Free State Project Forum

FSP -- General Discussion => General FSP Discussion => Topic started by: Friday on October 23, 2005, 01:21:02 pm

Title: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Friday on October 23, 2005, 01:21:02 pm
FSP Participants, Friends, libertarians, lend me your eyeballs, and let us discuss what is to be done with our beloved FSP.

As has been discussed at great length on this forum and elsewhere, the FSP has “issues”.  :P

The current configuration of the Board of Directors is self-appointed and meets in secret.  The minutes of its meetings are a joke, IMHO. Some Directors and department heads go MIA for months at a time, yet retain access to internal leadership discussion lists, while other very active members are refused admittance.     There hasn’t been a board election since the summer of 2004.   The winner of that election became so disgruntled, for reasons that were never publicly spelled out, that she not only quit the Board, she quit this forum.  Several other Boardmembers and officers have disappeared over the years.  Even public DISCUSSION of BoD elections has been relocated to the Participants Only section, preventing prospective members from being fully informed about the history of an organization that, let’s face it, asks for a rather large dose of personal sacrifice. Calls for even token electoral representation on the Board by members have been denied.  It appears to have analysis paralysis; it has been sitting on over $30,000 in organizational funds for months now, unable to decide whether to spend it on a marketing campaign or a paid employee (resulting in the money being spent on neither).  If I were prone to paranoia, I’d find some of this deeply disturbing. Oh wait… I AM prone to paranoia.   :-\

Exciting and inspiring things are being done by early movers and friends of our cause in New Hampshire.  This is the proof that our concept is feasible, and must be shared with the rest of the world. However, in a vain attempt to comply with IRS registration standards and to adhere to a concept that the FSP is “merely a bus”, and takes absolutely no positions on anything at all, discussion of such things is verboten here.  Several times when an FSP participant has gained media exposure, they have been ignored or publicly disavowed by the organization.  I don’t know about you, but all of this seems extremely counterproductive to me.  What we need is publicity; why do we run away every time we get some?  I’m referring to the Free Town imbroglio, the Outlaw Manicurist, the Unidentified Flying Objector, and now Lauren Canario.  Our spokesperson recently indicated to a newspaper reporter that the FSP has no position on eminent domain. What?!?!? If we can’t even admit that we do have a position on eminent domain (we’re AGAINST it!!!), what the hell do we stand for? What’s the point of joining this organization?  ???

With all due respect to the members of the Board and some members of the Organizers, who have contributed huge amounts of time, energy and money to bringing this outrageous concept into reality, and some of whom have already made the move, they alone do not comprise the FSP.  *I* am the FSP. WE are the FSP.

There’s a growing schism between those who, officially, hold the reins of power over FSP policy, publicity and funds, and those of us who have actually put our lives where our mouths are by moving to New Hampshire and becoming political activists, in some cases at enormous personal cost.  The denizens of the FSP forum, and those of the NH Underground forum, each pretend that the other doesn’t exist (except for a few gadflies  ;) ).  The FSP leadership seems repulsed or frightened by the radicalism expressed on the Underground; yet, as far as I can see, the majority of regular posters there are bonafide FSP early movers, or NH natives friendly to our cause, or FSP participants who seem serious about relocating within the next few years.  The official forum, meanwhile, is dominated by nonmembers engaged in endless discussion that has nothing to do with the FSP.  The early movers who are running for political office (or have already won) post in neither place, and we therefore lose the ability to point to their successes (or noble defeats) as a recruitment tool.

With the recent BoD decision to remove the officially “unofficial” 2006 deadline, while retaining the now utterly arbitrary goal of 20,000 signups, and a new emphasis on encouraging people to move as soon as possible, we must address certain unpleasant realities.  Our Director, President and Media Representative, Amanda Phillips, has recently enrolled in Harvard Law School.  It appears very doubtful that she will relocate before finishing her program. And when she does, she will presumably have a mountain of school debt and will need to find as high-paying a job as possible to work on paying it off.  Do you think she’ll be taking her first post-law school job in New Hampshire… or staying where she is in greater Boston?

Our Chairman of the Board and founder, Jason Sorens, meanwhile, has recently relocated farther away from NH than he was already living. He has purchased a house and obtained a tenure-track teaching job… at a public university.

I’m not trying to slam Amanda and Jason too much; they have both been extremely dedicated to the FSP concept for years, and have dedicated countless hours of their lives in promoting it.  Amanda is well-spoken and charismatic and makes a great spokesperson. The FSP is Jason’s baby.  But I think those of us who comprise the FSP need to ask ourselves: with our recruitment numbers remaining in the toilet for over a year now, and the new direction of the organization, will it help or hurt our chances of success having Amanda and Jason at the helm?  At a bare minimum, I think it is fair to ask for a firm statement of intent to move by such-and-such a date by anyone holding a leadership position.

What is to be done?  I don’t know.  But I do know that the current system is increasingly not just ineffectual, but idiotic.  And I have far too much invested in the FSP to just walk away now.  I know some of you others have as well, or plan on doing so in the near future.  It's time to try something new, preferably with the sanction of the leadership, but without it if need be.

The concept of the FSP will succeed or fail by our actions.  Let’s discuss this, and take action.  I welcome all ideas.  Please post them here, IM me, email me, or call me (I’m in the Porcupine directory).  If you’re *really* paranoid, I’ll even meet you in a crowded pub and remove all my bugged fillings first.   ;D


(This message will also be posted on the Underground forum, for the benefit of those early movers who have become so frustrated with the FSP leadership that they won't even look at this forum anymore.)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 23, 2005, 03:10:17 pm
I totally agree Sandy.
I will discuss this on the NH Underground forum.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: JasonPSorens on October 23, 2005, 03:57:59 pm
Seditious ramblings can be helpful, Sandy... I don't have the time to read your whole message, but I think I can understand some of the frustration at the way the FSP is going, but I also don't think "FSP leadership" as a whole is to blame - except maybe there's not enough communication. We're doing lots of stuff - sending speakers out, writing articles, running ads, manning tables, selling merchandise, planning the annual festival, and the like - but do people know about that stuff? Probably not many. As far as spending the 30K, we're just trying to make sure we make the best decision. We're definitely going with a PR firm, but we have offers from two different firms and are now working on special projects to try them out. Some decisions take a really, really long time to make - and I admit some decisions take longer than I would like. We're trying to do our due diligence, but all of us also have full-time jobs, so it can take a week or two just between each step of the process. That's inevitable, unless some rich person steps up and funds the position of a full-time administrator.

I really would like to know where we can do better - realistically.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Dreepa on October 23, 2005, 04:45:33 pm
I really would like to know where we can do better - realistically.

Great post Sandy.


Jason.. we (FSP) fail in that we don't do anything with new members.  After they join that is it.  See ya 5 years after we hit 20K.
How about a welcome letter signed by you and Amanda?  How about a packet full of NH details, websites with job postings, real estate details, news from NH?  How about a free bumper sticker?  How about a phone number for the leader in their area?  How about a letter explaining N number of ways to help the FSP?  How about we teach the new (and probably excited) members how to recruit more members?  If we can energize people we can recruit more.  How about emailing people more frequently?    Hell I got 15 PORCfest spam and I get shit about recruiting.
Hell at the rate we are going we could probably get a personal phone call to each new member by the board.

Another tangent... lots of time/energy goes into planning Porcfest... does the same time/energy go into thinking about how to recruit?  (I mean how many people JOIN because of Porcfest?)


Chris

PS I would volunteer to be the person to assemble kits and then mail them to all new members. 
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: FTL_Ian on October 23, 2005, 05:09:33 pm
<applauds Friday>

From Jean Alexander, FSP Signup Analyst:
Quote
Ian and Free Talk Live have brought a steady and consistent stream of
new participants to the Free State Project.  The regular results FTL
brings to our recruiting efforts is greatly appreciated!

The FSP while it certainly deserves Friday's critique, is doing one thing right.  They are sponsoring Free Talk Live to the tune of $500 a month.  If you look in the signup statistics thread, you'll see that we recruited at least 10% of the FSP's signups in July, and increased that to 13% in August.

Free Talk Live is currently the number one recruiter for the Free State Project.

Let's put these excellent statistics in perspective:  Free Talk Live currently is coming up on its first year of syndication.  We've only got 8 affiliates.  But really, that's our Saturday show that has all those 8, our weekday show only has 2.  While one of those two is in Kansas City, it's also a 6 Watt signal during our show, and therefore, not a "player" in the metro.  Realistically, we only have a few thousand listeners, and maybe several thousand on our Saturday show.

Even with a relatively small footprint, we are recruiting 13% of the new FSP signups!!

I only wish the FSP leadership was as excited about this possiblity as we are.  Before I continue, I give major kudos to Bob Hull, Brian Sullivan, and Jean Alexander who have been active supporters of my show amongst the FSP brass.

Unfortunately, I have been told that there are certain members of the FSP leadership that either do not like me or my show.  No one will tell me who my detractors are, nor what exactly their problem is.  So that leads me to speculation:

-Did the detractors think that the money being allocated to Free Talk Live would be wasted?  If so, they surely have been proven wrong by now, and as we grow will continue to be proven wrong.

I have publicly invited the detractors to come talk to me about their issues or objections, and to date, no one has.  The invitation remains open.

The FSP's $500 a month has been a major help in promoting our show.  It accounts for nearly 50% of the measly amount of income we have.  (Our listeners are directly contributing about $675 a month via our AMP program (http://amp.freetalklive.com).)  All of this money is going right back out to market our show to more stations and more internet listeners.  No one is collecting a paycheck from Free Talk Live.

The more money we have coming in, the more we can promote our show, the more stations we'll get on board, the more listeners we'll convert into FSP participants.  It's a simple, powerful process.

I promised to not raise rates on the FSP, and I won't.  But I must say, we could do so much more with a little extra.  If the board is too skeptical to increase funding voluntarily, I would like the FSP to consider allowing me to reach out directly to the membership and ask them to contribute to FTL via our AMP program (http://amp.freetalklive.com).  I'll only ask them for $3 a month.

We will not sit on the money.  We will spend it to promote our show, because we want to grow.  We want to spread the Liberty message and promote the FSP as far and as wide as possible, as fast as possible.

With our meager budget, we're already:
-Buying ad space in the Talk Radio industry's top publication, "TALKERS" (Radio Program Directors are seeing us in talkers, and hearing our name when I call them personally, and our listeners call them personally.)
-We just signed up with "Talk Shows USA" a promotion group run by an old industry pro, to whom radio program directors turn for advice on what to add to their stations.  He'll be telling them "Free Talk Live".  (This will begin next month.)
-We're running a Google Adwords campaign resulting in hundreds of hits per month.

Months ago I said we were the most potentially powerful and affordable recruiting tool the FSP has ever had.  The numbers have vindicated that claim already, and we have only scratched the surface of the potential that we hold for the FSP.

To the leadership reading this:  Please let me send an email to the FSP Participants and Friends, and ask them to help AMP my show.  A 2% response rate will push our listener contributions over the $1,000 mark.  Also consider acknowledging the value of Free Talk Live, and increasing the FSP's contribution amount towards our show.

To those of you reading this who understand the power of this opportunity for growth, please go now to http://amp.freetalklive.com and read all about our AMP program, then sign up to be an AMPlifier for as little as $3 a month.

We will not disappoint you.



Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: artienewport on October 23, 2005, 05:36:19 pm
I don't have the time to read your whole message

But you had time to write a long paragraph?

No wonder this org is in trouble...
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: artienewport on October 23, 2005, 05:40:10 pm
Months ago I said we were the most potentially powerful and affordable recruiting tool the FSP has ever had. 

I concur.

While your operation is certainly commercial in nature, and your ultimate aim is a nice paycheck for yourself, I wish the FSP would throw some of that $30k collecting dust in their accounts at you.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: JasonPSorens on October 23, 2005, 06:34:29 pm
Unfortunately, I have been told that there are certain members of the FSP leadership that either do not like me or my show.  No one will tell me who my detractors are, nor what exactly their problem is.  So that leads me to speculation:


Oh, please. Gossip is a killer of organizations. Don't pay attention to whining and whispering and speculating, and don't engage in it. My two cents.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: JasonPSorens on October 23, 2005, 07:03:35 pm
Jason.. we (FSP) fail in that we don't do anything with new members.  After they join that is it.  See ya 5 years after we hit 20K.
How about a welcome letter signed by you and Amanda?  How about a packet full of NH details, websites with job postings, real estate details, news from NH?  How about a free bumper sticker?  How about a phone number for the leader in their area?  How about a letter explaining N number of ways to help the FSP?  How about we teach the new (and probably excited) members how to recruit more members?

We used to send out a packet with all that stuff. I believe (I'm not positive) that program has stopped recently. The Local Greeter program is going again, however.

Quote
PS I would volunteer to be the person to assemble kits and then mail them to all new members. 

Excellent! Please email Varrin at vswearingen@freestateproject.org. You'll be asked to sign an NDA (everyone who gets participant info has to). Thanks!
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: RidleyReport on October 23, 2005, 07:18:25 pm
One thing worth making note of is that this FSP sedition thread, posted on the FSP's own forum, is generating only about 25% as much discussion as the same thread posted at NHfree.com

FSP activity is dying with the current leadership in charge.  Those who are in the saddle should, as I requested over six months ago on this forum, submit themselves to election by the members or perhaps just an open vote on the forum.  Anyone registered before today could be allowed to vote.  Not 100% representative but certainly easy and quick.

If you folks in leadership are the best people for the job, you'll do fine in any election.  But as a group you completely lack my confidence, just as surely as New Hampshire has it.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: RidleyReport on October 23, 2005, 07:22:38 pm
jason wrote:

<<but I also don't think "FSP leadership" as a whole is to blame >>

I don't blame the leadership for all the stagnation, I *do* blame you for failing to submit yourselves to election, that is something you have complete control over and you've wilfully failed to heed our requests.

I do think we'd probably be ok just electing board members though and leaving you Jason as Emporer LOL.   Things worked ok when you were the only one in the saddle so I'm suspecting that this would not be harmful.

Very sad to hear about the 30K being misused by being UNUSED. No more donations from me, I give straight to the people who are doing things like Lauren and Russel...people you are sometimes wilfully ignoring on the website.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: RidleyReport on October 23, 2005, 08:00:47 pm
The much more lively and active discussion of this issue can be found on the NHfree.com forum at

http://forum.soulawakenings.com/index.php?topic=2095.0
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: kater on October 23, 2005, 08:06:52 pm
We used to send out a packet with all that stuff. I believe (I'm not positive) that program has stopped recently. The Local Greeter program is going again, however.

For my own amusement (and irritation, after reading the asinine thread on the Underground), I feel compelled to point out that I handed that project over to Kat when she moved to New Hampshire.  Gee.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: jeanius on October 23, 2005, 08:06:57 pm
I'm going to have to address these piecemeal.  There's a lot of ground covered in your post Sandy!

With respect to meeting minutes, there are brief by design.  They are first and foremost a corporate legal requirement.  Secondly, the actual conversations leading to decisions generally happen over email and other venues in advance of the actual meeting.  Finally, the conversations are most unhindered if they are private.  If people worry about curbing their discussion due to it being public that could be a bad thing.  

