----- Original Message ----- From: "Peter R." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "WISPA General List" <wireless@wispa.org> Sent: Monday, April 23, 2007 7:00 AM Subject: Re: [WISPA] FCC Admits Mistakes In Measuring Broadband Competition
> Mark Koskenmaki wrote: > > > > >Never say never, they say. What will you do when the FCC or FBI > comes and > >says " we want you to help us enforce... blah blah"? You're going > to have > >a hard time saying "no" when you have already made a policy of always > saying > >"yes". You will have to "blow" that non-existent 'goodwill'. It wont' > >have bought us or anyone else a thing. How many times must I say it? It > >would be far better to have a solidly honest position of ALWAYS > standing up > >for our industry, in everywhere way, in opposition to EVERYTHING negative. > > > First, let me say that there is no going to DC and standing up for this > Industry. > It is barely an Industry. And with 200 paid members out of 2000 possible > WISP's, it is not very representative. Plus you have Part-15 and its Well, if your point is that WISPA hasn't much muscle, not even combined with part-15's numbers, I have no disagreement with that. This IS, however, "an industry", with thousands of players, both big and small. Are we comparable to telco in assets and sales? No, but then for some reason, we can run rings around them in ceertain markets. > agenda. You have Vendors and their agenda. You have the so-called "Big > Boys" like NextWeb, Clearwire, ELN or whomever - and thiner agenda. And > if by some stroke of luck, energy and effort, you could get them all to > back your one principle, even then - and with money in the bank - it > would be a wasted effort to spend John's, Marlon's and Rick's own money > to go to DC to "Stand Up". Because someone would break ranks for a deal > or good will or whatever. Hmmm... You know, I thought I made the case that we needed the numbers... and that WISPA needed the numbers, too, for more "clout". I guess maybe I have to say these things, and not just let people connect the logical dots. > > Ask Frank Muto. You have to have Leverage to Stand Up. And a significant > number behind you who are willing and demonstrate a willingness to > support. Um, we don't have that here. > > DC is not the Town Hall. DC is layers upon layers of subterfuge. You > need a full-time well-connected lobbyist. IN a former life, we hired a > well-connected lobbyist to ask Karl Rove if Indie ISP's had a chance (in > 2005). This was about the time of Brand-X and Forbearance. The lobbyist > gave us the check back with a solemn look. A lobbyist returned money. > What does THAT tell you? that says that we're not going to influence Congress much, unless we manage to find some politician allies. > > I hired a PR firm to craft 14 template letters that just needed a > signature, a name and an address to be faxed to Congress. Do you know > how many times it was downloaded? 15. Yeah. > > SO tell me again how WISPA with 200 paid members should Stand Up? > I'd love to hear the plan, because the one I used obviously did not work. Hrm... So, maybe the point is that you need to stir up the membership to fight for thier own interest. Best way I can tell, is to slap down the ones that speak up and say they disagree with something. /sarcasm > > > > > I am not advocating "shunning the rules". I am advocating telling those > > making up the rules as they go, TO BACK OFF BECAUSE THEY ARE > > COUNTERPRODUCTIVE! It is both our privilege and our duty to tell > them to > > back off when they cross their proper boundaries. And we should be > utterly > > unafraid to do so. > > Actually all your speeches have been about shunning the rules and you > have stated you will not comply. > That may not be your message, but that is what you have written. It is not realy your business. But for some reason you want to make this about what I do. Is that because generically, the ideas themselves are hard to argue with? I stated publicly once, clearly, what my intention is. And looks like this... I'm still waiting for some kind of agreement and clear direction from the people working on it. If i can do it, I will. If not, I won't. If not, the FCC is going to know I am not, and cannot. Then I want to know... Where does WISPA fall on this? Does WISPA support the notion of taking out ISP's because they cannot technically or financially, or physically follow some stupidly obscure and obtuse demand? Or will they start arguing in defense of their industry? Because as far as I can tell, I cannot. What I have deployed lacks the technical capability to "comply". Yeah, I could help law enforcement, but I can't follow thier stupidly precise and yet obscure specified methodology. I know you've repeatedly complained that I don't put my money where my mouth is, because I can't buy plane tickets and hotel nights and can't run for office in WISPA. But I WILL put EVERYTHING on the line. I'll fight the FCC by myself if I have to. And, it sounds like a lot of people here will applaud my departure. Of course, I suspect that means you're going to have to applaud chopping the WISP numbers down BIG time, because I know there's plenty who can't do it either, because they can't find a way to meet some minor point or other. I know by personal experience that there's PLENTY of people who have the money...and would actually sign up in a hurry, if WISPA were bold and defensive. Heck, they'd have my money again, if they would. But most see no benefit, especially when nobody appears to be defending them, but instead siding with the overreaching regulators. PERCEPTION, as you know, is everything. > > No one is tar and feathering you. But look at this perspective: You want > people to spend their time and money to travel to DC to do something for > you. When they want to go to DC and become Advocates and open doors for > WISPA to work with the gov't. (Which is a worthwhile endeavor). > > You could go to DC and say we want money to comply - or something like > that. But you might as well phone it in and save the money for all it > will do. > > One more point: When we have sessions on DC and Lobbying at ISPCON, NO > ONE SHOWS UP! > When ISP-CEO discusses politics, it empties the room. (So, Frank, no > politics this May, okay?) I'm not talking politics. I have YET to bring up anything concerning politics, other than the process of dealing with political bodies, like Congress and the FCC. Nothing I say is partisan. It has little to do wtih politics. It has to do with our view of what's good for us and what's not. My positions and statements are nothing but but common sense and business sense, combined with an educated understanding of the nature of government and regulation. All I have to do is look at a wide array of industries and see exactly what happened to them, and see that I need a presence to at least TRY to stop that from happening to me. What I do has national atttention. I am filling what the government wants as a national need. If we can't get traction from that alone, in defense of our ability to survive and thrive and grow, then we're doomed. But I'm not a pessimist. I don't give up easily. Heck, I never give up. > > Just my 25 cents worth, > > Peter @ RAD-INFO, Inc. > -- > WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org > > Subscribe/Unsubscribe: > http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless > > Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/ -- WISPA Wireless List: wireless@wispa.org Subscribe/Unsubscribe: http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
