Cox slows Internet speeds in entire neighborhoods to punish any heavy users

Why (administratively)slow an entire neighborhood for one heavy user? This can't possibly have the effect that a mass punishment usually has, which is to get the bulk of those being punished to enforce the rules on themselves and their peers, because Cox isn't apparently notifying Mike's neighbors of the issue. The neighbors will just wonder WTF is going on with their internet.

This just seems extraordinarily stupid, a real foot-cannon for Cox.

>Cox defended the temporary 10Mbps upload speed for its gigabit-download plan, saying that "10Mbps is plenty of speed for the vast majority of customers to continue their regular activity and have a positive experience."

Great quote. I know another great quote:

>640K ought to be enough for anybody.

This article seems misleading. It's conflating two independent events:

-Cox is terminating accounts of individuals using excessive bandwidth.

-Cox is limiting upload speed in certain neighborhoods.

I don't see anything to suggest the termination warning that Mike received has anything to do with the later neighborhood-wide upload limits. In fact, Cox specifically states they have nothing to do with each other:

>Cox provided a little more detail after this story published, saying that the neighborhood-wide slowdowns and disconnection threats sent to individual customers "are two separate initiatives that could cross over in some cases."

Oh dear, even with it's limits StarLink will steal away high demand customers if they continue this.

To people who protest for Black Lives Matter: could you protest for people like Mike at the same time as well?