Elections didn't work out very well.  Very few people voted overall which showed an overall lack of interest.  Drawing in people who have shown dedication and good judgment seemed to work best.  

The money *is* being put to use.  As Jason pointed out we're talking to a couple of PR firms and expect to spend the funds that way.  Being slow to spend it is a bit of a problem but we are actively working on that.

Neil and I *have* moved to New Hampshire.  We are pleased to be here.  And while not everyone values my/our contributions to the FSP we care deeply about liberty in our lifetime and have committed thousands of dollars to help achieve it not including our move costs.  

With respect to neutrality ... that's a difficult stance  I know.  The problem is, as much as we all care about liberty, we all care about it differently.  One early issue was the highway cleanup signs.  The fact is , not everyone wants to support the state by cleaning their highways.  Yes, it's a nice piece of roadway advertising and it is generally considered a nice community volunteer effort.  But not everyone feels that way.  Are we helping our enemy?  These issues are not trivial.  Every "position" we could take could be vilified by folks on the other side.  Every time someone does something remotely controversial we hear from people who didn't like it.  

One of the reasons we seem to end up arguing, imo, is that we all have different ideas about how to achieve liberty and how to make FSP work best.  Those ideas are not always in sync ... actually they're rarely in sync.  Somehow there ends up being sniping and complaining.  And, I guess that's the way of many volunteer organizations.  But I continue to put many hours a week into the FSP.  Getting more movers to the Granite State is a worthy goal.

Jean


Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: JonM on October 23, 2005, 08:28:32 pm
What's all that wrong with being vilified now and then?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: CP ridgerunner on October 23, 2005, 09:06:12 pm
<applauds Friday>

From Jean Alexander, FSP Signup Analyst:
Quote
Ian and Free Talk Live have brought a steady and consistent stream of
new participants to the Free State Project.  The regular results FTL
brings to our recruiting efforts is greatly appreciated!

The FSP while it certainly deserves Friday's critique, is doing one thing right.  They are sponsoring Free Talk Live to the tune of $500 a month.  If you look in the signup statistics thread, you'll see that we recruited at least 10% of the FSP's signups in July, and increased that to 13% in August.

Free Talk Live is currently the number one recruiter for the Free State Project.

Let's put these excellent statistics in perspective:  Free Talk Live currently is coming up on its first year of syndication.  We've only got 8 affiliates.  But really, that's our Saturday show that has all those 8, our weekday show only has 2.  While one of those two is in Kansas City, it's also a 6 Watt signal during our show, and therefore, not a "player" in the metro.  Realistically, we only have a few thousand listeners, and maybe several thousand on our Saturday show.

Even with a relatively small footprint, we are recruiting 13% of the new FSP signups!!

I only wish the FSP leadership was as excited about this possiblity as we are.  Before I continue, I give major kudos to Bob Hull, Brian Sullivan, and Jean Alexander who have been active supporters of my show amongst the FSP brass.

Unfortunately, I have been told that there are certain members of the FSP leadership that either do not like me or my show.  No one will tell me who my detractors are, nor what exactly their problem is.  So that leads me to speculation:

-Did the detractors think that the money being allocated to Free Talk Live would be wasted?  If so, they surely have been proven wrong by now, and as we grow will continue to be proven wrong.

I have publicly invited the detractors to come talk to me about their issues or objections, and to date, no one has.  The invitation remains open.

The FSP's $500 a month has been a major help in promoting our show.  It accounts for nearly 50% of the measly amount of income we have.  (Our listeners are directly contributing about $675 a month via our AMP program (http://amp.freetalklive.com).)  All of this money is going right back out to market our show to more stations and more internet listeners.  No one is collecting a paycheck from Free Talk Live.

The more money we have coming in, the more we can promote our show, the more stations we'll get on board, the more listeners we'll convert into FSP participants.  It's a simple, powerful process.

I promised to not raise rates on the FSP, and I won't.  But I must say, we could do so much more with a little extra.  If the board is too skeptical to increase funding voluntarily, I would like the FSP to consider allowing me to reach out directly to the membership and ask them to contribute to FTL via our AMP program (http://amp.freetalklive.com).  I'll only ask them for $3 a month.

We will not sit on the money.  We will spend it to promote our show, because we want to grow.  We want to spread the Liberty message and promote the FSP as far and as wide as possible, as fast as possible.

With our meager budget, we're already:
-Buying ad space in the Talk Radio industry's top publication, "TALKERS" (Radio Program Directors are seeing us in talkers, and hearing our name when I call them personally, and our listeners call them personally.)
-We just signed up with "Talk Shows USA" a promotion group run by an old industry pro, to whom radio program directors turn for advice on what to add to their stations.  He'll be telling them "Free Talk Live".  (This will begin next month.)
-We're running a Google Adwords campaign resulting in hundreds of hits per month.

Months ago I said we were the most potentially powerful and affordable recruiting tool the FSP has ever had.  The numbers have vindicated that claim already, and we have only scratched the surface of the potential that we hold for the FSP.

To the leadership reading this:  Please let me send an email to the FSP Participants and Friends, and ask them to help AMP my show.  A 2% response rate will push our listener contributions over the $1,000 mark.  Also consider acknowledging the value of Free Talk Live, and increasing the FSP's contribution amount towards our show.

To those of you reading this who understand the power of this opportunity for growth, please go now to http://amp.freetalklive.com and read all about our AMP program, then sign up to be an AMPlifier for as little as $3 a month.

We will not disappoint you.




                                                                                                                                                                     
  Could you possibly do some sort of sydication of the show. I think your show would do good on Talk Radio WGOW-FM, Chattanooga, TN. and probally the Talk station out of Nashville?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: JonM on October 23, 2005, 09:09:13 pm
Can and does.  see http://pd.freetalklive.com
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: CP ridgerunner on October 23, 2005, 09:14:16 pm
Months ago I said we were the most potentially powerful and affordable recruiting tool the FSP has ever had. 

I concur.

While your operation is certainly commercial in nature, and your ultimate aim is a nice paycheck for yourself, I wish the FSP would throw some of that $30k collecting dust in their accounts at you.
                                                                                                                                                             
 Â Commerical can be a good idea for people who think the free market is a good idea, could the show run commericals maybe highlighting NH., maybe FSP member businesses and FSP friendly businesses with possibly libertarian friendly local businesses if the show airs out of state.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: lloydbob1 on October 23, 2005, 09:21:30 pm
 One early issue was the highway cleanup signs.   These issues are not trivial.  

What should be done or not done invoking the name of the FSP will seem trivial after the organization falls apart.

Oh...and yes if people started curbing their discussions because people would know what they were thinking, that would be a bad thing.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: lloydbob1 on October 23, 2005, 09:24:10 pm
Months ago I said we were the most potentially powerful and affordable recruiting tool the FSP has ever had. 

I concur.

While your operation is certainly commercial in nature, and your ultimate aim is a nice paycheck for yourself, I wish the FSP would throw some of that $30k collecting dust in their accounts at you.

Yes, doing well by doing good.  That's one of the American ways!
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: eukreign on October 23, 2005, 09:28:42 pm
Months ago I said we were the most potentially powerful and affordable recruiting tool the FSP has ever had.

I concur.

While your operation is certainly commercial in nature, and your ultimate aim is a nice paycheck for yourself, I wish the FSP would throw some of that $30k collecting dust in their accounts at you.
                                                                                                                                                             
  Commerical can be a good idea for people who think the free market is a good idea, could the show run commericals maybe highlighting NH., maybe FSP member businesses and FSP friendly businesses with possibly libertarian friendly local businesses if the show airs out of state.

Can and does. The Free State Project is advertised at least a dozen times during the show. They also advertise businesses on their website and have a monthly auction where you can win a spot on their website to advertise your business.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: CP ridgerunner on October 23, 2005, 09:31:28 pm
Can and does.  see http://pd.freetalklive.com
                                                                                                                                                     
 Â Ok I need to view that on another screen. Hell is dark suppose to be cool now or is my new flat acreen need adjusting? Hell it is probally me I haven't even looked at the owners instructions.                                                    
 Â               Oh well, I will look it over, if I like it, I will pass the idea to the TNLP to sponser a slot on WGOW. It goes down into GA, AL. and I'm pretty sure NC. around Murphy. It fads out before you get to Knoxville in TN. but covers most of southeast TN. and the southern part of the Cumberland.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: CP ridgerunner on October 23, 2005, 09:36:00 pm
Months ago I said we were the most potentially powerful and affordable recruiting tool the FSP has ever had.

I concur.

While your operation is certainly commercial in nature, and your ultimate aim is a nice paycheck for yourself, I wish the FSP would throw some of that $30k collecting dust in their accounts at you.
                                                                                                                                                             
  Commerical can be a good idea for people who think the free market is a good idea, could the show run commericals maybe highlighting NH., maybe FSP member businesses and FSP friendly businesses with possibly libertarian friendly local businesses if the show airs out of state.

Can and does. The Free State Project is advertised at least a dozen times during the show. They also advertise businesses on their website and have a monthly auction where you can win a spot on their website to advertise your business.
                                                                                                                                                                       
    Cool!
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Morey on October 23, 2005, 10:22:12 pm
Friday, great post!  Thank you.

Ian, the reason I personally find your behaviour annoying is because you constantly hijack threads to promote yourself.  Yes, your recruitment cost of  $40-60 per member (not counting member donations) is pretty good.  Maybe we should try some other libertarian talk shows.  But there are also a lot of people who never listen to talk radio.  Diverse outreach efforts are a good thing.

CP Ridgerunner, could you please just quote the relevant bit of text?  There is no reason to use 20k of bandwidth to say "yes, I agree".

Re: The Underground forum, it has lots of communication, but it is, at its core, a clique; an insiders club, consisting more of inside jokes and back patting than actual signal.  Digging through all the muck to find out what is going on is like reading slashdot at -1 threshhold.  Over here in the FSP forum, we get a little bit of news and a whole lot of philosophical debate.  Neither is especially rewarding.

Finally, the conversations are most unhindered if they are private.  If people worry about curbing their discussion due to it being public that could be a bad thing.
 
I strongly disagree.  FSP leadership should operate with complete transparency, like any decent non-profit.
Quote
Elections didn't work out very well.  Very few people voted overall which showed an overall lack of interest.  Drawing in people who have shown dedication and good judgment seemed to work best.
Again, I disagree.  I don't think its worked out well at all.  Evan is VP, and a swell guy.  But what has he done since the AH article?  Had some knives made?  He's not participated in lists or forums, and usually doesn't even make the board meetings.  I expect more from the VP.  And Evan isn't the only seemingly dormant leader.  What have you done, Jean?  I truly hope you don't count making a new category in the forums as one of your key accomplishments.
Quote
The money *is* being put to use.  As Jason pointed out we're talking to a couple of PR firms and expect to spend the funds that way.  Being slow to spend it is a bit of a problem but we are actively working on that.
Decisiveness is key to being a good manager.  "We're working on it" for months on end just doesn't cut it with me.

Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: jeanius on October 23, 2005, 10:22:50 pm
It should be noted Lloyd that my comment wasn't meant to be a reason for FSP board meetings to be private but rather a reason commonly given for such meetings to be private.  The FSP corporation isn't doing anything with respect to meetings that isn't commonplace.  

Jean

Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 23, 2005, 10:32:05 pm
Time to dismantle the fsp as a corporation .... spend the money ...... fold the tent and start over. :)

The leadership looks down on us common members and is getting in the way of our goal. So step aside, we have a police state to dismantle. :)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: jeanius on October 23, 2005, 10:35:55 pm
Transparency ... ask a question Morey.  Because the board meetings are private doesn't mean we're not willing to talk about it.  The mission change issue was discussed heavily in the forum and via email.  We don't operate in a vacuum.  

With respect to what I do, well, I can name a few things.  I've been a generalist for the FSP, stepping in when a need arises.  I did the massive and extremely detailed sign up analyis in early 2004.  I've updated that since and look for changes and trends in where our new participants hear about us.  I developed and paid for ads in the LP News and California Freedom early this year.  I recreated our most recent trifold in my desktop publishing software when our advertising gal had to step out.  I've written a few pieces and have tried to reach out to women in particular.  The one area in the forum was actually created due to a couple of women's reaction to our forum.  I put together the program for Porc Fest and ran the silent auction there.  I am a board member and that eats up a fair number of cycles.  I keep our corporate records and pay for filings out of my pocket.  I have been homeschooling liaison but have dropped that recently to head up the New Hampshire Information effort.  Having just moved to the state and having just researched the state re: finding a place that's right for our family I am passionate about making that easier for folks.  A *lot* of what I do is not visible, is behind the scenes stuff that has to be done.  

Jean
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 23, 2005, 10:41:02 pm
"I am a board member and that eats up a fair amount of cycles.  I keep our corporate records and pay for filings out of my pocket."

End board meetings and say stuff it to the feds ....... see saving time and money already. ;D


Soon they will be circling the wagons ..... the savages are on the warpath.
The O-list must be abuzz ..... the barbarians are at the gates. ;D
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 23, 2005, 10:48:18 pm
Re: The Underground forum, it has lots of communication, but it is, at its core, a clique; an insiders club, consisting more of inside jokes and back patting than actual signal.  Digging through all the muck to find out what is going on is like reading slashdot at -1 threshhold.  Over here in the FSP forum, we get a little bit of news and a whole lot of philosophical debate.  Neither is especially rewarding.

Some of us consider it a community of friends. :) We never promised signal. Just a place for some of us to hang out.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 23, 2005, 10:54:48 pm
Elections didn't work out very well.  Very few people voted overall which showed an overall lack of interest.  Drawing in people who have shown dedication and good judgment seemed to work best.  

With respect to neutrality ... that's a difficult stance  I know.  The problem is, as much as we all care about liberty, we all care about it differently.  One early issue was the highway cleanup signs.  The fact is , not everyone wants to support the state by cleaning their highways.  Yes, it's a nice piece of roadway advertising and it is generally considered a nice community volunteer effort.  But not everyone feels that way.  Are we helping our enemy?  These issues are not trivial.  Every "position" we could take could be vilified by folks on the other side.  Every time someone does something remotely controversial we hear from people who didn't like it.  
I thought they did. The current way has not worked out at all.

The FSP pickup has worked wonderfully. Anyone that wants to help ..... does and the rest of you are not forced to do anything. People think the FSP is a helpful organization and we all win. :) These issues are trivial. The fsp leadership takes itself too seriously.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 23, 2005, 10:56:09 pm
Look at the great picture from this months cleanup.

http://underground.soulawakenings.com/tiki-index.php

 8)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: 5thconcerto on October 23, 2005, 11:07:26 pm
My 2 cents worth:

 Results are the important thing. Regardless of how hard someone tries, if they are not producing the desired results, they are failing.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: FTL_Ian on October 23, 2005, 11:12:50 pm
Months ago I said we were the most potentially powerful and affordable recruiting tool the FSP has ever had.

I concur.

While your operation is certainly commercial in nature, and your ultimate aim is a nice paycheck for yourself, I wish the FSP would throw some of that $30k collecting dust in their accounts at you.

Absolutely, but if someone doesn't profit from spreading Liberty, it will take forever! (and is!)

