New @Home user group forming (fight the AUP!)

[John Oliver]

"Paul G. Allen" wrote:

> Pardon my smart ass comment, and rather strong language, but it's exactly the
> view taken above - why worry about it until it happens - that enables this kind
> of crap to happen to begine with. People hear about a law they don't like that's
> in the works, a company doing something they don't like, a possible bandwidth
> limit on a service they pay good money for, and instead of stopping it BEFORE
> it's implemented, they'd rather bitch, moan, and complain about it after the
> fact.
> 
> To those people, I say, "Get a clue."

Amen.  The cap *is* coming.  David Knight has said so.  He was doing
some testing and evaluation, and feels that 128k is too low.  But guess
what?  There will be a 128k cap, and probably before the end of the
year.  Why?  A) He said that the Cox suits like the 128k cap.  B) Every
other U.S. @Home MSO that is capped has a 128k cap.  C) They've already
seen that the complainers in the newsgroups are all talk and no action.

*If* people were able to get together and tell Cox *now* what's what,
there's a chance it might be avoided or mitigated.  But nobody wants to
get off of their rears and do anything.

Further, those who poke sarcasm at an attempt to get organized now are
probably going to be the ones who moan and bitch the loudest when the
cap does come (although you won't catch them cancelling their service
over it, no sir!).  I pray that these backwards souls might pardon me in
advance for calling them hypocrites at that time.

I'm un-Koolering this because I feel that this situation is very much
on-topic for this list.  Linux is, if nothing else, a networked OS.  And
a networked OS that's specifically targetted by the AUP.  If there is
disagreement, I'll let it go back to the Kooler.

Well, to show that I can walk some of the walk at least, see my next
post... :-)