4 ms·
What I don't get is why this is so important. Someone spammed a web form but... this isn't a vote. This is a chance to provide information, which spam by defi
by Natsu 6y ago
What I don't get is why this is so important. Someone spammed a web form but... this isn't a vote. This is a chance to provide information, which spam by definition does not contain.
If they wanted to make legal or technical points, it doesn't even matter who they are, the points are true (or not) no matter who said them.
So I just don't see what the big deal is here, because someone spammed meaningless comments into a comment form and it's not like they really took any of our opinions into account when making the ruling to begin with.
- dsr_ 6y agoThe Chair of the FTC used the number of comments against Net Neutrality as "proof" that people did not want Net Neutrality. He then refused to investigate the obvious forgeries.
- pydry 6y agoThen he released this cringefest: https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LFhT6H6pRWg https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=LFhT6H6pRWg
- lowercased 6y agoHOLY CRAP that's insane. Wow, we can still participate in the pop culture of the day that the pop culture czars want us to keep doing? Sweet! If I can still keep doing all these cool things, why the need for repealing the Obama-era regulations (his words) in the first place?
- toiletfuneral 6y agoalso starring a pizzagate promoter, which seems a whole lot darker now than it was at the time: https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/janelytvynenko/fcc-chairman-video https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/janelytvynenko/fcc-chai...
- crispyambulance 6y agoOuch. It's disturbing to see a politically nominated official, who is in his position presumably because of world-class leadership and communication ability, be SO OUT OF TOUCH that he doesn't recognize that what he is doing appears as satire. Elections matter.
- edgyquant 6y agoAppears? This guy was constantly making jokes and memes and he did so to appeal to the internet trolls that were his base. Right leaning millennials loved this guy; you must not have seen his back and forth with John Oliver over his Reece’s cup. For context https://www.chron.com/national/article/net-neutrality-repeal-Ajit-Pai-FCC-reeses-coffee-12431725.php https://www.chron.com/national/article/net-neutrality-repeal...
- natch 6y agoFCC, but yes. Another demonstration of how election choices have consequences.
- Natsu 6y agoThe thing is, I don't for one minute believe that they would've made a different decision if the comments were different. This is just a legally-mandated hoop they jump through before doing what they want to do. For the record, I support the goal of NN, I just am too cynical to believe that these comments ever mattered.
- colejohnson66 5y agoThey matter because the inevitable lawsuits can/will point to the multitude in support of NN and demand the FCC explain why they decided against keeping it. They’re not just a bureaucratic hoop to jump through; they actually have to consider and weigh them all. A reason of “it’s ‘Obama era’ regulations that we don’t need” isn’t enough. “It’s bad for economic growth” would require them to explain how. Obviously, one that just says “** you Ajit” or whatever doesn’t need to be considered, but ones voicing concerns or similar have to be.
- Natsu 5y agoEven if you say that, that just means it's the contents of the comments that matter--not who sent them. So the wrong thing is faked under that analysis. I agree that Ajit made the wrong decision, I just facepalm when I see people raising this as an argument as to why when there are so many better arguments than whether someone spammed an insecure comment box.