By the way, our plans to profit are long term.  We've been doing this show FOR FREE for 3 years now.  5 people put in their time for zip, zero, zilch.  We just love doing it.  Eventually, there will be profit, but we're still paying our dues.  Evey cent we have coming in right now is going back out.  I've spent well over $20,000 of personal funds on this show.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: FTL_Ian on October 23, 2005, 11:15:05 pm
Oh, please. Gossip is a killer of organizations. Don't pay attention to whining and whispering and speculating, and don't engage in it. My two cents.

I don't really give a rat's ass about gossip, but when it's preventing us from working together as productively as possible, it bugs me.  I'm just listening to what I'm told, and I've been told it by multiple people.  If it was just one person, I'd chalk it up to heresay, but it's not.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: FTL_Ian on October 23, 2005, 11:18:07 pm
                                                                                               
  Could you possibly do some sort of sydication of the show. I think your show would do good on Talk Radio WGOW-FM, Chattanooga, TN. and probally the Talk station out of Nashville?

CP,

   We ARE syndicated.  That's how we're on 8 stations already.  I spend all day calling stations to promote our show, private message me your location or email me at ian@freetalklive.com , and I'll give you details on helping us get on your local stations.  (This applies to everyone reading this, not just CP.)

Thanks for your interest!
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: FTL_Ian on October 23, 2005, 11:27:47 pm
Ian, the reason I personally find your behaviour annoying is because you constantly hijack threads to promote yourself. 

Thanks for speaking up, Morey, but I already know you have a problem with me and you're not part of "leadership".  However, until you're able to recruit at the level I can, all you're doing is sniping.  I suppose if I wasn't promoting my show (I don't promote myself.), you'd like me a lot more, but then our membership recruiting would be down!  Oh well, keep being angry!  In the meantime, those of you who want to do something other than snipe should really consider joining AMP:  http://amp.freetalklive.com .

Quote
Yes, your recruitment cost of  $40-60 per member (not counting member donations) is pretty good.  Maybe we should try some other libertarian talk shows.

Let me know when you find a talk show where 100% of the hosts are FSP members, let alone principled Libertarians.  We're bigger than Harry Browne's show, and there are no other true Libertarians that are syndicated, to my knowledge.

Fact is, NO other show can provide this opportunity.

Quote
  But there are also a lot of people who never listen to talk radio.  Diverse outreach efforts are a good thing.

I agree, but I'm still waiting to see if any of those outreach efforts have as good of an ROI, or as much potential as we do.  We are only on 8 stations.  Imagine 80, 200, or 400 stations airing the FSP message, and the FSP STILL getting this dirt cheap rate.  No one else will do that.  I suppose it's possible, and if you can prove it, I'll eat my words.  Until then, we're the best deal the FSP has ever seen.

Thanks for the thoughts!
http://amp.freetalklive.com
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: KBCraig on October 24, 2005, 01:30:33 am
Look at the great picture from this months cleanup.

http://underground.soulawakenings.com/tiki-index.php

 8)

Well, let's see who was out there "defaming" the FSP through an adopt-a-highway cleanup:

A candidate for Congress from NH.

A freedom-loving activist who moved across the country, put her livelihood and freedom on the line, was arrested, spent a couple of weeks in jail, and made national news.

Her husband, who was in the news along with her.

A large, shambling, furtive, giggling UFO who made the news (and jail) by standing up for the freedom to travel without government permission.

His wife, who was the "victim" of the Outlaw Manicurist.

A couple I don't recognize, whom I'm sure are perfectly nice people.

And, one crotchety old curmudgeon who suffers the younger generations (and their blasting music) to promote the Free State at every opportunity. And who's been known to drive around with a nine foot joint.  ;)

The FSP's goal is to get people to NH to engage in liberty-loving activities however they choose. But the official FSP response to the actions above? "We have no comment. We take no position. They do not speak for the FSP."

Gee, what's wrong with, "While the FSP doesn't endorse any particular cause or action, we cheer freedom-loving activists who choose to get involved and make a difference in their communities."

Would that be so horrible? Would it contaminate the purity of the FSP's official non-involvement?

As for keeping participants informed, I've never received a single email or snail-mail from the organization. Not that I've wanted any, because I'm an active forum participant, checking in daily. Heck, I've never even gotten the FSP vinyl decal I ordered and paid for over two months ago!

I understand what it's like to be an officer in an all-volunteer organization of die-hard individualists (trust me!). Members scream and beg for information. Why is it so difficult to provide?

I used to check the FSP forums every couple of hours; now it's every couple of days. The crap:signal ratio just got unbearable. While the NHunderground forums might seem clicquish, it's a clicque with open membership. C'mon in, the water's fine (and in Keene, it's deep!)

Kevin
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Morey on October 24, 2005, 02:30:04 am
Transparency ... ask a question Morey.
Jean, I want to know everything. From the expenditures (not just a high level budget), to the planning, to the strategy.  I want myself, and every other participant to be able to view the organizers list archives.

Thank you for taking time to list some of your activities.  The fact that you have moved and that you do participate here gives you more credibility than others in my mind.  But I'm still obviously unhappy with your answers.

Every couple of months we have a leader criticism thread ("A pivotal question", "Leadership on sabbatical", "FSP Board should submit to recall vote", etc.) and nothing ever comes of it.  Are we, the activists who care enough to visit the forum on a regular basis, being blown off as just some "vocal minority", not to be taken seriously?

Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: KBCraig on October 24, 2005, 03:17:05 am
Are we, the activists who care enough to visit the forum on a regular basis, being blown off as just some "vocal minority", not to be taken seriously?

From what we've seen, the "participants" are largely ethereal. My WAG is that at least half (probably 3/4ths) of the SOI signers thought it sounded cool, signed on, and disappeared. That makes the 20k goal simply silly. What counts is those who are willing to participate, not fill in some forms.

Kevin
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 24, 2005, 06:45:19 am
Jean, I want to know everything. From the expenditures (not just a high level budget), to the planning, to the strategy.  I want myself, and every other participant to be able to view the organizers list archives.

Every couple of months we have a leader criticism thread ("A pivotal question", "Leadership on sabbatical", "FSP Board should submit to recall vote", etc.) and nothing ever comes of it.  Are we, the activists who care enough to visit the forum on a regular basis, being blown off as just some "vocal minority", not to be taken seriously?
Good ideas. We can give the current leadership a little while to open everything up and submit themselves to vote. If not, then we have to take our organization back.
The goal of the fsp is to change NH the us and the world for the better. Lets see if we can clean up our own org 1st. :)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: lloydbob1 on October 24, 2005, 07:24:48 am
My 2 cents worth:

 Results are the important thing. Regardless of how hard someone tries, if they are not producing the desired results, they are failing.

Yes, for whatever reason the recruiting numbers suck. :-X
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 24, 2005, 07:49:57 am
I think the fsp can function much like the Open Source Software world does. Total volunteerism works well. We don't need any specific leaders, just a goal. We already have a perfectly good mission statement and such. Let's just do it. :)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: JasonPSorens on October 24, 2005, 08:29:35 am
I don't really give a rat's ass about gossip, but when it's preventing us from working together as productively as possible, it bugs me.  I'm just listening to what I'm told, and I've been told it by multiple people.  If it was just one person, I'd chalk it up to heresay, but it's not.

Let me get this straight. Your client has discussions about the pros and cons of retaining your services, and because someone may or may not have criticized certain aspects of your show as part of that process, you want to call them out on the carpet and hold some kind of public inquisition? Disgustingly inappropriate.

I might add that reaming your client in public is not a great sign of intelligence.

For everyone else, this is exactly the reason why some leadership conversations need to be private, and why all decent non-profits (Cato, Reason, LNC, etc.) have private Board meetings. People need to be able to express honest opinions without having the gossip faction tear them a new one.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: JasonPSorens on October 24, 2005, 08:33:40 am
Gee, what's wrong with, "While the FSP doesn't endorse any particular cause or action, we cheer freedom-loving activists who choose to get involved and make a difference in their communities."

We do that! All the time! Just look at the website! We report on everything positive that happens.

Quote
As for keeping participants informed, I've never received a single email or snail-mail from the organization.

Well, that must be your fault. Emails go out on the 15th of every month.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: "Hagrid" on October 24, 2005, 08:43:49 am
As for keeping participants informed, I've never received a single email or snail-mail from the organization.

Gee, aren't you getting the monthly, like CLOCKWORK on the 15th, newsletter?  Brian spends a lot of time on it, and I make sure it goes out the door.    http://www.freestateproject.org/news/fspnews/

It goes to 10K email addresses, so perhaps it's time to sign up...

Quote
I understand what it's like to be an officer in an all-volunteer organization of die-hard individualists (trust me!). Members scream and beg for information. Why is it so difficult to provide?

There is far more screaming for heads than for information... IMHO.

Frankly, the FSP is being hurt on every front by its radical fringe who are more vocal than anyone else, and they are too 'individualist' to see it.  This entire thread is part of the symptoms of the problem.  It's not new, and the problem is ongoing.  I'm not saying FSP leadership is perfect... by any means.  I'm an active and vocal critic at times... but I also know when it's effective and when it's just noise and fury for the sake of flames. 

Without getting personal, that's about all I'll say of anyone in this thread.  And no, I'm not getting personal... far too many others are, and I have lost what little respect for them I had left.

BTW, those of us truly active IN the open source world (grep the linux kernel source, how many FSPers are listed?  At least one - me) are well aware that "open source" is NOT the model to in use for FSP leadership.  But hey, I'm sure it sounded good to those who want anarchy... and think that Open Source uses it... but Open Source is more often benevolent dictatorship than any other model.... ask Linus.  [Edited Corrected - some might say we use Open Source leadership methods now.... we have forks - a vocal minority who want to steer things differently who have split off;  People doing whatever they want when and if it scratches their itch.... regardless of whether it moves the project forward or is scalable or good practices.... and a volunteer and exhausted leadership who tries to steer things in a benevolent way... and lots of people bitching that someone else should fix the bugs instead of stepping up and coding a patch themselves to fix the bug...  Yup, sounds like a typical Open Source project.]  I stand by my statement that it is NOT the model we should be using.... even to the extent we are now.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: atr on October 24, 2005, 08:45:21 am
It appears to have analysis paralysis; it has been sitting on over $30,000 in organizational funds for months now, unable to decide whether to spend it on a marketing campaign or a paid employee (resulting in the money being spent on neither).
The Board recently approved the expenditure of money for paid PR/marketing. My sense is that this amount will grow as time goes on.

Quote
Exciting and inspiring things are being done by early movers and friends of our cause in New Hampshire.  This is the proof that our concept is feasible, and must be shared with the rest of the world. However, in a vain attempt to comply with IRS registration standards and to adhere to a concept that the FSP is “merely a bus”, and takes absolutely no positions on anything at all, discussion of such things is verboten here.  Several times when an FSP participant has gained media exposure, they have been ignored or publicly disavowed by the organization.  I don’t know about you, but all of this seems extremely counterproductive to me.  What we need is publicity; why do we run away every time we get some?  I’m referring to the Free Town imbroglio, the Outlaw Manicurist, the Unidentified Flying Objector, and now Lauren Canario.  Our spokesperson recently indicated to a newspaper reporter that the FSP has no position on eminent domain. What?!?!? If we can’t even admit that we do have a position on eminent domain (we’re AGAINST it!!!), what the hell do we stand for? What’s the point of joining this organization?  ???
The point is to move to New Hampshire and work for liberty, knowing that there are others doing the same. We do not all agree on every issue. People have called for "the leadership" to take positions on issues. Do you want us to be "for" everything and against nothing? How will you feel if we say that we are against eminent domain but don't believe the Supreme Court reached the wrong decision in Kelo (because the Bill of Rights is not supposed to be applied to the states)? How will you feel when we're for outlaw manicurists but against UN flag burnings? Or for privacy rights but against HB599?

Quote
What is to be done?  I don’t know.  But I do know that the current system is increasingly not just ineffectual, but idiotic.  And I have far too much invested in the FSP to just walk away now.  I know some of you others have as well, or plan on doing so in the near future.  It's time to try something new, preferably with the sanction of the leadership, but without it if need be.
It is much easier to recognize a problem than to take responsibility for achieving a solution. It will, as you note, take action.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: atr on October 24, 2005, 08:50:31 am
No more donations from me, I give straight to the people who are doing things like Lauren and Russel...people you are sometimes wilfully ignoring on the website.

Is that why everyone's so worked up? They want a pat on the head from the FSP any time they do anything? Would you volunteer to be the ultimate arbiter of who should get a pat on the head (Lauren, Russell, Mike) and who shouldn't (Zack Bass, or the guy in Maryland with the meth lab)?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: atr on October 24, 2005, 08:52:32 am
The leadership looks down on us common members and is getting in the way of our goal.

We are? How?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: artienewport on October 24, 2005, 09:01:06 am
Would you volunteer to be the ultimate arbiter of who should get a pat on the head (Lauren, Russell, Mike) and who shouldn't (Zack Bass, or the guy in Maryland with the meth lab)?

Whoever does the updates to the website certainly is volunteering for that position.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: atr on October 24, 2005, 09:11:17 am
Every couple of months we have a leader criticism thread ("A pivotal question", "Leadership on sabbatical", "FSP Board should submit to recall vote", etc.) and nothing ever comes of it.

Like the government, we are expected to serve all your needs and vilified when we do not. The success of the FSP mission depends on indvidual actions, not the collective power of corporate office-holders. If you want something done, then do it. If you have an idea of what you would like "the leadership" to do, please share it. We are not deaf, but the recurring message is complaining without any guide to corrective action.

In fairness, the leadership (myself included) does not accomplish as much as I think can reasonably be expected. But what is telling us to do more going to accomplish?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: atr on October 24, 2005, 09:16:35 am
Would you volunteer to be the ultimate arbiter of who should get a pat on the head (Lauren, Russell, Mike) and who shouldn't (Zack Bass, or the guy in Maryland with the meth lab)?

Whoever does the updates to the website certainly is volunteering for that position.

So your problem is that we're not giving enough pats on the head?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: artienewport on October 24, 2005, 09:21:27 am
So your problem is that we're not giving enough pats on the head?

My problem is that no prospective member can see any current successes "we" have made in The Free State. If I look at the front page and the news archives as one, all I see is a bunch of masturbation for the past two years.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: atr on October 24, 2005, 09:33:33 am
So your problem is that we're not giving enough pats on the head?

My problem is that no prospective member can see any current successes "we" have made in The Free State. If I look at the front page and the news archives as one, all I see is a bunch of masturbation for the past two years.

What successes?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: artienewport on October 24, 2005, 09:45:39 am
What successes?

 :D

Now that's a whopper!
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 24, 2005, 09:49:22 am
They're closing ranks boys .... we got 'em pinned down. ;D
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 24, 2005, 09:51:14 am
I see that suddenly the leadership has found all kinds of time to communicate with the rabble.
I did not vote for this current crew and neither has anyone else. Time for a big vote. :)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 24, 2005, 10:01:33 am
For everyone else, this is exactly the reason why some leadership conversations need to be private, and why all decent non-profits (Cato, Reason, LNC, etc.) have private Board meetings. People need to be able to express honest opinions without having the gossip faction tear them a new one.
I didn't join one of those libertarian non-profits. I want to be part of a revolution. Having another think-tank is not going to get it done. The fsp can be the vehicle for revolutionary change. If not then it will get run over by the stampede.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: atr on October 24, 2005, 10:06:39 am
The fsp can be the vehicle for revolutionary change. If not then it will get run over by the stampede.

