Signatures 113 total
-
1
Name: Phillip Mulligan on Jul 5, 2012Comments:Flag
-
2
Name: Susan Morse on Jul 6, 2012Comments: Please don't overlook the efforts of ECFiber. It has the capability and the mission that we want to support!Flag
-
3
Name: Jonathan Durham on Jul 6, 2012Comments: As a technology worker, I bring good money into Vermont. By allowing the original grant to go through, the message is clear that government is listening and knows what is good for business. Otherwise it is just another reason not to do business in VT - Hey, its 2012 and they are just getting old-time DSL!Flag
-
4
Name: Trev Huxley on Jul 6, 2012Comments: I just don't understand why the state of Vermont, which is supposed to be a "forward" looking state, would do something that is so obviously detrimental to the future of the stae and its citizens by not supporting a true broadband solution who were on the verge of having ECFiber, and its real broadband service, while forcing Fairpoint to provide at least some service to those who have none. To do anythng else is just absurdFlag
-
5
Name: Gwendolyn Forbes on Jul 6, 2012Comments:Flag
-
6
Name: Anna Sykas on Jul 6, 2012Comments:Flag
-
7
Name: Marty Gratz on Jul 6, 2012Comments:Flag
-
8
Name: Caleb B. Rick on Jul 6, 2012Comments:Flag
-
9
Name: Andrew Pomerantz on Jul 6, 2012Comments:Flag
-
10
Name: David Webb on Jul 6, 2012Comments: ECFiber has created an affordable way to bring the best technology to the home and this truly Vermont solution deserves to be supported!Flag
-
11
Name: Marie Ricketts on Jul 6, 2012Comments:Flag
-
12
Name: Chris Byrne on Jul 6, 2012Comments:Flag
-
13
Name: Andrew Reicher on Jul 6, 2012Comments:Flag
-
14
Name: Noah Brick on Jul 6, 2012Comments: Chelsea, VTFlag
-
15
Name: Stephen Loughman on Jul 6, 2012Comments:Flag
-
16
Name: John Hawkins on Jul 6, 2012Comments:Flag
-
17
Name: Tessa Huxley on Jul 6, 2012Comments: We should be investing in the better technology and Fairpoint doesn't offer it. Many of us have been trying for years to solve thew internet problem in rural Vermont. The current "gift" to Fairpoint is not the right way to go.Flag
-
18
Name: Christine Lilyquist on Jul 6, 2012Comments: Our request is reasonable and cost effective; why not allow it?Flag
-
19
Name: Richard Brick on Jul 7, 2012Comments: We thought the govenor was reasonably progressive. Allowing Fairpoint to go into towns which can be better served by EC Fiber- a democratic, grass roots organization - is a TERRIBLE decision. Perhaps evidence that a bribe was involved will emerge. You MUST reverse this decision and allow Fairpoint to serve towns which only have dial up service.Flag
-
20
Name: Bill Barrette on Jul 7, 2012Comments: I strongly support the ECFiber initiative to bring service to the Chelsea and other poorly served areas. We are currently served by Fairpoint DSl which is inadequate for professional use.Flag
-
21
Name: Jeff Tolbert on Jul 7, 2012Comments:Flag
-
22
Name: Carol Rousseau on Jul 7, 2012Comments:Flag
-
23
Name: Scott Paulson on Jul 7, 2012Comments:Flag
-
24
Name: David Gordon on Jul 7, 2012Comments: Vermont needs more forward thinking and far less politics as usualFlag
-
25
Name: Heidi Nikolaidis on Jul 7, 2012Comments: We want REAL high speed Internet from ECFiber, not some dinosaur DSL from Fairpoint!Flag
-
26
Name: Martin J Blumberg on Jul 8, 2012Comments: It seems such a waste for Fairpoint to invest $6.6 million in ECFiber towns when there are so many unserved areas which no other provider has otherwise offerred to serve. Those areas are in Fairpoint territory and outside the areas served by ECFiber. Vermont is rewarding Fairpoint for its bad behavior and penalizing the residents of the ECFiber towns, who have supported and invested in ECFiber. Approximately 200 investors have invested over $2.0 million to begin delivering fiber to the home service to the ECFiber network.Flag
-
27
Name: Anonymous on Jul 8, 2012Comments:Flag
-
28
Name: Barbara Smith on Jul 8, 2012Comments:Flag
-
29
Name: Peter Revers on Jul 8, 2012Comments:Flag
-
30
Name: Colleen Olson on Jul 8, 2012Comments:Flag
-
31
Name: William Burden on Jul 8, 2012Comments:Flag
-
32
Name: Anita Onofro on Jul 8, 2012Comments:Flag
-
33
Name: Peter Duveneck on Jul 8, 2012Comments:Flag
-
34
Name: Mary Newman on Jul 8, 2012Comments:Flag
-
35
Name: Anonymous on Jul 8, 2012Comments:Flag
-
36
Name: Patrick Gillespie on Jul 8, 2012Comments:Flag
-
37
Name: Stephen Willbanks on Jul 8, 2012Comments:Flag
-
38
Name: Russell Ward on Jul 8, 2012Comments:Flag
-
39
Name: Kate Siepmann on Jul 8, 2012Comments:Flag
-
40
Name: Edward Doughtie on Jul 8, 2012Comments: Fiber internet should be like rural electric--necessary for the future.Flag
-
41
Name: Sandy Preston on Jul 8, 2012Comments:Flag
-
42
Name: Gregory McHugo on Jul 8, 2012Comments: I strongly support the expansion of ECFiberNet in our area, and I do not understand why support from the state has not been forthcoming.Flag
-
43
Name: Charles Lewis on Jul 8, 2012Comments:Flag
-
44
Name: Barrie North on Jul 8, 2012Comments:Flag
-
45
Name: Susan Colm on Jul 8, 2012Comments: Support ECFiber, please! We are in an area currently only served by WaveComm (radio Internet), and were very much looking forward to the speed and reliability of ECFiber. Do not allow Fairpoint to continue with their terrible business practices and false promises of speed, reliability, and Internet access for all. Only ECFiber has committed to serving my home.Flag
-
46
Name: Chris Lee on Jul 8, 2012Comments:Flag
-
47
Name: Allison Willbanks on Jul 8, 2012Comments:Flag
-
48
Name: Martha Manheim on Jul 8, 2012Comments: What we want ;is EC Fiber's kind of service.Flag
-
49
Name: Stephanie Willbanks on Jul 8, 2012Comments:Flag
-
50
Name: Wendy Wolfe on Jul 8, 2012Comments:Flag