User:Econterms/Responses by en.wp users to proposal for banner on net neutrality issue

Net neutrality issue

• It is hard to summarize briefly.
• Standard position in favor (informally): Internet Service Providers (ISPs) should not be allowed to block or slow traffic in order to compete with it, or to extract fees from the provider, or because of political views it expresses. They are still allowed "reasonable network management" and so to prioritize traffic by datatype, or for safety against malware, or to satisfy legal requirements.
• WMF policy blog post in favor of net neutrality
• WMF invited user groups and chapters to support it too.
• Wiki DC statement in favor

Proposal to have a banner advocating support for specific vote for net neutrality in U.S. Senate

• [main discussion at en.wp's Village pump (proposals)]
• Responses were mixed, and some were vigorous. I estimate 53 in favor and 52 opposed
• Explain !votes
• ==> there was not a consensus to do the action

Lessons

• Advocates could prepare the relevant articles more thoroughly in advance
• Ask our partners to participate on-wiki
• Review previous advocacy on the subject, and refer to it
• Prepare for the basic argument that wp should not be "involved in politics" and that the action is not mainly partisan

Sources

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Net_neutrality/Archive_1
• w:Fight_for_the_Future
• Just a few references in this archive page: Village pump (proposals) Archive 151
• w:Talk:Net neutrality in the United States/Archive 1
• [1]
• much here: [2]
• vast amount here: [3]
• brief protection of the page: [4]
• 12 refs: [5]
• The big proposal and the main responses, starting 6 May 2018: [6]