Why can't the FSP remain as the vehicle for getting liberty-lovers to move to New Hampshire, while allowing others to be the vehicles for revolutionary (radical?) change?

Why does the NH Underground exist? Why does the NHLA exist?

Because the FSP inspired people to move and then allowed them to pursue their own vehicles for activism.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: atr on October 24, 2005, 10:29:00 am
Because the FSP inspired people to move and then allowed them to pursue their own vehicles for activism.

Actually, I should add to that. The NH Underground exists because the FSP would not be the vehicle for activism in NH.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 24, 2005, 10:33:10 am
Why can't the FSP remain as the vehicle for getting liberty-lovers to move to New Hampshire...?
It can ..... it just is not doing that right now. That is why it needs to be taken back by the people.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: atr on October 24, 2005, 10:46:09 am
Why can't the FSP remain as the vehicle for getting liberty-lovers to move to New Hampshire...?
It can ..... it just is not doing that right now. That is why it needs to be taken back by the people.

People who want to work on getting more liberty-lovers to move to move to NH? If you have some ideas on that, you can share them. If you want to help with that, all the better. If you want to complain about "the leadership" not doing it enough, hey, I'm with you on that, but it doesn't take a takeover to work towards that goal yourself. At the same time, I'd be curious to see the current "leadership" replaced with you, Kat, Dave, Mike, Sandy, and whomever else. Would you be able to ramp up our numbers? How?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: KBCraig on October 24, 2005, 10:58:58 am
The leadership looks down on us common members and is getting in the way of our goal.

We are? How?


Letter to the editor by Steve Cobb:

http://www.seacoastonline.com/news/06022005/letters/45462.htm

"Not only does the Free State Project (FSP) plan no acts of civil disobedience, it performs no change activism of any sort. Neither Russell Kanning nor Mike Fisher has any authority to speak or act on behalf of the FSP, and the FSP did not authorize their actions; we found out in the press along with everyone else."


Regarding Lauren Canario's imprisonment in New London:

http://www.infowars.com/articles/ps/eminent_domain_ft_trumbull_protestor.htm

"Amanda Phillips, the president of the Free State Project, also distanced the group from Canario, saying her imprisonment has nothing to do with the goals of the organization, which does not take a position on eminent domain."


And who can forget the whole Grafton debacle?

http://www4.fosters.com/june_2004/june_20_04/sports/ap_nh0620a.asp

"Other Free Towners and Free Staters have tried to distance themselves from Pendarvis, also known as Zack Bass, an Internet consultant who runs a Filipina mail-order bride business.

"'He’s not the kind of person that represents the Free State Project,' said Amanda Phillips, president of the Free State Project."


Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: atr on October 24, 2005, 11:04:19 am
The leadership looks down on us common members and is getting in the way of our goal.

We are? How?


Letter to the editor by Steve Cobb:

...

Regarding Lauren Canario's imprisonment in New London:

...

And who can forget the whole Grafton debacle?

Speaking for myself, I don't believe "the leadership" looks down on its active members, or that those examples reflect any disrespect, excepting the FTP situation. And in none of those cases did the FSP organization get in the way of those actions.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: artienewport on October 24, 2005, 11:26:11 am

And who can forget the whole Grafton debacle?

And in none of those cases did the FSP organization get in the way of those actions.

 ::)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: atr on October 24, 2005, 11:39:29 am
And in none of those cases did the FSP organization get in the way of those actions.

Unless you're inclined to think, for example, that if the government doesn't provide food it must mean the government is against food, and we surely will all starve.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: eukreign on October 24, 2005, 11:51:00 am
And in none of those cases did the FSP organization get in the way of those actions.
Unless you're inclined to think, for example, that if the government doesn't provide food it must mean the government is against food, and we surely will all starve.

Except that the whole purpose of the FSP is to get 20,000 recruits. If the FSP does a poor job recruiting people then YES WE WILL FAIL (at least fail to achieve the 20,000 liberty minded individuals moving to NH).

I can't believe you compare the FSP with government, are you saying that the FSP is just as useless, inefficient and corrupt as our government?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: atr on October 24, 2005, 12:00:24 pm
And in none of those cases did the FSP organization get in the way of those actions.
Unless you're inclined to think, for example, that if the government doesn't provide food it must mean the government is against food, and we surely will all starve.

Except that the whole purpose of the FSP is to get 20,000 recruits. If the FSP does a poor job recruiting people then YES WE WILL FAIL (at least fail to achieve the 20,000 liberty minded individuals moving to NH).

I can't believe you compare the FSP with government, are you saying that the FSP is just as useless, inefficient and corrupt as our government?

The FSP is like a government in that many of its constituents want it to do things for them that are beyond the scope of its conception. Yes, the purpose is to get recruits. And like government, the FSP is blamed for not doing enough while the people take no responsibility themselves.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: artienewport on October 24, 2005, 12:11:21 pm
Unless you're inclined to think, for example, that if the government doesn't provide food it must mean the government is against food, and we surely will all starve.

"'He’s not the kind of person that represents the Free State Project,' said Amanda Phillips, president of the Free State Project."

Logically, one must conclude that there ARE certian kinds of people that represent the FSP according to that quote.

Which kind of people does the FSP support then?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: freedomroad on October 24, 2005, 12:12:13 pm
The FSP leadership is good people.  The problem is that the FSP membership is having a hard time getting new members to join.  Clearly, we need more people to give more hours and new ways of recruiting.  I am partly at fault for this.  We can all do a little more but it is up to us as individuals.  Maybe the leadership needs to motivate the members to work just a little harder.  
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: artienewport on October 24, 2005, 12:13:47 pm
The FSP is like a government in that many of its constituents want it to do things for them that are beyond the scope of its conception.

Oh, you want to bring up the scope of it's conception?

http://64.233.187.104/search?q=cache:x1Rms1eXDd4J:www.ncc-1776.com/tle2001/libe131-20010723-03.html+free+state+project+%22take+over%22+sorens&hl=en
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: kater on October 24, 2005, 12:34:24 pm
It can ..... it just is not doing that right now. That is why it needs to be taken back by the people.

And why would that be necessary if the NH Underground is doing such a bang-up job? 
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: FTL_Ian on October 24, 2005, 01:06:55 pm
Let me get this straight. Your client has discussions about the pros and cons of retaining your services, and because someone may or may not have criticized certain aspects of your show as part of that process, you want to call them out on the carpet and hold some kind of public inquisition? Disgustingly inappropriate.

I never said anything about publicly calling out anyone.  I haven't even revealed my sources.  I'm just publicly asking for my detractors to speak with me personally about their issues, so they can hopefully be resolved.  How else am I to get in touch with them, when I don't even know who they are?

Quote
I might add that reaming your client in public is not a great sign of intelligence.

My "client" is the FSP, and I've publicly thanked the FSP for sponsoring the show, perhaps you can point out where the reaming is?

Quote
For everyone else, this is exactly the reason why some leadership conversations need to be private, and why all decent non-profits (Cato, Reason, LNC, etc.) have private Board meetings. People need to be able to express honest opinions without having the gossip faction tear them a new one.

I just wish people with negative opinions would express them to me, privately.  That's all I'm asking for.  No one's been called on the carpet.  If there's something we can do as a show to make you happier, whoever you are, we won't know what that something is unless you tell us.

Take it easy, Jason.  We still support the FSP and are proud to have the FSP as a sponsor.  I'm just bewildered by what I'm told, and this is the only way I can communicate with the mystery detractors, as I don't know who they are.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 24, 2005, 01:08:27 pm
The leadership looks down on us common members and is getting in the way of our goal.

We are? How?
"Is that why everyone's so worked up? They want a pat on the head from the FSP any time they do anything?"

You did it 1 reply earlier. ::)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 24, 2005, 01:12:38 pm
If you have some ideas on that, you can share them. Would you be able to ramp up our numbers? How?
Get out of the way of activity. I do not want to share a few ideas for the leadership to ignore. We don't need anyone in charge. We need you to stop holding the fsp back. :)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 24, 2005, 01:16:37 pm
It can ..... it just is not doing that right now. That is why it needs to be taken back by the people.

And why would that be necessary if the NH Underground is doing such a bang-up job? 
We do certain things the fsp does other things. I don't want to give up on the fsp and work around it.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Morey on October 24, 2005, 01:17:42 pm
I keep hearing the mantra of "ignore the powers that be, and go do it yourself!"  That has generally been my approach.  But imagine how much more effective we could be if we turned this structure upside down.  If the people who are most active were calling the shots, I'm betting we would see a significant gain in member numbers.  Beyond the specific gripes that have already had dismissed, I can't give you a recipe for exactly how or why that would happen.  But after a year of slow progress, isn't it worth trying a new approach?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: KBCraig on October 24, 2005, 01:38:53 pm
The FSP leadership is good people.  The problem is that the FSP membership is having a hard time getting new members to join.  Clearly, we need more people to give more hours and new ways of recruiting.

The best recruiting tool is activism in action, by those who've moved because of the FSP, or natives who actively welcome fellow freedom-lovers. Whenever someone makes the news by working for liberty, FSP should celebrate that!

My only complaint with the FSP leadership is how quickly they back away when they think someone's activism might make FSP "look bad". It reminds me of political correctness.

Instead of distancing FSP from activists, anyone speaking as an Official FSP Spokesperson should respond to press inquiries by saying, "The goal of the project is to get people to move to NH, and work for freedom in whatever way they choose. We (as an organization) don't take positions on issues, because the participants themselves have different opinions about what course to take. My only comment on "xxxx" is to praise their involvement in the process, no matter what I or others may think about their actions."

Again, what's so hard about that?

Kevin
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: FTL_Ian on October 24, 2005, 01:39:34 pm
Despite our disagreements, Morey, you and I agree on this.  The FSP needs some serious help, and if what we're doing isn't working, we certainly should do something different.  However, convincing the board to submit to an election seems to be a daunting task.    :(
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: freedomroad on October 24, 2005, 01:51:12 pm
The FSP leadership is good people.  The problem is that the FSP membership is having a hard time getting new members to join.  Clearly, we need more people to give more hours and new ways of recruiting.

The best recruiting tool is activism in action, by those who've moved because of the FSP, or natives who actively welcome fellow freedom-lovers. Whenever someone makes the news by working for liberty, FSP should celebrate that!

My only complaint with the FSP leadership is how quickly they back away when they think someone's activism might make FSP "look bad". It reminds me of political correctness.

Instead of distancing FSP from activists, anyone speaking as an Official FSP Spokesperson should respond to press inquiries by saying, "The goal of the project is to get people to move to NH, and work for freedom in whatever way they choose. We (as an organization) don't take positions on issues, because the participants themselves have different opinions about what course to take. My only comment on "xxxx" is to praise their involvement in the process, no matter what I or others may think about their actions."

Again, what's so hard about that?

Kevin

Fine.  Start a website- NHResults.com or something.  Build profiles for all the members that want to be included.  Build profiles for all of the protests, newspaper articles written by FSP members, complete details of all of the elections, etc.  Just get permission from the individuals.  Propose future projects.  Include 101 ways how people outside of NH can help recruit FSP members.  Give tips on how to move to NH quicker.  Put a big disclaimer on the main page of the site about how the things detailed on this page are the actions of pro-freedom people in NH or planing on moving to NH and are not related to the FSP.

I'll send you $100 to help pay for things if you get it going.  Ask Kat or Jason, I'm good for it.  And I'll work my butt off to MAKE sure there is a link to it on the FSP mainpage.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: atr on October 24, 2005, 01:53:34 pm
Unless you're inclined to think, for example, that if the government doesn't provide food it must mean the government is against food, and we surely will all starve.

"'He’s not the kind of person that represents the Free State Project,' said Amanda Phillips, president of the Free State Project."

Logically, one must conclude that there ARE certian kinds of people that represent the FSP according to that quote.

Which kind of people does the FSP support then?

I cannot speak for Amanda, but my personal view is that the FTP situation should have been handled differently.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: atr on October 24, 2005, 01:54:55 pm
The leadership looks down on us common members and is getting in the way of our goal.

We are? How?
"Is that why everyone's so worked up? They want a pat on the head from the FSP any time they do anything?"

You did it 1 reply earlier. ::)

Russell, there's no mistaking you for a common member :P.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Dreepa on October 24, 2005, 02:04:04 pm
I keep hearing the mantra of "ignore the powers that be, and go do it yourself!"  That has generally been my approach.  But imagine how much more effective we could be if we turned this structure upside down.  If the people who are most active were calling the shots, I'm betting we would see a significant gain in member numbers.  Beyond the specific gripes that have already had dismissed, I can't give you a recipe for exactly how or why that would happen.  But after a year of slow progress, isn't it worth trying a new approach?

Great post.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: freedomroad on October 24, 2005, 02:05:19 pm
So your problem is that we're not giving enough pats on the head?

One of the main roles of leadership in non-profit groups is to give pats on the head to those directly lower than you.  The pats are hoped to keep going, until they reach the members that do the least.  The people on the highest levels are there because they are self-directed and they rarely need pats.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: JasonPSorens on October 24, 2005, 02:16:39 pm
(Responding to no one in particular here...) I definitely believe pats on the head are great. Does this count?

http://freestateproject.org/news/newswire/

How about this?

http://freestateproject.org/about/essay_archive/

Or this?

http://freestateproject.org/news/festival/reports/

Or what about this?

http://freestateproject.org/news/issues/

This definitely counts:

http://freestateproject.org/getinvolved/liaisons/LiaisonsCorner

And so does this:

http://freestateproject.org/community/moved/

But maybe the issue is more private head-patting on specific tasks. Something to keep in mind for our many organizers and doers - that is one of several good ways to motivate volunteers.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 24, 2005, 02:25:34 pm
I don't want head pats .... I want deadwood to step aside. We don't need central planning for our decentralization project. :)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: atr on October 24, 2005, 02:36:04 pm
If the people who are most active were calling the shots, I'm betting we would see a significant gain in member numbers.  Beyond the specific gripes that have already had dismissed, I can't give you a recipe for exactly how or why that would happen.

Given the Project's slow growth lately, I don't think it's crazy to consider drastic changes. But, consider how what you're proposing sounds. You're suggesting that the "most active" should be put in charge, without specifying who those people are or what they've done that qualifies them. You admit that you don't know what they'd do differently (as opposed to Russell who says he has ideas that he won't share). I admit I'm curious about what would happen, but I'm not very optimistic about your suggestion. I do wonder who the "most active" really are, and I suspect they're not the people that would end up "calling the shots," in any case.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: KBCraig on October 24, 2005, 02:42:02 pm
Fine.  Start a website- NHResults.com or something.

You misunderstand my point. The publicity already happens when an activist does something to make the news. My point is: those speaking officially for FSP damage recruiting when they disavow those engaging in liberty activism. People who are interested in FSP and activism have to do a double-take whenever "corrections" are issued to the press, pointing out that activists aren't working on behalf of FSP.

