 
jvigier
Premium
join:2002-01-17
Wells, ME
| Hmmm...this sounds familiar I wonder if the next study from these losers will prove that McCarthyism was a good thing and that Nixon was our best president.
I know these kinds of people, who use lies, deceit and any other means necessary to fightt anything and everything that doesn't put loads of cash into their wallets...where I come from we call "extreme right" | |
|  | joebear29
join:2003-07-20
Alabaster, AL
| Re: Hmmm...this sounds familiar said by jvigier  :I know these kinds of people, who use lies, deceit and any other means necessary to fightt anything and everything that doesn't put loads of cash into their wallets...where I come from we call "extreme right" Really? I just call them "politicians". | |
| | | 
Bill
Light Up The Halo
Premium,VIP
join:2001-12-09
clubs:
| Re: Hmmm...this sounds familiar said by jvigier :I know these kinds of people, who use lies, deceit and any other means necessary to fightt anything and everything that doesn't put loads of cash into their wallets...where I come from we call "extreme right" Of course, the "extreme right" are the only ones who use these tactics 
--
The new Secure-Wifi.net is open!
| |
| | | | | | | | | phuntism
join:2003-08-01
Manhattan Beach, CA | familiar indeed justncredible is my favorite poster, always good for a laugh.  | |
| | | | | 
meprivacynet
@verizon.n | Re: Hmmm...this sounds familiar In "justncredible", n stands for "not". Still, for a troll, he is extremely intelligent and entertaining. | |
| | | | | |
justncredible
@rr.com
 from:
pnh102
| Re: Hmmm...this sounds familiar I claim to be neither, I just want to see a open real debate with a logical conclusion. What are the real pros and cons of this topic.
1. more people with access to the Internet.
That is the only "pro" for muni ran networks I can think of. Now what are the cons.
1. paid for by tax money
2. more government employees for the tax payer to support.
3. government control of internet content (ie, Utah porn blocking law)
4. government price control (comcast and charter in the last 2 months forced to raise prices)
5. Teaching the children to rely on the government for services and "handouts" ( another generation of lazy bums)
6. even tho the tax payers paid up front for the network they still have to pay fees. (higher fees than me on roadrunner to)
7. it is socialist in nature and we know that socialism killed 100 million people, just one more step closer to your death for speaking your mind.
8. not one single muni has been shown to be a success, 600+ exist but no one thinks they are "good"
9. has been tried before and failed, why keep wasting money?
Really think about the benefits and what is gained from a muni ran network, does it make any sense at all to force all tax payers to provide a service that only a few will use? We see what the education and socialism has done for our kids, they are so stupid nowadays. As for the remark about MacCarthy, well he was 100% correct, the FBI released tapes proving he was right, he exposed commies, and the commies killed him, he is a true American hero, we need him back to save this country. | |
| | | | | | | 
RR Conductor
RailRoadDude
Premium
join:2002-04-02
Redwood Valley, CA
 ·Comcast
| Re: Hmmm...this sounds familiar McCarthy was an evil man who ruined many innoncent people and even went so far as to accuse Eisenhower of being a Communist, along with other great people like actress Lucille Ball, whose husband, Desi, had fought the Communists in Cuba. I can't believe anybody would honor or think he was a great hero.
--
See the BOOMING railroads of today,and tommorrow@ »www.gorail.org/See HEAVY DUTY freight and passenger action @ the Galesburg, IL Rail Cam!»205.245.189.161:1100/ See my Familys gorgeous home of Mendocino County@»www.gomendo.com | |
| | | | | | | 
Octopussy2
Premium
join:2003-03-30
Batavia, IL
| 1) Not all muni ventures are paid for with tax money...do your home work.
2) The govt. doesn't control the content. A separate board generally puts together tiered packages for customers to choose from. Parents control content in the home with the remote control!
3) Munis, in general, have lower prices than the monopolistic Telcos and Cable Co.s like Comcast. Munis provide a choice for service. What is wrong with that? And prices at Comcast and SBC haven't been raised across the country due to munis, if that is what you are suggesting! Comcast and SBC will tell you it is because of all their wonderful upgrades (cough, cough). Wonderful upgrades to subpar technology...
