4 ms·

Isn't it because this is required by the Administrative Procedures Act?

dragonwriter 9y ago
Soliciting and addressing public feedback is; ignoring and/or misrepresenting it is not (and may, in fact, help support a finding that the act was arbitrary and capricious in the light of the information available to the agency at the time of the decision, though that's—even with that fact established—a fairly difficult case to make.)
Delmania 9y ago
Yes, the intent is to let the public weigh in, help the committee make an informed decision as opposed to a capricious and arbitrary one. The decision is clearly arbitrary, as Pai has stated from the beginning he's going to do this, has blatantly ignored everyone, and is now on record as having insulted us. In terms of capricious, that's harder to prove. Between the EFF and the various attorneys general, this will be tied up in federal court.
- harryh 9y ago
  Arbitrary means random. I don't think that Ajit Pai flipped a coin to make this decision.
  - nerfhammer 9y ago
    adjective based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system. "his mealtimes were entirely arbitrary" synonyms: capricious, whimsical, random, chance, unpredictable; (of power or a ruling body) unrestrained and autocratic in the use of authority. "arbitrary rule by King and bishops has been made impossible" synonyms: autocratic, dictatorial, autarchic, undemocratic, despotic, tyrannical, authoritarian, high-handed; mathematics. (of a constant or other quantity) of unspecified value.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - catnaroek 9y ago
    > Arbitrary means random. This is false both in mathematics and in everyday language.
    - harryh 9y ago
      It also means due to personal whim. I don't think it was this either. Pai has reasons for his choice. Many, of course, disagree with these reasons or think they are bad reasons but they are reasons nonetheless. It wasn't an arbitrary decision.
      - Delmania 9y ago
        It's "arbitrary" because Pai, on multiple occasions, indicated he will not take the comments into effect. Even after the reports of the faked comments, the calls to delay the vote by some senators, the faked DDoS attack, he still went through with it. There's also allegation he violated the FCC's process. He was determined to ram this through no matter what. That's arbitrary.
        harryh 9y ago
        No, that just means it's not a democracy. One can listen to a bunch of comments, disagree with them, and choose to do the opposite of what they say without being arbitrary. His determination actually demonstrates the lack of arbitrariness. Arbitrary choices are held lightly and easily changed. This was the opposite.
        Delmania 9y ago
        That's capricious, not arbitrary. If Pai wanted this to go by the book, he would have pushed the vote out until the investigations into the fraudulent comments was completed, at the least. Someone who was determined to see this go through, but not in an arbitrary fashion, would have waited until the various issues with the process were resolved, and then held the vote. Pai was determined to hold this vote no matter what, that's arbitrary.
- marcoperaza 9y ago
  The intent is to let different parties bring their concerns to the attention of the FCC. It is not a vote. Every public comment could advocate for one thing, and the FCC is perfectly in its right to do the other. The only federal elections are for the President, Senators, and Representatives. This is not a direct democracy.
  - Delmania 9y ago
    Administrative Review Act.

Soliciting and addressing public feedback is; ignoring and/or misrepresenting it is not (and may, in fact, help support a finding that the act was arbitrary and capricious in the light of the information available to the agency at the time of the decision, though that's—even with that fact established—a fairly difficult case to make.)

Delmania 9y ago

Yes, the intent is to let the public weigh in, help the committee make an informed decision as opposed to a capricious and arbitrary one. The decision is clearly arbitrary, as Pai has stated from the beginning he's going to do this, has blatantly ignored everyone, and is now on record as having insulted us. In terms of capricious, that's harder to prove. Between the EFF and the various attorneys general, this will be tied up in federal court.

harryh 9y ago
Arbitrary means random. I don't think that Ajit Pai flipped a coin to make this decision.
- nerfhammer 9y ago
  adjective based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system. "his mealtimes were entirely arbitrary" synonyms: capricious, whimsical, random, chance, unpredictable; (of power or a ruling body) unrestrained and autocratic in the use of authority. "arbitrary rule by King and bishops has been made impossible" synonyms: autocratic, dictatorial, autarchic, undemocratic, despotic, tyrannical, authoritarian, high-handed; mathematics. (of a constant or other quantity) of unspecified value.
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 9y ago
  [deleted]
- catnaroek 9y ago
  > Arbitrary means random. This is false both in mathematics and in everyday language.
  - harryh 9y ago
    It also means due to personal whim. I don't think it was this either. Pai has reasons for his choice. Many, of course, disagree with these reasons or think they are bad reasons but they are reasons nonetheless. It wasn't an arbitrary decision.
    - Delmania 9y ago
      It's "arbitrary" because Pai, on multiple occasions, indicated he will not take the comments into effect. Even after the reports of the faked comments, the calls to delay the vote by some senators, the faked DDoS attack, he still went through with it. There's also allegation he violated the FCC's process. He was determined to ram this through no matter what. That's arbitrary.
      - harryh 9y ago
        No, that just means it's not a democracy. One can listen to a bunch of comments, disagree with them, and choose to do the opposite of what they say without being arbitrary. His determination actually demonstrates the lack of arbitrariness. Arbitrary choices are held lightly and easily changed. This was the opposite.
        Delmania 9y ago
        That's capricious, not arbitrary. If Pai wanted this to go by the book, he would have pushed the vote out until the investigations into the fraudulent comments was completed, at the least. Someone who was determined to see this go through, but not in an arbitrary fashion, would have waited until the various issues with the process were resolved, and then held the vote. Pai was determined to hold this vote no matter what, that's arbitrary.
marcoperaza 9y ago
The intent is to let different parties bring their concerns to the attention of the FCC. It is not a vote. Every public comment could advocate for one thing, and the FCC is perfectly in its right to do the other. The only federal elections are for the President, Senators, and Representatives. This is not a direct democracy.
- Delmania 9y ago
  Administrative Review Act.