FCC poised to adopt network neutrality rules

Anytime the clueless Washington, DC imbeciles stick their unwanted noses into the people's business, it turns out to be a disaster.

Hey FCC.....Foxtrot.Uniform.Charli e.Kilo. You...

^ssholes!!!!

Stick it up your stanky ^ss!!!!

AMERICAHELP wrote:

<quoted text>
I am I guess you would call "Grandma". I am 60, I know where not to look, but why make it so easy for children to access the crap.
You are probably too young to have children, why should parents have to constantly watch their children on the internet. The predators are out there EVERYWHERE!
What ever happened to the America I knew!

Your case sounds 'more severe' than the one I've been dealing with for some months now, on a separate TPX... Have you filed data (posts with links, quoted phrases, etc) at...

IC3.gov ?

I have an ongoing situation, but in discussing it with 'local law enforcement', they reminded me they spend a lot of time with teenagers, telling them 'not to get involved, or amplify' situations with cyber-stalkers or harassing posters or 'fraudsters'(and of course, for those teens, to 'beware' anyone on-line discussing sex... sigh).

My phone was called, but only once: no one has spammed my emails, although it was sent from 'collaborators' to the Prime Stalker...

I've simply stopped replying to their taunts, lies (mostly) and unabashed hate-speech... while still conversing with other, more civil 'detractors'.

My local law enforcement officer went as far as to call the Prime Stalker and seek to receive agreement to 'end the shenanigans': that produced him stating hundreds of times that I 'filed a false claim' and 'will be sued for it...'(which is pure bullshit, as I have a JD degree... I actually told the LEO that I was 'collecting research for a future work on cyber-bullying, cyber-stalking, etc!')

So good luck: it seems your case (based on the post I read) is infinitely worse.

ZENjd

AMERICAHELP wrote:

<quoted text>
Do you have a clue how much these people make off of all of us??
Keep government out of it! Force corporations to hire more people to MONITOR what is posted.
That means CRAIG'S LIST, YOU TUBE, FACE BOOK and of course topix.
I really enjoyed topix until my step-son and his mother found me on it and are now terrorizing me on it.
Every comment I make they slam, then post all my personal information!
I do not like control, but you obviously have never been a victim of internet terrorism. Thank God!

You have a personal problem and you want everyone else to suffer because you think the g-ment will make things better with more possible illegal legislation and control of our lives. I doubt it would be to serve your personal current plight.

It is too bad that they are so fixed on you to go through all of this. Anther poster said fight fire with fire...it is your choice, but I would certainly think about getting a new number. Pretty sad, really that a so-called mother leads or joins her own child in this absurd behavior.

The more they believe they have you ticked/upset/terrorized, the more enjoyment they get. Eventually, you will be the one laughing. Things work out, and the hollow spend their time unwisely and do not survive.

RE: the America you knew has been going down a slippery slope for quite some time. Some of us have not been paying attention...shame on US, and NO MORE. Put your energy elsewhere, maybe in your own way work towards uniting with fellow Americans and putting it back upright or at least in the right (prosperous) direction.

Give it a few months, or even a few years. And whatever they decide to do, it'll be for the children. I have yet to see a government agency not go beyond the initial scope of it's power to gobble more.

Wartime wrote:

<quoted text>
And it high time Americans blow the top off this god-forsaken liberal assault.
But hey, we'll give 'em the standard government discount on nipple cream.

meet little foxxxxker movie coming 2day Weddin, Dickember-22-2010
:-0000h, enjoy da movie!:)

AMERICAHELP wrote:

<quoted text>
Oh I forgot, it freezes in Ohio. Your brain has already been frozen and you are not informed as to what really goes on.
Just check out my stepson & him mothers posts.
They endanger our lives, lie, release private information.
But because IDIOTS like you will stop any reform, they will be able to continue their attacks!

Put down the meth pipe, you idiot, it's killing what's left of your brain.

Eighthman wrote:

The FCC wants to do to the internet what the TSA is doing at airports. It's "Communism Gone Wild".

Either your avatar is a clue to a sort of MAD Magazine satire present in your posts, or you are the dumbest person on Topix...I'm not yet certain which.

Shady Lady wrote:

Jim Demitt already has plans to Neutralize the neutrality rules in Jauary. Let them play while they can. This is just one more reason not to elect a Democrat until they get the message the people tried to send them in the last election.

Another semi-literate post from the Clueless Wonder. You don't have the slightest idea of what Net Neutrality is, or that it would make the 'net accessible to EVERYONE, do you?

