but the logic displayed by many here is inherently flawed. All too often do we hear bullshit comparisons that have no merit to the subject at hand. So I thought I'd try my hat at making a good comparison that is relevant.
It is a shame you failed so miserably then. Lets have a look at your analogy, shall we? He asserts:
Net Neutrality demands that children downloading warez have the same priority as a company doing video conferencing.
His assertion says that net neutrality demands that children doing something illegal would receive treatment equal to a company which is legally compliant.
You assert that your analogy is better than most of the analogies you find here because many of us have inherently flawed logic. But then you make an analogy which does not map well to his comment. Thus:
Do you also feel that black people should not be permitted in schools because they "may cause" conflicts in school?
You appear to make the mistaken assumption that black people are "children" or that black people are doing something "illegal". It seems that white people, or any other people are your analogical paring for "companies" and that you somehow equate "school" with the Internet.
In fact this is not an analogy, it is a red herring.
red herring: A fallacy that introduces an irrelevant issue to divert attention from the subject under discussion.
And finally you label him a Racist...
When called upon it you deny your assertion and insult "many" of the users on the forum for their "faulty" logic.
It seems to me that your analogy fails spectacularly.