Rick, if someone is really seriously interested in looking back, they can 
read the archives.

There's little point in it, really.  I've just been watching for change. 
There has been at least some shift over the years.


++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
<insert witty tagline here>

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Rick Harnish" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "'WISPA General List'" <wireless@wispa.org>
Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 1:39 PM
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Article


> Mark,
>
> I would like you to further elaborate on the following comment for those 
> who
> don't remember or those who were not on the list at the time.  Please
> include the specific examples of this accusation so this person can defend
> what they said "in context".  If that person is me, then I will clarify my
> position to the best of my ability.
>
> "I'm just recalling a specific thread on this list that's now 2 or 3 years
> old, about how this industry will be much better and more representable in
> Washington when it is "mature" and not a whole lot of smaller players.
> Someone who is influential in WISPA was the source of this attitude, too.
>
> This particular person seemed to be embarrassed to consider representing
> this industry as having mom and pop type members."
>
> Respectfully,
> Rick Harnish
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 4:20 PM
> To: WISPA General List
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Article
>
>
> ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
> <insert witty tagline here>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Butch Evans" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org>
> Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 12:44 PM
> Subject: Re: [WISPA] Article
>
>
>> On Thu, 4 Dec 2008, [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
>>
>> When did this ever happen?
>
> It did.  Long ago.   I supported WISPA until someone spilled the beans.
>
>>
>> There are some regulations that are good for WISPs.  Just ONE HUGE
>> example are the regulations that govern the FREE use of spectrum
>> under the Part-15 rules.  It's funny that I've never heard you go
>> off the deep end about THOSE regulations.  Either way, that is one
>> example of a good regulation.
>
> Hmmm... Allowing the people to use a public commodity.  Wow.  I feel so
> privileged.  NOT!  No, the knotheads in DC OWE US THE USE OF IT.
>
> Wow, what a strange concept.   When did we forget, we're the boss and the
> owners, they're the designated stewards?
>
>>
>> In terms of specific impact that WISPA has had that benefits ALL
>> wisp operators (even those like you that don't like regulation)
>> there are 2 MAJOR examples that I will suggest.  You are probably
>> the only one "in the room" who will not like them, but then I
>> suspect you are often in that situation.  The first example is the
>> most recent HUGE WIN for WISPs in the TVWS debates.  I don't know if
>> you noticed, but in the R&O, do a search for "WISPA" and then do a
>> search for "GOOGLE".  You'll quickly see that just based on the
>> number of "mentions" that WISPA had a HUGE impact on the ruling.
>> That spectrum is free for you to use UNLICENSED (NOT UNREGULATED),
>> even if you don't support WISPA.  Another example is CALEA.  I know
>> that in YOUR world, CALEA isn't something that you have to comply
>> with, but the rest of us that live in a world shared by ~300Million
>> other Americans, we DO have to comply.  WISPA could have gone to DC
>> and said "this isn't fair", but it would NOT have changed the law.
>> Moving beyond that, we have developed a REAL solution that is very
>> affordable for ANYONE to follow.  There is currently no software
>> supporting it, but that is under development and will surface in the
>> near future.
>
> Wow.   Effective and reasonable ideas could have been dreamed up and
> proposed and made into law by now.  But nope, we're still determined that
> pounding a square peg into a round hole "just has to be".
>
>>
>> One of the reasons WISPA doesn't take the approaches you suggest is
>> that your ideas are SO far out of line with reality that there is no
>> way to meet you on common ground.  Perhaps the muddy frogs can, but
>> real people cannot.
>
> Why, Thanks  Butch.   I feel ever so much better now.
>
>>
>>>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
>>
>> What's bad about building and selling?  You don't like money either?
>
> Hmmm...  words have a specific meaning, I said precisely what I meant.
> When the attitude that the smaller players need to go away is shaken out 
> of
> WISPA, that will be a good thing.
>
>>
>>>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.
>>
>> Yeah..my "mom and pop" raised me and fed me, but if I can find a way
>> to move my "mom and pop" operation into something bigger, then why
>> is that bad?  Look at companies like McDonalds, Wendy's and even
>> WAL-MART.  These companies were ALL "mom and pop" operations at one
>> time.  Personally, I'd not complain if my business grew to the size
>> of any one of those examples.  There are examples just like this in
>> the WISP industry, but I'll leave that as an exercise for you to
>> find.
>
> LOL, how'd you ever construe what I said into being against people 
> building
> whatever size they want or think they can be?
