[PapaBear3625]

I went and looked at the PDF of the actual regulation, and what it appears to be about is prohibiting ISPs from granting a preference in transmission speed to one site over another (for example, a major site paying a fee for preferential transmission speed, or an ISP giving a preference to content from its owners or affiliates).

The discussion here seems to imply that the "Net Neutrality" rules are similar to the FCC "Fairness Doctrine" and would regulate content based on political factors.

Can anybody point to where in the actual regulations anything involving government-mandated discrimination in favor or against any site is talked about?

[Halfmanhalfamazing]

-------------The discussion here seems to imply that the "Net Neutrality" rules are similar to the FCC "Fairness Doctrine" and would regulate content based on political factors.---------------

I've stated outright that Net Neutrality is not the Fairness Doctrine. It's several shades worse. Here's an article which contains fact after fact after fact regarding the agenda of these people:

Forget the Fairness' Doctrine - Net Neutrality is the Future of Censorship

-------------Can anybody point to where in the actual regulations anything involving government-mandated discrimination in favor or against any site is talked about?--------------

As of yet, no. But everybody here knows the history of marxism. I presume you know the history of marxism?

These people are out there pushing iphone neutrality, search neutrality and other such orwellian terms. One of the FCC's chairpeople said they want to control all of the internet's on/off ramps.

They are not done yet. The current regulations do not achieve any of these stated goals.

You can do what you like. But I'm not going to wait for them to silence me, then scramble to do something about it. I prefer to stay ahead of the curve. They've stated enough about their agenda, any and every one of us can stay ahead of this agenda.