Just be clear about what your position is. As in the parent example - ask for ISPs to be reclassified as common carriers. If all you do is say that you're in favor of a neutral Internet, or network neutrality, they'll be free to interpret that any way they like.
If that's a real question: I created this petition because I thought one was needed. I have since seen the other and signed it, but frankly, and I realize I'm biased here, I think mine is better. The other petition lacks specificity - all it's asking for is "true neutrality," which the FCC and the ISPs can (and have) defined to mean whatever they want. There's also some weird language about an invading military... I don't know what that guy was thinking there.
There's no reason you can't sign both though, and you should. Here's another one that another poster in this thread mentioned:
The FCC does not serve at the pleasure of the executive branch. It's an independent agency. I know that I pushed a Whitehouse.gov petition, and I do think that's important, but the congress is the only group that can control the FCC directly, through legislation, and there are midterm elections coming up. This is not hopeless.
This is exactly what Comcast wants to hear. "Can't you just back off and let us abuse our monopoly in peace? Where's all this laissez-faire business that we were promised?"
YOU'RE NOT HELPING. Maybe the GP is right, maybe we need to a simpler explanation for some people, sum it up in a couple sentences, but what you're suggesting is the death of the open internet.
What, you've forgotten about SOPA already? Things do happen when you spread the word widely enough.
That study about the US being an oligarchy basically comes down to the Citizen's United decision paving the way for deep and widespread corruption. And that's a huge problem, no question, bigger than net neutrality for sure. But SOPA happened just last year, well after Citizen's United was passed. The Oligarchs don't control everything, just most of it.
You are certainly right to be outraged, maybe even despondent, but your fatalism isn't going to help anything. If you're upset about the oligarchy study you have two options: find a way to leave the country - Canada is nice, and apparently they have the richest middle class in the world now. Or you can volunteer for a campaign finance amendment which would overturn the Citizen's United decision.
Don't underestimate that second option. At the very least it would be a good life experience. Maybe you'd learn something, maybe you'd accomplish something, but at the very least you'd be contributing and doing something a little different with your time.
What we need to fix this lack of regulation is - PROPER REGULATION!
There, I fixed it. It's easy to see where ISP regulation went wrong in this country, the first point was in 2002 when providers were deregulated and, with nothing forcing them to sell wholesale, all the competition went away and the country was divided up into local monopolies. The second point was in 2005 when the FCC went the bullshit "third option" route, instead of just classifying ISPs as what they are: common carriers.
In other words, it's lack of regulation that has caused this problem and it's deregulation that keeps us from finding a market solution to the problem. You can't vote with your wallet when there's no where else to turn.
I should have included this in the summary: when you write to the FCC or your congressmen be specific - we need to reclassify Internet providers as common carriers. If you just say you're in favor of net neutrality they'll weasel around it again. They've already tried to redefine net neutrality as whatever it is that they're doing at the moment.
I also did a petition with some different wording: here. I don't get why he's bringing up the military either, but the petition objective is still good. There's no reason why you can't sign both.
Look like I'm a little late to the party, but I also started a petition here. I like mine better, I'm not sure I understand where he's going with the military bit in this one, but there's no reason why you can't sign both.
Slashdot Mirror
Just to throw out a few other things that you can / should do:
A petition to sign.
An email address that the FCC has set up for public comments on this issue.
Contact information for your congressional representatives.
Just be clear about what your position is. As in the parent example - ask for ISPs to be reclassified as common carriers. If all you do is say that you're in favor of a neutral Internet, or network neutrality, they'll be free to interpret that any way they like.
If that's a real question: I created this petition because I thought one was needed. I have since seen the other and signed it, but frankly, and I realize I'm biased here, I think mine is better. The other petition lacks specificity - all it's asking for is "true neutrality," which the FCC and the ISPs can (and have) defined to mean whatever they want. There's also some weird language about an invading military... I don't know what that guy was thinking there.
There's no reason you can't sign both though, and you should. Here's another one that another poster in this thread mentioned:
https://petitions.whitehouse.g...
I considered calling them "congress critters," as something neutral, but figured that congressmen was less belligerent, being the standard term.
The FCC does not serve at the pleasure of the executive branch. It's an independent agency. I know that I pushed a Whitehouse.gov petition, and I do think that's important, but the congress is the only group that can control the FCC directly, through legislation, and there are midterm elections coming up. This is not hopeless.
If you need something short and punchy you could try this picture: https://i.imgur.com/wrAJgjA.jp...
It's not really an explanation, but it does get the point across.
This is exactly what Comcast wants to hear. "Can't you just back off and let us abuse our monopoly in peace? Where's all this laissez-faire business that we were promised?"
YOU'RE NOT HELPING. Maybe the GP is right, maybe we need to a simpler explanation for some people, sum it up in a couple sentences, but what you're suggesting is the death of the open internet.
Oh hey, that's a good one. Signed.
What, you've forgotten about SOPA already? Things do happen when you spread the word widely enough.
That study about the US being an oligarchy basically comes down to the Citizen's United decision paving the way for deep and widespread corruption. And that's a huge problem, no question, bigger than net neutrality for sure. But SOPA happened just last year, well after Citizen's United was passed. The Oligarchs don't control everything, just most of it.
You are certainly right to be outraged, maybe even despondent, but your fatalism isn't going to help anything. If you're upset about the oligarchy study you have two options: find a way to leave the country - Canada is nice, and apparently they have the richest middle class in the world now. Or you can volunteer for a campaign finance amendment which would overturn the Citizen's United decision.
Don't underestimate that second option. At the very least it would be a good life experience. Maybe you'd learn something, maybe you'd accomplish something, but at the very least you'd be contributing and doing something a little different with your time.
What we need to fix this lack of regulation is - PROPER REGULATION!
There, I fixed it. It's easy to see where ISP regulation went wrong in this country, the first point was in 2002 when providers were deregulated and, with nothing forcing them to sell wholesale, all the competition went away and the country was divided up into local monopolies. The second point was in 2005 when the FCC went the bullshit "third option" route, instead of just classifying ISPs as what they are: common carriers.
In other words, it's lack of regulation that has caused this problem and it's deregulation that keeps us from finding a market solution to the problem. You can't vote with your wallet when there's no where else to turn.
I should have included this in the summary: when you write to the FCC or your congressmen be specific - we need to reclassify Internet providers as common carriers. If you just say you're in favor of net neutrality they'll weasel around it again. They've already tried to redefine net neutrality as whatever it is that they're doing at the moment.
I also did a petition with some different wording: here. I don't get why he's bringing up the military either, but the petition objective is still good. There's no reason why you can't sign both.
Look like I'm a little late to the party, but I also started a petition here. I like mine better, I'm not sure I understand where he's going with the military bit in this one, but there's no reason why you can't sign both.