4) If a muni decides to build infrastructure to provide services it is a CHOICE to take services. And if you decide to take services of course you have to pay fees! You don't see customers getting free Comcast cable TV, do you? And the tax payers don't pay upfront for the network. You need to learn about the different business models and financing methods in place for muni infrastructure...you sound like a moron.
5) Now I know you are a moron when you say no munis are a success. And the reason you say they aren't a success is because no one thinks they are "good"? What is that supposed to mean?
You say you want "a open real debate with a logical conclusion". Since you are neither logical, nor mindful of real facts, might I suggest you not represent the anti-muni side?
--
It's muni-licious! »www.tricitybroadband.com | |
| | | |
RR Conductor
RailRoadDude
Premium
join:2002-04-02
Redwood Valley, CA | No SW, but they are the scariest. | |
| | 
footballdude
join:2002-08-13
Imperial, MO
| said by jvigier :I know these kinds of people, who use lies, deceit and any other means necessary to fightt anything and everything that doesn't put loads of cash into their wallets...where I come from we call "extreme right" I know these kinds of people, who use lies, deceit and any other means necessary to fight anything and everything that doesn't put loads of cash into the government's coffers...where I come from we call them the "extreme left". | |
| 
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
1 edit | It's simple folks... Deploy or get the F out of the way. As for 'socialism'...nice try industry whores...broadband infrastructure is no more socialism than the interstate highway system or public libraries.
If private industry spent 1/2 as much time trying to please customers as they do kissing the ass of politicians there wouldn't be a push for muni BB.
--
Don't get it, demand it! The Anime Network www.theanimenetwork.com | |
| | brisonic
join:2001-08-05
San Diego, CA
| Re: It's simple folks... There's at least a bit of truth to this, everyone wants bandwidth for "free", when in reality it is paid for by someone upstream, some government, company, Robin Hood income redistribution via taxes, or a user. Something with value shouldn't be given away for free except in cases of charity. Bandwidth has a price, as do most things of value. Want some, step right up, with the ability to pay for it. These efforts will certainly drive prices even lower. But, how much lack of quality can you gripe about if you aren't paying for it at all. | |
| | |
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
| Re: It's simple folks... As I see it consumers are looking for 3 things...product availability/deployment, provider choice and freedom not from having to pay, but simply freedom from the profiteering that is commonplace with double digit rate increases and/or cuts in service.
While I don't think muni BB should be forced upon taxpayers if a municipality puts on a ballot a bond measure to fund deployment that is paid back by revenues, the people should have that option.
Personally I think the optimal situation for munis is line sharing. The bond pays for the deployment, then private content providers provide service paying the muni a lease or delivery fee per customer that pays back the bond. Then you have content providers trying to undercut each other because the margin isn't a given. And when one provider wants to cap you, their email sucks, their TOS/AUP is restrictive or their latest price increase is the last straw...you're only a phonecall away from switching.
Then from this you kill the monopoly and the likes of Time Warner, SBC or even smaller ISPs like Sonic.net and DSL Extreme have access to customers of another incumbants area.
--
Don't get it, demand it! The Anime Network www.theanimenetwork.com | |
| | | | | | | | 
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| said by oliphant :Personally I think the optimal situation for munis is line sharing. The bond pays for the deployment, then private content providers provide service paying the muni a lease or delivery fee per customer that pays back the bond. Then you have content providers trying to undercut each other because the margin isn't a given. And when one provider wants to cap you, their email sucks, their TOS/AUP is restrictive or their latest price increase is the last straw...you're only a phonecall away from switching. I agree with you on this, I feel the best situation would be for local governments that so choose to run fiber and whatever infrastructure needed to support that fiber and then lease out the lines to whoever wants to use them.
However, correct me if I'm wrong but, no "muni" I've seen wants to do this they want to run the whole thing end to end. They want control; they want to implement a price point that is lower than the private sector to hell with what the real price (as determined by the market) is; in short, they want another carrot to dangle in front of voters and those who would donate to their campaign.
I see the broadband conundrum as being similar to the issue of roads at the beginning of the age of the automobile (that being that there weren't enough and those that were there were built for the horse and buggy); the problem wasn't a lack of automobiles (or providers in this case), it was a lack of infrastructure.
--
Dear Hollywood:Shut up and dance monkey! | |
| | | | |
oliphant
I Have 8 Boobies
Premium
join:2004-11-26
Corona, CA
| Re: It's simple folks... If no muni is willing to do it...perhaps this could be the compromise between business and state governments who until now are looking at nothing but banning munis. So long as munis are looking to totally run their show then the opposition has nothing to lose battling them to the death.
--
Don't get it, demand it! The Anime Network www.theanimenetwork.com | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| Re: It's simple folks... said by JTRockville :Correction: Tacoma leases their Click! network. yes but you as private industry still have to compete with the government run company correct?
--
Dear Hollywood:Shut up and dance monkey! | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Octopussy2
Premium
join:2003-03-30
Batavia, IL | Re: It's simple folks... Yes, Comcast. | |
| | | | ricep5
Premium
join:2000-08-07
Jacksonville, FL
 ·AT&T CallVantage
·Comcast Formerly ..
| Agreed. Let munis build the infrastructure then let the content/delivery providers offer their wares to the end user in a competitive fashion.
No different than me choosing between UPS,FedEx, DHL etc. They use the same highways, airports and railroads.
Want cable? Check for what deal Comcast, Time Warner or whomever is offering.
Want broadband? check which bulk provider is offering the best value in bandwidth.
Want Telecom? Check to see what SBC, Qwest or Verizon/MCI is offering in a package. | |
| | | der_panzer
join:2003-12-18
Lebanon, TN
| said by brisonic :Bandwidth has a price, as do most things of value. You're absolutely right. Bandwidth is expensive. Having worked for a small local ISP, I know this.
It infuriates me to think that my taxpayer dollars (which are already being wasted on so much ridiculous bull****) could now be wasted on the bandwidth for some jerkoff to download hundreds of gigabytes of pirated music and DVDs a month.
Name ONE program that the government operates that is not a complete disaster. City, state, federal, it doesn't matter. Name ONE!
States have got it right in trying to ban municipal broadband. Connectivity should be left to private enterprise. If there is a demand, private enterprise will provide a solution. | |
| | PDXPLT
join:2003-12-04
Banks, OR
| said by oliphant :Deploy or get the F out of the way. It should be a requirement that this phrase gets tatooed on the forehead of every telecom CEO.
To me, this is like voting. You don't vote, you don't get to complain about who gets elected.
You don't deploy broadband, you don't get to complain if the people do it themselves. | |
| 
dslextreme
Premium,VIP
join:2001-02-23
Canoga Park, CA
1 edit | Affects BPL Has anyone stopped for one moment to think that at least some BPL deployment will be muni based?
Here in Los Angeles we have the "department of water and power" run by the city. Should they not be allowed to offer Broadband over Power Lines?
The FCC is really talking up BPL as the holy grail for competition, but is allowing many states to enact laws banning "muni competition". How can we have BPL if it's banned? (let alone the fact that it has yet to be proven to work). The FCC is really starting to look like the political arm of the telco and cable companies and it is becoming painfully evident. | |
| | 
calvoiper
join:2003-03-31
Belvedere Tiburon, CA
| Re: Affects BPL The FCC didn't decide that states could prevent their municipal subsidiaries from deploying broadband, the courts did.
The analysis used was that while states can't prevent other entities from offering telecom services, they can prevent their own subsidiaries from doing so, the same way that GM could certainly tell Buick that it couldn't offer telco services.
calvoiper
--
VoIP--the death knell of remaining voice monopolies! | |
| Goldman
join:2002-06-21
Maumelle, AR
1 edit | Harsh assessment That's an extremely harsh assessment of the Heartland Institute. They attempt to cut through the politically correct, socialist agendas that politicians and bureaucrats are continually shoving down our throats and tell the truth for a change. It isn't politically correct to say that taxpayers shouldn't pay for FTTH for everyone in the country. It isn't politically correct to say that broadband isn't a right in this country, it isn't politically correct to say that people need to work for the things they want rather than expect things to be handed to them by others. The final cost of taxpayer supported broadband will be astronomical by the time government gets through with it, and no matter what they tell you, broadband is not a necessity. | |
| | 
Minister
join:2002-01-02
Fleeting | Re: Harsh assessment Utter nonsense.
