There is a larger context in play here, and that is the topic itself... when combined with your oft-mentioned distaste for analogies and subsequent employment thereof it muddies your message. On one hand you want to separate the penny analogy from the wifi usage, and in the next breath you say they're connected. It isn't simply a matter of anyone "not reading" your entire post or ignoring a narrow context... it's about noticing that you often want to have an argument both ways at the same time, Liam1, and when pinned on a point try to squirm out by saying you're not saying what you're saying... then proceed to say it again.

And checking another person's email in ANY context is by no means "low magnitude". As iBall has been saying, see if a position like that makes it past the FBI or similar law enforcement.

But just to be clear: I said the penny analogy falls flat because, regardless of which way you intended to use it, proximity of a penny vis-a-vis one's domicile is just not parallel with proximity of wifi. One hard reason is the fact that, as already stated, it is impractical to expect users to contain their wifi signals (the way a penny can be contained). There are other reasons (some mentioned in this thread), and I'm sure if you actually thought about it, you'd see them. You're a smart guy, just a little misguided it seems.