Page 3 of 6 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
5
... LastLast
  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Gumboy View Post
    Have you read the rules? The document itself?

    Have you decided why it is normal for someone to go from "The rules should be public for public discussion" to "The rules are private because I'm in charge"
    So your entire opinion is based on the simple fact that he didn't trust the people that were responsible for making decisions about something before and he wanted full disclosure and now he doesn't? Do you need a tin foil hat? I can make you one if you need. This is not some giant conspiracy theory. It's someone opposed to Obama reaching to justify an untenable position. Carry on.

  2. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by Gumboy View Post
    Have you read the rules? The document itself?

    Have you decided why it is normal for someone to go from "The rules should be public for public discussion" to "The rules are private because I'm in charge"
    You're not even reading what I said. Nobody has read the specifics yet because they are still being written. When they are ready to be voted on, they will be submitted, in completion to be voted on. In the meantime we have the summaries, like every bill, so we know what the intent is.

    When the bill is ready, it will be submitted for vote and people will argue on whether the bill should be passed or not. That hasn't happened yet. Its not done yet.
    While you live, shine / Have no grief at all / Life exists only for a short while / And time demands its toll.

  3. #43
    this is the net neutrality debate:

    the republicans want a system of checks and balances. private companies run the internet and the government regulates this activity. this separation of powers is key. if there is a problem, they can air their problems to the government who can make changes.

    the democrats wish to destroy checks and balances and separation of powers. they wish for government to run the internet directly like a public utility. this means if there are problems, there really is no one the public can turn to for help because there no longer is a third party regulatory arm.

    the democrats attempt to promote this plan by lying about what republicans believe, asserting republicans want zero regulation and for companies to do whatever they want. since democrats control the press, its easy to keep voters greatly misinformed about the issue and make people think republicans are evil.

  4. #44
    Titan Gumboy's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Lost in Space
    Posts
    11,649
    Quote Originally Posted by niil945 View Post
    So your entire opinion is based on the simple fact that he didn't trust the people that were responsible for making decisions about something before and he wanted full disclosure and now he doesn't? Do you need a tin foil hat? I can make you one if you need. This is not some giant conspiracy theory. It's someone opposed to Obama reaching to justify an untenable position. Carry on.
    Except..I'm siding with Obama. Just 2007 Obama. The one I voted for

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Rukh View Post
    You're not even reading what I said. Nobody has read the specifics yet because they are still being written. When they are ready to be voted on, they will be submitted, in completion to be voted on. In the meantime we have the summaries, like every bill, so we know what the intent is.

    When the bill is ready, it will be submitted for vote and people will argue on whether the bill should be passed or not. That hasn't happened yet. Its not done yet.
    They are still being written? they are being voted on tomorrow....

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Grummgug View Post
    this is the net neutrality debate:

    the republicans want a system of checks and balances. private companies run the internet and the government regulates this activity. this separation of powers is key. if there is a problem, they can air their problems to the government who can make changes.

    the democrats wish to destroy checks and balances and separation of powers. they wish for government to run the internet directly like a public utility. this means if there are problems, there really is no one the public can turn to for help because there no longer is a third party regulatory arm.

    the democrats attempt to promote this plan by lying about what republicans believe, asserting republicans want zero regulation and for companies to do whatever they want. since democrats control the press, its easy to keep voters greatly misinformed about the issue and make people think republicans are evil.
    This has nothing to do with this thread.
    You're a towel.

  5. #45
    Epic! Bristae's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Location
    Bakersfield, CA
    Posts
    1,517
    Quote Originally Posted by Hubcap View Post
    Thanks for the snark.

    Okay, if he said that in 2007, so what?
    Because people in politics are NOT allowed to change their minds in light of new information.... DUH.. :P
    I know it is stupid, but Fox News likes to tell people that enlightenment is a bad thing.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Grummgug View Post
    it blows my mind that people equate net neutrality with government control. do they seriously think governments wont abuse the hell out of such power? have not paid attention to history at all?
    so you'd rather have billion dollar corporations in control??? I don't! They abuse more than any government.
    Fanboy (Fanboi):
    1. A term used towards someone when a person disagrees with the said someone on a subject, person, place, thing, company, or product line and they are not smart enough to debate their counterpoints or facts, so they resort to childish name calling in hopes of shaming others into silence and thus them winning through dominance.* 2. A term used as a taunt/peer pressure technique to shape popular opinion through shame and humiliation.

