Talk:Fon Wireless

message: take one shot and don't know user have to have to register and ahve some rigth to upload simple photo  !! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Slumer (talk • contribs) 
Its just to prevent new users from spam uploading. I think you've got to wait till your "autoconfirmed". 10 edits and 5 days IIRC. —Reedy 11:25, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Or i can upload it to WP for you if you upload it somewhere else. —Reedy 15:05, 13 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: photo of fonera +

message: It would be good to have against each fon-friendly ISP a link to a public statement from the ISP saying that they are OK with customers having Linus or Bill hotspots. If the list is built based on an interpretation of the terms and conditions then this may be misleading and comes close to original research.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 80.189.65.98 (talk • contribs).
: Then the list would be unnecessarily limited. I have received mail from customer support by specific dates where they say that FON is ok to use with Comhem.se (UPC is now part of Comhem) and Adamo.se in Sweden. So I added them. This is ok as a source in social science at university level. The idea is that it's verifiable because you can mail them yourself and that way check the validity. I suppose that I have done more than most people adding ISPs on this page. Cmlewan 16:38, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: A personal email does not meet Wikipedia's standards for Wikipedia:Verifiability I think the whole list should be reviewed with the link for each ISP pointing to a clear statement or clear terms and conditions indicating that they support their users using FON. ISPs that don't have such a statement on their site (or I guess a statement reported somewhere else that is verifiable) should be removed from the list. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 193.36.240.5 (talk) 14:44, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: What is the criteria for listing an ISP?

message: This page is a mess, terms like "kiddy porn" and the list of suggestions really should go. I'd do it but I don't have the time right now. EAi 01:25, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Cleanup needed

message: There is considerable noise making going on, on the FON discussion boards about what the liability of hosts is, if someone connects through their service and participates in illegal activities.
The following quote appears to be from Richard Morrell.  - The phpBB board has his email displayed, and I doubt this could have been fudged by someone else (without admin access to the board, and it hardly brings FON any credibility), however before this goes in the article the authenticity would need to be checked:
12 days ago I sat opposite two senior officers from New Scotland Yard in the UK with my hat on as Head of Internet Security for four of Europes largest Internet service providers.
I asked them this exact question to clarify over abuse/aup/child pornography wifi sharing issues.
In the UK as the law sees it if you put your Fonero router into your LAN and then it is abused for downloading of illegal content and its on your router/dsl/cable modem mac address and thats where the records stop then I'm afraid they aren't going to look any further than prosecuting you.
Thats the bottom line. The two guys I talked to head up electronic interception and work with the telco's and they're credible.
Dick
http://boards.fon.com/viewtopic.php?p=5752#5752—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 59.167.16.123 (talk • contribs).
:The police may only look as far as your router, and the CPS or equivalent may decide to prosecute on that basis, but under the law we are only responsible for our own actions.  Even if a prosecution was brought, if the FON logs show that someone else was using your router that's surely the basis for a defence.  Similarly, if your car goes through a speed trap they send the fine notice to your house, but it's still open for you to say you weren't driving it at the time (as long as you tell them who was).  --HughCharlesParker (talk - contribs) 10:27, 8 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This talk page is for the discussion of changes that need to be made to the article. If you'd like to discuss Fon in general try their forums.--Crossmr 23:16, 20 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Liability of users

message: Surely the above liability should be mentioned on the article rather than the discussion page?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 82.45.207.118 (talk • contribs).
:I'm not exactly prepared to start putting material from a forum into the article. Probably true or not, unless we get the info from a reliable source its not beneficial.--Crossmr 16:13, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Liability of users #2

message: How can it be a "company of British law" in Madrid?
And is it based in Madrid or in Alcobendas?—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 84.20.17.84 (talk • contribs).
:Due to the freedom of movement, which is granted in Art. 43, 48 of the EC Treaty, all persons (including entities) may settle anywhere within the European Union. Since requirements for founding a limited company in the UK are the lowest throughout the EU, a lot of companies are registered there. E.g. whereas you need € 25'000 of authorized capital to found a company with limited liabilty in Germany, in the UK you can start with just £ 1. Also the procedure of founding and registration is a question of days in the UK - in other countries it takes week up to months. </br>For more information on this see: </br>--Cvdr 12:11, 2 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Company of British law in Madrid 

message: OK, the article does not discuss that FON used to distribute WRT54GS routers for $5 each, nor what happned to them, and yet I have one sitting on my desk, with a big orange fon sticker slapped on it.
Also, I dont know who listed AT&T as forbidding FON. I talked to them, and they said it is fine so long as I do not exceed my bandwidth limitations (and I have a 6mb DSL connection, so I dont think that would be a problem). Iamdigitalman 13:58, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  What happened to the linksys routers? 

