of course it does. why else do you care who made a political argument? only if you care who made the argument. ad hominem So what crime do you all want investigated? Again, apparently if you want to stall a piece of legislation, just spam the internet with fake comments and tell everyone you are doing it.
No it's not, can't believe you are repeating this nonsense. There were likely millions of faked opinions in such a crucial vote and thousands of citizens have reported that their identities were stolen for that action. This in itself is an illegal act, but you also can see that the fraud was possibly facilitated by a party that is involved in the voting process or has serious stakes to lose, so it would be illegal manipulation of this entire political process. Stop your nonsense just for today, I don't want to believe that any coherently thinking person wouldn't see that this HAS to be investigated properly.
And I am shocked you don't see the danger in a public policy passage, which the overwhelming majority of the country doesn't support, due to the mistrust of big ISPs, possibly being manipulated by big ISPs manufacturing troll farms. It would require a shockingly low amount of intelligence or willful ignorance.
If only the Republican had realized this strategy during the Obamacare debate. Coulda stalled that **** out for years. Russia is counting on you being this stupid to give a **** about 'fake comments'. They spam pro and anti net neutrality comments and then watch you flip out 'democracy in shambles!!!!'.
You're completely dodging the legal implications and also suddenly talking about Obama and Russia out of nowhere, absurd bias and shows me that you are not interested in this topic. I would have the same sentiments if the vote ended the other way around but was swayed by fake opinions in the opposite direction. At least saves us time and shows everyone that you aren't honest here. PS: Extremely ironic to see you accusing others of ad hominem but you yourself don't care about the legal implications at all and talk about Obama and Russia instead.
Its interesting to see that the trump supporters like tallanvor have surrendered any pretense that they have integrity. In the past there were at least be an effort to have an honest debate based on principles. So what if the FCC claimed that they took public comment, in this case, 22 million comments on net neutrality before ruling. So what if over 90% of those comments turn out to be illegitimate, either submitted multiple times, or from dead people. So what if there was no integrity in the process... trump, Pai, and the large ISPs got the result they wanted. Because after all, that is all that trump supporters care about. Child rapist runs for senate? So what, he is a republican. trump obstructs justice, colludes with the Russians to win the presidency? So what, he is a republican. As FCC Prepares Net-Neutrality Vote, Study Finds Millions of Fake Comments
what legal implications? I can't imagine anyone thinking its a good use of government time or money to investigate political comments on the web. Finally, Russia is the one spamming comments pro and against net neutrality. That dont really care about the issue they just want you to make the mistake you are making right now. why is the number important? and I can promise you mass numbers of emails were ignored by the FCC.
Seriously. There's no point in even bothering to argue with people like Tallanvor or Commodore, they're just corporate shills who fully buy into taking away any and all power from the government and handing it over to corporate interests as if they'll somehow act in the best interest of consumers because the free market or something. You can't find any country in the world where a system like that has worked successfully but its like some sort of religion to them where there's somehow some libertarian utopia out that no one has discovered yet. On top of that, I'm pretty sure that they both love Ted Cruz, which is a dead giveaway that you're dealing with someone who has been completely bamboozled.
Ajit Pai not concerned about number of pro-net neutrality comments https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy...-about-number-of-pro-net-neutrality-comments/
Many conservative positions regarding the role of government can find no successful example anywhere in the world. Reality never dissuades them.
And I will stand by that statement. Its ludicrous to argue that within a week major changes will happen. That would be like me saying “the tax cut bill passed yesterday but my quarterly business taxes haven’t gone down.” That said I stand by that repealing net neutrality rules exposes sites like Clutchfans which do not have either the reach or deep pockets of many other larger sites to potential harm fro ISPs not giving Clutchfans and its users the same access as other sites that may be willing to pay more and or charge their customers more for preferential treatment.
I like the general thrust of the article, though it is a bit amusing that he was looking at the official notices of proposed rulemaking without, as he implies, essentially "listening to the political BS". He couches this as a virtue, but missed the forest for the trees, ignoring the myriad public statements Pai has made not only after he was named chairmain, but while he was still minority under Tom Wheeler. Had the author not been so zealously dedicated to tuning out public discourse, he would've known by now that Pai is at best negligent (possibly criminally so), at worst a big telecom puppet so full of bullshit, I'm surprised he hasn't exploded yet. After not bothering to really investigate the supposed DDoS attack on the comments system and further refusing to have a new comments period that isn't rife with fraud, it should shock no one that the real proposed rule changes were hidden away in a hard-to-find-place to discourage honest discourse about the facts. Or, in In Douglas Adams' words: “But the plans were on display…” “On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.” “That’s the display department.” “With a flashlight.” “Ah, well, the lights had probably gone.” “So had the stairs.” “But look, you found the notice, didn’t you?” “Yes,” said Arthur, “yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.” And, the Netflix example the author uses regarding the price increases is either ignorant or disingenuous, since it seems to imply price increases could only be tied to interconnection agreements... when in fact, they are almost certainly driven primarily by content agreements. Verizon as well. People like to try to relate NN harms to existing services, but the bigger problem may actually be not letting the next Netflix get off the ground. And Pai's response to that is essentially "but there will be public outcry if that happens, so we don't need the rule." Yeeaaahhhh... but if we all agree it's bad, why NOT have a rule against it, exactly...? I've been seeing it covered in a cursory kind of way. It's quite sad that it's not a bigger story, and also that most coverage fails to remind people that this is the same assclown that already took away online privacy regulations earlier this year. Pai is a cartoon villain, and a lot of the media doesn't care to point this out...
"Internet comments"? You realize these were the formal comments on proceedings on the official FCC website, and that the FCC is required by law to review public comments for a certain period of time before it votes... right? Or are you under the mistaken impression these were comments from some random media website? There was clear, proven fraud here in the established rulemaking process. Pai didn't care. That is highly likely to be one of the items that will be brought up in lawsuits against the FCC.
this is the dumbest controversy ever, we don't govern by internet comments, no one cares about them, they had zero influence on either public opinion or what the FCC decided to do
So the statement below is completely false? https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/guides/how-comment Gathering and analyzing comments from the public is an important part of the Federal Communications Commission's rulemaking process. The FCC considers the public's input when developing rules and policies. By submitting comments, the public can take part in developing policies that affect telecommunications and broadcast issues.
my point is, it's the content of the comments, not the volume or motive or source fwiw, I find the comment process insulting, these unelected, unaccountable bureaucrats ruling over us, issuing decrees, how generous of them to let us comment on their power the FCC should be abolished, if these rules are so important, they should be voted on by those we can hold accountable
