Message boards :
Politics :
Net Neutrality Part Deux
Message board moderation
Previous · 1 · 2 · 3 · 4 · 5 · 6 · Next
Author | Message |
---|---|
OzzFan Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 |
Why would I like R.L.? No one said you would like him. It was said you were trying to take over for him. I do understand those who believe in a Secular Religion (Ideology) must call The Infidel names and compare this Blasphemer to a chosen 'Devil'. I do understand that you think you don't have an ideology, but anyone whom has an opinion on the way the world should be, or even not be, and presses, expresses, votes, or argues in favor of that opinion, has an ideology. Back to my original question. ...and this is why I know you're getting your information from bad resources. You don't even know what was proposed, therefore you have no idea which ones are going to be enforce and which ones are not. When I asked you to cite specifics, you, like a child, try to turn it back around on me ("Its YOUR thread"). And like all threads you get into, you ruin them with your off topic rants about ideology (because you still don't think you have one), and about religion or religious-like beliefs, and all the other rhetoric you crap into any thread you can so as to bring the discussion down to your level. If you cannot contribute intellectually, I will stop responding to your posts and cease giving you the attention you so desperately seek. |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30648 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
Simple question: Exactly what do you ... dislike about the proposal you are championing?It does not permit ISP's to charge extra to internet trolls, a/k/a people with too much time on their hands who like to ask inane questions to stir the pot. Kind of like Rusty Lintball does on his talk show. |
Sarge Send message Joined: 25 Aug 99 Posts: 12273 Credit: 8,569,109 RAC: 79 |
Start reading the Entire Proposal. I wrote to one of my congressmen about Net Neutrality back in 1999 or so. Yes, I did get a response. So yeah, it's not just another "Obama-ism". Capitalize on this good fortune, one word can bring you round ... changes. |
Sarge Send message Joined: 25 Aug 99 Posts: 12273 Credit: 8,569,109 RAC: 79 |
Please point to specific statements in the proposal. It really sounds like you've read a GOP pre-interpreted version of the proposal. There's no way lower speeds, higher consumer costs, and small independents are going out of business with this proposal. Wow, Ozz, he most certainly does NOT have your number, does he? Has he called you a lib yet? Capitalize on this good fortune, one word can bring you round ... changes. |
OzzFan Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 |
Question: Ok, I tried getting you to admit this earlier, but you were just not getting the hint. They haven't released the entire proposal. The FCC is not suggesting that all regulations under Title II be enforced. So asking people if they are "FOR the Entire Act" is very misleading on your part. No one in favor of Title II Regulation / Net Neutrality is "FOR the Entire Act". What you should be asking is, from the proposal, is there anything you disagree with or would add? For me, I would add the local loop unbundling section as well. But otherwise, I agree with the entire summary that has been proposed so far. Again, the FCC has tried to establish Net Neutrality without Title II previously. There's no way this can be described as a gov't power grab. The ISP Cartels have only themselves to blame for this. Verizon should have left well enough alone. |
Sarge Send message Joined: 25 Aug 99 Posts: 12273 Credit: 8,569,109 RAC: 79 |
Question: Clyde, here's an honest answer for you: I have not read it. (Do we have a link to it in this thread or could someone provide it? Yes, I know I can search engine it, but, hey, I'm multi-tasking as it is.) On principle, Clyde, I believe ... yes, believe for the time being, that it is not a government power grab but rather the result of not doing this would be instead that the big ISPs will be the ones making the grab ... the grab for power and money. So, while I must educate myself on the exact details of the Act, let me ask YOU: do you *not* believe *companies* are sometimes the ones grabbing for power?? Capitalize on this good fortune, one word can bring you round ... changes. |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30648 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
(Do we have a link to it in this thread or could someone provide it? We do not have a link and can not provide it because it has not been released and will not be until adopted. |
OzzFan Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 |
Ok, I tried getting you to admit this earlier, but you were just not getting the hint. Your reading comprehension fails you. An "Act" is not being proposed. I said I agreed with the entire summary that has been released. I am FOR what is trying to be accomplished, that which was attempted without Title II before. |
OzzFan Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 |
Clyde, here's an honest answer for you: I have not read it. (Do we have a link to it in this thread or could someone provide it? Yes, I know I can search engine it, but, hey, I'm multi-tasking as it is.) What does it matter if both are? What does hating both sides accomplish? Will that end ISPs charging both content providers and customers for the same access twice? |
Sarge Send message Joined: 25 Aug 99 Posts: 12273 Credit: 8,569,109 RAC: 79 |
Question: Why do you not, and when will you, accept that I am independent and, despite any leanings I have, I do not subscribe to the idea that our goverment is or has been perfect? Why is it, for so many (and that includes some posting here), that if one does not agree with a person on one point, it is belleved the disagreer must therefore hold an opinion diametrically opposed from the other on all issues? Why is it, besides work and life (such as it is) that some people disappear from here for months? To answer the last question: because there's only so many ways we can explain ourselves and get tired of running over the same old ground. Capitalize on this good fortune, one word can bring you round ... changes. |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30648 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
