Switch Theme:

FCC to defend Net Neutrality  [RSS] Share on facebook Share on Twitter Submit to Reddit
»
Author Message
Advert


Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
  • No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
  • Times and dates in your local timezone.
  • Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
  • Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
  • Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.




Made in us
Secret Force Behind the Rise of the Tau




USA

 whembly wrote:
It's true that the nature of their business hasn't changed, but the way we use it as evolved rapidedly.


The first part of this statement is the only one that actually matters to the ISP providers. The way we use the internet has evolved rapidly but the ISPs are not the internet. They're not even a fraction of it. They are a minor gear in the larger machine and their gear just doesn't juggle that much as time has gone on. The machine as a whole has changed rapidly but that gear doesn't have that many technical hurdles to jump through in comparison.

Reclassification will not effect the internet in the way you're suggesting.

If you can't get Congress to pass anything that you think is important... then, it's I'm sorry, it's not THAT important.


Congress doesn't pass anything important. Congress passes what gets congress elected. NN is a big issue, but I don't think it's big enough that we can expect congress to do much about it. It'll be a minor talking point they argue over, but no one in congress will be dedicated enough to it to meaningfully act on it in any way.

And even if the FCC did change ISP back to Title II, I don't see how they can prevail over a concerted lawsuit.


Defeating ad hoc regulations is wildly different from defeating Tittle II (an act of Congress).

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/02/10 04:26:34


   
Made in us
Posts with Authority






Can we maybe get an offshoot political party that is reasonably conservative without being corporate shills? I'd just.... really like that. Because every argument against this is just sounding really corporate shill-y?
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

 Bromsy wrote:
Can we maybe get an offshoot political party that is reasonably conservative without being corporate shills? I'd just.... really like that. Because every argument against this is just sounding really corporate shill-y?

Yeah... I'll readily admit that opponents to this plan sounds "shill-y". But that doesn't mean there's opposition to "Net Neutrality" in principle. It's the method to achieve it gives me the willys.

Here's a Republican "Net Neutrality" bill:
http://energycommerce.house.gov/sites/republicans.energycommerce.house.gov/files/114/BILLS-114hr-PIH-OpenInternet.pdf

It would prohibit paid prioritization, throttling, and blocking of “lawful content and non-harmful devices,” while requiring transparency of network management practices.

The bill defines paid prioritization as:
the speeding up or slowing down of some Internet traffic in relation to other Internet traffic over the consumer’s broadband Internet access service by prioritizing or deprioritizing packets based on compensation or lack thereof by the sender to the broadband Internet access service provider.


Here's a recent USNEWS article about it:
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2015/01/21/republicans-counter-fcc-with-net-neutrality-bill
The Federal Communications Commission will vote on Feb. 26 on rules aiming to protect competition online by treating all website traffic equally, despite broad opposition from congressional Republicans who are proposing their own legislative version of net neutrality.

[READ: Obama Defends Net Neutrality, Broadband Policy in State of the Union]

President Barack Obama’s State of the Union address on Tuesday did not focus as much on tech policy as in 2014, but he briefly mentioned net neutrality in his speech. Obama has called for the FCC to craft net neutrality rules using some of the regulatory power it claims over phone companies through Title II of the Communications Act — a concept Republicans oppose as an unwarranted increase of government power.


“I intend to protect a free and open Internet … so that the next generation of digital innovators and entrepreneurs have the platform to keep reshaping our world,” Obama said during his speech.

The commission is considering applying Title II to protect new rules against an anticipated lawsuit from a telecom like Verizon, said FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler.

Republicans supported the lawsuit by Verizon Communications that successfully struck down the previous net neutrality rules last year on the grounds that the FCC did not have legal authority to enforce them. Public support has pressured Republicans to embrace some of the core issues of the commission’s new proposed rules, including forbidding Internet service providers from slowing rival websites and charging for priority traffic speeds.

These provisions are part of a bill being drafted jointly by the chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce, Rep. Fred Upton, R-Mich., and the head of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation, Sen. John Thune, R-S.D. The draft bill signals that the conversation has shifted from contesting the need for net neutrality as a way to ensure reliable download speeds for websites and consumers to the argument that the FCC has no legal authority to enforce online competition.

The Republican bill has met criticism from consumer protection advocacy group Fight for the Future, which claims the bill is an effort to "derail the FCC’s net neutrality efforts” in a way that would benefit the cable industry over consumers.

