yeah, grift free solutions tend to be that way when it comes to government On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 4:24 PM James Howard <[email protected]> wrote:
> You’ve got a complete deal-breaker non-starter involved that makes this > something that will never happen. > > > > *From:* AF <[email protected]> *On Behalf Of * Steve Jones > *Sent:* Wednesday, December 16, 2020 4:13 PM > *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <[email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] SpaceX RDOF boondoggle? > > > > first to provide verifiable test results. Would be good to have the > regions defined, and you can "claim" them for 90 days or something, self > expiring, doesnt give you rights, but lets others know who is prospecting > the area > > > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 3:27 PM Adam Moffett <[email protected]> wrote: > > Interesting idea. It would have to be structured so the funding was > legally obligated if the network was built to within some performance > parameters. Nobody would take the risk otherwise. And you'd have to > handle situations where two parties built the same area, or they were > adjacent and they overlapped. > > On 12/16/2020 4:19 PM, Steve Jones wrote: > > im talking about the award, not the check. You shouldnt even be able to > get on the radar without a completed region to ask for an award for > > > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 3:00 PM Adam Moffett <[email protected]> wrote: > > That is how it usually is. I don't know what program is giving out cash up > front, but please sign me up for that. > > Proving you built it starts with invoices for all the crap you bought and > ends with physical audit. The terms are not the same in every program, but > typically you get reimbursed based on invoices you paid. The physical > audit comes later. I suppose if you wanted to take the money and skip town > you could produce a lot of fake invoices from all the vendors, but you'd > have to know that it's a temporary thing and have your permanent vacation > to Brazil already planned. > > On 12/16/2020 2:22 PM, Steve Jones wrote: > > I wish funding would change to a retroactive award, ie, you build it, you > prove it, you get reimbursed. Reimbursement award chart can be public per > region. Awards have rate cap requirements to avoid predatory monopolies. > You really only need to self fund your first build, subsequent awards fund > subsequent builds if you choose that model. Keeps things fair and gives > opportunity for small operators to step up their game rather than being > over built with government money and poor quality/customer service. > > Funding should also be based on regional polling. We can send ballots to > every address and census workers, we should be able to verify there is > actual demand not being met before we dump cash into it > > > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020, 1:09 PM Bill Prince <[email protected]> wrote: > > Banana pants for sure. Do bananas burn? Maybe if you soak dried banana > peels in gasoline; then your banana pants could catch fire. > > bp > > <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com> > > On 12/16/2020 11:05 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote: > > It’s like all the arguing over how many locations can get gigabit > Internet. That’s a first world problem. Rural areas would be like pigs in > mud if they could get 100M or even 25M. I saw some expert quoted (and I > think it was in a WISPA newsletter) that farms needed gigabit. No backup > for that assertion, I am pretty sure he pulled it out of his ass. > > > > Some rural senator said we are arguing about 4G vs 5G and his farm had no > G. > > > > It’s like the kids who can’t do their Zoom classes, and people want you to > believe they need 25 or 100 or 1000 Mbps for that. No, they need a little > over 1 Mbps for each kid. I’m not saying they should only get 3M or 5M > service, but if you’re telling people that rural kids can’t do their video > classes unless they get 100M or gigabit, that’s a load of crap. And the > people who say that either have an agenda, or their pants are on fire. > > > > *From:* AF <[email protected]> <[email protected]> *On Behalf > Of *Jason McKemie > *Sent:* Wednesday, December 16, 2020 12:01 PM > *To:* AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <[email protected]> <[email protected]> > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] SpaceX RDOF boondoggle? > > > > I'm a big fan of letting the market take care of it. If there is a > demand, then a WISP will likely meet it. If not, either deal with it or > move somewhere that has service. Maybe that is another argument entirely, > but I think we're searching for a solution to a problem that doesn't exist. > > > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 11:34 AM Adam Moffett <[email protected]> wrote: > > Is it better to fund Frontier FTTH and risk them being evil, incompetent > Frontier or better to leave rural WV unserved? It's easy to sit back in > our comfy chairs and say Frontier doesn't deserve that money, but then what > do we do after not giving it to them? > > On 12/16/2020 12:24 PM, Jason McKemie wrote: > > It should probably be a requirement that you aren't under bankruptcy > protection if you're going to be getting public money. Plus Frontier is > just generally incompetent, hence the bankruptcy. > > > > On Wed, Dec 16, 2020 at 10:58 AM Adam Moffett <[email protected]> wrote: > > I saw the senator's complaint. I can't speak to Frontier's competency, > but Frontier threw their hat in the ring to voluntarily serve unprofitable > areas with government assistance. I'm betting the senator's complaint is > moot because nobody else wants that job. > > > > On 12/15/2020 12:50 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote: > > I forget who was complaining that SpaceX was getting RDOF money to serve > areas like universities and airports, but FreePress is complaining about > the same thing. > > > > Keep in mind this is FreePress, which likes criticizing Internet policy a > lot. Also winners still have to submit their long forms. > > > > > https://www.freepress.net/our-response/expert-analysis/insights-opinions/broadband-boondoggle-ajit-pais-886m-gift-elon-musk > > > > I also saw that a WV senator was objecting money to Frontier which she > said was not competent to deliver gigabit service in her state. > > > > -- > AF mailing list > [email protected] > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > > > -- > AF mailing list > [email protected] > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > > > -- > AF mailing list > [email protected] > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > > > -- > AF mailing list > [email protected] > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > > > -- > AF mailing list > [email protected] > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com > > ------------------------------ > > *Total Control Panel* > > Login <https://asp.reflexion.net/login?domain=litewire.net> > > To: [email protected] > <https://asp.reflexion.net/address-properties?aID=242260993&domain=litewire.net> > > From: [email protected] > > *You received this message because the domain afmug.com <http://afmug.com> > is on your allow list.* > > > -- > AF mailing list > [email protected] > http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com >
-- AF mailing list [email protected] http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
