Please vote against wifi in schools

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Please vote against wifi in schools

kikkie2004-2
Hi all

This article (link) states the wifi concern in schools is
overblown and the levels of wifi 'hardly measurable' with most
equipment.
The commentary after the article isn't very pleasant to read either.
To the right of the article you can vote whether it should be cause for concern - so far in favour of 'not concerned'.

Thanks
Kirsty

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Please vote against wifi in schools

ESther
Would love to vote but the link didn't come through.  Can you send  
again?

gomma
On Jun 27, 2012, at 12:41 AM, kikkie2004 wrote:

> Hi all
>
> This article (link) states the wifi concern in schools is
> overblown and the levels of wifi 'hardly measurable' with most
> equipment.
> The commentary after the article isn't very pleasant to read either.
> To the right of the article you can vote whether it should be cause  
> for concern - so far in favour of 'not concerned'.
>
> Thanks
> Kirsty
>
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eSens/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/eSens/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [hidden email]
    [hidden email]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [hidden email]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Please vote against wifi in schools

C.a.b. Johnson
Ditto

--- On Thu, 6/28/12, Esther LeSieur <[hidden email]> wrote:

From: Esther LeSieur <[hidden email]>
Subject: Re: [eSens] Please vote against wifi in schools
To: [hidden email]
Date: Thursday, June 28, 2012, 8:58 AM

Would love to vote but the link didn't come through.  Can you send 
again?

gomma
On Jun 27, 2012, at 12:41 AM, kikkie2004 wrote:

> Hi all
>
> This article (link) states the wifi concern in schools is
> overblown and the levels of wifi 'hardly measurable' with most
> equipment.
> The commentary after the article isn't very pleasant to read either.
> To the right of the article you can vote whether it should be cause 
> for concern - so far in favour of 'not concerned'.
>
> Thanks
> Kirsty
>
>



[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Yahoo! Groups Links





[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Please vote against wifi in schools

kikkie2004-2
In reply to this post by ESther
Hi

Sorry, here is a retry on the link.

Thanks
k

http://bc.ctvnews.ca/wi-fi-danger-in-schools-overblown-ctv-investigation-1.854418#ixzz1ywQbjdJY

--- In [hidden email], Esther LeSieur <gomma@...> wrote:

>
> Would love to vote but the link didn't come through.  Can you send  
> again?
>
> gomma
> On Jun 27, 2012, at 12:41 AM, kikkie2004 wrote:
>
> > Hi all
> >
> > This article (link) states the wifi concern in schools is
> > overblown and the levels of wifi 'hardly measurable' with most
> > equipment.
> > The commentary after the article isn't very pleasant to read either.
> > To the right of the article you can vote whether it should be cause  
> > for concern - so far in favour of 'not concerned'.
> >
> > Thanks
> > Kirsty
> >
> >
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Please vote against wifi in schools

KathyB

You can  write something under comments, as well.

Kathy




http://bc.ctvnews.ca/wi-fi-danger-in-schools-overblown-ctv-investigation-1.854418#ixzz1ywQbjdJY







> On Jun 27, 2012, at 12:41 AM, kikkie2004 wrote:

>

> > Hi all

> >

> >

> > To the right of the article you can vote whether it should be cause  

> > for concern - so far in favour of 'not concerned'.

> >

> > Thanks

> > Kirsty

> >

> >

>

>

>

> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

>





   
     

   
   






 










[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]