Why don't y'all put the correct SUBJECT line (BS) in place on this piece of $*it thread or take it off list?
All of you ought to be ashamed for feeding trolls - - hehehehehe <banging head on desk rapidly and repeatedly> Mac > -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Rick Harnish > Sent: Thursday, December 04, 2008 3:40 PM > To: 'WISPA General List' > 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" <[email protected]> > 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: [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/ > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG - http://www.avg.com > Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.9.12/1824 - Release Date: > 12/4/2008 8:05 AM -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 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/
