1) The FCC apparently needs to hear from every living soul in the country. 4 million people commented already, but it's not enough?!?!?
Thanks for the link. Bless her. I wanted to reach out and give her a hug with life energy (sounded like she was about to keel over).
As for the 4 million. They didn't say what the context of those 4 million feedback inputs were, how many were duplicates of the same entity, how many were for or against ... but lets assume all 4 million were unique requests for one side ... that is still a small percentage of the broadband customer base. Just looking at a quick search turned up some 2011 numbers
and here is just some numbers for verizon
When policies that impact entire markets are up for discussion the numbers need to be overwhelming and not 1% or 2%.
2) Very often during the debate, the panelist who was against NN would make a statement of fact and it would be immediately refuted. This wasn't of the "well hey, that's like just your opinion, man" kind of refutes, it was more like "What you just said was utterly false and here is proof".
Yea. I'm not sure who this was but it was weird.
3) Classification as Title II would not require broadband providers to follow every rule. The FCC can pick and choose, so I'm sure any change will have limited teeth.
I'm not sure what their approval process is when they refer to "pick and choose". If the approval isn't from outside the FCC then "pick and choose" is open for abuse. Checks and balances are a must. It wouldn't surprise me if this pick and choose exists today for other matters of their jurisdiction. However, continuing such a pattern is not palatable.