it.
>
>That is why I get hacked off when idiots drive at well below the speed
>limit without reason!

You do understand the meaning of the word "limit" don't you?
Note in particular that it is not the same thing as a "target".

Just because you don't know their reason is not the same as there
being none - there are ALWAYS at least some reasons to travel more
slowly, so you are getting "hacked off" over your own ignorance.
Their reason is obviously good enough for them, and unless there is a
minimum speed limit, they are behaving far more responsibly than
someone who gets "hacked off" with perfectly legal behaviour, never
mind someone who describes them as "idiots" for simply having a
different preference in speed.

To be so hacked off that you'd raise it as a response to something
completely unrelated when it is totally off topic in this particular
group seems to indicate a dangerous level of obsession over the
subject. Try reducing your level of stress by simply leaving a little
earlier.

In article <(E-Mail Removed)>,
DrTeeth <no-(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>On Sat, 22 Jan 2011 12:21:37 +0000, just as I was about to take a
>herb, fred <(E-Mail Removed)> disturbed my reverie and wrote:
>
>>Before posting anything like this my own approach is, "would it f'ck up
>>the group if everybody did it?". If the answer is yes, then I don't do
>>it.
>
>That is why I get hacked off when idiots drive at well below the speed
>limit without reason!

How wonderful and powerful it must be to know, at a distance and without
asking, whether someone else has a reason for their actions or not.

Nick
--
Serendipity: http://www.leverton.org/blosxom (last update 29th March 2010)
"The Internet, a sort of ersatz counterfeit of real life"
-- Janet Street-Porter, BBC2, 19th March 1996

On Sun, 23 Jan 2011 03:54:34 +0000, just as I was about to take a
herb, Phil W Lee <(E-Mail Removed)> disturbed my reverie and
wrote:

>You do understand the meaning of the word "limit" don't you?
>Note in particular that it is not the same thing as a "target".

I said WITHOUT REASON. Clear vis etc. Passed my Advanced test ages ago
and going below the speed limit WITHOUT REASON is a 3 point offence.
--

Cheers,

DrT

** Stress - the condition brought about by having to
** resist the temptation to beat the living daylights
** out of someone who richly deserves it.