Is the issue about "net neutrality" or "net hogs"?

I'm still venting over the New York Times op ed written by Damian Kulash, Jr., "Beware the New New Thing" .  A few days ago I wrote a blog questioning why Damian should be a star witness for the House Judiciary Committee on net neutrality.   Here is a young man who is increasing his profit margin at our expense while making it more and more difficult for us to use the expansive resources and capabilities of the internet.   Is this "net neutrality"?   My blood is starting to boil again, just thinking about it.   If you haven't read my original blog yet, you can find it on our WIPP blog.

   I am not finished on this subject though.   Damian raises an interesting point on network management that I want to address.   While he and other bandwidth hogs are seizing and slowing  the internet for us mere mortals (without paying a single  penny extra for their excessive use), he is proudly taunting the managers of the networks for trying to make sure that it runs as smoothly and efficiently as possible so that we can a) get our email; b) log on and do our work when away from the office; c) do research and shop; d) communicate with friends and family; and e) watch his videos!   What is he thinking?   Is the net his and his alone?   Can he use it exclusively  to promote his videos to us leaving few and fewer resources available for us to use and enjoy the internet?

   Thank goodness there are network managers that are watching out for us!   Like our elected officials whose job  it is to make sure there are enough city and state roads and the police whose job it is to manage traffic flow so that we can all get home at a reasonable hour, network managers have the capability and responsibility of monitoring and adjusting traffic patterns so that we can ALL enjoy the internet.   What is Damian thinking when he says "We can't allow a system of gatekeepers to get built into the network?"   I'm sure he has HIS "gatekeepers"!