TWO weeks ago, the worried folk of Warndon Villages took centre stage in their fight to stop a phone mast being planted outside their homes.

It was hardly a feat of crystal ball-gazing to predict that it wouldn't be long before similar voices were heard in another part of the Faithful City. So stand up St John's.

For those readers who've been leading a sheltered life, the arguments against masts are well-rehearsed.

The first is based on a so-far unsubstantiated fear that masts aren't proven to be safe. At best, the jury's still out on that one.

The second is aesthetic. Masts simply look awful, wherever you put them.

It means there's a familiar ring about the cries coming from St John's, where residents have upped the anti and organised themselves into a lobbying group to tell Orange and the city council that erecting a mast at the Hallow Road layby will not be as straightforward as they'd like.

The difference in this case, however, is that the protesters calculated the cost to residents of the council granting Orange's wish.

To be honest, the sums make illuminating reading. And, if they can sustain their evidence in the face of city planners and the Telecommunications Act, their attention to detail will shine like a beacon for others.

There's one thought, however, which no protest lobby has addressed yet. We voiced it two weeks ago, and it bears being repeated.

As a mobile phone-carrying public - a revolution whose speed and scale has taken us by surprise - the British crave two things at once.

They want a strong signal wherever they go so that their not inexpensive hunger for walking and talking can be fed - but they don't want a column of metal in their backyards.

As soon as someone finds a way of reconciling those two demands, we'll all be happy. Until then, we have to decide whether we want one or the other.