DaveNJ
No Fear
join:1999-09-01
New Jersey | We dont want your business
So clearwire is saying that if you use 45k for voip on there system they dont want you. But if you visting high graphic sites they do. So if your only reason to get them for surfing and voip, they lost a customer. |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
 ·AT&T Midwest
1 edit | No, what they are saying is they can do what they want, when they want, to any traffic they want. That includes HTTP, FTP, UDP, or any number of other "P"s that may dare request transit on the Clearwire wireless network. Why would anyone use an ISP which has such absurd terms? They could, in effect, cut your traffic off completely and you would have no recourse except to take them to court and hope to get a sympathetic judge who throws out the TOS you agreed to in the first place.
Incredible. |
|
batageek
Slave To The Duopoly
Premium
join:2003-01-25
1 edit | Why would anyone use an ISP that requires you to purchase a landline too in order to get DSL when all you want is a "naked" DSL line? Hmm......
--
»www.tricitybroadband.com |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
·AT&T Midwest
| said by batageek  :Why would anyone use an ISP that requires you to purchase a landline too in order to get DSL when all you want is a "naked" DSL line? Hmm...... I don't know. Why would anyone listen to a slimy little troll like you? But hey, I'll play along since I feel sorry for you sitting there all alone in the dark pouting like that.
You can get a "naked" line from Covad and several others if you want one. You pay for the physical delivery medium either way. In my case it's a budget bustin' $14 a month for the POTS line that's used for inbound fax. Oooohhh, what a sacrifice. SBC tells you in advance you need POTS to get their DSL and then doesn't put silly restrictions on how you can use it. Silly ISP-imposed restrictions are what this article is all about, not picking fights with people you can't defeat... |
|
batageek
Slave To The Duopoly
Premium
join:2003-01-25
2 edits | Good Lord....Is that the best you can do?
The silly restriction SBC (the ISP) sticks you with is the POTS service. There's no need for it. In addition, how's Covad getting to my house? SBC.....
Typical SBC attitude by the way. "You can't beat us, so quit whining..." At least you toe the company line.
These are not the droids you're looking for......
--
»www.tricitybroadband.com |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
·AT&T Midwest
| Huh? What company would that be? I work for myself, kid. SBC ain't got nothin to do with my profession, either. Is that the best you can do?
Covad leases a dry pair, no POTS necessary. Go read up on it on their website.
Hey, since you seem to like following me around, answer this: I still haven't heard you or your master explain why, since there is no public money involved in your little fiber project, you need voter approval via referendum. I've been all over your website and it's just not there. In fact, there isn't much there except for a lot of sour grapes and bold type extolling the virtues of private financing and the less-than-zero chance of increased taxes. Why don't you just raise the $60 million and build the damn thing. You seem to believe that it's the best thing for everyone and they'll all climb over each other to sign up.
You might also update the cost/benefit numbers to reflect actual rates charged and services available. 192 kbps DSL? Please. Even Comcast doesn't try that. |
|
batageek
Slave To The Duopoly
Premium
join:2003-01-25
2 edits | Again, this is no more silly than SBC, the isp, requiring you to take POTS service in order to get DSL service.
As you said, "Why would anyone use an ISP which has such absurd terms?" It's no more silly than what Clearwire is doing.
As to public money, see my posts here
»Tri-Cities Try Again all about why referendum was required/used. Almost a year ago.
And here »Illinois Battles SBC in October
And here »America: Wiring Itself
As to the rates charged, tool, the study was done by the Cities not the citizens group. A citizens group could hardly afford the $90,000 the study cost to start with.
Just to be clear, shill, the TriCity Broadband site is a citizen group website. Not city, not private business - just townies.