  6. #46
    I didn't read anything on this, there is no need, Obama says it's good, SO ITS FUCKING GOOD DO YOU UNDERSTAND ME!?! Now shut up and get back on your knees, Michelle Obama needs a BJ. Just like our God King passed socilaist failed obama care and we didn;t get the meat of the bill until AFTER it was passed...fuck todays liberal extremest generation is so gullible lol.....simple logic, if obama has his hands in it, then it's bad and will bring in more government control. Sometimes i hate America. And all you MMO champ socialist extremest militant liberal arm chair politicians!

  7. #47
    Titan Gumboy's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Lost in Space
    Posts
    11,649
    Quote Originally Posted by Bristae View Post
    Because people in politics are NOT allowed to change their minds in light of new information.... DUH.. :P
    I know it is stupid, but Fox News likes to tell people that enlightenment is a bad thing.

    - - - Updated - - -



    so you'd rather have billion dollar corporations in control??? I don't! They abuse more than any government.
    This was not a case of enlightenment changing his mind; the only thing that changed was who was in charge :P




    This thread has been an almost exact 100% reason of why talking about ANYTHING that has even a slight political bend to it is almost impossible in america now.


    this is not a partisan issue. This effects the entire world and anyone that uses the internet. We deserve to know what secret freaking rules are being voted on that effect us.

    - - - Updated - - -

    And saying "Oh, well we know it will be voted on by party lines anyway!" just points out even FURTHER that they should be public, so we can DEMAND a compromise that will actually get net neutrality passed, in a way that is actually good for the people.
    You're a towel.

  8. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by Gumboy View Post
    Have you read the rules? The document itself?

    Have you decided why it is normal for someone to go from "The rules should be public for public discussion" to "The rules are private because I'm in charge"
    Why do you keep asking me if I've read an unreleased document? I've answered you 5 times so far. Do you expect a different answer? The summary of what is going in to the document is available. The specific legaleese isn't done yet. When it is done, it'll be submitted for our representatives to vote on.
    While you live, shine / Have no grief at all / Life exists only for a short while / And time demands its toll.

  9. #49
    Titan Gumboy's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Lost in Space
    Posts
    11,649
    Quote Originally Posted by Rukh View Post
    Why do you keep asking me if I've read an unreleased document? I've answered you 5 times so far. Do you expect a different answer? The summary of what is going in to the document is available. The specific legaleese isn't done yet. When it is done, it'll be submitted for our representatives to vote on.
    IT isn't done? Its being voted on tomorrow. I sure hope they type fast :P


    And keeping it a secret just means it will probably be shot down on political lines, simply because of a refusal to make it public so the people could have input and demand that it be passed so that we would have net neutrality.
    You're a towel.

  10. #50
    Only the politicians are smart enough to know what's best, that's why nobody else needs to know. /s

  11. #51
    Bloodsail Admiral
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Location
    Budapest, Hungary
    Posts
    1,185
    Quote Originally Posted by Erin View Post
    I see loads of stuff about this "net neutrality" thing, but I don't really understand what it is and it's always relating to american stuff.
    My issue exactly, I have no idea what it even is.
    Much love to Indicate for creating. Eis' work

  12. #52
    Titan Gumboy's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Lost in Space
    Posts
    11,649
    Quote Originally Posted by Daerio View Post
    Only the politicians are smart enough to know what's best, that's why nobody else needs to know. /s
    One of my biggest issues with this specific rule vote is not just that it is private; but the sides have freaking switched just because of who is in power. (And no, I am not excusing republicans for wanting it to be private back in 2007)

    Its like "Oh yeah? Well if *YOU* are going to do something wrong, that we vehemently protested, WE are going to do something wrong!!

    Its like this is a freaking fourth grade playground rules at the moment, not even the wild west.
    You're a towel.

  13. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by Gumboy View Post
    IT isn't done? Its being voted on tomorrow. I sure hope they type fast :P


    And keeping it a secret just means it will probably be shot down on political lines, simply because of a refusal to make it public so the people could have input and demand that it be passed so that we would have net neutrality.
    Lots of stuff gets reviewed and re-reviewd up to the last moment. Wanting to have an earlier time to review it is valid, but it's not some frightening or disturbing conspiracy that it's not available until its being voted on, as much as you desperately want to paint it like that. Let it go man.
    While you live, shine / Have no grief at all / Life exists only for a short while / And time demands its toll.

  14. #54
    Titan Gumboy's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Location
    Lost in Space
    Posts
    11,649
    Quote Originally Posted by Schadow View Post
    My issue exactly, I have no idea what it even is.
    The US has some fucked up ISP/telecommunication things, so it has to be an issue for us, but I assure you, this effects the entire internet, for everyone.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Rukh View Post
    Lots of stuff gets reviewed and re-reviewd up to the last moment. Wanting to have an earlier time to review it is valid, but it's not some frightening or disturbing conspiracy that it's not available until its being voted on, as much as you desperately want to paint it like that. Let it go man.
    Or, or, how about this: They could do what Obama wanted, and postpone it AFTER they finish the bill, so it could be reviewed by the public and congress, letting the people have input on something that directly effects their lives, and not some lobbied up assholes on both sides?


    not making it public is going to force it to be voted on by party lines; no compromise pre-vote means no net neutrality. No net neutrality in any way=bad for the people, but at least people will have political ammunition to throw at the other party!
    You're a towel.

