* 55957 comments with "The unprecedented regulatory power the Obama Administration imposed on the internet is smothering innovation, damaging the American economy and obstructing job creation. ..."
* 13649 comments with: "I was outraged by the Obama/Wheeler FCC's decision to reclassify the Internet as a regulated \"public utility\" under a Depression-era law written for the old Ma Bell telephone monopoly. ..."
There are a bunch of repeated pro net neutrality comments, but they tend to be variances of "I support strong net neutrality backed by Title II oversight of ISPs."
There are 263512 unique comments, and 14859 comments repeated twice, 4318 comments repeated thrice.
The new admin is generally against regulations that restrict business. Net Neutrality is one of these. Whether you think that is legit is up to you. But don't fall into the trap of thinking the other side is disingenuous and evil.
All I have heard in favor of removing net neutrality is "it's a regulation, and regulation is bad."
Of course, this argument falls to pieces very quickly no matter what angle I try to think of it from.
As far as I can tell, there really is no legitimate argument. I like to think that I can consider any perspective on an issue, and understand why someone might disagree with me. In most cases, I can do that, but removing privacy and net neutrality rules are two subjects where I have been completely unable to do so.
I don't like to give up, and jump to the conclusion that my perspective is the only plausible one. I want to make it clear that I haven't given up on listening for the other side of the story, but thus far, I haven't heard a peep of it. I hate to say it, but there likely isn't one.
Because new administration is very pro monopoly, and therefore they are scaling down anti-trust limitations. Net neutrality is just one of them. TL;DR: they pretend to be pro free market, but in essence they are against strong competition.
Also corruption. Monopolists pay them a lot, and play the dumb "don't regulate, the invisible hand of the market will fix all" card which simply doesn't apply in monopolized cases.
Is the 2012 appointment of Ajit Pai, who will gut net neutrality and return the Internet back to the people, the greatest accomplishment of the Obama administration?
It is this kind of thinking that will get us in trouble. Once you stop fighting they win. Make enough noise and they have to listen. They still don't listen make them hear with your votes. Never stop fighting for what you believe in!
For those who do not want to save Net Neutrality and would rather the FCC stay out of regulating ISPs, here is a website to find details to contact your representative:
be_erik|8 years ago
pvnick|8 years ago
neuralFatigue|8 years ago
Bots flooding the FCC comment section with the same text, different addresses. e.g all 'Brittany' posts
fccdata|8 years ago
https://www.reddit.com/r/netneutrality/comments/6ach2d/top_r...
* 55957 comments with "The unprecedented regulatory power the Obama Administration imposed on the internet is smothering innovation, damaging the American economy and obstructing job creation. ..."
* 13649 comments with: "I was outraged by the Obama/Wheeler FCC's decision to reclassify the Internet as a regulated \"public utility\" under a Depression-era law written for the old Ma Bell telephone monopoly. ..."
There are a bunch of repeated pro net neutrality comments, but they tend to be variances of "I support strong net neutrality backed by Title II oversight of ISPs."
There are 263512 unique comments, and 14859 comments repeated twice, 4318 comments repeated thrice.
neuralFatigue|8 years ago
ahoy|8 years ago
unknown|8 years ago
[deleted]
dadvocate|8 years ago
rhino369|8 years ago
akmiller|8 years ago
thomastjeffery|8 years ago
All I have heard in favor of removing net neutrality is "it's a regulation, and regulation is bad."
Of course, this argument falls to pieces very quickly no matter what angle I try to think of it from.
As far as I can tell, there really is no legitimate argument. I like to think that I can consider any perspective on an issue, and understand why someone might disagree with me. In most cases, I can do that, but removing privacy and net neutrality rules are two subjects where I have been completely unable to do so.
I don't like to give up, and jump to the conclusion that my perspective is the only plausible one. I want to make it clear that I haven't given up on listening for the other side of the story, but thus far, I haven't heard a peep of it. I hate to say it, but there likely isn't one.
shmerl|8 years ago
Also corruption. Monopolists pay them a lot, and play the dumb "don't regulate, the invisible hand of the market will fix all" card which simply doesn't apply in monopolized cases.
wtf_is_up|8 years ago
Yizahi|8 years ago
aaaawweeeee|8 years ago
unityByFreedom|8 years ago
We absolutely have a say. Without our vote, these characters are out of a job. No job means no lobbying money.
Raphmedia|8 years ago
jjuel|8 years ago
thrillgore|8 years ago
unknown|8 years ago
[deleted]
c8g|8 years ago
pvnick|8 years ago
http://whoismyrepresentative.com/
thomastjeffery|8 years ago
Do you mind taking a moment to tell the rest of us why?
I really want to know.