Political Crossfire Forums

[Nathyn]

Could we make there be a rule against forum activism. Case in point, I support net neutrality, but posts like this bug me:

Quote: Thread title: Hey you Democrats, save the Internet when you vote in NOV!

www.savetheinternet.com
Net Neutrality is a serious issue that will definately effect us as users of the internet so before you decide to go vote down a certain party line, please do some research so that we can keep our internet ours! And please check this out to see that the primary backers of this bill are the Democrats, who are supposed to be against s**t like trouncing the little guy in favor of big business.
(Three hours later)

Quote: Thread title: Crushing your rights to give Big Media the internet

www.savetheinternet.com
On June 8, the House of Representatives passed the "Communications Opportunity, Promotion and Enhancement Act of 2006," or COPE Act (H.R. 5252) -- a bill that offers no meaningful protections for Net Neutrality. An amendment offered by Rep. Ed Markey (D-Mass.), which would have instituted real Net Neutrality requirements, was defeated by intense industry lobbying.

It now falls to the Senate to save the free and open Internet. Fortunately, Sens. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine) and Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) have introduced a bipartisan measure, the "Internet Freedom Preservation Act of 2006" (S. 2917), that would provide meaningful protection for Net Neutrality.

On June 28, the Snowe-Dorgan bill was introduced as an amendment to Sen. Ted Stevens' (R-Alaska) major rewrite of the Telecom Act (S.2686) [now HR.5252]. The committee split down the middle on the measure, casting a tie vote of 11-11.

Though meaningful Net Neutrality protections were not added to Stevens' bill, the fight for Internet freedom is gaining serious momentum as the bill moves toward the full Senate later this year. Sen. Ron Wyden (D-Ore.) has threatened to place a "hold" on the entire legislation unless it reinstates Net Neutrality and prevents discrimination on the Internet.

Heading into August recess, the Senate Commerce Committee reclassified the Stevens bill as the "Advanced Telecommunications and Opportunities Reform Act" (HR.5252) to speed it to conference committee should it pass.

Call Congress today: No senator can in good conscience vote against Internet freedom and with the telecom cartel.

Isn't this just a battle between giant corporations?

No. Small business owners benefit from an Internet that allows them to compete directly — not one where they can't afford the price of entry. Net Neutrality ensures that innovators can start small and dream big about being the next EBay or Google without facing insurmountable hurdles. Without Net Neutrality, startups and entrepreneurs will be muscled out of the marketplace by big corporations that pay for a top spot on the Web.Don't Let Congress Ruin the Internet
Right now Congress is pushing a law that would abandon the First Amendment of the Internet -- a principle called "network neutrality" that preserves the free and open Internet. Congress needs to hear from you today or they will hand over control of what you do online to companies like AT&T, Verizon and Comcast.

Politicians are trading favors for campaign donations from these companies. They're being wooed by people like AT&T's CEO, who says "the Internet can't be free." Sign this petition to tell your elected representatives to protect Internet freedom now. When you fill out the information and push submit, we will automatically send it to your Members of Congress.

Isn't the threat to Net Neutrality just hypothetical?

No. By far the most significant evidence regarding the network owners' plans to discriminate is their stated intent to do so.

The CEOs of all the largest telecom companies have made clear their intent to build a tiered Internet with faster service for the select few companies willing or able to pay the exorbitant tolls.Network Neutrality advocates are not imagining a doomsday scenario. We are taking the telecom execs at their word.

So far, we've only seen the tip of the iceberg. But numerous examples show that without network neutrality requirements, Internet service providers will discriminate against content and competing services they don't like.

* In 2004, North Carolina ISP Madison River blocked their DSL customers from using any rival Web-based phone service.
* In 2005, Canada's telephone giant Telus blocked customers from visiting a Web site sympathetic to the Telecommunications Workers Union during a labor dispute.
* Shaw, a big Canadian cable TV company, is charging an extra $10 a month to subscribers in order to "enhance" competing Internet telephone services.
* In April, Time Warner's AOL blocked all emails that mentioned www.dearaol.com — an advocacy campaign opposing the company's pay-to-send e-mail scheme.

BOTTOM LINE IF YOU THINK THE MEDIA'S BIASED, AND YOU LOVE THE INTERNET, YOU NEED TO ACT. IT'S JUST GOING TO OPEN THE CAN OF WORMS TO MAKE THE INTERNET BIASED BECAUSE THE INTERNET IS JUST ANOTHER FORM OF MEDIA, LIKE TV, RADIO, MAGAZINES AND NEWSPAPERS. ONLINE YOU CAN GET ALL YOUR INFO WHERE EVER YOU WANT, WITH THIS IN PLACE ITS BACK TO THE MAIN MEDIA OUTLETS AGAIN. DO YOU WANT THAT?!?!?!?!

WHO IS FOR NET NEUTRALITY?

http://www.savetheinternet.com/=senatetallybyvote
This a debate forum, not a personal soapbox. If your post is written with the intent of "getting the word out," this has two implications:

#1. You're probably a spammer.

#2. You have no interest in actual debate, but just want everyone to visit your website. Any "opinions," offered are just filler material to make sure the thread isn't deleted or locked.

Forum activists are srsly annoying, whether Liberal or Conservative. A good guideline would be, "If any poster directly TELLS the forum to vote a certain way," that it would be forum activism.

Go ahead and bring up discussions, but don't just obnoxiously show and say, "Support such and such!" Even if I agree with your position, it's still obnoxious.

[Revenant]

I think we need of clearing of party spammers. I'll give you a hint of a list by first letter of username.

B
J
R
S

It's getting terribly annoying.

[Gus]

Report them as spam, please.

[Pebble]

I believe that you aren't allowed to link to your own site unless you have 100+ posts anyway...

[agentkgb]

Forum activism is annoying, especially if it's done twice in a row like the net neutrality thing.

[JRM4833]

Pebble wrote: I believe that you aren't allowed to link to your own site unless you have 100+ posts anyway...

That's correct, but it's discretionary.