These groups exist with one purpose: protecting their master's profit margins, and convincing consumers that it's good for them. | |
| | | gilgamesh0
join:2003-12-01
Seattle, WA
| Re: Harsh assessment Jeez, guys. Went and had a look at this think tank's site about their funding, etc.:
»www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=10582
»www.heartland.org/FAQArticle.cfm?faqId=7
Doesn't look any worse than most policy think tanks (sounds like they were more open than most in the past)... At any rate, this sort of criticism doesn't begin to cut it. How about focusing on the actual study in question, instead of this "corporate shill" (or "government shill", in other cases) nonsense? Unless there is specific evidence of bias, this kind of accusation invariably detracts from the conversation, rather than assists it. While I've seen the righties do this, too, I have to say that this seems to be more the lefties' favorite game, and it is pretty sad.
Moreover, even if a study is indeed an *industry* study (or industry commissioned) -- i.e. one where clearly the funders have a monetary interest -- you note that fact, certainly, but it is not ipso facto bogus, and simply dismissible because of that. I love how independent orgs (lefty or righty "public interest" groups) claim their studies to be pure, because they have no monetary bias -- but somehow their ideological perspective (the very reason for their existence) has no effect on this "purity"? On the contrary, I'd say the ideological commitment can have an even stronger effect.
From what I can see, this Heartland Insititute has in fact more of an ideological motivation than financial. And that is not per se a reason to dismiss their study out of hand (any more than for of any of these other groups). Let's focus on evaluating the actual study, folks, shall we?
--Adam | |
| | | | 11337845
Live free or die
Premium
join:2002-12-20
Seattle, WA
| Re: Harsh assessment said by gilgamesh0 :I love how independent orgs (lefty or righty "public interest" groups) claim their studies to be pure, because they have no monetary bias -- but somehow their ideological perspective (the very reason for their existence) has no effect on this "purity"? On the contrary, I'd say the ideological commitment can have an even stronger effect. In a country whose God is money, you will see the evidence mount. Congratulations on an excellent and thought provoking observation.
--
Join me and those that think as I do. Revolt against the powers that be. Tell them that they are hypocrites. Let them know that their control is weak and pointless. Urge them to let us evolve into our own society and flourish as we should. | |
| | | |
Combat Chuck
Too Many Cannibals
Premium
join:2001-11-29
Erie, PA
| People don't seem to understand that it's hard to get funding from someone who doesn't agree with you or has a vested interest in something you oppose; so it should come as no surprise where the funding comes from, nor should it be taken as an absolute sign of bias because of it.
I've got a big surprise for everyone, you'll find that most private donors to a particular political candidate come from individuals of that candidates same party; i know it's hard to believe, but its true.
--
Dear Hollywood:Shut up and dance monkey! | |
| | | |
Minister
join:2002-01-02
Fleeting
| They don't reveal their funding sources, because their funding sources are the very people who don't want muni-broadband to thrive.
I'll take any study from a real independent research seriously and consume it.
Taking these individuals seriously from the start is a grave error, they have but one agenda, and it is to protect their profits.....
Even considering their studies is a sign one considers them legitimate researchers, which I will not do. Spend five minutes studying Issue Dynamics and realize how deep this rabbit hole goes.... | |
| | | | | gilgamesh0
join:2003-12-01
Seattle, WA
| Re: Harsh assessment Again -- to refuse to consider out of hand a study (or an argument) made by someone because they have an interest in the answer is both impractical and unjustified.
Impractical -- as pointed out above, most research is funded by people who hope to like the results; and I've already pointed out that there are many interests other than the purely monetary. Who will be these "real independent" researchers, completely free from fiscal or occupational or ideological bias?
Unjustified -- because someone has an interest, arguments they make and facts they marshall to support a position are simply automatically invalid? If you go to court to defend yourself against an accusation of fraud, or to accuse another party of fraud against you, you certainly have an interest in the results -- should what you say therefore be dismissed out of hand?
At the end of the day -- logically speaking, it is the argument and data that matter most, not the source. If you shut your eyes because you disapprove of the messenger, though they may be correct, well, you are making a mistake. | |
| | 11337845
Live free or die
Premium
join:2002-12-20
Seattle, WA
| Take your argument, travel back in time about 100 years, and proceed to say the same thing about telephone service.
Then look at how far this country came and how we became a pre-eminent superpower because of our advancements in technology. Our so-called "socialist" approach to telephone service enabled this country to dominate the world.