message: Will this (below) be added to the article? It got removed when I did. Why?Srw985 17:52, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  BT Change of policy 

message: I'm not sure if I should make the edit becasue I'm tired and would probably makes mistakes. The Fonero gets Fonero program has been altered, a Fonero gets three invites so that they can invite three people to purchase a La Fonera for $20 + tax + s/h.
Personally I think this is not good... Being a fonero in North America is not looked kindly upon by most ISPs and there aren't that many FON access points here anyway. Ewdin 05:52, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Fonero Gets Fonero program altered 

message: I think it is important to talk about FON alternatives.
The fact that linus think they are sharing for free, and that FON resells the bandwidth in their back is clearly a bad thing.
There exists alternative services which offer free sharing for everybody, and offer much better conditions for selling the bandwidth.
http://worldspot.net is a good example. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sophana (talk • contribs) 09:33, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: This isn't an editorial. Its an encyclopedic article about FON. Please see WP:NOT wikipedia is not a soapbox.--Crossmr 23:46, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: However, a link to list of similar companies/communities/services would be very useful. In fact, I was only looking at the article on FON because I was trying to find out the name of a similar network I encountered recently, whose name I have temporarily forgotten.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 193.131.176.54 (talk) 14:47, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

text: Calling someone a Nazi is not big or clever. As for deleting it, its cause it didnt meet notability criteria. —Reedy 10:02, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  FON alternatives 

message: Can people please re-list the criticisms with appropriate cital. I can vouch for their accuracy but can't find adequate docs. Sean keevey 19:10, 18 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Unless reliable sources can be provided, both showing the deficiency AND showing them as criticisms they can't be relisted. Often there are flaws in a product, but no one can ever provide reliable sources like a news article, or review of a product (non-blog) criticizing that aspect of the product. Wikipedia is not a soapbox.--Crossmr 01:18, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Criticisms 

message: i get the feeling some parts are very commercial.. i removed some words.. but i still have the feeling some of the text tries to sell FON.. it needs a more objective viewpoint, and for that restructuring.. -- Wisefire (talk) 01:38, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Extension of the fon website. 

message: I've made changes there. Feel free to add comments about it. Logictheo (talk) 20:25, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Non Member access to FON Spots 

message: I rewrote the section on the company and business model. I think that statements like "its a company and not a non-for-profit enterprise" are not very helpful. I think it's better to accurately describe the company's business model - this will automatically show that it's not a humanitarian effort.
If the company tries to *portait* itself as a grass-roots initiative it should also be mentioned, without passing judgement, while at the same time stating what FON actually *does* do. 
The new section is still needs to cite some independent sources, though....
Averell (talk) 13:12, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Company/Business model 

message: I cited the same source twice, for different paragraphs. Unfortunately I didn't find how to do this "correctly", so if somebody knows, please fix it - and let me know ;-) Averell (talk) 14:39, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: - If you give the reference a name, you can use it somewhere else by just using the same start tag with a "/" to close it. Hope that helps. —Reedy 18:03, 25 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Duplicate Citation 

message: I'll take one of the Fontenna later. —Reedy 10:11, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Added. Also some infoboxes for the hardware... Maybe worth moving them onto their own pages... —Reedy 15:45, 7 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Images 

message: Recently I have tagged File:Fonera2n-17.jpg for deletion, and because uploader didn't respond in proper time and the image was possible copyright violation it got removed from Wikimedia Commons, it is still possible to undelete that image if someone verify source and license and get permission if needed. the image is likely from same source as this one :File:Fonera2.png, so if anyone solve this image's problem then we can also undelete other one.   ■ MMXXtalk  05:22, 2 October 2009 (UTC)
thread_title:  To whom it may concern! 

message: Reference #19 leads to a deprecated page.  The correct link is:
http://wiki.fon.com/wiki/Fonera_2.0n
However, the references aren't laid out in a way in which I know how to edit them properly, so someone else should update the page.  Thanks.PVarjak (talk) 05:53, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
thread_title:  References should be updated 

message: This article is in need of a dire rewrite due to the abysmal grammar used and the styling of the writing like an advertisement. Therefore, in the near future, I will rewrite this article. 86.149.109.142 (talk) 16:58, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
replies: text: It's still a very clunky read. I suspect many of the contributors aren't native English speakers, and are associated with FON in some way. --Ef80 (talk) 17:52, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Maintenance Needed 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Fon (company). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130215040619/http://corp.fon.com:80/en/about/investors to http://corp.fon.com/en/about/investors/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121117101244/http://corp.fon.com/en/this-is-fon/safe-and-secure/ to http://corp.fon.com/en/this-is-fon/safe-and-secure/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:39, 2 January 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: My experience from Germany:
 The cooperated ISP integrated the FON-Network in there customer Router.
 The ISP-Router prefers every-time the traffic of there customer (the broadband owner). Example: If a Broadboad-Owner starts a big download, all Hotspot-guests are disconnected. The Internet-connection can be unstable for Hotspot-User/Guests.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Oposagewo725 (talk • contribs) 19:00, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Speed on Partner-ISP