>
> I'm just recalling a specific thread on this list that's now 2 or 3 years
> old, about how this industry will be much better and more representable in
> Washington when it is "mature" and not a whole lot of smaller players.
> Someone who is influential in WISPA was the source of this attitude, too.
>
> This particular person seemed to be embarrassed to consider representing
> this industry as having mom and pop type members.
>
>>
>>>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.
>>
>> This is just not correct.  I'm not going to try to correct you on
>> it, but wanted it to be in the archives for anyone who is interested
>> to know that the TRUTH (of which your messages was NOT an example)
>> is available in the archives.
>
> If you're trying to convince me that DC is my friend, or that government 
> can
>
> be trusted in the slightest... good luck  There's a whole world history to
> prove that notion the b iggest folly ever committed by man.
>
>>
>>>Sorry, that's just my opinion and it's not subject to "revision and
>>>extension".
>>
>> If you were to revise your opinions, how would we all know what we
>> were doing wrong?  Please...never change for the sake of us all...
>>
>>>And no, don't tell me to "run for WISPA office".
>>
>> I don't think I've EVER seen anyone ask you for this.  Besides, as a
>> non-member you can't.  If you decided to join and you think your
>> opinions are held by even a small group of people, and that you CAN
>> convince the other board members and you can have some impact on our
>> policies.
>>
>>>Agitators like myself don't win popularity contests.
>>
>> I'm not sure "agitator" is the right word...It is something of a
>> cop-out, actually.
>>
>>>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.
>>
>> And which part of ANY of your messages posted to any list I've EVER
>> seen you post to actually IS "conducive to winning"?  What is it you
>> want to win?  If you are attempting to sway opinion, then why not
>> post some legitimate arguments (note the word "legitimate" does not
>> mean the same thing as "wild ranting") and convince people you are
>> right?
>
> It really would not matter.   There's sufficient numbers of people who 
> brand
>
> anything said by me as wild ranting, so...  Let them think that.  Maybe 
> I'll
>
> just add some fuel to the fire for my own entertainment's sake.
>
>>
>>
>>>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.
>>
>> Personally, I hold neither love NOR hatred for you.
>>
>>>I am firmly convinced you could make a serious impact if you think
>>>outside the box of present conventions.
>>
>> We have already made a "serious impact".  You just don't like it
>> because we did so WITHIN the law.
>>
>>>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.
>>
>> Umm..what was your idea again?  The idea of raising the bar for what
>> is defined as broadband has little to do with "federal handouts".
>> It is the reality that there really IS a problem in this country.
>> We are falling behind in the world.  There are things that need to
>> happen at the federal level to get us (the nation) back on track
>> with BB availability.  In order to do that, we have to first define
>> broadband.  In today's world, 200k is NOT sufficient to be called
>> broadband.  But I'm not going to argue this whole point out with
>> you.  You wouldn't agree in the end anyway.
>
> Oh, GAWD.   Spare us the unmitigated tripe about "falling behind the 
> world"
> already.   This political BS is so tiresome, so stupid, and so 
> ridiculously
> absurd it deserves NEVER ANOTHER MENTION.
>
> What, if we fell behind the world in euthanasia, we'd need Congress to 
> bail
> us out with some federal guns and death policy?   Cripes, what IS this 
> rot?
>
> I see a needed service to people who need it.   NOT EVERYONE NEEDS IT. 
> NOT
> MANY BENEFIT MUCH FROM IT!  Seriously!  To think that abject buffoons in 
> DC
> can somehow determine that broadband is going to cure our country's 
> economic
>
> ills is beyond stupid.  It's mindless.   It has it's place, it has its
> value, but to think that somehow it is or should be an issue so critical
> that we need our government to step in and blow taxpayer money on 
> studying,
> subsidizing, and ultimately screw with the markets to "fix" it is beyond
> stupid.   This nation is NOT SUFFERING A LACK OF BROADBAND.   Not to say
> that there's no place lacking it, it's just that in the universe of
> important stuff, this is a grain of sand in the middle of a desert.   I
> can't believe that we should fall for this notion and use it as the basis
> for our industry's lobbying.   I'ts just more of the "can't think outside
> the box" that I mentioned before.    Just because someone turned this into 
> a
>
> meme is no reason to keep repeating it.
>
> Why can't the approach to all this make sense?   Seriously, this is all 
> I've
>
> ever argued for.
>
>>
>> -- 
>> ********************************************************************
>> * 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: wireless@wispa.org
>>
>> 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: wireless@wispa.org
>
> 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: wireless@wispa.org
>
> 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: wireless@wispa.org

Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless

Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/

Reply via email to