Kevin
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: atr on October 24, 2005, 02:56:14 pm
Instead of distancing FSP from activists, anyone speaking as an Official FSP Spokesperson should respond to press inquiries by saying, "The goal of the project is to get people to move to NH, and work for freedom in whatever way they choose. We (as an organization) don't take positions on issues, because the participants themselves have different opinions about what course to take. My only comment on "xxxx" is to praise their involvement in the process, no matter what I or others may think about their actions."

That doesn't sound unreasonable to me--you might try contacting Amanda directly to discuss it.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: artienewport on October 24, 2005, 03:02:22 pm
They'd have to amend the bylaws again to do that, though.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Steve on October 24, 2005, 03:02:53 pm
Fine.  Start a website- NHResults.com or something.
You misunderstand my point. The publicity already happens when an activist does something to make the news. My point is: those speaking officially for FSP damage recruiting when they disavow those engaging in liberty activism. People who are interested in FSP and activism have to do a double-take whenever "corrections" are issued to the press, pointing out that activists aren't working on behalf of FSP.
Kevin
What do you think about these pages?
http://www.freestateproject.org/news/issues/
I put quite a lot of time into them.  Rather than disavowing controversial activists, I linked to them.  As both a director and the VP of Publicity, I think I am more able than most to speak officially for the FSP. ;)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Steve on October 24, 2005, 03:16:52 pm
Hey, that's pretty cool.  Are you going to do pages for Russel Kanning's no ID civil dis?  Also, Michael Banarik's try to get into the debates?
Thanks. Russell is already on the CD page. Badnarik...that was great stuff,  but is it CD or something else, namely Ballot Access?  I put to much time into this already, but I wanted to create a couple of examples.  I think if someone else were to create a Ballot Access issue page, we'd put it up. 
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: freedomroad on October 24, 2005, 03:25:22 pm
Hey, that's pretty cool.  Are you going to do pages for Russel Kanning's no ID civil dis?  Also, Michael Banarik's try to get into the debates?
Thanks. Russell is already on the CD page. Badnarik...that was great stuff,  but is it CD or something else, namely Ballot Access?  I put to much time into this already, but I wanted to create a couple of examples.  I think if someone else were to create a Ballot Access issue page, we'd put it up. 

Badnarik was CD.  He said what he was going to do ahead of time.  He did press releases and did a march about it.  He did not fight back.  He went to jail.  The local media reported it and the national indy media reported it. 
See here for lots of good stuff, http://badnarik.org/supporters/blog/2004/10/08/michael-badnarik-arrested/
It has a cartoon, all of the info, and tons of photos.

Also, there is this,
http://underground.soulawakenings.com/tiki-index.php?page=Lauren+Canario+Arrest
and
http://underground.soulawakenings.com/tiki-browse_gallery.php?galleryId=42

Lauren Canario did great things and I think she would go better under the Kelo Case than CD but she would fit under either
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 24, 2005, 03:33:30 pm
I put quite a lot of time into them.  Rather than disavowing controversial activists, I linked to them.  As both a director and the VP of Publicity, I think I am more able than most to speak officially for the FSP. ;)
gag :-X
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: FTL_Ian on October 24, 2005, 03:36:54 pm
I'd just like to publicly say thank you to the self-proclaimed "biggest detractor" of me and FTL for emailing me personally.  We're currently ironing things out.

As I said on another thread, I hold no grudges.  All I ask for is open communication, and my posting here resulted in exactly what I wanted to happen.

Thank you!   ;D
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Dreepa on October 24, 2005, 03:39:41 pm
Who said these forums don't have a purpose? ;D ;D

BTW-- now we can all guess who it is.
I have my guess. :-X
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 24, 2005, 03:43:21 pm
I thought this forum was for discussing georgism, anarcho-geo-socialism and calling for the resignation of leadership.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: JonM on October 24, 2005, 03:45:51 pm
I thought this forum was for discussing georgism, anarcho-geo-socialism and calling for the resignation of leadership.
Green and Greenbacks are no longer welcome here, so you're going to be left with just the 3rd option.  And recruiting if you can get around to it.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 24, 2005, 03:55:17 pm
I don't do much recruiting.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: JonM on October 24, 2005, 04:01:55 pm
That must be the problem!
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: eukreign on October 24, 2005, 04:24:10 pm
That must be the problem!

I don't think it's easy to recruit people to move to NH if you live in NH ;-)

Besides, that's the the FSP is supposed to be for.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Amanda on October 24, 2005, 04:33:04 pm
Instead of distancing FSP from activists, anyone speaking as an Official FSP Spokesperson should respond to press inquiries by saying, "The goal of the project is to get people to move to NH, and work for freedom in whatever way they choose. We (as an organization) don't take positions on issues, because the participants themselves have different opinions about what course to take. My only comment on "xxxx" is to praise their involvement in the process, no matter what I or others may think about their actions."

That doesn't sound unreasonable to me--you might try contacting Amanda directly to discuss it.

I said something almost identical to the reporter, and the reporter quoted only part of what I said out of context. That particular reporter obviously had a personal agenda. (Couldn't you tell that the whole piece was slanted??)

And thanks, Adam, for pointing KBCraig my way. Instead of making unwarranted assumptions about others, it would be helpful if we contacted each other directly about things that are bothering us.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Amanda on October 24, 2005, 04:56:28 pm
Jason and others have answered a lot of your issues, so I'm just answering the comments directed at me.

Our spokesperson recently indicated to a newspaper reporter that the FSP has no position on eminent domain. What?!?!? If we can’t even admit that we do have a position on eminent domain (we’re AGAINST it!!!), what the hell do we stand for? What’s the point of joining this organization?  ???

If you had bothered to ask, I would have been happy to clarify. The reporter quoted only part of what I said, and he quoted me out of context. What I said was that while the FSP as an organization has no position on specific political issues, it's safe to say that most of our individual participants strongly oppose eminent domain. The FSP's goal is to move 20,000 libertarians and small-government activists to New Hampshire where we can enhance and expand upon the freedom that already exists in New Hampshire.

Our Director, President and Media Representative, Amanda Phillips, has recently enrolled in Harvard Law School.  It appears very doubtful that she will relocate before finishing her program. And when she does, she will presumably have a mountain of school debt and will need to find as high-paying a job as possible to work on paying it off.  Do you think she’ll be taking her first post-law school job in New Hampshire… or staying where she is in greater Boston?

Again, if you had bothered to ask, I would have been happy to tell you my plans. I'm attending Harvard Law School because the academic credential will be enormously helpful to our movement. While Yale Law School is slightly more prestigious, I didn't apply to Yale because I didn't want to move away from NH. Yale is ranked #1 and Harvard is ranked #2, depending on what year it is. I chose to attend the #2 ranked school, so you see... you're not the only one who has sacrificed for the FSP.

I plan to take the bar in both NH and MA, and unless I obtain a prestigious Supreme Court clerkship (which would delay my move to NH one more year) I will buy a place in NH after graduation. It's completely unwarranted for you to assume, with no basis for your assumption, that I am staying in MA long-term when it just is not true.

Addressing another of your unwarranted assumptions -- I don't have "a mountain of school debt" because Harvard gave me a decent grant. I will still have some student loans, but could you let me worry about my finances? I'm a little shocked that my finances were even brought up on the forum in the first place.

And to address yet another of your unwarranted assumptions -- it's fairly easy to work in Boston and live in NH; it's not that far. Even if I do decide to take a job in Boston, I can easily move to NH. So what's the problem?

I’m not trying to slam Amanda and Jason too much; they have both been extremely dedicated to the FSP concept for years, and have dedicated countless hours of their lives in promoting it. 

Then don't. Offer to help, stay positive, give constructive criticism, make specific suggestions, or go off and work for freedom in NH. We're an organization with limited resources (both financially and human) and like you we are doing the best that we can. I'm sorry that isn't good enough, and that this freedom thing didn't happen yesterday. We all want the same thing. Why can't we work together toward our common goal instead of slamming wach other?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: lloydbob1 on October 24, 2005, 05:19:23 pm
Hey, that's pretty cool.  Are you going to do pages for Russel Kanning's no ID civil dis?  Also, Michael Banarik's try to get into the debates?
Thanks. Russell is already on the CD page. Badnarik...that was great stuff,  but is it CD or something else, namely Ballot Access?  I put to much time into this already, but I wanted to create a couple of examples.  I think if someone else were to create a Ballot Access issue page, we'd put it up. 

I'm pretty sure it is Civil Disobedience to try to crash a debate you have been dinied access too.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: lloydbob1 on October 24, 2005, 05:22:29 pm
Come up with ways to increase membership

or


go shit in your hats!
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: artienewport on October 24, 2005, 05:51:01 pm
What if one doesn't own a hat?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Morey on October 24, 2005, 06:00:46 pm
You're suggesting that the "most active" should be put in charge, without specifying who those people are or what they've done that qualifies them. ... I do wonder who the "most active" really are, and I suspect they're not the people that would end up "calling the shots," in any case.
Adam, I have complete confidence that officer elections would open up both records of accomplishments, as well as the proposal of new ideas.  This alone is reason enough to undergo the ugliness of faction wars that exist even without elections.

I don't understand your last comment.  Why would you doubt that those perceived as the most effective activists would win the elections?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: atr on October 24, 2005, 08:23:13 pm
You're suggesting that the "most active" should be put in charge, without specifying who those people are or what they've done that qualifies them. ... I do wonder who the "most active" really are, and I suspect they're not the people that would end up "calling the shots," in any case.
Adam, I have complete confidence that officer elections would open up both records of accomplishments, as well as the proposal of new ideas.  This alone is reason enough to undergo the ugliness of faction wars that exist even without elections.

I don't understand your last comment.  Why would you doubt that those perceived as the most effective activists would win the elections?

Morey,

I missed your suggestion of elections. I am not opposed to elections for at least part of the Board--in fact I proposed having one elected seat way back in February (or thereabouts) when there was major reorganization being discussed, which I thought would at least inject some flesh ideas into the Board periodically.

Having said that, I am not confident that voters would select the most effective activists, but rather would vote based on other criteria, for good or bad I can't say.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: JonM on October 24, 2005, 08:35:21 pm
Well, a thought . . .

The Free State Project is a corporation.  A corporation's board is elected by the shareholders.  The officers are elected by the board.

How about selling Free State Project stock?  Those wishing to pony up the most cash will have the most influence on the selection of the board, but if enough shares are issued nobody will be able to get dominant control without giving the FSP enough money to advertise the heck out of itself.

For those donating their time, stock could be awarded as a thank you for efforts expended on behalf of the FSP.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: JonM on October 24, 2005, 08:42:08 pm
It hasn't proposed a method to run the Free State so far as I know.  It proposes to get people to New Hampshire and they get to figure out how to get from now to maximum role of government is protection of life liberty and property.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: artienewport on October 24, 2005, 08:46:40 pm
Could we quit with the repeating of the modern mission statement like broken records? Thanks.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: JonM on October 24, 2005, 08:48:04 pm
Nah, I'll probably post it again at some point.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: ThomasPaine on October 24, 2005, 08:50:13 pm
It hasn't proposed a method to run the Free State so far as I know.  It proposes to get people to New Hampshire and they get to figure out how to get from now to maximum role of government is protection of life liberty and property.

Why and when did it switch from "minimum" to "maximum" role?

TeePee
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Morey on October 24, 2005, 09:16:01 pm
I am not opposed to elections for at least part of the Board--in fact I proposed having one elected seat way back in February (or thereabouts) when there was major reorganization being discussed, which I thought would at least inject some flesh ideas into the Board periodically.
Anyone familiar with the Eddie Bradford Experience knows that throwing a single freshman into the mix is to sacrifice an activist at the altar.  I'm afraid that it has to be the whole enchilada, save for Jason.

Quote
Having said that, I am not confident that voters would select the most effective activists, but rather would vote based on other criteria, for good or bad I can't say.
An election is always a popularity contest to some degree.  So are appointments.  What have we got to lose?  Even if they run the project into the ground through bad decisions and infighting, 'tis better to have tried and failed....
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: CP ridgerunner on October 24, 2005, 09:18:04 pm
Can and does.  see http://pd.freetalklive.com
                                                                                                                                                         
  Well  here is one person that understood my posts.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: CP ridgerunner on October 24, 2005, 09:21:47 pm
Months ago I said we were the most potentially powerful and affordable recruiting tool the FSP has ever had.

I concur.

While your operation is certainly commercial in nature, and your ultimate aim is a nice paycheck for yourself, I wish the FSP would throw some of that $30k collecting dust in their accounts at you.
                                                                                                                                                             
  Commerical can be a good idea for people who think the free market is a good idea, could the show run commericals maybe highlighting NH., maybe FSP member businesses and FSP friendly businesses with possibly libertarian friendly local businesses if the show airs out of state.

Can and does. The Free State Project is advertised at least a dozen times during the show. They also advertise businesses on their website and have a monthly auction where you can win a spot on their website to advertise your business.
                                                                                                                                                                   
 Well thanks for your honest reply, I see you can understand enough of my post to reply as if you understood my points.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Morey on October 24, 2005, 09:37:10 pm
And to address yet another of your unwarranted assumptions -- it's fairly easy to work in Boston and live in NH; it's not that far. Even if I do decide to take a job in Boston, I can easily move to NH. So what's the problem?
Amanda, isn't Harvard roughly the same distance from NH as Boston?  If it isn't even that far, why aren't you in NH now?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Friday on October 24, 2005, 09:59:44 pm
Hello all,

I haven't even begun to read the 8 pages of this thread; I've been too busy responding to phone calls and personal emails.

In regards to my remarks about Jason and Amanda, I would like to clarify that I don't for a second doubt their sincerity to the FSP. I know that they both intend to move to New Hampshire at some point.  My remarks were intended to comment on an apparent conflict between the recently announced new FSP policy of encouraging FSP participants to move as soon as possible, and the recent career changes the two of them have made.  I based my remarks on public postings each of them has made, as well as public postings I have already seen made by others. I didn't think that either of them would appreciate my remarks, but they were intended to be constructive for the FSP, not personal attacks against them as individuals. Based on private feedback I have received (like I said, I haven't even had time to read what this thread says yet), I see that I misjudged how hurtful my remarks would be.

Jason and Amanda have both given far more to the development of the FSP than I have or could. It would not even exist if not for both of them. I don't want either of them to leave, I admire and respect both of them, and I am sincerely sorry for any pain or embarassment I have caused either of them. I didn't ask them what their relocation plans were, I just speculated and then posted it publicly. It was very bad form. I apologize to both of them.

--Sandy
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Amanda on October 24, 2005, 10:02:22 pm
And to address yet another of your unwarranted assumptions -- it's fairly easy to work in Boston and live in NH; it's not that far. Even if I do decide to take a job in Boston, I can easily move to NH. So what's the problem?
Amanda, isn't Harvard roughly the same distance from NH as Boston?  If it isn't even that far, why aren't you in NH now?

No, it's slightly closer to NH than Boston. I haven't moved because I can't afford to move while in grad school. I can't believe we're talking about my finances and my living situation on the freakin forum. Why aren't you in NH now?Are you any less dedicated to the FSP because *you* haven't moved yet?

