Does the Straight Dope have a stance on the 2 tied internet rules that are being pushed in legislation ? It would seem to me it could have a direct impact on the Dope and Dopers.
I don’t think there’s a Straight Dope, Inc., position on anything. I suppose the Chicago Reader might take a stand, and meanwhile there might be a sentiment somewhere between a majority and a consensus among actively posting board members (I suspect there is, and that we’re agin’ it)
I’m for it, but given the contentious nature of the question, my honest guess is that this thread will be removed from GQ, posthaste! 
Contentious? I merely seek information as to whether the Dope has a stance. They may be impacted. I do not know for sure. I ask in curiosity with no personal slant intended.
If it isn’t contentious, then it will be removed to About this message board. 
I didnt know that you could ask questions there.However many Dopers may be interested.
If you are looking for a simple answer on “does the Straight Dope (or this message board) have a position on this issue” then there’s no reason for any of us to offer an opinion. I will click on a triangle to summon a moderator to give you a factual answer.
I agree. If network neutrality were enacted into law, it could stifle the develoment of the Internet and ensure that great sites like the Straight Dope aren’t able to offer new services.
Of course, I’m sure that you disagree with me on this. So why would you think the SDMB members – who can’t agree on anything – would have an opinion on this?
I’m not sure what you mean by “The Straight Dope.” That will determine where I move this. Certainly it doesn’t belong in General Questions.
Are you interested in what the members of this board think? Then this goes in either IMHO or Great Debates. If you want to know about the Chicago Reader, then perhaps ATMB, but don’t wait up for an answer. You could only get opinions from mods/Admins, probably, and I doubt that’s what you’re after.
I am not getting the question to begin with, what is the 2 tiered internet?
I have heard this term used 2 ways:
- Where the internet would be divided into ‘free vs paid’, where paid would get better and more services
- data will be prioritized into ‘urgent’ vs. ‘normal’ where urgent would be time critical such as VoIP, nuclear launch orders, internet gameing, where data would be routed for the shortest path for urgent, and normal would be stuff that a second or so would not be a big deal (checking email, straight doping)
http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2006/06/08/house_considers_2_tier_internet/ This is info about it.
My interest is what is the impact on the Dope and what do they envision for the future. There are some smart people running this board and I figured they may have an insight to share.
MOved to ATMB.
samclem GQ moderator
There’s no official policy. I don’t know that you’ll be able to get a comment from Chicago Reader management, that’s not their style.
Neither of these really describes it, although the second comes closest. The whole idea is that the ISPs want to be able to charge more to people who want their data to get priority, and to be able to purposefully degrade the connections of those who don’t pay their new fees. This could be used to do fairly nefarious things, such as degrade VoIP to the point of unusability because the phone companies have paid off the ISPs and force small companies and nonprofits into a low-bandwidth ghetto that may or may not be accessable to everyone.
On the flip side, it could be used to do some great things, too, like prioritize VoIP traffic (which has problems now because it does not have such priority), telemedicine, and other traffic that needs reliable service. Without the ability to charge websites for this type of usage, it’s unlikely we’ll see development of the Internet in this direction any time soon.
Basically, it’s saying that people who make more demands on the system should pay for upgrades to meet their demands.
Of course, this isn’t GD, but I thought I’d give the other side of the story.
messages received from any individual ,company or corporation from any telegraph lines connecting with either end of the termenii shall be impartially transmitted except in the case of government priority. act in 1860
Not a new problem. This was debated then and impartiality won. Hopefully it will again. Once you open the door you have to define and set priorities. Which impacts a site like the Dope. How remains to be shown ,but I am concerned.
They need to be using leased lines. Anyone who thinks they can get away with running lifesaving services over consumer-grade gear is out of their minds.
But not pay twice (or three times, or twelve…) to get basic levels of service.
Ah, yes, the Trail Of Two Tiers. We need to forward your inquiry to the Native American Museum in Washington, DC. In the meantime, would you like some buffalo chili and fry bread? How about some squash soup?
So it is about money. Wealthy corps could just write a bigger check. What makes you think essential services would have the ability to pay more.It does not follow that the ones with a real need could afford it. But the can of worms is that some corp would be making decisions about who gets fast internet. Would they base it on need or profit. Would they stifle sites that criticize them. Google has already been accused of this kind of stuff. Then would they slow down opposite political stances. Its potentially a big can of worms.