Again, not the merits of net neutrality itself, you go back to talking about proponents in the first sentence. You have been so adverse to discussing the actual issue that I'm not even sure if you think net neutrality, even without any regulation whatsoever, is a good idea.
-—————Again, not the merits of net neutrality itself——————
Yes, the very merits of net neutrality itself.
You have been so bought hook line and sinker by the sales pitch of net neutrality, that you can’t see past it. A metaphor used in a prior discussion was that of an ice machine.
The ice machine is sitting right there, and they’re icing the ground with it.
-————you go back to talking about proponents in the first sentence.——————
Not just proponents. Drivers. I am talking about the drivers.
The definition of the word proponent is this:
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/proponent
“One who argues in favor of something : advocate”
As if the FCC is outside of the car. Your use of the word “proponent” is very indicitive. As if free press is outside of the car. They aren’t. They are in the car.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/driver
“b : the operator of a motor vehicle”
This is what I mean when I say you can’t recognize the ice machine sitting right there. You can’t even admit that free press and the FCC are in the car driving.
—————You have been so adverse to discussing the actual issue-————
It doesn’t get any more issue oriented than discussing the people in the driver seat.
-—————that I’m not even sure if you think net neutrality, even without any regulation whatsoever, is a good idea.-————————
That sentence doesn’t compute in reality. You use net neutrality in the definition of it’s sales pitch. Even though that definition; that net neutrality never existed.
If I take that sentence and listen to it as if the sales pitch really had any chance of becoming the real net neutrality, yes, I think net neutrality is a good idea if only........ IF ONLY, we keep the government’s hands off of the internet.(and yes, current government involvement with the internet is purely hands off. Don’t mix this up.)
The government is making it as clear as they can that they want to regulate content winners and content losers.
==========that I'm not even sure if you think net neutrality, even without any regulation whatsoever, is a good idea.==========
Here is how I see that statement:
"that I'm not even sure if you think marxism, even without any regulation whatsoever, is a good idea."
That's why I say the statement doesn't make sense in reality.
You look at the FCC as proponents. And you look at Free Press as proponents. It's time you recognized that they aren't innocent bystanders. They're in the drivers seat.