I think above these points of style is the larger question of whether the institution of the free internetwork -- inherited as a presumably Unquestionably Good Thing from it's beginnings under DARPA -- should be protected, or subordinated to commercial pressures.

You may recall what an uproar first ensued when the first use of email for commercial purposes began. Seems there was a deal of wisdom in thos eprotests. A free and open communication channel, and a commercially constrained service, are not quite compatible. In the days of Ma Bell, it seemed they were, but those were circuit-switched connections, and they could not be slowed or improved because of their content. Using packet-switched digital connections means you can sniff the who and why of each message and treat it better or worse accordingly, just by parsing the headers (not in every case, understood).

The promise of the internet to greatly free large volumes of information has been partially acheived, offset by the glut of torturously bad information it has also been loaded with by those who wouldn't know good from bad if it bit them in the ass.

But subordinating this great good to commercial interests AND wide-spread public mediocrity (not to say insanity) will be the ruin of a good reliable information universe.

Them's my two bits.

A