fight club :) richard bennett vs various nanogers, on paid peering
pauldotwall at gmail.com
Wed Nov 25 06:25:37 CST 2009
Where can we find data on your group's funding sources?
If we're to continue this discussion, we need to establish bias and
motive, which you've not covered on your own accord.
On 11/25/09, Richard Bennett <richard at bennett.com> wrote:
> Now you've descended from Steenbergen's hair-splitting between "on-net
> routes" (the mechanism) vs. "on-net access" (the actual product) into
> Simpson's straight-up lying. ITIF is not opposed to network neutrality
> in principle, having released a paper on "A Third Way on Network
> Neutrality", http://www.itif.org/index.php?id=63. There is not a single
> ultra-conservative on the ITIF board, they're all either moderate
> Democrats or moderate Republicans.
> I'm letting most of this childish venting slide, but I will point out
> the bald-faced lies.
> William Allen Simpson wrote:
>> They're opposed to net neutrality, and (based on his comments and several
>> of the papers) still think the Internet is some kind of bastard child
>> needs adult supervision in the middle -- by which they mean themselves
>> /in loco parentis/.
>> Looking at the board, it's populated by ultra-conservative wing-nut
>> Republicans, and some Conservadems (as we call them in political circles,
>> they call themselves "centrists") from the "New Democrat Caucus" for
>> "bi-partisan" cover. And lots of lobbyists -- Federal lobbyists -- who
>> seem to list their educational clients on their bio, but not whether
>> they are also employed by a firm that represents other clients....
> Richard Bennett
> Research Fellow
> Information Technology and Innovation Foundation
> Washington, DC
Sent from my mobile device
More information about the NANOG