There has been a fair bunch of analysis, going back to the beginning, of where the bot traffic is coming from. The ONLY evidence that does actual forensic analysis demonstrates 'bot traffic and forgery from the anti-Net neutrality side. This has been fairly clear since May, when multiple neutral sources reported on it.
You, oh True Believer, will no doubt respond that all such evidence ios fake news. After all, Breitbart ha said otherwise. Whi is the True Believer to dispute the pravda.
Mind you, the FCC's comments are not "inept." That is such a useful idiot response. Ajit Pai's response has been quite calculated.
it has, however, failed miserably. Other than a handful of True Believer useful idiots, months of hard sell (including one rather laughable "Antifa" cosplay at which i was present, attempted to interview the "Antifa" protesters, was told they did not give interviews, and then saw them give interviews to conservative outlets in "support" of net neutrality as a means of blocking True News like Brietbart) Pai has been utterly unsuccessful in selling anti-net neutrality even to conservatives. Still polling, according to Harvard Harris, at 75% in favor across the political spectrum.
So, to revap -- why does the NY AG ask about fake pro comments?
Because those are the ones in evidence.
Oh yeah, including the very specific allegation of forgery by a reporter, Karl Bode, which the FCC refused to remove from the public records file -- despite the request from Bode. You can find that evidence too, if you are interested, by using your preferred search engine.
Law enforcement usually only investigate crimes for which there is evidence, not crank allegations supported by demonstrably false flag operations. Complete with video taped evidence of the false flaggie. (I mean really, these guys were a hoot.)
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2017-11-23 02:50 pm (UTC)There has been a fair bunch of analysis, going back to the beginning, of where the bot traffic is coming from. The ONLY evidence that does actual forensic analysis demonstrates 'bot traffic and forgery from the anti-Net neutrality side. This has been fairly clear since May, when multiple neutral sources reported on it.
You, oh True Believer, will no doubt respond that all such evidence ios fake news. After all, Breitbart ha said otherwise. Whi is the True Believer to dispute the pravda.
https://www.theverge.com/2017/5/11/15626278/net-neutrality-spam-bot-fcc-leak-data
http://www.zdnet.com/article/a-bot-is-flooding-the-fccs-website-with-fake-anti-net-neutrality-comments/
https://motherboard.vice.com/en_us/article/43a5kg/80-percent-net-neutrality-comments-bots-astroturfing
Mind you, the FCC's comments are not "inept." That is such a useful idiot response. Ajit Pai's response has been quite calculated.
it has, however, failed miserably. Other than a handful of True Believer useful idiots, months of hard sell (including one rather laughable "Antifa" cosplay at which i was present, attempted to interview the "Antifa" protesters, was told they did not give interviews, and then saw them give interviews to conservative outlets in "support" of net neutrality as a means of blocking True News like Brietbart) Pai has been utterly unsuccessful in selling anti-net neutrality even to conservatives. Still polling, according to Harvard Harris, at 75% in favor across the political spectrum.
So, to revap -- why does the NY AG ask about fake pro comments?
Because those are the ones in evidence.
Oh yeah, including the very specific allegation of forgery by a reporter, Karl Bode, which the FCC refused to remove from the public records file -- despite the request from Bode. You can find that evidence too, if you are interested, by using your preferred search engine.
Law enforcement usually only investigate crimes for which there is evidence, not crank allegations supported by demonstrably false flag operations. Complete with video taped evidence of the false flaggie. (I mean really, these guys were a hoot.)