Re: the anti-free wireless internet wifi movement

I strongly disagree that we should "not fight".  These articles cause real harm.

Quote:
;:''"The public needs to realize that all they're doing is making it harder on 
me to go find the bad guys," said Mr. Gilhooly, the former Secret Service 
agent.''

''Bad guys?''  Please.  Is that ''all'' we're doing?  I don't think so.  
Statements like these reveal a fundamental misunderstanding of the benefits of 
amenity wireless--the reporter's should have known better than to just let that 
statement go uncountered.  And the whole article reeks of fear.  Should we 
close all Internet cafes as well?  Should we take a page from China's Internet 
policy?

__Again, these articles cause real harm.__  A user doesn't really understand 
the "good thing" that free wireless represents until he tries it himself away 
from home, and if he's afraid, he won't try.  Likewise, a person inclined to 
set up an community access point might drop the idea after reading this 
article, especially if he imagines a Secret Service agent is going to "come to 
you and knock on your door".   Sorry, former Secret Service Agent.   

The Times has done a disservice to its readership.  Maybe it's inadvertent.  
But "I they'd do better focusing on what good things community wireless 
enables, especially in a city like New York. 

If you agree, I recommend sending a letter to the editor.  

[http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/lettertoeditor.html?8qa]

Here's the direct info:
Email  [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] or fax to (212)556-3622.

Rob

P.S.  A good opener is:  "I (love/like/read) the (paper name), but I was 
shocked and disappointed by...".  That usually hits the right tone. 


--
NYCwireless - http://www.nycwireless.net/
Un/Subscribe: http://lists.nycwireless.net/mailman/listinfo/nycwireless/
Archives: http://lists.nycwireless.net/pipermail/nycwireless/

Reply via email to