Sounds like you could get some of their equipment by showing loss of business and goodwill tarnishment to your name by his false accusations. Based on slander, you may want to call in some counsel and see what may be done.
Ask for Bob Ellis at 614-221-2422, tell him I sent you. ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: "Blazen Wireless" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Tue, 21 Oct 2003 10:51:53 -0700 >UPDATE > >Sorry this is off topic but remember how I told you a competitor around here >was pissed and making accusations??? Well the harsh reality has hit. Last >night at my night job the TELCO I was interviewed by our corporate security >over this guys accusations of me attacking his system from our place of >business (Telco) well they only reason for the investigation was because >this idiot called and complained. > >Turns out they investigate his claims and basically told him sorry not our >employee! well now they did a full 2 hour interview asking me why I did not >ask them before starting the WISP your in direct competition with us, >conflict of interest yaddy yaddy yaddy. Well my story and this is the gods >honest truth is... If the TELCO I work for IS NO currently servicing this >area and never will and then how could it be a conflict of interest? They >kind of were lost on that one and are going to finish the investigation in >the next few days and my partner and I could be losing our jobs!! so now we >are in a bind and HAVE to make this work BIG time and find other jobs to >support our families. > >I am soo pissed I am going to BURY this ass for making the accusations and >of course like we told him he was on crack it was not us which our company >proved. So now we are going to REALLY go after him and his clients and blow >his doors down by outdoing him in sales and doing MASS marketing around >here!.. > >My question I have been wondering all morning is this. Legally can we do >anything to him since he made false accusations and they were proved wrong? >should we pursue this Ave or will it backfire if they fire us because they >think it is a conflict of interest?? > >as much as I hated the new job we were doing I did not want to leave or get >fired at least not now. The good thing I guess is that we are starting 3 >weeks vacation tomorrow and well we may not be coming back! > >Spiritual, legal and just plain support is appreciated!!!!!! > >Thanks >Martin & Steve.. > > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Tom Haynes" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sent: Tuesday, October 21, 2003 3:01 AM >Subject: RE: [smartBridges] Beta 1.0.08 locking up Ethernet anyone else?? > > >I would like to know what results everyone get if they look at the >ethernet traffic on effected and non-effected radios. Log in to >simpeMonitor and pull up a client. Go to the 'Statistics' tab and click >on the 'Extended View' for Ethernet. Try this befor the radios lockup. >On the Transmitted side: >You should see zero collisions of any kind on the transmited side unless >the radio is plugged in to a hub with two or more other devices >attached. If you see any, make sure all devices connected are set to >10BaseT/Half Duplex. I have only seen this happen on radios connected >directly to the clients computer. CRC Errors should also be zero. If it >is excessive compared to 'Total Packets' then the cableing is probably >bad. If you see any 'Pause Frames' and the clients is not running a 386 >computer, then you can guess that the TCP/IP stack in the OS is Fragged >or the buffer in the NIC is going bad. 'Single Defer Packets' should >also be low or zero and are caused by congestion on the ethernet side. >Add a router to help solve this problem. >On the Received side: >CRC Errors usually indicate that the NIC is faulty. Unknown OP Codes >come from trying to use VLAN tagging or other Layer 1 extensions that >are not supported. Check the protocols attached to the LAN port on the >computer. Just about every other error indicated a bad NIC or damaged >cableing except for Oversized Packets. An oversized packet is generally >caused by a late collision which indicated that the ethernet cable is >too long (over 300') or the network diamater is to large (over 1500' to >the farthest client with no more than 2 repeaters IE Hub, switch, >etc...). >If you see anything other than zeros below received broadcast packets or >transmitted unicast packets let me know. I am trying to study ethernet >errors for the smartBridges MIB Hadbook. > >----------ANNOUNCEMENT---------- >Don't forget to register for WISPCON IV >http://www.wispcon.info/us/wispcon-iv/wispcon-iv.htm > >The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List >To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe >smartBridges <yournickname> >To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe >smartBridges) >Archives: http://archives.part-15.org > > >----------ANNOUNCEMENT---------- >Don't forget to register for WISPCON IV >http://www.wispcon.info/us/wispcon-iv/wispcon-iv.htm > >The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List >To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe smartBridges ><yournickname> >To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe smartBridges) >Archives: http://archives.part-15.org >--- >[This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus By Avolve.net] > > --- [This E-mail scanned for viruses by Declude Virus By Avolve.net] ----------ANNOUNCEMENT---------- Don't forget to register for WISPCON IV http://www.wispcon.info/us/wispcon-iv/wispcon-iv.htm The PART-15.ORG smartBridges Discussion List To Join: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type subscribe smartBridges <yournickname> To Remove: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (in the body type unsubscribe smartBridges) Archives: http://archives.part-15.org
