You are free to believe that the analogy is not sound, or that the comparison is weak, but it is silly to say that they did not set the comparison themselves. Y

You are free to believe that the analogy is not sound, or that the comparison is weak, but it is silly to say that they did not set the comparison themselves. You should definitely take it up with them (which was part of the point of my post). Its not really clear to me how to prove this to you other than just quoting the post back to you: "As we’ve written before, we believe in the power of impartial platforms. We’re building a platform ourselves, and we work hard to ensure that Stripe treats businesses of all size neutrally. Mr. Wheeler’s plan would push the internet in the opposite direction. It would give larger players a distinct advantage, hurt new companies, and dampen the rapid innovation that has thus far defined the internet economy." Unless you believe mentioning themselves and how they stay neutral was one big typo, or some sort of strange and irrelevant digression, it seems pretty clear that they are comparing their neutral intentions with the importance of keeping net neutrality. Their argument basically goes: 1. We believe in impartial platforms as a general tenant. 2. For example, our platform, as a subset of "platforms", should remain neutral which we strive to do. 3. The internet, another platform, should also be neutral, if not these bad things will happen: blah blah blah.