• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do You Believe There Should Be a "Pay to Play" System on the Internet

Do You Believe There Should Be a "Pay to Play" System on the Internet

  • Yes

    Votes: 2 4.3%
  • No

    Votes: 44 93.6%
  • Other

    Votes: 1 2.1%

  • Total voters
    47

TheDemSocialist

Gradualist
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 13, 2011
Messages
34,951
Reaction score
16,311
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Socialist
Do you believe the FCC should allow a "pay to play" system on the internet?
A new FCC Chair threatens to let cable and phone companies create an Internet fast lane for companies that can afford it and a slow lane for everyone else who cannot afford it.
 
There isn't a word for "no" strong enough to express my answer to this.
 
Net neutrality needs to be amended to the constitution.
 
Do you believe the FCC should allow a "pay to play" system on the internet?
A new FCC Chair threatens to let cable and phone companies create an Internet fast lane for companies that can afford it and a slow lane for everyone else who cannot afford it.

Well, first, the FCC is over broadcasts, as in radio or the tv you get with rabbit ears... They have no claim over the internet.

Net neutrality is what makes the internet as valuable as it is,if companies control the information then all unpopular opinions will get shut out. (Ie, no more debate politics, or you pay the premium).

Bye bye free speech on the internet.
 
Do you believe the FCC should allow a "pay to play" system on the internet?
A new FCC Chair threatens to let cable and phone companies create an Internet fast lane for companies that can afford it and a slow lane for everyone else who cannot afford it.
Everyone who thinks a pay to play is a good idea should realize that if they like conservative sites and the ISP is owned by liberals then they can count on access to those sites being gone or practically nonexistent, if their ISP is owned by by the cable company then they can kiss access to netflix, hulu and other similar sites goodbye, and if your ISP doesn't like political forums then you can kiss access to those sites goodbye. I do not know about most cities but in my city the cable company provides the fastest internet and it has no real competition, so the idea you can simply go to someone else is idiotic.
 
Everyone who thinks a pay to play is a good idea should realize that if they like conservative sites and the ISP is owned by liberals then they can count on access to those sites being gone or practically nonexistent, if their ISP is owned by by the cable company then they can kiss access to netflix, hulu and other similar sites goodbye, and if your ISP doesn't like political forums then you can kiss access to those sites goodbye. I do not know about most cities but in my city the cable company provides the fastest internet and it has no real competition, so the idea you can simply go to someone else is idiotic.

What about the ISP's right to freedom of association?!


:2razz:
 
There isn't a word for "no" strong enough to express my answer to this.

**** no?
Die in a fire no?
Drown to death no?
Tortured to death by clowns no?
Chop your dick off no?

One can get quite colorful with the word 'no'.
 
What about the ISP's right to freedom of association?!


:2razz:

The control (build, toll, and maintain) the "highway", they don't associate with the vehicles (information packets) traveling on that highway.

(Apology if that was sarcasm)
 
The control (build, toll, and maintain) the "highway", they don't associate with the vehicles (information packets) traveling on that highway.

(Apology if that was sarcasm)


They associate with websites. Presumably, some racists would want ISPs to refuse to serve blacks and to exclude all black and liberal websites. Freedom to associate!
 
They associate with websites. Presumably, some racists would want ISPs to refuse to serve blacks and to exclude all black and liberal websites. Freedom to associate!

What vote you my dear and lovely friend Ecofarm?
 
Do you believe the FCC should allow a "pay to play" system on the internet?
A new FCC Chair threatens to let cable and phone companies create an Internet fast lane for companies that can afford it and a slow lane for everyone else who cannot afford it.

But we do need a very secure internet payments system.
 
Do you believe the FCC should allow a "pay to play" system on the internet?
A new FCC Chair threatens to let cable and phone companies create an Internet fast lane for companies that can afford it and a slow lane for everyone else who cannot afford it.

Absolutely not. Not with the current quasi-monopolies that are allowed to exist as it relates to the telecom providers.
 
