On Sun, 2002-01-27 at 09:52, Lisa Winkler wrote:
> Cox has the right to decide on whatever usage policy they like and enforce it
> however they like.  If you don't like it you don't have to subscribe to their
> service.
> 
> What is truly sad is that there have now become 2 categories of net connections:
> "internet for dummies" (i.e., @home) and "internet for clueful people" (i.e.,
> speakeasy, or business connections).  "internet for dummies" is not really a bad
> thing if you really fall into this category, and all you do is browse the web
> and read email.  It's just a pain in the ass for us "clueful people".  And
> "internet for clueful people", while providing you with fewer "services" (not
> blocking ports), costs a whole lot more.
> 
> Cox's policies irritate me too.  But I am too cheap to pay $100/month or so for
> a "clueful" connection with acceptable speeds.  So I subscribe to their service,
> whine occasionally, and try to get around the stuff I don't like.
> 
----
I think ADSL tends to work better for your 'clueful' people category. I
have Sprint Broadband which is totally tolerant - meaning there is a
bunch of code red/nimda activity but their upstreams are worse than Cox
so as a web server, it tends to be self-policing.

Craig