We were able to advance our society in a way never seen throughout history. The advent of the telephone, and our attitude towards making sure that almost everyone had access to it (monetarily and physically), is probably the primary reason we're not under Hitler's control at the moment (or his successor).
Believe it or not, internet access is the "new" telephone and needs to be treated as a necessity for our citizens. We cannot advance as a society and an industrial nation if we continue to fall behind other countries in broadband deployment and accessibility.
It's not just about porn and movies and music. That's a significant amount of the traffic, but we'll fall as a nation if we don't address this important problem.
--
Join me and those that think as I do. Revolt against the powers that be. Tell them that they are hypocrites. Let them know that their control is weak and pointless. Urge them to let us evolve into our own society and flourish as we should. | |
| | |
See 13 replies to this post | |
| Kearnstd
Elf Wizard
Premium
join:2002-01-22
Mullica Hill, NJ
| the corperations are also scared of having to compete, look at that article further down where a cable co had to offer cheaper services because the town had its own triple play. Competition isnt compatable with the monopolies that the execs of these companies are used to.
--
[65 Arcanist]Filan(High Elf) Zone: Broadband Reports | |
| | | | | 
jsinaiko
Premium
join:2001-04-25
Chicago, IL
 ·AT&T Midwest
| Re: Harsh assessment LOL  Best I've seen yet! I bet the Heartland Inst. idiots believe it too.
I still think it's ironic that this bunch of numb-nuts is in Chicago, the bluest of blue cities in a very blue states.
These guys never quit - they just keep on spewing out their horsedooky.
--
Illigitimati non carborundum | |
| | | 
John Galt
What...me panic??
Premium
join:2004-09-30
Happy Camp
| Might as well be accurate...
--
A is A | |
| | | | | 
Penguins
Have You Played Atari Today?
join:2001-12-01
Cleveland, OH
1 edit | Heartland Instutute Neo-con shill orginization.
These are the same idiots who want to create a new slave class by shutting down all public schools. | |
| |
See 13 replies to this post | |
pcscdma
Chocobo Chocobo Random Battle
Premium
join:2004-01-14
Winterset, IA
clubs:
| ok "Informed, honest debate over municipal broadband is rare."
At last, something the Heartland Institute says that I agree with!
++++
Look at a link that was on the same page -
»www.chron.com/cs/CDA/ssistory.mp···/3072809
now scroll to the bottom
LOL!
--
"The bad news is that we are told that Michael Powell, one of Washington's better bureaucrats, is calling it quits today after four years at the helm of the Federal Communications Commission." - WSJ 2005/01/21 | |
| |
jsinaiko
Premium
join:2001-04-25
Chicago, IL | Re: ok No shame whatsoever. In a way I'm jealous. Amazing. | |
| 
woody7
Premium
join:2000-10-13
Torrance, CA | one word shills | |
| 
teambnet
Team B Group
Premium
join:2003-05-06
Chicago, IL
| HI bashing is off base I defy you to show me an organization that has a better grip on the intricacies of municipal economics. There's a lot of conventional wisdom (also known as anecdotes) on the value of municipal i projects but very little in the way of comprehensive research much less from organizations that study local economics. Personally I have seen limited amounts of data that could support EITHER position.
A *lot* of HI's research and positions have remained unassailable after years of scrutiny. For example, one of their more widely cited studies (done over a dozen years ago) was about public funding of municipal....stadiums. Their conclusions in that study revealed that- contrary to conventional wisdom- only one publicly financed stadium had EVER been a boost to the overall long term economy of a region. (the stadium and team: the RCA dome and the Indy Colts). Efforts by the leagues and local franchises to counter HI's data and conclusions have consistently failed.
As for their funding sources, this is a straw man argument. A more constructive approach would be for you to cite hard data (keep in mind anecdotes are not data) that directly counter HI's arguments. If you can't then your pronouncements are simply uninformed opinion.
--
We believe in the Keyser Soze rule of websites: your site can't be hacked if there is no site to hack. | |
| |
Octopussy2
Premium
join:2003-03-30
Batavia, IL
| Re: HI bashing is off base The funny thing is that Joe Bast and his crew never really back up their arguments. They say things like: Click! Tacoma is a failure. Muni broadband doesn't work. And they never follow it up with hard evidence. Sure, Joe Bast has written a paper on muni broadband and the Tri-Cities. The funny thing is he never interviewed some of the key players he cites in his "research". Neither has Steven Titch. And both of them have errors in what they have written about the Tri-Cities. Don't always believe what you read ladies and gentlemen!