Enough dick waving, folks! Why don't we think about, say... how to recruit more participants?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: eukreign on October 24, 2005, 10:14:12 pm
Why don't we think about, say... how to recruit more participants?

Can you tell us more about the PR firm that is being hired? Or can i read about that somewhere?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: JonM on October 24, 2005, 10:19:41 pm
How's this?

If you can't recruit, move.  If you can recruit, stay where you are and RECRUIT!
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Morey on October 24, 2005, 10:28:10 pm
No, it's slightly closer to NH than Boston. I haven't moved because I can't afford to move while in grad school. I can't believe we're talking about my finances and my living situation on the freakin forum.
Hey, I didn't ask for details.  If your personal situation won't allow you to go until 2008, then that's what we have to deal with.  Saying you plan to buy a house straight out of college kind of makes it sound like you're set.

Quote
Why aren't you in NH now?Are you any less dedicated to the FSP because *you* haven't moved yet?
I'm Joe Bloggs, faceless participant.  You're the bloody President of the org.  There is a big difference in how your participation affects our morale and credibility from what I do as an individual participant.  You already know all of this.  And for the record, I'll be there in '06.

How about if we turn this discussion away from individual personalities and toward the root issues of reforming the FSP?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Amanda on October 24, 2005, 10:58:34 pm
Quote
Why aren't you in NH now?Are you any less dedicated to the FSP because *you* haven't moved yet?
I'm Joe Bloggs, faceless participant.  You're the bloody President of the org.  There is a big difference in how your participation affects our morale and credibility from what I do as an individual participant.  You already know all of this.  And for the record, I'll be there in '06.

But you see, I am just like everyone else. I will move when I am able to move. My commitment was to move when the FSP reaches 20,000 participants. I am happy for and I applaud all the early movers, and I, too, will be moving before we reach 20,000. But we shouldn't be backbiting and sniping at those who are moving later than us. I don't see Cal and Karen Pratt complaining that you're moving in 2006 when they moved in 2003.They're just happy you're moving. Why all the dick waving ore who moved before whom?

How about if we turn this discussion away from individual personalities and toward the root issues of reforming the FSP?

I'd be happy to do that. I didn't make this personal, you know. Sandy brought up my personal situation, and I corrected the many mistaken assumptions. I'm more than happy to not talk about personal stuff, and it appears that Sandy dropped it.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Amanda on October 24, 2005, 10:59:55 pm
Hello all,

I haven't even begun to read the 8 pages of this thread; I've been too busy responding to phone calls and personal emails.

In regards to my remarks about Jason and Amanda, I would like to clarify that I don't for a second doubt their sincerity to the FSP. I know that they both intend to move to New Hampshire at some point.  My remarks were intended to comment on an apparent conflict between the recently announced new FSP policy of encouraging FSP participants to move as soon as possible, and the recent career changes the two of them have made.  I based my remarks on public postings each of them has made, as well as public postings I have already seen made by others. I didn't think that either of them would appreciate my remarks, but they were intended to be constructive for the FSP, not personal attacks against them as individuals. Based on private feedback I have received (like I said, I haven't even had time to read what this thread says yet), I see that I misjudged how hurtful my remarks would be.

Jason and Amanda have both given far more to the development of the FSP than I have or could. It would not even exist if not for both of them. I don't want either of them to leave, I admire and respect both of them, and I am sincerely sorry for any pain or embarassment I have caused either of them. I didn't ask them what their relocation plans were, I just speculated and then posted it publicly. It was very bad form. I apologize to both of them.

--Sandy


Thank you, that was nice of you.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Pat K on October 25, 2005, 12:01:03 am
Dick waving?= Is that one of those Harvard Law Terms?  ;D


Amanda and Jason are allowed to have personal lives. I really doubt there would be a FSP with out them and other
on the board. I don't always agree on their  we take no stand stand.But big deal. On the other hand maybe the folks
on the board will see that this little forum came alive. Maybe we can make it busy like this in a more productive way.

Maybe everyone should take a deep breath.

God I really hate being fucking reasonable. ;D

I blame that skinny bastard Varrin. ;D
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Morey on October 25, 2005, 12:11:58 am
How about if we turn this discussion away from individual personalities and toward the root issues of reforming the FSP?

I'd be happy to do that.
Super.  We have several pages of commentary here, less than half of which is personal attacks and ankle biting.  I'd love to hear your take on KBCraig's excellent suggestion, the possibility of standing for elections, and communications from the back room. 

By the way, I'm glad to see you back here.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Friday on October 25, 2005, 12:27:35 am
It appears I'm damned no matter what I say or do.  ;)

On the one hand, I have received delightfully`nasty email, full of personal insults the like of which I have never slung publicly *or* privately to anyone in the FSP, in response to my post. On the other hand, as soon as I posted my public apology to Jason and Amanda for any perceived personal attack, I was promptly accused of "backing off completely" from my original post.  I really wasn't kidding about not even having had time to read this thread yet. Believe it or not, I have a job, and had laundry to do.  And made some phone calls. And responded to the nasty email with far more courtesy than it deserved.

With the exception of my previously stated regret about jumping to conclusions about Jason and Amanda's personal future plans, and coming across as more hostile and aggressive towards them than I intended or feel, I stand by everything I said in my post.  It's the truth.  After various discussions, I suspect that what little hope I had that it might make a positive difference was unduly optimistic.  But I still feel it was the right thing to do, making the attempt.  :)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: KBCraig on October 25, 2005, 12:29:55 am
Fine.  Start a website- NHResults.com or something.
You misunderstand my point. The publicity already happens when an activist does something to make the news. My point is: those speaking officially for FSP damage recruiting when they disavow those engaging in liberty activism. People who are interested in FSP and activism have to do a double-take whenever "corrections" are issued to the press, pointing out that activists aren't working on behalf of FSP.
Kevin
What do you think about these pages?
http://www.freestateproject.org/news/issues/
I put quite a lot of time into them.  Rather than disavowing controversial activists, I linked to them.  As both a director and the VP of Publicity, I think I am more able than most to speak officially for the FSP. ;)

Those are very good. But do they offset quotes by Amanda, or a letter to the editor by Steve Cobb, disavowing the activists you linked to? Their comments appeared in the news coverage, after all.

Kevin
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Steve on October 25, 2005, 12:42:15 am
Fine.  Start a website- NHResults.com or something.
You misunderstand my point. The publicity already happens when an activist does something to make the news. My point is: those speaking officially for FSP damage recruiting when they disavow those engaging in liberty activism. People who are interested in FSP and activism have to do a double-take whenever "corrections" are issued to the press, pointing out that activists aren't working on behalf of FSP.
Kevin
What do you think about these pages?
http://www.freestateproject.org/news/issues/
I put quite a lot of time into them.  Rather than disavowing controversial activists, I linked to them.  As both a director and the VP of Publicity, I think I am more able than most to speak officially for the FSP. ;)

Those are very good. But do they offset quotes by Amanda, or a letter to the editor by Steve Cobb, disavowing the activists you linked to? Their comments appeared in the news coverage, after all.

Kevin
Funny you should bring that up: the CD page (llinked to from the Issues page) is taken directly from that very same LTE. Read it again.  While we didn't embrace these activists (we can't, since many FSP participants disapprove of the methods), but we didn't "disavow" them either.  I offered Mike Fisher to pay to make several hundred customized emery boards; personally I support him completely.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: KBCraig on October 25, 2005, 12:55:18 am
I said something almost identical to the reporter, and the reporter quoted only part of what I said out of context. That particular reporter obviously had a personal agenda. (Couldn't you tell that the whole piece was slanted??)

That's perfectly believable, and my personal disgust with the journalistic process is why I never entered the field of journalism, despite having the degree.

Quote
And thanks, Adam, for pointing KBCraig my way. Instead of making unwarranted assumptions about others, it would be helpful if we contacted each other directly about things that are bothering us.

To be honest, it never occurred to me to contact you directly. I'm fully aware of your incredible work/school/mom workload, and I'm in awe that you have any time at all for the FSP, especially travelling to speak. I salute your hard work.

Let me also say that I'm glad to see you and Jason posting here again. It's unfortunate that the forum deteriorated so badly from its purpose, but I believe JonM has it back on track. Now that the signal:crap ratio is better, the forum is again a good place for all of the leadership to let the participants know what's going on -- especially issuing correction notices, letting us know if you've been misquoted or taken out of context when you're portrayed in the press as backing away from FSP activists' activities.

Now... let's go recruit some people!

Kevin
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Friday on October 25, 2005, 06:01:28 am
I received an email that said "...I will not correspond with someone if I cannot trust him or her not to publish my words and use them against me. "  I'm not sure what particular thing I said that the writer feels was a betrayal of something said in confidence in personal email.  However, it's just flat-out wrong.  Everything I wrote was based on my personal observations, my personal interactions with members of the Board and department heads, this forum, the NH Underground forum, Amanda's personal blog (which the FSP site links to), the publicly posted FSP financial statements, and face-to-face conversations with members in good standing (i.e. neither Kat nor Russell  :P ).  Anyone told otherwise is being fed bad information.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 25, 2005, 06:50:11 am
The essence of leadership is not denying any problems and then telling the members "Go recruit!".
The rest of us are not more brilliant or insightful than the current leadership. We just want you to get out of the way.
Since we are not aggressive, if you keep stonewalling us, we will just ignore you and go about our work. This movement will happen with or without your help or permission.
The fsp leadership does a poor job of representing the membership, so the next time one of you stabs a wonderful activist like Lauren Canario in the back, we will have to correct it as best we can. We all represent and recruit for this movement and will do so. Since the fsp website does not properly represent the vitality and excitement of this movement, we are forced to direct people to other sources of information. The fsp leadership is unelected and does not represent us. We represent ourselves and that is how I will interact with anyone I come in contact with, including the media.

We want "liberty in our lifetime" and we will make it happen.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: kater on October 25, 2005, 07:12:29 am
Russell,

You couldn't be more right: the FSP leadership doesn't represent you.  It isn't meant to.  In fact, that's the point of asking people to take credit/responsibility for their own actions--so you represent yourself.  Most importantly, as a person who's already moved to New Hampshire, your responsibility to the FSP at this point is to do what you do best: be an activist for liberty in this state.  Why you enjoy these sniper attacks on an organization that is no longer of primary concern to you is beyond me.

Kate
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 25, 2005, 07:42:22 am
Guys like Amanda and Steve Cobb act like they represent us to the media often. I am going to correct that.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 25, 2005, 07:45:04 am
Why you enjoy these sniper attacks on an organization that is no longer of primary concern to you is beyond me.
I want more activists to move to NH and the fsp is doing a poor job of that and is misrepresenting members. That is why I care and will do what I can to fix it.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Dreepa on October 25, 2005, 07:53:18 am
/stops waving his dick around.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: kater on October 25, 2005, 08:11:21 am
I am going to correct that.

Well, isn't that generous of you.  Do you care much if other members disagree with you?  Or are you so patently right that it doesn't matter?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Dreepa on October 25, 2005, 08:13:06 am
Ok people say there are not enough ideas.

1. Better BOD meeting minutes.
2. A specific plan by the board for the upcoming year for:
 Â    How many members for certain deadlines. (Goals)
 Â    How to raise more money.
 Â    How to spend that money wisely.
 Â    How to teach people how to recruit.
 Â    Plans to get the new people very active
 Â    Plans to give more info about NH so people can move.
3.  Open communication about the above.
4.  Something like the activist army where the 'gogetters' want to do more.  (I have no idea why it failed but all the people bitching on this forum can either join or be quiet.  -- or at least put your dick back in your pants.)
5.  Plan some way of commenting, without comprising the FSP goals, when activists do take action. (and maybe that is being done and the reporters aren't reporting-- but if that is the case then the FSP should then get a retraction or post the full story on the website)
6. Excite the local groups

I am sure there are other ideas.
I really don't care about elections. But if people are too busy they should step down and let someone with the time/energy to join the board.

Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: kater on October 25, 2005, 08:16:50 am
I posted favorably in response to Dreepa on the Underground... So another, "Amen!" from me here. ;)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: jeanius on October 25, 2005, 08:23:59 am
And a cheer from me too Dreepa.  Constructive rational suggestions!  I'll work on the minutes.  Meetings already done will be as always.  I'll see what we can come up with for future meetings.

Jean
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: lloydbob1 on October 25, 2005, 08:33:50 am
Hello all,

I haven't even begun to read the 8 pages of this thread; I've been too busy responding to phone calls and personal emails.

In regards to my remarks about Jason and Amanda, I would like to clarify that I don't for a second doubt their sincerity to the FSP. I know that they both intend to move to New Hampshire at some point.  My remarks were intended to comment on an apparent conflict between the recently announced new FSP policy of encouraging FSP participants to move as soon as possible, and the recent career changes the two of them have made.  I based my remarks on public postings each of them has made, as well as public postings I have already seen made by others. I didn't think that either of them would appreciate my remarks, but they were intended to be constructive for the FSP, not personal attacks against them as individuals. Based on private feedback I have received (like I said, I haven't even had time to read what this thread says yet), I see that I misjudged how hurtful my remarks would be.

Jason and Amanda have both given far more to the development of the FSP than I have or could. It would not even exist if not for both of them. I don't want either of them to leave, I admire and respect both of them, and I am sincerely sorry for any pain or embarassment I have caused either of them. I didn't ask them what their relocation plans were, I just speculated and then posted it publicly. It was very bad form. I apologize to both of them.

--Sandy


Well said, Sandy, but, the potential members we're not reaching, don't know anything about what Jason and Amanda are doing.  I don't believe their activities are behind our inability to recruit.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: artienewport on October 25, 2005, 08:43:59 am
And a cheer from me too Dreepa.  Constructive rational suggestions!  I'll work on the minutes.  Meetings already done will be as always.  I'll see what we can come up with for future meetings.

Howabout a recording? Would that be so difficult?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: "Hagrid" on October 25, 2005, 09:03:11 am
1. Better BOD meeting minutes.
3.  Open communication about the above.

While I understand the frustration over short minutes, I'd point to overall communication problems as the real problem, not just short minutes.  Solve communication issues better and the minutes don't matter.

Quote
2. A specific plan by the board for the upcoming year for:
     How many members for certain deadlines. (Goals)

Agreed.... but that depends on volunteers and recruitment.


Quote
     How to raise more money.

Money raising has not really been an issue.  History says that we can count on funds for concrete projects

Quote
     How to spend that money wisely.

The arguments over spending money on a PR firm were mostly about that.  It's a #1 concern.

Quote
     How to teach people how to recruit.

See #4 on the AA.  Easier said than done.

Quote
     Plans to get the new people very active

If you have one, please share it.  I think too many of us are stumped based on past failures to do just that.

Quote
     Plans to give more info about NH so people can move.

As former NH Info head, the lack of infrastructure (and general chaos, resistance, infighting, etc etc) hampered much of that... and I found myself focusing more and more on better ways to get info out there.  The newsletter and improved mailings was one growth of that, and website improvements are another....   The info is there, it's been clumped together on one page, which was always on my todo list to fix and got pushed back again and again because at least it was there on one page now, and the few volunteers for help to fix it, despite requests a few times, kept disappearing silently, instead of producing new Info pages as they promised to...