Why do you not, and when will you, accept that I am independent and, despite any leanings I have, I do not subscribe to the idea that our goverment is or has been perfect? Why is it, for so many (and that includes some posting here), that if one does not agree with a person on one point, it is belleved the disagreer must therefore hold an opinion diametrically opposed from the other on all issues? Why is it, besides work and life (such as it is) that some people disappear from here for months? To answer the last question: because there's only so many ways we can explain ourselves and get tired of running over the same old ground. I believe in the instant case it is not because they actually believe it, but that by saying it they can evoke bad feelings, and loud shouting posts which somehow they assume validates themselves in some sick twisted manner. Perhaps someone with a medical practice related to the study of personalities can offer a better description. Perhaps, feeling totally isolated and in need of any kind of human interaction, even the most vile kind. An internet addiction? |
OzzFan Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 |
Therefore... Ohferchrissakes. I just told you it isn't an act yet you continue to refer to it as one. Then you completely misrepresent my position by telling me I like it because of the title. Are you doing this on purpose? Are you even trying to have a conversation? Or are you just being contrarian? I am for the idea of Net Neutrality. If light touch Title II regulation will get it done, then I am for it. |
OzzFan Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 |
GARY... You do realize he was talking about you, right? |
Gary Charpentier Send message Joined: 25 Dec 00 Posts: 30648 Credit: 53,134,872 RAC: 32 |
GARY... No he doesn't. |
OzzFan Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 |
FCC Chair Refuses to Testify before Congress ahead of Net Neutrality Vote Wheeler rightly turned down testifying. He's not on trial. And the two people asking were both Republicans, and so far it seems to be a party thing for Republicans to be anti-Title II, which means all they were going to do is grill him and try to get him to trip up. There's no need for Wheeler to put himself through that. There's also no reason to delay tomorrow's vote. There's been plenty of time for public comment, and the public has responding with a resounding "Yes! Do something about it!". The two Republican Commissioners want to delay the vote to give Congress more time to write up a bill preventing the FCC from reclassifying broadband as a communication service. |
OzzFan Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 |
Net neutrality order could get last-minute change on peering disputes "Jon Brodkin @ ArsTechnica" wrote: A Democrat on the Federal Communications Commission reportedly objects to a portion of the FCC's net neutrality order, potentially paving the way for a last-minute change to preserve the Democratic majority expected to vote in favor of the plan. Guess it's a good thing they didn't release the full document with the potential for last minute changes. |
OzzFan Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 |
Republicans seems to want to ensure that ISPs can continue to double-dip: http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/02/despite-fcc-vote-republicans-in-congress-not-conceding-on-net-neutrality/ "Jon Brodkin @ ArsTechnica" wrote: Republicans are going forward with another hearing this morning with the Communications and Technology subcommittee, titled "The Uncertain Future of the Internet." Gotta love the promoted user comment too: "chronomitch" wrote: I wish President Obama would just publicly say he was against net neutrality. Then the Republicans wouldn't offer any opposition to the FCC's plans. ;) |
MOMMY: He is MAKING ME Read His Posts Thoughts and Prayers. GOoD Thoughts and GOoD Prayers. HATERWORLD Vs THOUGHTs and PRAYERs World. It Is a BATTLE ROYALE. Nobody LOVEs Me. Everybody HATEs Me. Why Don't I Go Eat Worms. Tasty Treats are Wormy Meat. Yes Send message Joined: 16 Jun 02 Posts: 6895 Credit: 6,588,977 RAC: 0 |
As Long As My Bill Continues to go UP UP UP and Service Continues to go Down Down Down, I'll Be A Happy, Smiling Consumer. Got Throttled? Got Pinched Pipe? Got Lame Streamed? Got Higher Bill? Got Shat Service? Got 'it'? Yep. May we All have a METAMORPHOSIS. REASON. GOoD JUDGEMENT and LOVE and ORDER!!!!! |
OzzFan Send message Joined: 9 Apr 02 Posts: 15691 Credit: 84,761,841 RAC: 28 |
As Long As My Bill Continues to go UP UP UP and Service Continues to go Down Down Down, I'll Be A Happy, Smiling Consumer. ROFL! Now that's humor done right. |
Sarge Send message Joined: 25 Aug 99 Posts: 12273 Credit: 8,569,109 RAC: 79 |
As Long As My Bill Continues to go UP UP UP and Service Continues to go Down Down Down, I'll Be A Happy, Smiling Consumer. Is humor defined by whether a good number of people find it funny? Because, yeah, I actually found this funny as well. But, the other post, by someone else, talking about humor? Where is it? Because a whole bunch of people from different walks of life just ain't seeing it, bro'! Maybe the supposed humor was in what the "last" question was. I didn't answer his question. I answered my own "last" question, as he so often does with questions he asks. I have simply stated I need to go look up more info and that, in the meantime, I am not for ISPs charging more for the same or more for less service. What's so difficult to understand about that response, ha ha, hee hee, ho ho? And to take it for, that's the closest I have to an answer right now? When I'm certain on a response I provide, you'll know it. Meantime, enjoy the warm fuzzy feelings. Capitalize on this good fortune, one word can bring you round ... changes. |
©2024 University of California
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.