Why donors to DU should support "Net Neutrality."

[Eric J in MN]

Companies like AT&T would like to divide the internet into fast lanes and slow lanes.

If they're allowed to do this, Skinner may pay these companies to put DU in the fast lane. Our donations which could have been used for new features or better servers would go to AT&T instead.

Supporters of "Net Neutrality" don't want the internet divided into fast lanes and slow lanes.

More here:
http://action.freepress.net/campaign/savethenet

[MisoWeaver]

1. I disagree

The internet is fine the way it is. Anything else will just screw it up.

[Eric J in MN]

2. I'm saying we should keep the status quo.

"Net neutrality" is how the internet has been run from the invention of the web through today.

[SuperWonk]

4. Exactly

You're right, MisoWeaver. Do we really want Congress deciding the future of the Internet? Even if we were to assume that congressmen and senators are objective and well-intentioned, they simply don't have the time or resources to understand an issue as complex as net neutrality. I know we haven't forgotten Sen. Stevens' level of understanding; are we willing to put the future of the Internet in his hands?

[annabanana]

3. You have Stated it clearly!

There are some very sophisticated disinformation campaigns out there trying make it look like "keeping the internet unregulated" or "keeping the government's hands off the internet" is what we should support.

We WANT net neutrality to be protected by statute. We DO NOT WANT the big telecom companies to buy up all the bandwidth and decide what websites get "preferential treatment" (the rich ones).

If you have an interest in deargodihateverizon.com, you will be shit out of luck. . . believe it!