When I purchased my Tesla, Superchargers were free, for life. No statement for long distance charging, although that clearly is the limiting factor for driving a Tesla away6 from your home base. What constitutes long distance driving? 100 miles? 60 miles? I do opportunity charging and expect to continue to do so. I beleive that I should be able to use a SC when it's available. If I think I need some juice, I stop and charge. I don't think I should forsake the extremely faster SC charging than other chargers, including ny ability to charge at home.
I am nopt abusing the SC network; I am using the best charger available for my Tesla. I didn't see any limitations when I ordered and picked up my MS. Why are these limitations coming to light now? If Elon is complaining about my $3 worth of electricity, then I'm not a fan of the change (or clarification) of the previously vague or unstated scope of Tesla's take on SC usage. If Tesla wants to charge me or limit me when using a SC, they will lose a fan and supporter.
I'm driving along, and see I'm close to a SC. Do I need to stop and think before plugging in, as to whether my charging willm cause Tesla to send me a notice, when I'm using a charger that was stated to be fast, free and forever? I don't remember there being 'but not for use within x# of miles from your home address'
I think yours is a fairly typical story of how Tesla's Supercharger was perceived, so I don't blame you.
- - - Updated - - -
Hi, AR.
If by "negated" you mean "supplemented," and by "vague at best" you mean "simply stated to avoid bogging down in factual but complexly-parsed conditional answers to those just curious about how the new generation of electricars works," then you can count on my agreement.
I like your refreshing, crisp reply style by the way. Two lines! I'm a fan of this version of AR.
How does your story of Superchargers being for long-distance only support the apartment dweller Superchargers built e.g. in London, which by Tesla's definition are meant for that? How do you explain the Schipol airport taxi fleet? I mean, these are not roadtrips. These are examples outside of Tesla's Supercharger page preamble.
Let's face it: the long-distance argument doesn't cover it all, nor is the topic simple at all. Because when we remove the long-distance only argument, which we must in the face of those examples and because Tesla never enforced or was limited to such, Tesla's communications become even more vague - because some local charging is OK, but there have been no clear lines or rules in the marketing which type is.
Even the quote from Elon was, occasional local charging is "cool".
There are no rules or limitations expressed from Tesla. That's what it boils down to. And that's why people have understood them differently. And that's why we have a debate.
- - - Updated - - -
It's similar to the prisoner's dilemma. Two choices with three potential outcomes. It's really the difference between placing value on short or long term thinking. On social vs sociopathic behavior.
Those who look to the letter of the law without regard to intent tend to be narcissistic and sociopathic. Antisocial behavior of such personality types probably can't be corrected but may be moderated by creating generally accepted social norms with the potential of shaming for those who blatantly deviate.
This conversation is really important. What AnxietyRanger is doing in keeping it going is really important.
It is incumbent upon early adopters to think about, discuss, and crystalize what are acceptable codes of conduct because in so doing, they define and clarify the boundaries of acceptable social behavior for those who follow. Having these social rules can help prevent "tragedy of the commons" type events.
I suspect these norms may be very different in different areas of the globe due to vast differences in infrastructure. For example; people in China or Europe may need to rely more heavily on away from home charging than we do in the US.
I think yours is a nice message.
I would only add one more angle:
It all applies to companies as well. If companies look only to the letter of the law or try to find loopholes in terms, instead of understanding and respecting what they stood for and what they promised, that too needs to be moderated - and potentially, as you put it, shamed in public, if need be. The checks and balances work in all directions and it is important that they do. For example, if one believes a company is trying to wiggle themselves out of existing commitments by subtly changing the terms over time, that might warrant a public response, lest it become the norm in society.