Upton said in a statement ahead of a net neutrality hearing Wednesday in the House Subcommittee on Communications and Technology that the bill would provide clear rules on Internet protection that would not hinder investment in broadband, unlike the FCC efforts.

“Providers need certainty so they can move forward with their business models,” Upton said. “Without this certainty, innovation and investment suffer, and consumers lose.”

[ALSO: FCC’s Wheeler Confirms February Vote on Net Neutrality at CES 2015]

But Democrats have questioned whether investment would be damaged if the FCC reclassified broadband as a utility, like a mobile phone company. Sen. Bill Nelson of Florida, ranking Democrat on the Senate Subcommittee on Communications, Technology and the Internet raised the issue Wednesday during a hearing in his committee.


“With an ever-evolving Internet, we need a regulator who is not frozen in time,” Nelson said. “The FCC must have authority that is flexible enough that it can respond to a changing world.”

During the Senate hearing, Nelson questioned Meredith Attwell Baker, president of industry trade group CTIA-The Wireless ​​Association, to explain her concerns that the FCC would confuse potential broadband investors if the commission extended regulations used on mobile phones to the Internet.

“Investment will happen, the question is how much,” Baker said.

Gene Kimmelman, president of the ​consumer advocacy group ​Public Knowledge, said that​​ to keep regulation from becoming too broad the FCC will likely use a process called forbearance to selectively apply relevant parts of Title II to the Internet, including portions that would encourage building networks and making services affordable​​. Obama also called for the FCC to forgo non-relevant portions of Title II, including rate regulation.

“Out of 48 sections, there are only a handful that could be relevant,” said Kimmelman, a former antitrust official with the Department of Justice.

Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in se
Ferocious Black Templar Castellan






Sweden

 whembly wrote:

. Having the government in control means the rest of the world at least can have input, whereas having private entities do it means the rest of the world is completely cut out of the loop

Philosophically... that's flawed.

I believe the government should stay as far away as possible and with "light fingers" on the internet. Only get involved when things gets too big. Frankly, we're nowhere near there.


How is it philosophically flawed?

For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back. 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
 whembly wrote:

. Having the government in control means the rest of the world at least can have input, whereas having private entities do it means the rest of the world is completely cut out of the loop

Philosophically... that's flawed.

I believe the government should stay as far away as possible and with "light fingers" on the internet. Only get involved when things gets too big. Frankly, we're nowhere near there.


How is it philosophically flawed?

Because I believe "Net Neutrality" in current parlance in our government is a misnomer.

Also... the 332 page plan is kept secret. Why is that?

Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in se
Ferocious Black Templar Castellan






Sweden

 whembly wrote:
 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
 whembly wrote:

. Having the government in control means the rest of the world at least can have input, whereas having private entities do it means the rest of the world is completely cut out of the loop

Philosophically... that's flawed.

I believe the government should stay as far away as possible and with "light fingers" on the internet. Only get involved when things gets too big. Frankly, we're nowhere near there.


How is it philosophically flawed?

Because I believe "Net Neutrality" in current parlance in our government is a misnomer.

Also... the 332 page plan is kept secret. Why is that?


And your opinion on whether "NN" is a misnomer or not has what to do with my statement being philosophicaly flawed?

As for the plan, presumably to let the Commissioners deal with it without having to wade through the gak-storm that could potentially erupt and actually get the vote over with. They're going to release it to the public, no? I agree that it's pretty poor form though (to the point that it'd be unconstitutional in Sweden), so that's fair criticism IMO.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/10 17:22:48


For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back. 
   
Made in us
Wise Ethereal with Bodyguard




Catskills in NYS

Perhaps it's not ready for release? It may come as a shock to you, but the government isn't the hive of evil that you seem to portray it as.
Edit:ninja-ed

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/10 17:23:12


Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
 kronk wrote:
Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
 sebster wrote:
Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
 BaronIveagh wrote:
Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

 Co'tor Shas wrote:
Perhaps it's not ready for release? It may come as a shock to you, but the government isn't the hive of evil that you seem to portray it as.
Edit:ninja-ed

The commissioners have the completed plans in their hand. Hence they ACTUALLY scheduled a vote at the end of this month.

And government isn't "evil"... it's just not always the best solution.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
 AlmightyWalrus wrote:

As for the plan, presumably to let the Commissioners deal with it without having to wade through the gak-storm that could potentially erupt and actually get the vote over with. They're going to release it to the public, no? I agree that it's pretty poor form though (to the point that it'd be unconstitutional in Sweden), so that's fair criticism IMO.

