I voted A. I think the poll would have been better with just two options. Now you have A+B+C competing against D. If the results are 20% each for A,B,C and 40% for D, then it will appear like most people say it is fine which is incorrect because 60% voted inappropriate.
This is not just about blocking or not blocking the supercharger for others. It is also about costs. Currently on average each Model S supercharges 27 times per year. That is a lot. It is more than 5 times Tesla's allocated funds.
I can appreciate your point and for consistency's sake I would have just left "abusive" as the only choice, but several people objected to the term so I decided to sneak a bonus poll in on that question. At the moment, the results suggest that I may as well have left it alone.
I'm puzzled by your assertion that charging 27 times annually is more than 5 times what Tesla has budgeted for charging. If Tesla planned the average user to charge 5 times per year, that is extremely poor planning. I'll probably take 3 road trips this year, each of which requires 2 Supercharger stops in each direction which is 12 charges per year. I would imagine I am on the low end of what anyone would reasonably have predicted. I've also read that Tesla allocates $500 per car as a liability to offset future electric consumption of Supercharger use. At an average of 5 charges per year that implies that Tesla predicts the car to run a very long time indeed.
There is however something that begs the question: Why did Tesla place Superchargers at a mall in a town? This might suggest that this particular charger is more of an Urbancharger.
In fact, three of the four currently operational superchargers in Virginia are located at shopping centers or malls. The one I was imagining when I wrote this is the Salisbury, MD supercharger, which Wikipedia tells me is the only shopping mall in a 60 mile radius.
Thanks. So here's where problems can arise: a SC location that can act both as long-distance enabler but at the same time as a convenient charger for locals. A charger in central London or Hong-Kong is obviusly meant for local charging, while one along a highway with few people living within miles is obviously for roadtripping. If someone kept driving to and from the obvious road trip charger to do all their charging that would be abusive. In this hypothetical example it's not as clear cut.
Many superchargers in my neck of the woods would potentially fit this "potential dual use" scenario. Of the ones I've been to 6 of the 8 fit that description: Glen Allen, Woodbridge, Norfolk, Bethesda, Hagerstown and Salisbury. Newark, DE is in the median of a busy interstate and South Hill is next to the interstate at a small restaurant, both of which seem pretty much to imply an exclusive interstate purpose (although I've met a local charging at Newark). You could also really argue that Bethesda is "intended" for local charging than interstate driving anyhow -- it only has two stalls, it isn't very convenient to the interstate and it is located near the entrance of a shopping mall.
