[CaptainHaplo]

OK I have done some research on this.

Its good and bad. Both sides have valid concerns and points.

As it is currently proposed, I cannot support it. Provide a way for companies to pay for larger pipes, while assuring a minimum level of service to all customers - would allow for the freedom we see today to continue.

Like it or not, every person or company does NOT have the same internet needs. You can't limit a major company to a limited pipe just because them having a bigger one isn't "fair". Especially if they are willing to purchase it. A small, 100-200 person business may need a fragmented T1, where grandma will be fine with a standard ADSL line.

Huge companies may need an OC-3 of better. Data warehouses are great, but what if you can't GET too them?

As for it being good for subsim - no it wouldnt be. The firm that hosts the servers for Subsim would be entitled to the "standard" connection - thats all they get. So all us subsimmers would be fighting with every other person who wants to connect to some other site that is hosted alongside Subsim. That would be HORRIBLE.

Change the legislation to where traffic shaping can and must be used to provide on deman minimum levels of service to any paying customer, as well as allowing that same bandwidth to be used by others when its not required to meet service levels, and then allow higher level service packages to be sold if the pipe can meet its base service levels and have room. Then we will talk.

Edit - the reason I am against this - is because its designed to fix a "future problem" that hasn't happened yet, and might not, when the "fix" WILL cause problems. Thats not smart government.