  15. #55
    The Unstoppable Force Belize's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Gen-OT College of Shitposting
    Posts
    21,922
    2spoopy.

    Anyways, I doubt congress is dumb enough to actually pass a bill that would let telecom companies have free reign in doing what they want.

  16. #56
    Quote Originally Posted by Gumboy View Post
    This was not a case of enlightenment changing his mind; the only thing that changed was who was in charge :P

    This thread has been an almost exact 100% reason of why talking about ANYTHING that has even a slight political bend to it is almost impossible in america now.

    this is not a partisan issue. This effects the entire world and anyone that uses the internet. We deserve to know what secret freaking rules are being voted on that effect us.

    - - - Updated - - -

    And saying "Oh, well we know it will be voted on by party lines anyway!" just points out even FURTHER that they should be public, so we can DEMAND a compromise that will actually get net neutrality passed, in a way that is actually good for the people.
    There is nothing contradictory or hypocritical about his position between then and now. You're trying to apply a position he held for a myriad of reasons about a specific issue to an entirely unrelated matter. Whether you voted on Obama in 2007 is meaningless. The public weighing in is about as impactful as Obama's call for full disclosure on a specific issue, it's just a political pressure point with no weight in reality about how we do things.

    And you're right, it is impossible to talk politics. People (you) intentionally take things out of context to make fallacious points. I get your gist about wanting the public to be able to weigh in on the legislation. You don't need to start off with a point that is erroneous in order to say that though.

  17. #57
    Quote Originally Posted by Gumboy View Post
    This was not a case of enlightenment changing his mind; the only thing that changed was who was in charge :P




    This thread has been an almost exact 100% reason of why talking about ANYTHING that has even a slight political bend to it is almost impossible in america now.


    this is not a partisan issue. This effects the entire world and anyone that uses the internet. We deserve to know what secret freaking rules are being voted on that effect us.

    - - - Updated - - -

    And saying "Oh, well we know it will be voted on by party lines anyway!" just points out even FURTHER that they should be public, so we can DEMAND a compromise that will actually get net neutrality passed, in a way that is actually good for the people.
    You don't even realize how you're making it partisan, do you?

    Well, let me enlighten you. This is an FCC and Tom Wheeler issue, not an Obama issue. Just because Obama appointed him doesn't mean his actions as FCC chair are "Obama actions." Obama has certainly used the bully pulpit to influence Wheeler on the issue of Net Neutrality, but Wheeler's decision is his and the FCC's to make. Saying Obama is a hypocrite on this issue implies he's the one making the decision here, which he is not. And considering the sheer number of issues Senator Obama and President Obama have taken opposing views on (including appointing Tom Wheeler in the first place), this really doesn't even register.

    As for the issue itself...well, it's a common tactic. Dirty and shouldn't be allowed to happen, sure, but common. No one seems to care when it's used on other issues, so you'll excuse me if I'm completely ambivalent when it comes to an issue where no one's fighting fair.

  18. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by Belize View Post
    I doubt congress is dumb enough
    oh crap we're fscked. : (
    While you live, shine / Have no grief at all / Life exists only for a short while / And time demands its toll.

  19. #59
    The Unstoppable Force Belize's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Gen-OT College of Shitposting
    Posts
    21,922
    Quote Originally Posted by Rukh View Post
    oh crap we're fscked. : (
    I WANT TO BELIEVE. plz.

  20. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by Schadow View Post
    My issue exactly, I have no idea what it even is.
    It's essentially what we had before Comcast (and it wasn't the first by any means, just the easiest and most public example) started throttling Netflix so people who subscribed to Netflix and Comcast or other IP's couldn't actually stream the content. Then Comcast blackmailed Netflix into playing "access fees" in order to have their service restored. Net Neutrality just means that you can't treat one set of data differently than you treat another, movies, youtube, emails, forums, patch downloads, it doesn't matter what it is they're all viewed the same, given the same priority, and cost the same thing because it's all data and the source doesn't matter. ISP's can't see that it's a big company using service and thus limit their access to make them pay more. Small companies can't have costs increased to run them out of business if they're dependent upon an ISP. Etc. It's just an equalizing force and is what we've essentially had for a long time now. Comcast and other Telecom folks are in the process of changing it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •