Net Neutrality

[Fairlight]

You're being awfully vague.  -What- are you reporting?  You have yet to
point me towards any specific reporting requirements, or even just say more
than "report" or "reporting" with zero specifics.

You're right; everything is in the details.  Unfortunately, you're giving
anecdotes backed up by -no- details, provable facts, sources, citations, or
proof.  Until you do so, you haven't actually presented a valid argument.

mark->

On Sun, Jan 29, 2017 at 03:03:33PM -0600, Paul McNary via Filepro-list thus spoke:
> Comcast has already changed it's term of service so that nothing
> really changes for them except
> for some additional reporting that will have minimal impact on their
> resources. However for
> a small WISP like we are, the resources to report for us is probably
> 2 employees full time.
> That's more employees than we have now just for Net Neutrality
> reporting and ComCast can
> still play the same game they do now if they properly word it and
> disclose in their terms of service.
> Terms of service can be changed daily and posted to a web site. The
> the lawyers already on staff
> deal with it. A single Net Neutrality case and we successfully
> defend, still costs between $30-50000,
> in legal fees and can not be collected from the losing party.
> 
> The crap in in the details not the bullet points.
> 
> Paul McNary
> 
> On 1/29/2017 8:45 AM, Boaz Bezborodko via Filepro-list wrote:
> >
> >>Date: Fri, 27 Jan 2017 12:27:48 -0500
> >>From: Fairlight <fairlite at fairlite.com>
> >>To: filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> >>Subject: Re: Net Neutrality
> >>Message-ID: <20170127172748.GI10126 at iglou.com>
> >>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> >>
> >>On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 12:08:57PM -0500, Boaz Bezborodko via
> >>Filepro-list thus spoke:
> >>>The downside is the increased costs and reduced options that come
> >>>with a regulated government market.  For the big guys this is a
> >>>feature, not a bug.  Kill off the small guys so that the big guys
> >>>get to slice things up and capture the regulatory system.
> >>Oh. My. God.
> >>
> >>Because Comcast can absolutely be trusted not to gouge people after it's
> >>finished gobbling up the little guys, as it's been steadily doing for
> >>years.  I'm sure the consumers will fare well when Comcast holds all or
> >>most of the cards, and there's practically zero government regulation
> >>barring them from giving people the shaft.
> >>
> >>*facepalm*
> >>
> >>You might want to invest in a GPS system, because you just unknowning
> >>crossed the border into the Imaginary Realm.
> >>
> >>mark->
> >
> >(I'm repeating because my response because my phone sent it in HTML.)
> >
> >That's exactly my point...Comcast can exist as it does because of
> >more government regulation.
> >You say that a Comcast is what you don't want, and then you tell
> >me that you want to set up more government regulations.
> >
> >
> >
> >---
> >This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> >https://www.avast.com/antivirus
> >
> >_______________________________________________
> >Filepro-list mailing list
> >Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> >Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Subscription Changes
> >http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
> >
> >
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Filepro-list mailing list
> Filepro-list at lists.celestial.com
> Subscribe/Unsubscribe/Subscription Changes
> http://mailman.celestial.com/mailman/listinfo/filepro-list
> 

-- 
Audio panton, cogito singularis.