So far, they've said they'll release the full text after the vote. Which, to me, should be a huge flag.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/02/10 17:44:10


Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in se
Ferocious Black Templar Castellan






Sweden

While I agree with you, just to be the Devil's advocate: if it were released ahead of the vote, what would change? You either have a scenario where the Commissioners vote on the proposal and then make public what they've voted for and how they've voted for it, or they make the proposal public and then vote on it with the same outcome anyway. The vote is going to happen, and since as far as I understand it the Commissioners are not elected officials perhaps they should be allowed to do the job they were appointed to do?

For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back. 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
While I agree with you, just to be the Devil's advocate: if it were released ahead of the vote, what would change? You either have a scenario where the Commissioners vote on the proposal and then make public what they've voted for and how they've voted for it, or they make the proposal public and then vote on it with the same outcome anyway. The vote is going to happen, and since as far as I understand it the Commissioners are not elected officials perhaps they should be allowed to do the job they were appointed to do?

They're supposed to be an independent agency... ala, the Federal Reserve. However, my opposition is basically summarized by opposing more regulations at the federal level (Title II).

My current internet service provider (ISP) is Charter.

We know that Charter is a regulated regional monopoly, since they are able to provide monopoly service within a local area. The reason being is because it's so expensive to lay down the pipes, the companies negotiate with the regional government for the franchise. The regulation here comes, in large measure, from the local governments that oversee the franchise agreement that Charter operates under . While I can't get Cox, or Time Warner, or some other cable company. I do have the option of getting my phone and internet from AT&T/Uverse, Clear Wireless, or Verizon FiOS (off the top of my head).

I've stuck with Charter for years because stability is king. I only thought about going to somewhere else shortly after they've merged with the other MSOs way back when because their customer service/billing service were epically horribad. But, over the years, they've pulled their asses out of their nether regions and worked out their customer service admirably.

Bottom line, NN (in this current proposal via Title II) is turning the ISPs into regulated monopolies, but at the federal level. If you want to address the performance of a regulated monopoly, you have to take it up with the level of government that oversees the regulated monopoly. It happened to Charter when the customers were leaving in droves because of poor customer service. Right now, I can at least corner someone in my city government about Charter. If Charter was regulated at the national level, I'd have to go to my congressional critters.... Who is more likely to take my call? Or a grass root effort?

If you support Wheeler's proposal, you are supporting oversight at a higher level of government. I can see elite statist really want to get involved, but it can open doors to problematic interference.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/10 19:47:51


Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in us
Proud Triarch Praetorian





So, how do you know that considering you know nothing about what is in 330ish page document that you have never seen?
   
Made in us
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan






Pleasant Valley, Iowa

 Dreadwinter wrote:
So, how do you know that considering you know nothing about what is in 330ish page document that you have never seen?


Because Whembly is never going to advocate for anything that might hurt Charter Cable's bottom line.

 lord_blackfang wrote:
Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.

 Flinty wrote:
The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

 Ouze wrote:
 Dreadwinter wrote:
So, how do you know that considering you know nothing about what is in 330ish page document that you have never seen?


Because Whembly is never going to advocate for anything that might hurt Charter Cable's bottom line.

Heh...

A business is in business for profit. Right?

These businesses has a fiduciary duty to their shareholders. That's something I can comprehend.

Government is in the business for control.

I will take my chances with Charter (ISPs)...

I can fight business, but I am powerless against the government.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/10 20:03:48


Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in us
Proud Triarch Praetorian





 Ouze wrote:
 Dreadwinter wrote:
So, how do you know that considering you know nothing about what is in 330ish page document that you have never seen?


Because Whembly is never going to advocate for anything that might hurt Charter Cable's bottom line.


I don't know why. I have had Charter. Everything about their services is awful.
   
Made in us
Wise Ethereal with Bodyguard




Catskills in NYS

 whembly wrote:
 Ouze wrote:
 Dreadwinter wrote:
So, how do you know that considering you know nothing about what is in 330ish page document that you have never seen?


Because Whembly is never going to advocate for anything that might hurt Charter Cable's bottom line.

Heh...

A business is in business for profit. Right?

These businesses has a fiduciary duty to their shareholders. That's something I can comprehend.

Government is in the business for control.

I will take my chances with Charter (ISPs)...

I can fight business, but I am powerless against the government.

I'm confused at that statement. You have feth all control over a corporation, but you have some control over government, votes.

Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
 kronk wrote:
Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
 sebster wrote:
Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
 BaronIveagh wrote:
Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

 Co'tor Shas wrote:

I'm confused at that statement. You have feth all control over a corporation, but you have some control over government, votes.

Incorrect.

The easiest thing I can do is vote with "my wallet" as I have options:
AT&T/Uverse, Clear Wireless, or Verizon FiOS.

Now, I've stuck with Charter because their broadband's stability is stellar... but those other internet options aren't bad, but the quality isn't in the same ballpark. (Their TV lineups, however, are better for the price).

As a consumer, I can simple go somewhere else.

If I wanted to stick with Charter and affect some sort of change, I can drum up some grass root supports in my city and go to my city authorities if I feel Charter is playing "unfairly".

Now you asked if I have some control over the government? Heh... I voted for Romney. Who got elected again?

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/10 20:20:30


Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in se
Ferocious Black Templar Castellan






Sweden

 whembly wrote:


Now you asked if I have some control over the government? Heh... I voted for Romney. Who got elected again?


You know what happens if you stop purchasing Internet services from someone? They lose you as a customer. That's it. You have 0 power over private companies.

For thirteen years I had a dog with fur the darkest black. For thirteen years he was my friend, oh how I want him back. 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
 whembly wrote:


Now you asked if I have some control over the government? Heh... I voted for Romney. Who got elected again?


You know what happens if you stop purchasing Internet services from someone? They lose you as a customer. That's it. You have 0 power over private companies.

In a vacuum... right-o.

However, if a bunch of customers switches... then, thats POWAH!

Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in us
Last Remaining Whole C'Tan






Pleasant Valley, Iowa

 whembly wrote:

In a vacuum... right-o.

However, if a bunch of customers switches... then, thats POWAH!


I suspect the average American does not have the options you have and I opine that may be coloring your opinion. Where I live, I have my cable company (100 megabit), I have DSL (1.5 megabit for half as much as the 100 megabit), and dialup.


 lord_blackfang wrote:
Respect to the guy who subscribed just to post a massive ASCII dong in the chat and immediately get banned.

 Flinty wrote:
The benefit of slate is that its.actually a.rock with rock like properties. The downside is that it's a rock
 
   
Made in us
Wise Ethereal with Bodyguard




Catskills in NYS

 whembly wrote:
 AlmightyWalrus wrote:
 whembly wrote:


Now you asked if I have some control over the government? Heh... I voted for Romney. Who got elected again?


You know what happens if you stop purchasing Internet services from someone? They lose you as a customer. That's it. You have 0 power over private companies.

In a vacuum... right-o.

However, if a bunch of customers switches... then, thats POWAH!

And if a bunch of people vote?

Homosexuality is the #1 cause of gay marriage.
 kronk wrote:
Every pizza is a personal sized pizza if you try hard enough and believe in yourself.
 sebster wrote:
Yes, indeed. What a terrible piece of cultural imperialism it is for me to say that a country shouldn't murder its own citizens
 BaronIveagh wrote:
Basically they went from a carrot and stick to a smaller carrot and flanged mace.
 
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

 Ouze wrote:
 whembly wrote:

In a vacuum... right-o.

However, if a bunch of customers switches... then, thats POWAH!


I suspect the average American does not have the options you have and I opine that may be coloring your opinion. Where I live, I have my cable company (100 megabit), I have DSL (1.5 megabit for half as much as the 100 megabit), and dialup.


So given what we know based on the leaked highlights from Wheeler and Ajits... how would the current NN plan promote more competition for you?

I just don't see it.

Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in us
Secret Force Behind the Rise of the Tau




USA

 whembly wrote:

So given what we know based on the leaked highlights from Wheeler and Ajits... how would the current NN plan promote more competition for you?


Where did anyone ever claim that?

NN is an argument for competition on the internet, not an argument for competition in internet access.

   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






 whembly wrote:
However, if a bunch of customers switches... then, thats POWAH!


I can't tell if it's adorable or pathetic that you think "the market will fix it" is really an actual thing that happens.


And as to "WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S IN IT!!!!OMGWTFBBQ!" No crap. Thank you for showcasing once again why 99% of the US population needs to take a freakin civics course. Do you get to see everything that every department works on? Should HHS make sure you're up to date on what their latest decision will be re: housing standards? Maybe the FDA should make public all the formulas and products they review every. single. day. Please, tell me what the FTC is up to, since apparently the FCC working behind closed doors like every other agency is now some horrible machiavellian plan.

