Wow...OK Who peed in the Muddy Water and hit the Frog????? Sheesh...
-B- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > And I won't be. I was once and put money into WISPA. When I think WISPA > has the interests of all WISPS in mind when they act, then I'll financially > support it. When WISPA goes to washington DC and represents to them, that > we actually WANT to be regulated, I cannot support them. When WISPA > consistently fights FOR all of us, and not just the narrow interests of > those who want federal money or whatever, then I may again support WISPA > financially. > > When the attitude that "consolidation and shaking out the smaller players" > is a good thing goes away, then there's on more barrier down. It may not be > official, but people who make decisions in WISPA have said that in the past. > Sorry, you lost me with that one. Small business and "mom and pop" are the > backbone of our economy and make up a huge segment of all the jobs in the > whole country. > > Every other industry organization unabashedly opposes everything that costs > them or can harm them, but the leadership continues to insist that somehow > playing nice and agreeing to mandates and costs will buy us favor... All > that happens is the mandates and agreements happen, the regulators change > and all the "goodwill" supposedly bought evaportes, with the precedents and > whatnot remain. Until they understand that Washington DC is NEVER our > friend, never to be trusted, then we're just sheep waiting to get shorn. > > Until this fundamental approach changes, no way in good conscience can I put > my name on what they do or give them money. > > > Sorry, that's just my opinion and it's not subject to "revision and > extension". > > This same attitude is going on still. WISPA leadership is still talking > about trying to out maneuver the big boys so as to make grants and loans > available. Cripes. Yeah, like we're ever going to win the arm twisting > contest to bend it in our direction? We don't collectively have that much > money or lobbyists tin DC to get our names to the top of the rolodexes. We > cannot win that fight with those rules. > > We have got to start selling the value of a thriving and diverse industry > that exists solely due to lack of regulation and lack of governmental > interference and that the big players cannot play our game effectively and > that betting on the big guys is like buying Enron or Lehman stock. We will > never be the providers to the masses, but there can never be affordable > ubiquitous broadband without us. > > That might take some thought and creativity to compose the narration and it > might take some skill to sell, but there's simply no rebuttal from Verizon > that FIOS is ever going to make a lick of sense in a wide array of places. > Or that in an era when Congress really, REALLY needs to get their fiscal act > in order, that blowing vast sums to reach few people makes sense. > > It has to be about selling the value of who and what you are and why you > are, not out muscling the big guys for a slice of pie. That can't be won. > Further, it obliterations the differences between us and them. That > DIFFERENCE is our strength, not our weakness. If you're not thinking in > those terms, then some re-thinking needs to happen. > > What will attract membership is a consistent, clear message about how we > have and are building a thriving and healthy industry, even in these > economic times, due to the fact that WE ARE NOT THEM and then selling > exactly who we are. The people coming back form DC need to talking about > how they sold us so well that when we say we need protection from mandates > and expensive intrusions, that they listened. The idea of going to DC and > being a "we threw a toothpick in the cogs of the big guys and got some money > for us" is self defeating. > > We need to be proactive, not reactive, we need a coherent message and a > coherent brand. We need to be defensive of the very thing that makes it > possible for our numbers to multiply - freedom to do business without > regulatory overhead. We need to not be attempting to joust with the cable > operators and telcos over what they want. We need to present something more > compelling than "feed our gaping maw so we c an continue our mediocre > performance" that the othe guys play. > > And no, don't tell me to "run for WISPA office". Agitators like myself > don't win popularity contests. Besides, I won't put my name on the > organization until it changes. I prefer poking a stick in the hornets > nest, to letting stuff go along quietly. I've never found that emulating > someone else is the sure-fire way to beat them. That is not conducive to > winning anything. Go for the whole banana, go for broke, or don't bother. > Lead, follow, or get out of the way... I spent the first half of my life > being compliant and found life has gotten too short. So, love me or hate > me, but for pity's sakes, grow a spine and act like real men with original > ideas when you go to lobby DC. The world is so absent real leadership that > even the mediocre would stand out if they make an effort these days. > > I am firmly convinced you could make a serious impact if you think outside > the box of present conventions. The whole notion of "raising broadband's > definition" to justify federal handouts to industry is so small, so weak, > such tired thinking that surely a better notion can be sold. > > Of course, if that's the best the "membership" can come up with... hell, we > probably deserve our fate.. > > Ok, soapbox gone... > > I am ever so late today... > > > > ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ > <insert witty tagline here> > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Butch Evans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: "WISPA General List" <[email protected]> > Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 6:45 AM > Subject: Re: [WISPA] Article > > > >> On Wed, 3 Dec 2008, Tom DeReggi wrote: >> >> >>> I am open to feedback from you, on what your opinions are, so we >>> can decide on a WISPA policy for those questions. >>> >> Tom, don't get caught up in arguments with him. He is not a WISPA >> member (unless that's changed) and as such, his opinion is NOT valid >> in shaping WISPA policy. That is a member's right, not his. >> >> -- >> ******************************************************************** >> * Butch Evans * Professional Network Consultation* >> * http://www.butchevans.com/ * Network Engineering * >> * http://www.wispa.org/ * WISPA Board Member * >> * http://blog.butchevans.com/ * Wired or Wireless Networks * >> ******************************************************************** >> >> >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> WISPA Wants You! Join today! >> http://signup.wispa.org/ >> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] >> >> Subscribe/Unsubscribe: >> http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless >> >> Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ >> > > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > WISPA Wants You! Join today! > http://signup.wispa.org/ > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- > > WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ > > > -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wants You! Join today! http://signup.wispa.org/ -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- WISPA Wireless List: [email protected] Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