Jean is now actively working to revamp the NH Info pages as her primary goal, while I continue to focus on infrastructure for information in general.  "groupware" is code for "infrastructure for better communication".

The information is out there now, don't expect "brand new" info to appear, just better presentation (important I grant you).... I find the biggest resistance comes from those who want a job ahead of time and cheap housing handed to them on platters, along with warm weather and  no family stress in moving.  Not much NH info can do there....

Quote
4.  Something like the activist army where the 'gogetters' want to do more.  (I have no idea why it failed but all the people bitching on this forum can either join or be quiet.  -- or at least put your dick back in your pants.)

As one of the people behind the Activist Army (Jean and I were the main force behind that, writing most of it ourselves, and tracking results), I'll tell you that the response was disappointingly small, despite our attempting to make the initial group small enough to have potentially good results.  We didn't publicize it heavily, wanting only those who really wanted to help recruit to join us, and have a good percentage of response in our first attempt. [ In other words, having just 50 committed people is better than 500 uncommitted people who just join because we pushed them into it]  The number of people who took _any_ action was way under 10% of the total signed up, and without naming names, I can safely say that few if any of the 'dick wagglers' did much of anything at all.  Most of those who did are in 'leadership' in some form now.

AA was a failure, despite starting small, giving out bite sized assignments meant to be easily fufilled, and asking only those already paying close attention to the FSP to get involved.  As a result, I lost much faith in the membership.  I was a big proponent of getting the membership active... and yet the results just were not there....   If you can't bother to post 10 flyers for the FSP, are you really going to move cross county to NH, and then hold signs, knock on doors, and be politically involved?  Of course not...  At this point, even of those who have moved, the 10% rule still applies.... and I expect it will continue, based on the nonsense some vocal anti-political members continue to waste the time and energy of everyone else on.  Those of us working politically have an uphill fight against some of our own radical fringes, sadly enough.
If I could change the SOI, I'd add the word 'politically within the system', as we can do the most there, and most of the radical fringe don't even register to vote, let along run for office.

Quote
5.  Plan some way of commenting, without comprising the FSP goals, when activists do take action. (and maybe that is being done and the reporters aren't reporting-- but if that is the case then the FSP should then get a retraction or post the full story on the website)

I'm against comments, but for noting actions.  My suggested solution has been to just have a running feed of news stories (ala Google News).  No 'Yes, we support this', but also no 'We don't support this', merely a running list of 'news'.  We're much closer to that now than we were 6 months, and we need to automate it, and not cherry pick.  The FSP should stay neutral: be the umbrella - reach out to people who might disagree with 20%, but agree with 80%...  The radical fundamentalists should not be in control, on any level.  Disclaimer it all with a simple "This is the latest activist news in NH according to Google' style notice...

Quote
6. Excite the local groups

Sounds good.  How?

Quote
I really don't care about elections. But if people are too busy they should step down and let someone with the time/energy to join the board.

Elections were tried and failed.   Lack of response among other reasons, as well as a simple fact: current leadership is mostly based on people who have contributed energy and gotten involved.
 I can't tell you the number of volunteers we'd have who disappear without ever producing what they promised they would.

Want to be a leader?  If you volunteer, in short fashion, you will be.  That isn't to say I don't have problems with current leadership.... I do... and they know it... but I don't think elections are the answer... holding people responsible is.... and some people are being held responsible these days... which is a slow change from the past.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: CP ridgerunner on October 25, 2005, 09:21:52 am
Can and does.  see http://pd.freetalklive.com
                                                                                                                                                       
          Ok, I see the show goes out over 1470- AM out of Alcoa/ Maryville TN. which is just outside of Knoxville. I did not know that because I never listen to AM, I will have to see if I can pick up that station.                       
  WGOW out of CHattanooga has both an FM and an AM, I think the FM has a bigger audience. The night time weekday slots are filled with Duke and the DR.,Laura Ingram( damn I can't stand  that show, at least Savage let counter callers on even if he did call them names)  Phil Henry and Coast To Coast. So probally it would have the be one of the weekend slots. Does it have to be on live?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Steve on October 25, 2005, 10:01:00 am
I really don't care about elections. But if people are too busy they should step down and let someone with the time/energy to join the board.
Elections were tried and failed.   Lack of response among other reasons, as well as a simple fact: current leadership is mostly based on people who have contributed energy and gotten involved.
 I can't tell you the number of volunteers we'd have who disappear without ever producing what they promised they would.

Want to be a leader?  If you volunteer, in short fashion, you will be.  That isn't to say I don't have problems with current leadership.... I do... and they know it... but I don't think elections are the answer... holding people responsible is.... and some people are being held responsible these days... which is a slow change from the past.
Well said.  Probably the single biggest misconception here is the handful of volunteer Board members somehow can make the FSP happen, and that they are somehow blocking others from involvement.  I have always considered the FSP to be something akin to Linux, and my #1 priority has always been decentralization.  To advertise ways to get involved, I made both these two pages:
http://www.freestateproject.org/about/organization.php
http://www.freestateproject.org/getinvolved/activistcenter.php

No one is going to jump from Forum debatertarian directly Board member, but it's not that hard, either.  We're desperately short of doers, as talkers outnumber them 10:1.  And thanks, but we don't need volunteers who promise to deliver and then disappear, leaving us wondering whether to replace them or keep begging them to come back.  We need self starters, responsible people capable of seeing a project through to completion.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 25, 2005, 10:22:51 am
The self starters are going around you.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Steve on October 25, 2005, 10:32:27 am
I am going to correct that.

Well, isn't that generous of you.  Do you care much if other members disagree with you?  Or are you so patently right that it doesn't matter?
There are nearly 7000 FSP participants--how can the FSP express a position that all, or even a majority, agree upon?  We have only one common denominator:
(http://photos.freestateproject.org/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=3677&g2_serialNumber=2)
When I speak for the FSP, I can only offer our mission statement, and perhaps hint at how it applies to a given situation.  But again: the FSP is just the bus, and there are other organizations within New Hampshire to implement reform.  Why should the FSP step on their territory?  Our own mission is challenging enough.  But really, this sort of difficulty doesn't come up often.  Kate, you'll notice that this particular howler monkey is pretty short on concrete examples, both of our own failings and his own accomplishments.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Dreepa on October 25, 2005, 11:13:29 am
More ideas.

Reapproach the following Orgs

Cato
National LP
State LPs in surrounding States
National RLC
State RLC in surrounding States
NORML
National DLC
State RLC in surround States
National NRA
Local Gun clubs
Any libertarian minded org.

Tell them it is time to stand up and be counted.. that they should mention the FSP and give the FSP a formal endorsement.
Yes I know they have been tried before..
Someone once mentioned that the LP wants to have 5000 more members.. Tell them that the FSP can help with recuitment of those 5000 if they help us.  Hell I would join the LP ( then they only need 4999 more  ;) )

I have no contact with any of these groups so I wouldn't be of much use but I think that many people in the FSP are part of some of these groups.

Just throwing out ideas  feel free to attack them now.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: kater on October 25, 2005, 11:21:29 am
Not attacking...  Some of that can be done and some can't; we can't promise, for example, to help a political party if they mention us.  That doesn't mean that we can't find some other way to make an endorsement (of us) attractive to them...  But the reality also is that as national parties, these folks do better spread out; imagine the reaction of 49 state LPs if the national LP told everyone to move to New Hampshire.  I don't know how to work around that, but I know it's a problem.

We do have a bazillion resources that I don't think we're using to the hilt, and I've posted about that on the forum ad nauseum.  I still believe that the Liaisons program should be completely overhauled, and I believe that effective group outreach might depend on that.  (See http://forum.freestateproject.org//index.php?topic=10472.0)  Doesn't appear to be a popular idea, and I'm too busy with other things to lend enough of a hand. 

Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Dreepa on October 25, 2005, 11:27:55 am
Not attacking...  Some of that can be done and some can't; we can't promise, for example, to help a political party if they mention us.  That doesn't mean that we can't find some other way to make an endorsement (of us) attractive to them...  But the reality also is that as national parties, these folks do better spread out; imagine the reaction of 49 state LPs if the national LP told everyone to move to New Hampshire.  I don't know how to work around that, but I know it's a problem.

We do have a bazillion resources that I don't think we're using to the hilt, and I've posted about that on the forum ad nauseum.  I still believe that the Liaisons program should be completely overhauled, and I believe that effective group outreach might depend on that.  (See http://forum.freestateproject.org//index.php?topic=10472.0)  Doesn't appear to be a popular idea, and I'm too busy with other things to lend enough of a hand. 


No Kate I don't think you are attacking me :)
But the National LP could put out a small blurb saying that they think that the FSP is a good idea/experiment etc etc and provide a link on their website.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: kater on October 25, 2005, 11:33:37 am
That'd be great.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: eukreign on October 25, 2005, 11:55:54 am
When I speak for the FSP, I can only offer our mission statement, and perhaps hint at how it applies to a given situation.

The Republican Party says it's for small government. The FSP says it's also for small government.

Without looking at the people and their actions of either group you do not really know what they stand for. Most people have become jaded (especially those looking for an alternative like the free state) by nice sounding mission statements and promises.

I'm sure plenty of people read the Free State Project mission statement and see it as that, just another promise, unless they can see what the members are doing.

If I had stumbled on the FSP website before hearing about it from activists I would have chucked it up to just another organization trying to get our hopes up to later turn on us.

But the FSP is just a bus you say. I don't think it's "just" a bus. If it was "just" a bus we could all go to Greyhound and spare ourselves the trouble of starting another bus company. The FSP IS POLITICAL. And since it is political it has to look different from all the other political parties to gain attention by showing that it not only talks about Freedom but also has activists supporting freedom.

The issue of FSP members having opposing beliefs is not totally correct. Yes, we may approach it differently but at the core we still believe the same thing. If the media asks why is one FSP member supporting taking Souters house and another opposing you explain that that they both oppose eminent domain but approach the situation differently. Furthermore, I don't think we can afford having someone as an FSP member who does not oppose eminent domain and thus I see no problem for the FSP in taking a stance on this. Lauren Canario should have been supported, I don't think there is a single FSP member who would disagree with what she is trying to do in New London.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Morey on October 25, 2005, 12:15:33 pm
These specific suggestions for recruitment are great stuff, possibly more important than the idea of overcoming the absent/secretive/anti leadership issue.  But they are still a bit off course for this thread.  I'm grateful that we have seen some response here, but a little disappointed that the heart of the message has been abandoned so quickly.  When we face criticism from a prominent buraucrat, will we scatter like mice, or stay unified, refine the message and press on?  I hope it is the latter.

So far we have the following positives to show for this effort:

This is a great start.  Obviously not all detractors are in agreement with the best course of action, but it would be great to see a few more people step up and support the ideas here or provide their own.

Dreepa said people who don't have time should step aside, with our thanks for everything they have done.  I couldn't agree more.  I would also add that if the fire is too hot, you shouldn't be in the kitchen.

Seth, I'm not going to spar with you this time.  There is already too much defensiveness in play here.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: ThomasPaine on October 25, 2005, 12:37:59 pm
Quote
The issue of FSP members having opposing beliefs is not totally correct. Yes, we may approach it differently but at the core we still believe the same thing. If the media asks why is one FSP member supporting taking Souters house and another opposing you explain that that they both oppose eminent domain but approach the situation differently. Furthermore, I don't think we can afford having someone as an FSP member who does not oppose eminent domain and thus I see no problem for the FSP in taking a stance on this. Lauren Canario should have been supported, I don't think there is a single FSP member who would disagree with what she is trying to do in New London.

Unfortunately the opposing beliefs center around the paradoxical idea of using civil disobedience/anarchism as a political strategy. So yes there can be people within the FSP who look at Lauren's actions as hurting the political strategy that will be needed to build an eventual majority political party.

The FSP has a problem. It doesn't know whether it should promote the state's maximum role as protecting life, liberty and property or the state's minimum role. One precludes anarchism while the other doesn't. The early movers who are now being critical of the FSP direction appear to be mostly anarchists.

Can someone please explain to me why this was changed on the SOI?

TeePee
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: eukreign on October 25, 2005, 12:48:10 pm
So yes there can be people within the FSP who look at Lauren's actions as hurting the political strategy that will be needed to build an eventual majority political party.

I didn't know it was a goal to eventually have a majority political party. I mean, a long time ago the Republican party was much better so what would prevent any political party that we come up with from taking the same course?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Steve on October 25, 2005, 12:48:42 pm
Not attacking...  Some of that can be done and some can't; we can't promise, for example, to help a political party if they mention us.  That doesn't mean that we can't find some other way to make an endorsement (of us) attractive to them...  But the reality also is that as national parties, these folks do better spread out; imagine the reaction of 49 state LPs if the national LP told everyone to move to New Hampshire.  I don't know how to work around that, but I know it's a problem.

We do have a bazillion resources that I don't think we're using to the hilt, and I've posted about that on the forum ad nauseum.  I still believe that the Liaisons program should be completely overhauled, and I believe that effective group outreach might depend on that.  (See http://forum.freestateproject.org//index.php?topic=10472.0)  Doesn't appear to be a popular idea, and I'm too busy with other things to lend enough of a hand. 


No Kate I don't think you are attacking me :)
But the National LP could put out a small blurb saying that they think that the FSP is a good idea/experiment etc etc and provide a link on their website.
Dreepa, the national LP has decided it is not their place to formally endorse us, but they do publish articles about us in the LP News, which amounts to the same thing.  No offense, but all your ideas and more are already on the list, and have been for years.  Cato? We've been lobbying them for a long time--I just sent them my annual contribution, and enclosed an FSP refrigerator magnet as a reminder.  But they wouldn't touch us with a ten-foot pole as long as we've got a forum as swampy as this one.  What we need is *manpower*, with competence and commitment.  There are a lot of boxes on the org chart without names attached:
http://www.freestateproject.org/about/organization.php
We need people to assume responsibility for a specific area, and pursue it full speed.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Steve on October 25, 2005, 12:51:23 pm
The FSP has a problem. It doesn't know whether it should promote the state's maximum role as protecting life, liberty and property or the state's minimum role. One precludes anarchism while the other doesn't. The early movers who are now being critical of the FSP direction appear to be mostly anarchists.

Can someone please explain to me why this was changed on the SOI?

TeePee
What are you talking about? I'm the one who changed the phrasing from "sole role" to "maximum role".  "minimum" was never in there.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: atr on October 25, 2005, 01:13:10 pm
So far we have the following positives to show for this effort:
  • ...
  • ...
  • One board member willing to consider elected representation

This is a great start.  Obviously not all detractors are in agreement with the best course of action, but it would be great to see a few more people step up and support the ideas here or provide their own.

Two points of clarification--

First, I was already willing to consider Board elections (and have proposed them), but I would not characterize it as "elected representation." The Board's job is not to represent Participants, but to oversee the organization's mission--getting pro-liberty activists to move to New Hampshire.

Second, I am no longer a member of the Board, having resigned about a week ago.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: atr on October 25, 2005, 01:15:27 pm
When I speak for the FSP, I can only offer our mission statement, and perhaps hint at how it applies to a given situation.

The Republican Party says it's for small government. The FSP says it's also for small government.

Without looking at the people and their actions of either group you do not really know what they stand for. Most people have become jaded (especially those looking for an alternative like the free state) by nice sounding mission statements and promises.