They associate with websites. Presumably, some racists would want ISPs to refuse to serve blacks and to exclude all black and liberal websites. Freedom to associate!

Moderator's Warning:
The threadjacking needs to stop now or action will be taken. Only warning
 
Do you believe the FCC should allow a "pay to play" system on the internet?
A new FCC Chair threatens to let cable and phone companies create an Internet fast lane for companies that can afford it and a slow lane for everyone else who cannot afford it.

Absolutely ****ing not. Especially not since most of the ISPs own content providers of their own, and have huge incentives to make it hard for you to access content by providers they don't own.

If the FCC isn't allowed to regulate the internet, then we need to create a body that is allowed, and put an end to this ASAP.
 
Absolutely ****ing not. Especially not since most of the ISPs own content providers of their own, and have huge incentives to make it hard for you to access content by providers they don't own.

If the FCC isn't allowed to regulate the internet, then we need to create a body that is allowed, and put an end to this ASAP.

Why? You don't need a new government agency to stop another government agency from over reaching... Just use already existing agencies to force them to stay within their mandates. Or just shut down the FCC and let the market, ie sponsors, determine what goes on?
 
Do you believe the FCC should allow a "pay to play" system on the internet?
A new FCC Chair threatens to let cable and phone companies create an Internet fast lane for companies that can afford it and a slow lane for everyone else who cannot afford it.

net neutrality should be enforced by federal law. what these companies want to do should be illegal.
 
What about the ISP's right to freedom of association?!


:2razz:

DO your like netflix/hulu/youtube, going to political forums, visiting certain news websites, visiting amazon or some other websites? Seeing how there is this quasi-monolopy with the ISPs what if some left wing loonies or even some right wing loonies decided they didn't like the opinions of the people who own the websites you didn't like and pressured the ISPs to slow down or shut down traffic to those sites? Are you going to get phone internet or just do without? If pay to play is allowed then you can kiss those things goodbye.
 
DO your like netflix/hulu/youtube, going to political forums, visiting certain news websites, visiting amazon or some other websites? Seeing how there is this quasi-monolopy with the ISPs what if some left wing loonies or even some right wing loonies decided they didn't like the opinions of the people who own the websites you didn't like and pressured the ISPs to slow down or shut down traffic to those sites? Are you going to get phone internet or just do without? If pay to play is allowed then you can kiss those things goodbye.

In other words, do you want the internet or AOL? :)
 
Why? You don't need a new government agency to stop another government agency from over reaching... Just use already existing agencies to force them to stay within their mandates.

Huh? ISPs aren't federal agencies, so I'm not really sure what you mean. The courts have said the FCC can't regulate the internet, so which existing federal agency do you believe should do it?

Or just shut down the FCC and let the market, ie sponsors, determine what goes on?

The problem with that is that in far too many areas, ISPs have local monopolies, and there is no other provider to switch to if you don't like how that provider treats you. Hence the need for regulation to prevent them from abusing their power.
 
In other words, do you want the internet or AOL? :)

Maybe netflix or Hulu will start offering low quality movie downloads that will take a week or two to download for AOL and other telephone internet users, they can call it their "freedom" package .
 
Huh? ISPs aren't federal agencies, so I'm not really sure what you mean. The courts have said the FCC can't regulate the internet, so which existing federal agency do you believe should do it?



The problem with that is that in far too many areas, ISPs have local monopolies, and there is no other provider to switch to if you don't like how that provider treats you. Hence the need for regulation to prevent them from abusing their power.

No, but the FCC is attempting to impose itself over the internet, and in turn eliminate net neutrality because they are regulators of content. You could say on behalf of ISPs.

Yes, ISPs do represent natural monopolies, and that's another reason that they should only be in control of the connections, not the content.
 
Who was the SOB who voted "yes"?

Name, address (both street and e-mail) and telephone number, please.

I have a feeling some of us would like to contact him.
 
Back
Top Bottom