There is nothing wrong with a public infrastructure; water, sewer, roads are good examples of necessity based infrastructure (the botched Mercedes lane program on 394 was bad use of necessity public infrastructure). Pools, water parks, beaches, and golf courses are good examples of non-necessity base infrastructure or services that are successful both as public and private. Wifi falls into the ladder. Public infrastructure can become saturated hence the reason that private up-charge facilities exist. When the system becomes saturated there will be a market for the paid providers just like always. This is not communistic, it is competition. A municipality can not prevent a provider from setting up a paid provider system. S. Earl Jarosh N0HZ (ex. KA0VYB) No Hertz, No Gain www.moneycenters.com "It may not be the answer you desire but reality seldom equals desire." -- Anonymous ----- Original Message ----- From: "Matthew S. Hallacy" <poptix at poptix.net> To: "Tim Erickson" <tim at politalk.com>; <tcwug-list at tcwug.org> Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2005 4:09 AM Subject: Re: [tcwug-list] THURS: International E-Democracy Event > Some might also say that municipal wifi is communist. How about we > keep this crap off the list? > > > On Thu, Jun 23, 2005 at 02:36:12AM -0500, Tim Erickson wrote: > > At 2:00 AM -0500 6/23/05, <mgenelin at fastcomputerserviceco.com> wrote: > > >With all due respect, is this on-topic for this list? What does this have > > >to > > >do with WiFi? > > > > Good point. I should have elaborated. > >