Pretty much everything except the legislature is close door. Black box. This isn't new. It wasn't any different for any other political group in charge. It has been this way for decades.
   
Made in us
Secret Force Behind the Rise of the Tau




USA

 streamdragon wrote:
I can't tell if it's adorable or pathetic that you think "the market will fix it" is really an actual thing that happens.


But capitalism says it does work! Capitalism would never lie to me!*

*Except when capitalism is subverted by business' who have laws written into place to protect their business interests to subvert capitalism, i.e. the US and social psychology comes into play and begins to show many of the basic underlying ideas on which capitalism is based are in fact false assumptions and capitalism will never function in the way Adam Smith originally conceived it especially in a global market place where laws and politics end up profoundly effecting the availability of products and the cost of bringing them to consumers.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/11 01:55:44


   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

Huh... all the cutesy responses.

Whatever.

I still stay reclassifying to Title 2 is wrong... but hey:
If you like your broadband, you can keep it!




Automatically Appended Next Post:
 LordofHats wrote:
 streamdragon wrote:
I can't tell if it's adorable or pathetic that you think "the market will fix it" is really an actual thing that happens.


But capitalism says it does work! Capitalism would never lie to me!*

*Except when capitalism is subverted by business' who have laws written into place to protect their business interests to subvert capitalism, i.e. the US and social psychology comes into play and begins to show many of the basic underlying ideas on which capitalism is based are in fact false assumptions and capitalism will never function in the way Adam Smith originally conceived it especially in a global market place where laws and politics end up profoundly effecting the availability of products and the cost of bringing them to consumers.

:sigh:

Then get ready for crony capitalism under Title 2*.

*unless challenged in court.

This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2015/02/11 03:48:38


Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in us
Proud Triarch Praetorian





 whembly wrote:

If you like your broadband, you can keep it!




Again, an Obamacare joke. So adorable.

Please, tell us more about how Capitalism is going to save us all and that the big corporations really care about our feelings.
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

 Dreadwinter wrote:
 whembly wrote:

If you like your broadband, you can keep it!




Again, an Obamacare joke. So adorable.

Please, tell us more about how Capitalism is going to save us all and that the big corporations really care about our feelings.

If...and that's an if... regulating ISPs as utilities will only further exacerbate crony capitalism.

Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in us
Longtime Dakkanaut






 whembly wrote:
Huh... all the cutesy responses.

Whatever.

I still stay reclassifying to Title 2 is wrong... but hey:
If you like your broadband, you can keep it!



So you are comparing a bill run through congress of elected representatives and turned into a law, with a regulation and reclassification run through a commission of appointed officials?

Just so we're clear. You think these two things are at all comparable in execution.
   
Made in us
5th God of Chaos! (Ho-hum)





Curb stomping in the Eye of Terror!

 streamdragon wrote:
 whembly wrote:
Huh... all the cutesy responses.

Whatever.

I still stay reclassifying to Title 2 is wrong... but hey:
If you like your broadband, you can keep it!



So you are comparing a bill run through congress of elected representatives and turned into a law, with a regulation and reclassification run through a commission of appointed officials?

Just so we're clear. You think these two things are at all comparable in execution.



I'm talking about the politics of it... or rather the PR of this ordeal.

I was just PM'ing someone about this, so I'm going to say it again.

Another way to look at this is if you look at the battle lines, the content/edge providers (Netflix, Google, Amazon, ect) are generally in favor of NN while service providers / hardware manufacturers are generally opposed.

NN as in transactions can't be discriminated and the prohibition "paid" prioritization.

These content/edge providers stand to make piles of cashola by dumping their content into provider networks.

If the service providers balk at the increasing load and asks for a fee from these edge providers to either help with infrastructure costs or host their servers on site, which would give their contents a more direct path to their customers... instead these edge providers can presumably just run to the FCC and ask them to intervene, instead of just letting the normal business processes work out (Peering, CDN, etc..).

It’s crony capitalism plain and simple. Sorry... I'm just not seeing any good out this, based on the highlights that Wheeler/Ajit has provided so far...

It's a misnomer... just like the Affordable Care Act is a misnomer.

This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2015/02/11 19:36:04


Live Ork, Be Ork. or D'Ork!


 
   
Made in us
Proud Triarch Praetorian





That is a lot of hot air.
   
 
Forum Index » Off-Topic Forum
Go to: