<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>

<rss version="2.0" xmlns:blogChannel="http://backend.userland.com/blogChannelModule">

<channel>
<title>absurd in </title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r16857705</link>
<description></description>
<language>en</language>
<pubDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 18:24:08 EDT</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>Tue, 08 Dec 2009 18:24:08 EDT</lastBuildDate>

<item>
<title>Re: absurd</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16858180</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/454292"><b>tsu9</b></A> : The key is that the <I>ISPs</I> wouldn't be <I>directly</I> billing that increase to customers.  They can spin it as content-providers upping prices when in reality, it is precisely their own doing.<br><SMALL>--<br>"You do not secure the liberty of our country and value of our democracy by undermining them, that's the road to hell." - Lord Phillips of Sudbury.</SMALL>]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16858180</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 07 Sep 2006 14:43:00 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

<item>
<title>absurd</title>
<link>http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16857705</link>
<description><![CDATA[<A HREF="/useremail/u/1236423"><b>broadbander</b></A> : How in God's name could charging more successful users more money be good for consumers?  It's not like it'll drop the price for other individuals.]]></description>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,16857705</guid>
<pubDate>Thu, 07 Sep 2006 13:23:53 EDT</pubDate>
</item>

</channel>
</rss>
