Ajit Patel: Why He's Rejecting Net Neutrality: https://www.theverge.com/2017/1/23/14338522/fcc-chairman-ajit-pai-donald-trump-appointment https://www.theverge.com/2017/4/11/15258230/net-neutrality-privacy-ajit-pai-fcc
Since when has evidence been required to make accusations about a political rival? I mean, they don't agree with NewRoxFan politically thus they are guilty of treason or whatever else anyone wants to accuse them of.
Whoa... interested in what you deem "vile character assassination" on what I wrote (I even bolded the same parts as in the earlier post): I posted his job history and a list of positions he is expected to take. btw, both were cut-and-pasted from the articles I linked.
The implication is that his past employment with Verizon shows he puts their interests over that of citizens'. His views and actions can be judged on their own merits without questioning his loyalties.
some net neutrality questions: - should zero rating services be outlawed? they are a clear violation of the net neutrality principle - should time sensitive packets for things like gaming and live streaming be given the same priority as packets for email and web browsing? how will treating them the same impact broadband performance? - rather than hypotheticals about what could happen, how is the absence of net-neutrality regulations negatively impacting citizens today?
WTF? His past employment is not a reasonable discussion topic? His past employment might not suggest how he thinks and even what bias or preferences he may reflect in this role? So if Trump had placed a oil industry exec as EPA Director his previous emplyment wouldn't be a point of discussion and you wouldn't anticipate he would rule favorably towards the oil industry? And in this case, Mr. Patel's position that we are discussing is clearly favorable to Verizon (and other major ISPs). And let me remind you of what your response to my quoting articles that listed both his job history and his known and anticipated positions: A pretty severe accusation, don't you agree? I can only hope that upon reflection you will tone down your remarks. Unless, of course, you are so politically motivated that the very question or criticism of Patel's opposition to net neutrality means it is a "vile"position to take.
True, b/c we will be cancelling the study of history, right after we're done with science and then math! Economics is also on notice!
Not sure where I stand on this- must do more research. However, what is heartening to see is that the large majority of you in this thread actually realize that ISPs is correct, not ISP's, and are using the correct grammatical form. As you know, ISPs is plural, not possessive and thus does not require an apostrophe. I can't tell you how many times I've seen this lately- where individuals are using the possessive form incorrectly on abbreviations (e.g. SOP's, NPI's). Thank you all. Please resume your debate.
Absolute! When they'res a gramatical situation that I can lend a hand too, Im always willing to get my nose dirty by putting my hands to the grindstone and providing the minimum effort possibility. Your welcome. (IOW, "Who said the rockets does not have the depth ------ to watch the Los Angeles rockets war feelings" - it just never, ever gets old)