If you want evidence of how Click!Tacoma is doing why not view www.tricitybroadband.com and see actual letters from people who run Click!Tacoma. They will tell you Click!Tacoma is doing fine -thank you. How about Kutztown,PA that gets disparaged by SBC and others as being a failure for the first muni FTTH network? Frank Caruso and his team are doing just fine. See his letter and their Governor's Award from the State of PA, also at www.tricitybroadband.com. These are not failures. Neither is Glasgow,KY. Call Billy Ray there. He'll tell you how "awful" they are doing- NOT! So bad that they ran Comcast out of town with some of the lowest cable TV prices in the nation of around $18.95/mo. Gee, they must be such a failure .
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to do just a little research on your own folks to see where the interests of the HI lie. And it also doesn't take long to disprove a lot of what they say is "bad" about muni broadband.
--
It's muni-licious! »www.tricitybroadband.com | |
| | |
teambnet
Team B Group
Premium
join:2003-05-06
Chicago, IL
| Re: HI bashing is off base Problem is these are all anecdotal single people with single stories- show me statistically valid aggregation that supports municipally run i- you can't. HI, meanwhile has 2 decades of data involving municipal run non-essential services to support its claims.
Show me one city in America that provides a non-essential commercial service that isn't either a drag on the economy, a double opportunity cost on the tax base, a failure as a going concern or a combination of all three.
And BTW, you really didn't need to interview people in the Tri Cities to grasp what the bbi issue was really all about: all you needed to see was the NIMBY placards on Main street west of Randall to understand that this is a place where asthetics (rather than practical consideration) is the key issue: Vanity thy name is Mill Creek and the McMansions off of Dearpath Rd. | |
| | | |
Octopussy2
Premium
join:2003-03-30
Batavia, IL
| Re: HI bashing is off base In the context of this broadband discussion...Mill Creek folks and many of those past Deerpath Rd were not eligible to vote. So, this vote was never about them or their views in the Tri-Cities.
I can show you plenty of successful muni ventures. But if you are a follower of Joe Bast I sincerely believe that you think any muni ventures are a success. I could write a book on muni broadband successes and you wouldn't believe me, even at the end of it.
As for your comment about not needing to interview the people involved with the Tri-Cities broadband issue before doing a research paper on them, I find that rather ridiculous and short-sighted. Groups are mentioned and false statements abound in Mr. Bast's work regarding the Tri-Cities. As for discussing all those errors here...I would need a lot more space. I'll save it for my own report and national publications.
--
It's muni-licious! »www.tricitybroadband.com | |
| | | | |
teambnet
Team B Group
Premium
join:2003-05-06
Chicago, IL
| Re: HI bashing is off base They weren't eligible to vote, yet, from talking to some of them myself, I know many expected to be beneficiaries since none of the proposals specifically excluded them. Moreover several residents were ardent proponent$ of the initiative and it's sponsors.
Once again I must state: you can show me lots of stories of success- but they are just stories. A three year old can poop in the toilet ten times in row but that's no indication that she won't crap in the bed the eleventh time. Show me verifiable proof that those stories ALL are a) successful according to standardized criteria, b) don't have negative or unintended consequences from both a macro and micro standpoint now, 1, 3 or 10 years down the line and c) are actually filling a verifiable basic necessity (the reason for government in the first place).
Basically you're saying you're proposal was right because you had glorified focus groups validate your position and something similar worked in communities X, Y and Z which are 300 to 1000 miles away from here and (MAY or MAY NOT) be somewhat comparable to ours. [Whoa, that's solid. Say, when can I catch you next at the Oxford Union debates?]
And then when it fails you run and seek solace with THE MYTH: that a think tank, ground in an ideology you hate, and faceless mega-corporations were responsible for it's defeat. I suppose it is a much more satisfying and convenient explanation especially when you're trying mingle with those who voted against it at the neighbor's wine and cheese party.
If the the viability of muni ftth as spelled out in the tri-city initiatives was as proven and sensible as you state, there shouldn't have been a contest in the first place. But there was. Stop blaming the naysayers and start blaming the proposal. | |
| | | |
|
|
·
·
·
Victory is mine!