What are WISPA's Principles?

What exactly are WISPA's principles?

Back when RF Elements was a small startup, they regularly engaged in comparative advertising, but unsurprisingly, their comparisons were often misleading. For example, Cambium’s sectors have better frequency ranges, front-to-back ratios, VSWR, and port isolation—key antenna parameters for sectors. Yet, RFE gave themselves green checkmarks across the board anyway.

RF Elements marketed their BackShield???? as a feature to improve front-to-back ratios, yet Cambium’s sector antennas were twice as good (3 dB better) in that regard, even for Cambium’s 120° sector, which has a much wider beam than RFE’s 100° sector.

RFE also misled customers by comparing their "typical" VSWR to Cambium’s max VSWR, claiming an advantage that doesn’t exist. In reality, RFE’s max VSWR is 1.8, while Cambium’s is 1.6 and 1.7. RFE's VSWR comparison is misleading.

Here are the datasheets:

Cambium Sector Antennas: https://www.cambiumnetworks.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/09/Spec_ePMP_1000_Sector_Antenna_March2015.pdf

RF Elements Sector: https://rfelements.com/assets/Uploads/Datasheet-SEC-CC-5-20.pdf

They even compared their 20 dBi sector antenna to Cambium's 14 and 15 dBi sectors and still came out with significantly worse performance in frequency range, front-to-back ratio, VSWR, and isolation—every important antenna parameter. Yet a WISP would never know that by simply looking at the comparison table.

Instead of pushing back against RFE’s misleading claims, Cambium partnered with them and has now adopted similar tactics. This is part of a larger trend in the WISP industry—a race to the bottom fueled by deceptive marketing.

As a new WISP antenna startup, I’ve found that WISPs tend to distrust product datasheets, relying instead on recommendations from fellow WISPs. This creates a double bind for startup vendors: we can’t attract customers without testimonials, but we can’t get testimonials without customers.

On top of customers mistrusting datasheets and the double bind, WISPA misuses their Code of Conduct to silence criticism of their preferred vendors' unprofessional conduct. This is un-American and hostile to innovation and the entrepreneurial spirit.

Comparative advertising is legal in Slovakia as long as it’s not misleading, but RFE’s comparisons clearly didn’t meet that basic standard. Their illegal actions under their own laws defamed Cambium’s products, yet there was no fake outrage over it. It seems those calling for censorship and feigning offense only do so when their own crony interests are threatened. So, will WISPA’s Code of Conduct ever be used to address these longstanding and widespread practices, or just to continue silencing valid criticism

?Illegal conduct and misleading marketing are clear violations of WISPA's Code of Conduct. Discussing these violations, however, is not. Yet, we’ve never seen WISPA use its Code of Conduct to address or discourage deceptive marketing. Instead, WISPA seems more interested in shielding unethical and illegal behavior from fair criticism. If WISPA can't enforce its own rules in the face of clear violations and only uses the Code of Conduct to protect bad actors, it’s time to scrap it entirely.

If WISPA stands for anything, it should stand for freedom of speech. An organization that doesn’t defend its members' right to speak openly and honestly has no principles worth preserving.