--
»www.tricitybroadband.com |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
·AT&T Midwest
2 edits | said by batageek :Again, this is no more silly than SBC, the isp, requiring you to take POTS service in order to get DSL service. As you said, "Why would anyone use an ISP which has such absurd terms?" It's no more silly than what Clearwire is doing. As to public money, see my posts here » Tri-Cities Try Again all about why referendum was required/used. Almost a year ago. And here » Illinois Battles SBC in October And here » America: Wiring ItselfAs to the rates charged, tool, the study was done by the Cities not the citizens group. A citizens group could hardly afford the $90,000 the study cost to start with. Just to be clear, shill, the TriCity Broadband site is a citizen group website. Not city, not private business - just townies. Stating in your TOS that you can shut down any and all traffic anytime you feel like for any reason whatsoever is quite a different thing than requiring a buy-in of some nominal cost to get the service. The fact that you can't express yourself without slinging insults speaks volumes about your credibility and motives.
No wonder nobody takes you folks seriously.
Since you insist on proving yourself to be the unprofessional lackey you are, let's talk about the rest of your post above. The rates I am talking about are here on your own site: »www.tricitybroadband.com/facts.htm and, for your convenience are summarized below :
Cost for Tri-City Internet WITH cable
Service Level Speed Cost
Platinum Service Downstream to 3.0 Mbps $64.95
Gold Service Downstream to 2.0 Mbps $44.95
Silver Service Downstream to 1.0 Mbps $34.95
Standard Service Downstream to 512 Kbps $26.95
Cost for Tri-City Internet WITHOUT cable
Service Level Speed Cost
Platinum Service Downstream to 3.0 Mbps $69.95
Gold Service Downstream to 2.0 Mbps $49.95
Silver Service Downstream to 1.0 Mbps $39.95
Standard Service Downstream to 512 Kbps $31.95
Still waiting for that explanation of why you need a referendum and don't just get those private backers to build this themselves. That Geneva is not home rule, or that your local politicos want a sign from God, is not enough. If they thought this was a good deal they would be tripping each other to claim credit for the idea. Instead they seem to be merely humoring a handful of amateur activists whose primary representatives do nothing but spew bile at anyone who dares ask a question, and know full well that only a small minority of the local residents (read: voters) even give a damn about it at all.
Western Springs recently had six lengthy plan commission meetings and then two more village trustee meetings over annexation of Timber Trails Country Club and it's imminent conversion to residential development. Hundreds of people came to those, so many that they had to hold several at LT-south high school's auditorium. And that didn't even have anything to do with property taxes...just people concerned about the future of their village. Tri-Cities voters don't seem to really think your "movement" is worth much.
You are really a fine example of why "grass roots" efforts mostly fail. Do your group a favor: Shut up.
edit: I really should have taken a screen shot of your original post with all the the "shill", "tool" and other infantile insults. The old flame-and-edit routine is pretty lame, don't you think? |
|
batageek
Slave To The Duopoly
Premium
join:2003-01-25
4 edits | Again...READ. ..the costing was provided in the original study in late 2002...DONE BY THE CITIES, not FFOF. It was a comparison from that time which we freely agree is from that time frame...the April 2003 referendum. The only way to reach the page you lifted these numbers from calls out that they're from the April 2003 referendum.
The referendum question has been answered countless numbers of times. You don't understand it or believe it....there's nothing more I could ever say. We've had this discussion before. The legality is what it is. The requirements of a municipal provider are law.
As to the shill and tool...you're right. I'll put them back. I thought better of it, but nuts to it. thanks for keeping me honest. My gut reaction was right the first time.
As to taking us seriously, SBC spent $200,000 to kill a citizen referendum. Comcast spent another $90,000 too. And these are only numbers for the 2004 election. Somebody is definitely paying attention. See
»www.elections.state.il.us/CDS/pa···/31/2004
and
»www.elections.state.il.us/CDS/pa···/31/2004
(You may get an error the first time you go to view these links...hit refresh and the links will work)
or just go here - »Buying Democracy?
The simple point I was trying to make was this: SBC's requirement that DSL customers have phone service is just as lame as Clearwire blocking Vonage. Both are examples of ISPS behaving badly since there's no technological reason for either, just greed. Both are just as "absurd."
But someone had to defend SBC........wonder why?
