I used to be, Mac. The "why not now" is not to be aired in public.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Mac Dearman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'WISPA General List'" <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2007 1:00 PM Subject: RE: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition > Mark, > > > Are you a paid WISPA member? > > > > Mac Dearman > > > > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Mark Koskenmaki > Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2007 11:43 AM > To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; WISPA General List > Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition > > Peter, your intended meaning for the word...and what I assumed you meant, > were pretty much the same. I am not "offended" by it, so no worries. > > You stated something that I was hoping you'd reveal... it goes something > like this, the regulators are in pursuit of "control or cooperation". I'd > like to point out that there's no "cooperation", really. Oh, a little. > They meet and play politely, but nowhere in this mess do we have a veto over > ANYTHING they propose to demand. All couched in nice language, but it's > still the man with the gun saying "do it or die". > > And, as you rightly point out, somewhere down this road, comes a point of > confrontation. When the FCC realizes that the great majority simply will > not comply... or, perhaps, cannot, or even more obtusely, don't even know or > care, these two trains are headed head on down the same track, in opposite > directions. > > I dunno what it's going to look like, I don't know how public it will be, > but the nature of regulators is to take out non-compliance. The question > is then, who will WISPA, EFF, etc, etc, stand with? Court fights between > the FCC and FBI and DOJ, etc, aside, the rubber meets the road when the > deadlines arrive, and I suspect that the vast majority of networks that are > supposed to be compliant are not. Then what? > > As you know, WISPA reprepresents under 200 actual members. Part 15 has no > huge number either. At that point, does the FCC start shutting down > THOUSANDS of networks? If the industry associations take their side... > Yes. And when or if Part 15 or WISPA takes the side of taking people > down... Exactly what do you think their future growth will be? > > This is going to get ugly, people. It's going to get REAL ugly, because I > don't think that WISPA will be able to remain on the fence. I know where > Bullitt stands. He's already publicly threatened to destroy non-compliant > people. I told him what I thought of that, and that's why I have a > "consultant of the year" plaque on my wall signed by him, but am banned from > everything Part-15. It was his stand that he was going to employ people to > search out WISP's and report non-filers. I dunno if he did or not. > > This is why I posted about whether our industry is going to thrive or die. > The FCC or FBI or whomever, is going to ask everyone to help enforce. If > that means putting people out of business, will WISPA do it? I'm not > asking this to incite an argument with the list members and the board, I'm > pointing out that there's coming a point where there's a NO WIN situation > coming. And, it might NOT be over CALEA. It might be the next thing to > come down the pike. > > Should WISPA engage in helping members help authorities in lawful pursuit of > criminals? Oh, absolutely. > > So far, WISPA is sitting the fence. "We don't police the industry". But > what will be the response when the FCC asks them to? I would suggest the > board at present and the soon to be elected board members consider this now. > I'm not even suggesting one way or the other. I'm no longer a member of > WISPA, though I strongly support the notion and value of a trade > organization for WISP's. > > I would guess from the response, we all see the need for MORE, not less > WISP's in our country, and we need growth in our industry. What will be the > response when WISPA is asked to undertake or support enforcement actions > that reduce the numbers and place barrriers to entry into the WISP business? > > As you stated... WE ARE COWBOYS. That's because that's who is always the > forefront of any industry. The intrepid, the gutsy, the indedpendent, the > stubborn, and willful. And I can predict without any hesitation that a > majority, perhaps not of WISPA members, but of the non-allied network > operators will not be so easily corralled into compliance. Not because what > they need is wrong, but because it's wrong for the government to do what > it's trying to do, place mandates on us for purely it's own convenience. > > The choices now will have a huge influence on the future. No matter which > way the twig is bent, the tree starts that way and reversing course will NOT > be without pain, cost and consequence. No matter which way WISPA goes, it > will cause grief, pain, and consequences. There's NO WINNING this one. > There's no side to choose to come out smelling like a rose. > > I suspect you all know what the stand would be should i be in charge. But > either way, the sooner leadership gets on a side, and stands by it with > whatever principles they choose to uphold, the better. Yeah, I think we > should have addresssed this long ago. But there's another important > decision by the feds to make.. and that is what kind of enforcement... > Enough fight from the industry, and they WILL change their minds. As you > so clearly stated, DC is a land of linguine spines. Expedience is king. > That's why the FCC dumped CALEA on us in the first place. No stomach for > the fight. > > Now, what will we do? > > You imply that in order to win their way, the feds are willing to take us > all out. You used 2K as the number of operators, and 400 that comply. > that's 400 vs 1600, and that the 1600 will "take down" the 400. How? > What's the strategy? Ban wireless ISP's? Is that not counterproductive > to EVERYTHING they have claimed they're for? > > But this argument isn't really about CALEA, Peter. I'm merely pointing out > that if we choose to run down that road... it's a LOT farther back when the > next thing pops up. And either we're going to start advocating shamelessly > and boldly for ALL our industry... Or we might as well fold up shop and go > home. I don't think there's a "picking and choosing" option later. Once > you choose to support something that hurts some of your industry in the name > of "cooperation", then you're pretty much committed to that action and WISPA > will see it enforce it's own industry's stagnation and perhaps demise, and > really have no choice in the matter. > > Maybe it has no choice as the board sees it now. That's not my view, but > again, I'm not in charge. > > And lastly, you keep talking about someone has to do something, it takes > numbers, not a lone voice. Uhhh, if I don't succeed in rallying any WISP's > to the idea, then what would be the point of anything else? Is not THIS > the starting point? Is not THIS the place to have the discussion? > Attacking WISPA from the outside, in my view would be a nasty thing to do, > but if we were to argue this outside, it WOULD turn into that, and I think > that would be absolutely WRONG. Just because I disagree with the driver of > the bus, doesn't mean I want to blow the bus up. We need it. > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Peter R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" <[email protected]> > Sent: Sunday, April 22, 2007 7:40 AM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition > > > > Mark, > > > > A well written piece. > > > > However, I think you miss my point: > > > > "Either we defend ourselves, and we defend the "cowboys" as Peter likes to > > call people like me by rising in opposition to ANY regulatory garbage that > > puts us under their thumb... Or we've just killed our whole industry." > > > > You talk about gov't wiping you out. And I agree. They will because they > > can't get cooperation (or if you want to go to your extreme, gov't can't > > maintain control). I could go on and on about the current Admin, what > > is going on at the Hill, etc., but the differences you and I have over > > CALEA is that you spent all your time moaning about it when the > > questions coming up were "How do I get compliant?" > > > > There has been a 2 year battle over CALEA including in the courts. Where > > was everyone then?? > > ACE and EFF could have used some help. But you are looking to close the > > barn door after the animals escaped. You can certainly fight CALEA - and > > any other regulation you want - but many just want help complying, so > > they can stay in business. > > > > I don't know when you last fought something in DC, but the whole > > experience is so disgusting that I found myself never wanting to even > > visit the area again. Liars and scumbags - the whole lot. Everyone up > > there - even those sitting with you supposedly - have their own agenda. > > And at any time will throw you under the bus to get their way. > > > > And I don't know why you take the term cowboy to be so offensive. If you > > want to operate in an unregulated or uncontrolled manner, that's a > > cowboy. People that pioneered the West were cowboys. You did your > > pioneering and now that Broadband is main stream and the President has > > proclaimed his BB Policy, you are entering the regulated world. > > > > As I explained to someone offlist, cowboy wasn't the best word to use, > > but I could not come up with another word. But visually a guy sitting on > > a plain pretty much alone with his livestock (business) is why it got > > used. Other words were too strong. I just couldn't find a good word to > use. > > > > Here's my main worry: About 400 of what we will call 2000 want to > > comply and run their business. The other 1600 don't want to fill out > > forms or be bothered, which is their prerogative but not their right. > > But it is the 1600 that will take down the 400. > > > > Here's my main peeve: It's quite okay to stand up and oppose something, > > but whistling in the wind does not get it done. Words are great, but > > action (like all those people you said would get behind you) is > > required. If you feel this strongly - and apparently you do because you > > and I keep going back and forth on this with you being insulted and then > > me being insulted - take some action. Don't write a missive. Go do > > something. > > > > Meanwhile the deadline for compliance with CALEA is still May 14. (Did > > you sign up for the Bearhill CALEA webinar?) > > > > Regards, > > > > Peter Radizeski > > RAD-INFO, Inc. > > 813.963.5884 > > > > -- > > WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] > > > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > -- > WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > -- > WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > -- WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
