Net neutrality refers to prioritizing/throttling traffic between the provider and the client based on anything other than infrastructure limitations and QoS markings, to avoid a situation where client network providers could conspire with service providers to extort extra payments from clients.
It says nothing about the provider deciding to throttle, or even completely block/ban, certain clients. That would be separate legislation, like the proposals to prevent “de-platforming” by major social networks (see how Threads avoided giving access to people in the EU until they enabled some integration with the Fediverse, to avoid getting accused of abuse of power).
Not an expert, but would our net neutrality rules that the supreme jerk Ajit Pai helped revoke have been a tool to combat this behavior?
No.
Net neutrality refers to prioritizing/throttling traffic between the provider and the client based on anything other than infrastructure limitations and QoS markings, to avoid a situation where client network providers could conspire with service providers to extort extra payments from clients.
It says nothing about the provider deciding to throttle, or even completely block/ban, certain clients. That would be separate legislation, like the proposals to prevent “de-platforming” by major social networks (see how Threads avoided giving access to people in the EU until they enabled some integration with the Fediverse, to avoid getting accused of abuse of power).