--
»www.tricitybroadband.com |
|
ricep5
Premium
join:2000-08-07
Jacksonville, FL | reply to DaveNJ
Why don't you guys just go get a room?
Then again, just go over to Kinko's and instant message each other. You seem to enjoy looking at your own typing. |
|
ricep5
Premium
join:2000-08-07
Jacksonville, FL | In fact, there is a 24hr Kinko's on Butterfield Road in Oakbrook Terrace that's about halfway between Western Springs and Batavia across from Dick's Sporting Goods.
He who types the most wins. |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11 | Nah. It's too much fun making his face turn red while he spits at the monitor. I'm done pushing his buttons for now. He needs to learn the fine art of staying on topic, and to quit following me around like a lost puppy. |
|
batageek
Slave To The Duopoly
Premium
join:2003-01-25
| Look at the first post I placed.
"Why would anyone use an ISP that requires you to purchase a landline too in order to get DSL when all you want is a "naked" DSL line? Hmm......"
On topic.
Your lead off topic. You asked, I answered.....again.
WOOF.
--
»www.tricitybroadband.com |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
·AT&T Midwest
| I guess I have to go find a rolled up newspaper now that you've peed on the carpet again. said by bad dog:
The simple point I was trying to make was this: SBC's requirement that DSL customers have phone service is just as lame as Clearwire blocking Vonage. Both are examples of ISPS behaving badly since there's no technological reason for either, just greed. Both are just as "absurd." The POTS line requirement does not prevent you from using the DSL connection for any service your little heart desires, and if you strictly apply the cost analysis should be added to the price of the line, or for many, ~$15 (POTS) + ~$20 (DSL) = ~$35 for 1536/384. For that $35 a month you are free to roam cyberspace as you please.
In the case of Clearwire, they are charging for 'Internet Service' and then arbitrarily cut off services they don't particularly feel like carrying to your computer. I'm sure that Clearwire feels perfectly validated doing this since they spell it out in their TOS, and THAT is what I was calling silly. If people want to use these "endangered" services and still sign up for Clearwire they get what they are paying for, which is not much.
Even you should be able to tell the difference. But, alas, you are blinded by your hate for SBC and Comcast (or anyone who dares question you) and refuse to be objective about anything which upsets your myopic world view, especially when you are confronted with facts. You resort to your usual simple-minded ad hominem tactics of attacking motives instead of the facts presented, while frantically glossing over the parts you don't like or can't defend. I mean really, is »www.tricitybroadband.com your website or not? If so, at least update the info and tone down the rhetoric on it and maybe, just maybe, you'll get the ball rolling. Right now its an incoherent, ranting mess that nobody outside your cult would bother with. By the way, I've never said the fiber network was a bad idea...I've said your approach to getting it built is. How that is "defending SBC" or anyone for that matter is between you and your wild imagination. |
|
batageek
Slave To The Duopoly
Premium
join:2003-01-25
1 edit | Your quote "Why would anyone use an ISP which has such absurd terms?" is precisely the issue I pointed to with regards to SBC (or any other LEC) that requires phone service for DSL use. I don't want your phone service.
Screw TOS....my point is that there is no reason for Clearwire to block Vonage VOIP. Obviously the Bell Canada product works just fine.
This is the equivalent of Comcast taking a stake in Napster and suddenly iTunes no longer works on the Comcast network.
There's no reason except greed. Maybe the service should be called "Clearwire Almost Internet"
As to the TCBB site, it's not mine. But to tone it down? Look at the junk Comcast & SBC threw at my town...»www.tricitybroadband.com/mailers.htm.
You'd be pissed too.
Your Western Springs Wifi project is no threat to SBC or Comcast and I would expect very little resistance. BPL projects are no threat. The TriCities plan was. They weren't really afraid of us, but the precedent it would set. Lafayette, LA is attempting the same right now (»www.lafayetteprofiber.com) and the same ridiculous games are going on there as well.
--
»www.tricitybroadband.com |
|