LOL

I find that very amusing, as I do most of your posts...:)

Here's a definition of Net Neutrality:

http://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~raylin/whatisnet...

"Simply put, net neutrality is a network design paradigm that argues for broadband network providers to be completely detached from what information is sent over their networks. In essence, it argues that no bit of information should be prioritized over another. This principle implies that an information network such as the internet is most efficient and useful to the public when it is less focused on a particular audience and instead attentive to multiple users.

To draw a simple example, take two content providers such as the Verizon website and the University of California website. If net neutrality were upheld, both entities would pay their monthly fees to the network provider and if all else equal, any bit of information from the Verizon website will make the same trek as one from say the UC Berkeley website. There would be no roadblocks or shortcuts any of the websites could take to make the end user desire their content more.

However, without a neutral stance in what is carried over their pipes, network providers can choose to discriminate and decide how fast data will be transmitted and at what quality. So in our example, say Verizon (which is also a network provider) chooses to prioritize their data over that of UC Berkeley. Information from Verizon will then be more desirable to the end user since it is so much faster than the UC website. The problem then arises when Verizon is trying to promote something opposed to that of the beliefs of the University of California. Is it fair that Verizon has these advantages over the university? What would happen if network providers bar content providers that they think have a conflict of interest from using higher speed networks? What if the network providers degrade the service of specific content providers?

These are just some of the many questions that plague the net neutrality issue."

Here's another:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_neutrali...

"Network neutrality (also net neutrality, Internet neutrality) is a principle proposed for users' access to networks participating in the Internet. The principle advocates no restrictions by Internet service providers and governments on content, sites, platforms, the kinds of equipment that may be attached, and the modes of communication.[1][2][3]

The principle states that if a given user pays for a certain level of Internet access, and another user pays for the same level of access, then the two users should be able to connect to each other at the subscribed level of access.

Though the term did not enter popular use until several years later, since the early 2000s advocates of net neutrality and associated rules have raised concerns about the ability of broadband providers to use their last mile infrastructure to block Internet applications and content (e.g., websites, services, protocols), even blocking out competitors. In the US particularly, but elsewhere as well, the possibility of regulations designed to mandate the neutrality of the Internet has been subject to fierce debate.

At its simplest, network neutrality is the principle that all Internet traffic should be treated equally."

Hope that helps those who seem extremely confused about the issue...

Oh bama langa ding dong wrote:

<quoted text>
And you expect the government to help you? It'll be a thousand times worse, just think of the red tape...As for your problem...Fight fire with fire, if they are "terrorizing" you, then terrorize them back...Start "slamming" their comments and start posting their personal information on the Internet...I bet they won't like that...

According to Saint Clair County (IL)judge said both had to abide by their own "cease & desist" order.

Two days later the harassment began again. I over night delivered to the judge written proof they were violating his ruling. Judge Babka has so far ignored it. I received confirmation that it was received by the judge on December 15th. To date he has taken no action against them!

Saint Clair county (Illinois) sheriff's department said it was a "civil" manner and they could not help. They said to send the evidence to the presiding judge, which I did. But he will not take any action, deputy said only avenue was to file for a "contempt of court" with the judge. I did, but still no action.

Illinois is there to protect the criminals, not the victims! I wish I lived there or were able to travel there. I would sit in the waiting room to personally see judge Babka and maybe THEN he would act.

Meanwhile they are posting ads and comments again all over the internet!

Where would you go for help??

The Net is accessible to everyone now. How do you think it will be better after the Democrats manhandle the current owners? Will it be free to the pitiful? I doubt the Republicans will stand by, and let the Internet be destroyed.

Oh bama langa ding dong wrote:

<quoted text>
I wouldn't go to the government, you see where that has gotten you, right? Since it is a civil matter, my next stop would be to file a lawsuit, you need to find a hungry lawyer and have these people served with a suit in civil court...Most people will respond to two things, one being the threat of going to jail and the other having to pay money...It seems you have a fair amount of evidence that can be presented...

I appreciaate your comments. Unfortunately he is already wanted but the state of New Mexico is to cheap to take him. The mother does however have money and I have proof that she is also involved. I guess I can file the lawsuit myself, you see in Florida lawyers do not want to handle a case unless they are looking at least the maximum settlement amount of 1 million. Unless you have $25.0000 retainer which they require.

But thanks, I even offered to pay the airfare to take him back to NM, oh you can't do that! I said WHY NOT? We just don't do things that way!

FCC Is A Joke...

http://www.youtube.com/watch...