said by mchambers3 :

Thanks for your reply and for taking the time to think about the issues.

I absolutely agree that the majority of users aren't equipped to know the difference between what they're getting and what they though they paid for.

That said, in all other parts of commerce, we don't allow firms to misrepresent a product or service. Your jeweler can sell a ring that has a few micrometers of 18 carat gold; however, if it's not 18 carat through and through, it can't be sold as 18 carat. The fact that neither of us have the assaying tools to spot the fraud doesn't make it any less deceptive.

Although I'm no big fan of the DSL carriers, I think that allowing a carrier to position itself as have a an enormous speed advantage is misleading, unfair to the shareholders in the competitive firms, and ultimately unfair to the industry and broadband customers overall. The fact is that our monthly subscription fees provide the capital to build future generations of broadband infrastructure. If other firms are using revenue to grow their infrastructure to deliver the services they market, I'd prefer to see them capture today's business to have the funds to continue to do the job.

In addition, I see marketing burst rate 6/8/12 Mbps services as FiOS is delivering 15Mbps as yet another aspect of unfair competition based on misrepresentation.

If Comcast would like to market itself as a 0.7 Mbps provider against DSL and FiOS, I'll withdraw my objections.

Meanwhile, even though I've never used anywhere near 250GB/month, if I'm going to have a pay for use contract, I want a detailed bill, just like the one I get for my cell phone. I want to see every connection, every packet size, and every source/destination IP address and port that substantiates what they say I'm using.

Thanks again for your well-thought out response!

mc