[ale] OT: Craig Newmark of Craig's List on Net Neutrality

[Chris Farris]

This thread is over

Chris

Geoffrey wrote:
> Jim Popovitch wrote:
>> eoffrey wrote:
>>> Jim Popovitch wrote:
>>>> Geoffrey wrote:
>>>>> Jim Popovitch wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Is that FUD?  Where do you see that this is the issue that 
>>>>>> broadband providers are concerned with?
>>>>> Do you really think they'll stop at simply prompting you to go to
>>>>>  another site?  Come on, look at television.  There's not a 
>>>>> channel out there that doesn't have pop up commercials during the
>>>>>  shows now.  It was bad enough when the commercials interupted
>>>>> the shows, now they're running during them.
>>>> So, why aren't you advocating a law to restrict TV broadcasters 
>>>> from displaying pop-up ads on their content?  I understand that you
>>>>  have pet-peeves (lots of them it seems ;-)), but really now,
>>>> should everyone of your pet-peeves stimulate a new law (which, btw,
>>>>  passing new laws isn't cheap either)?
>>> You know what Jim, I'm not going to get into another pissing contest 
>>> with you because you seem to enjoy that.
>> Oh Geoffrey stop that again, it makes you look petty. You respond to 
>> someone's comments, and when they respond back you point a finger and 
>> call it a pissing contest.  Nice.
> 
> Petty?  Who's the one dropping personal insults with their posts?  Now 
> that's petty.  You can't have a discussion without attacking the poster. 
>    I'll be glad to have a constructive discussion about the subject, but 
> don't go insulting people and throwing words in their mouths.  I never 
> once suggested a law regarding TV.  If you read it that way, that's your 
> problem.
> 
>>> But, I did not once mentioned creating any laws.  The original post 
>>> was about a law that was pushed through that would quote: 'allow 
>>> internet service providers to play favorites among different web
>>  > sites.'  Seems to me, I'm simply arguing against that law.
>>
>> You are arguing against a new law in the present case of "Net 
>> Neutrality".  But your comments (that I was replying to above) about TV 
>> Pop-up ads and TV broadcasters clearly implied that if you didn't do 
>> _something_ to stop them the world could run a muck.
> 
> How you turn a discussion against a particular law into one promoting 
> one is beyond me.  I find it interesting that you trimmed my comment as 
> to what I stated my solution to the TV problem is and that was:
> 
> 'As for television, I simply don't watch it anymore, so the popup ad 
> folks don't get my eyes..'
> 

-- 
Chris Farris				chris at vitalpowers dot com
The Exercise of Vital Powers		404 806 1403
http://www.vitalpowers.com