>>>Again, again, see the FAQ below for more information.
>>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
>If you followed the instructions fully then you should be all set.
>>Replies on Usenet aren't automatic or a matter of entitlement.
>
>Of course not ... it's just courtesy ;-)
No, it's catch as catch can. Nobody is under any obligation at all to answer
anything -- this is free help, very generously given, worth all that you're
paying for it, and for which you should be grateful, not rude. Sometimes
people just don't have the time to answer. Sometimes they just don't have
anything more to say. Sometimes they decide to spend their time on something
else they find more deserving or interesting or whatever. Sometimes ... well,
you get the idea ... right?
>>>>Again, again, see the FAQ below for more information.
>>>
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
>I didn't follow the instructions,
Then why do you presume to bug me (or anyone else for that matter)?
>as that was not the reason for visiting
>your FAQ page. You directed me there for an answer to a question I had
>about your posting ... I didn't find it.
Then you didn't try very hard.
>You made the assertion that it is necessary to configure a non-Cingular
>phone to use SMS.
Nope. What I actually wrote was:
It will work as a phone, but you'll need to configure it for SMS messaging
and for data. It might be possible to have this done OTA (over the air) by
SMS "push" by using the standard RAZR V3 settings, but I don't know for
sure. See the FAQ below for more information.
(What I meant to say was SMS and MMS messaging, but that's beside the point.)
This is in the context of a phone not supported by Cingular, one that I'm
personally not familiar with, and one that might well have a (non-standard)
firmware that inhibits things like messaging for all I know.
>I disagreed, and asked you to expand on that.
It seemed to me that you were being argumentative, which is one of the reasons
I didn't respond further.
>You still
>haven't.
I thought you were being rude, which is one of the reasons I didn't respond
further. Now I know you're being both rude and argumentative.
>Instead of responding to my question, you referred back to a
>boilerplate .sig on your postings that directs readers to your FAQ.
Which was largely compiled by me at a considerable investment of time and
effort, and which contains all the information you need (if and when you ever
climb down off your high horse). You're welcome.
>Of course, you are under no obligation to respond ;-)
I gave you more than you deserve. ;-) back at ya. Have a nice day.

Signature
Best regards, SEE THE FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS AT
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>