The Republican Party works to get its candidates elected (and appointed) to positions in government.

The FSP works to get pro-liberty activists to move to New Hampshire, a lot of them.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: "Hagrid" on October 25, 2005, 01:28:16 pm
Seth, I'm not going to spar with you this time.  There is already too much defensiveness in play here.

Morey, no offense intended... as far as I'm concerned, you're one of the rare few who DO stuff... not just talk.  We're on the same side.

As for sparring, I'm only pointing out that way too many of the suggestions aren't new, have been tried, or sound great but have no real substance.  "Get the membership more involved" is a great idea... we all agree on it... HOW?  You come up with a real, fresh previously unconsidered or tested PLAN, and watch how many of the 'leadership' back you up on making it happen.  So much for standing in the way....

What I do see is some of the same old detractors piping up in their semi-regular manner, criticizing the FSP leadership (nothing new there), and once again, they have no plan just want anarchy or fundmentalism, they only want "something different".  Never mind that they aren't saying anything new or different for ideas.  I have said it before and will again: if you volunteer, and you PERFORM (and not just talk), you will get somewhere.

The FSP is full of negative nellies.... Conservative?  Reactionary is more like it.
We need more positive souls to take the jobs that need to be done...

Volunteer and be part of the solution... or sit on the sidelines and namecall and hold up protest signs and burn FSP flags... your choice.
 
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: eukreign on October 25, 2005, 01:31:04 pm
The Republican Party works to get its candidates elected (and appointed) to positions in government.

The FSP works to get pro-liberty activists to move to New Hampshire, a lot of them.

So you agree then that they are both almost identical in shape. They both have a message and try to get people to agree with the message and support them (in the Rep. case it's through voting and donations and in the FSPs case it's through sign ups and donations).

The core at both of them is a PR Firm.  A PR Firm can make or break an organization of this type.

And we NEED A REALLY GOOD PR Firm to make the FSP succeed.

Look at the MINI Cooper, it's too expensive for what you get, takes 3-4 months of waiting to order one, small 4 cyl. engine, yet BMW has sold more than twice as many as predicted! The reason is simple, they hired the best PR Firm they could and the PR Firm really did their research on the car and it's history and created a community around the car and made it fun to be part of the community. Without the success of their PR Firm I doubt there would be any MINI Coopers in America much less in almost every country in the world.

We probably will not be able to hire a firm with that much talent but I think if we find one that is willing to guide us and work with us so that we can do some of the grunt work and possibly we could lower the price and still get the benefit of professionals.

Just a thought...
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Steve on October 25, 2005, 01:32:42 pm
So far we have the following positives to show for this effort:
  • Possible revival of press releases that applaud (but not endorse) NH activists efforts.
  • Willingness to share more details of BoD discussions in notes
  • One board member willing to consider elected representation

This is a great start.  Obviously not all detractors are in agreement with the best course of action, but it would be great to see a few more people step up and support the ideas here or provide their own.

Dreepa said people who don't have time should step aside, with our thanks for everything they have done.  I couldn't agree more.  I would also add that if the fire is too hot, you shouldn't be in the kitchen.
Morey, how do those things get us closer to 20K? What we need are more people *doing* things.  Not rehashing old ideas, not talking, not criticizing, but doing.  There are plenty of open opportunities:
http://www.freestateproject.org/about/organization.php
http://freestateproject.org/getinvolved/activistcenter.php
Not a one of the things you mention above compares with your having created the FSP matchbooks that were so popular at MassCan, or the presence at MassCan of Sandy, Amanda, Lloyd and others, which got us several new signups and the endorsement of Keith Stroup, national director of NORML:
http://photos.freestateproject.org/main.php?g2_view=core.ShowItem&g2_itemId=5019
We need more of this constructive action, not talk.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: ThomasPaine on October 25, 2005, 01:34:20 pm
The FSP has a problem. It doesn't know whether it should promote the state's maximum role as protecting life, liberty and property or the state's minimum role. One precludes anarchism while the other doesn't. The early movers who are now being critical of the FSP direction appear to be mostly anarchists.

Can someone please explain to me why this was changed on the SOI?

TeePee
What are you talking about? I'm the one who changed the phrasing from "sole role" to "maximum role".  "minimum" was never in there.

OK -- Thank you. I stand corrected but my point still stands -- sole role precludes no role. Why was it changed?

TeePee
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Steve on October 25, 2005, 01:37:23 pm
The FSP has a problem. It doesn't know whether it should promote the state's maximum role as protecting life, liberty and property or the state's minimum role. One precludes anarchism while the other doesn't. The early movers who are now being critical of the FSP direction appear to be mostly anarchists.

Can someone please explain to me why this was changed on the SOI?

TeePee
What are you talking about? I'm the one who changed the phrasing from "sole role" to "maximum role".  "minimum" was never in there.

OK -- Thank you. I stand corrected but my point still stands -- sole role precludes no role. Why was it changed?

TeePee
Precisely. It used to be "sole role", and then an anarchist (rightly) complained, so we changed it to the elegant "maximum role".  We're in violent agreement.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: ThomasPaine on October 25, 2005, 01:40:20 pm
So yes there can be people within the FSP who look at Lauren's actions as hurting the political strategy that will be needed to build an eventual majority political party.

I didn't know it was a goal to eventually have a majority political party. I mean, a long time ago the Republican party was much better so what would prevent any political party that we come up with from taking the same course?

How are you going to roll the state back to it's constitutional limits if not via a majority political party after you get off the bus?
How are you going to do that when half the people getting off the bus don't believe in the legitimacy of the state at all and the others are minarchists?

TeePee
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: ThomasPaine on October 25, 2005, 01:50:52 pm
Quote
Precisely. It used to be "sole role", and then an anarchist (rightly) complained, so we changed it to the elegant "maximum role".  We're in violent agreement.

And this in my opinion is the problem in a nutshell. There has never been a successful project of this kind inwhich the social movement and the political aspirations were not in complete alignment around the most fundamental question - what is the role of the state? You have unknowingly set the project up for the "violent" disagreement that is already starting to play itself out between early mover "anarchists" and the silent majority of "minarchists" who would like to sign on but can't because they don't agree with the early movers strategy. That is why this ultimately may not be sustainable.

TeePee
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: eukreign on October 25, 2005, 01:53:31 pm
How are you going to roll the state back to it's constitutional limits if not via a majority political party after you get off the bus?

By voting, civil disobedience, spreading the word about bad politicians and freedom, running for local government positions, etc.

How are you going to do that when half the people getting off the bus don't believe in the legitimacy of the state at all and the others are minarchists?

Exactly, how are you going to form a large political party if half (or maybe even more) are Anarchists/AnCaps?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Steve on October 25, 2005, 02:17:19 pm
Quote
Precisely. It used to be "sole role", and then an anarchist (rightly) complained, so we changed it to the elegant "maximum role".  We're in violent agreement.

And this in my opinion is the problem in a nutshell. There has never been a successful project of this kind inwhich the social movement and the political aspirations were not in complete alignment around the most fundamental question - what is the role of the state? You have unknowingly set the project up for the "violent" disagreement that is already starting to play itself out between early mover "anarchists" and the silent majority of "minarchists" who would like to sign on but can't because they don't agree with the early movers strategy. That is why this ultimately may not be sustainable.

TeePee
Being an anarchist myself, with mostly minarchist colleagues, I must disagree.  The LP itself is full of both anarchists and minarchists, as every political party contains a range of subtypes.  When they are polite and reasonable people they can find common ground and work to their mutual benefit.  When people are rude, childish, and obnoxious--whatever their political stripe--they create a lot of heat and noise but very little progress.  The FSP is comprised primarily of minarchists, and the mission statement is geared primarily towards them, with a minor nod to the anarchists so as not to exclude them.

>There has never been a successful project of this kind

When has there *ever* been a successful project of this kind?  We're doing some ground-breaking stuff here.
Look, we're not going to get anywhere if we keep rehashing very old discussions.  If you don't like the mission as it is now, word-smithed over years, I suspect there's not much hope for you.  If people could just be moderately polite and moderately constructive (like focused on achieving tangible goals), this thing would be a cakewalk.  It's like pulling teeth to get anyone here to make one concrete contribution; all anyone wants to share is his opinion. 
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: ThomasPaine on October 25, 2005, 02:44:59 pm
Quote
The LP itself is full of both anarchists and minarchists, as every political party contains a range of subtypes.

I rest my case. The original reason for the FSP is the failure of the LP. A big tent only works when you are one of the major parties with the potential for achieving political POWER. To get to be a majority party you have to know where the voters are. Trust me -- there are far more potential minarchists than there are anarchists.

The FSP has moved more self-proclaimed anarchists into NH then have every even existed in the state before.

TeePee
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Dreepa on October 25, 2005, 02:46:13 pm
Quote
The LP itself is full of both anarchists and minarchists, as every political party contains a range of subtypes.

I rest my case. The original reason for the FSP is the failure of the LP. A big tent only works when you are one of the major parties with the potential for achieving political POWER. To get to be a majority party you have to know where the voters are. Trust me -- there are far more potential minarchists than there are anarchists.

The FSP has moved more self-proclaimed anarchists into NH then have every even existed in the state before.

TeePee
TP.. are you a member of the FSP?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: ThomasPaine on October 25, 2005, 02:47:06 pm
Quote
Exactly, how are you going to form a large political party if half (or maybe even more) are Anarchists/AnCaps?

Good question!

TeePee
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Dreepa on October 25, 2005, 02:47:59 pm
As for sparring, I'm only pointing out that way too many of the suggestions aren't new, have been tried, or sound great but have no real substance.  "Get the membership more involved" is a great idea... we all agree on it... HOW?  You come up with a real, fresh previously unconsidered or tested PLAN, and watch how many of the 'leadership' back you up on making it happen.  So much for standing in the way....
Seth... I was trying to be positive.

I will have my plan emailed to FSP by the end of the week.  And I will volunteer to oversee it.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: atr on October 25, 2005, 03:03:38 pm
The core at both of them is a PR Firm.  A PR Firm can make or break an organization of this type.

And we NEED A REALLY GOOD PR Firm to make the FSP succeed.

The FSP recently hired a PR firm, and is exploring other possible firms in case the first does not perform as well as we hope.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: RidleyReport on October 25, 2005, 03:11:24 pm
KB wrote:

<<Gee, what's wrong with, "While the FSP doesn't endorse any particular cause or action, we cheer freedom-loving activists who choose to get involved and make a difference in their communities.">>

Right, and what's wrong with posting links to the front page news coverage that free staters inside NH are generating?

There was a front page article about us in the Concord Monitor last month, why is that not listed on the FSP website?

If the webmaster doesn't have time to do that, no problem.  Just post a permanent link to NHfree.com near the top of the FSP index page.   Russell and Kat will take care of the rest.
 
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: RidleyReport on October 25, 2005, 03:15:00 pm
Jason wrote:

<<I might add that reaming your client in public is not a great sign of intelligence.>>

reaming the creator of what may be the FSP's biggest asset in public is just as....well I won't say what you said, but you're wrong on this one Jason. 

Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: kater on October 25, 2005, 03:24:37 pm
You have unknowingly set the project up for the "violent" disagreement that is already starting to play itself out between early mover "anarchists" and the silent majority of "minarchists" who would like to sign on but can't because they don't agree with the early movers strategy. That is why this ultimately may not be sustainable.

TP, I think you're going a little far in assuming that early movers are anarchists (if I read your post correctly)--Kat and Russell are not everyone.  Frankly, of the 2 dozen or so movers I can think of off-hand (and know personally), I'm aware of maybe 4 or 5 anarchists, and I'm not one of them.

FWIW, while I got all worked up when this broke (and am still really annoyed), I think it's laughable to call the ramblings and proddings of the usual cranky blowhards a "violent disagreement."  There is a split of some sort between movers and nonmovers, but the line between the two is far too hazy to identify, and was rightly the subject of another conversation (re: mission statement). 

As long as Kat and Russell are sidelined by their attitude problems, I think (and hope) it's safe to say that there is no uniform early mover strategy--and there shouldn't be.  I welcome any pro-liberty person who moves here, and I encourage people to do what they can and help each other on common ground.  That's my strategy and I'm sticking to it.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: RidleyReport on October 25, 2005, 03:36:56 pm
With regard to the idea that some FSP board members have worked hard...that is appreciated but is not the issue.

The problem is not that leadership is doing too little.  In a sense they are doing too much!   I told Amanda this six months ago at Milly's.  Like FEMA they are not just failing to deliver, they are actively discouraging and sometimes intercepting "aid shipments."   I don't mind someone failing to deliver...I mind them failing to deliver and then standing in the way of those who *are* delivering.

If you guys in charge are not standing in the way, here is how you can prove it to me.  Give me access to the media coverage page and let me do the work posting links about FSP media coverage.  I will, if given that freedom, post pretty much all media references to the Free State Project which I can find, and pretty much all media coverage of Free Staters.  That will include the FEMA flag burn, the arrest of Lauren Canario and yes even the arrest of Larry Fox.   If I lack the technical ability to update that page, I will try to find someone who can.

The links I post there will convey, accurately, an impression THAT FREE STATERS ARE GETTING THINGS DONE and causing trouble where trouble needs causing.  You would never know that from looking at it now.  PM me with the information I need to begin fixing your media page and I - or my technically superior surrogate - will do what I/we can. 
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: ThomasPaine on October 25, 2005, 03:40:04 pm
I believe every act of non-violent civil disobedience in NH has been initiatied by the anarchist early mover wing and the concern from minarchist wing is that these will hurt efforts to build a majority political party. I only used the term "violent" in quotes in response to Steve's attempt at humor.

Quote
I encourage people to do what they can and help each other on common ground. 

There is no common ground on the fundamental question of the role of the state and that leads to one group hurting not helping the ultimate goal of the other -- to build a majority party to take political power.

TeePee
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: kater on October 25, 2005, 03:40:39 pm
Just out of curiosity, how would posting the story about Larry Fox give the impression of FSPers getting things done?  I met Larry, thought he was odd, don't understand why he'd get arrested just for having a gun, and know zip about the truth of the meth lab charges--BUT, if he did something intentional by getting arrested and possessing FSP literature in his room at home, I'm unaware of it.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: RidleyReport on October 25, 2005, 03:42:26 pm
atr

<<Would you volunteer to be the ultimate arbiter of who should get a pat on the head (Lauren, Russell, Mike) and who shouldn't (Zack Bass, or the guy in Maryland with the meth lab)?<<

I just did, before I read your post.  Looks like we are on the same page after all :)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: RidleyReport on October 25, 2005, 03:45:18 pm
Kater wrote:

<<Just out of curiosity, how would posting the story about Larry Fox give the impression of FSPers getting things done? >>

well, he got more news coverage for the FSP that week than any of the rest of us.  If it was by accident well then no gold star for him, but it still helped. 
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: kater on October 25, 2005, 03:45:50 pm
I believe every act of non-violent civil disobedience in NH has been initiatied by the anarchist early mover wing and the concern from minarchist wing is that these will hurt efforts to build a majority political party. I only used the term "violent" in quotes in response to Steve's attempt at humor.

Sure, but those acts of civil disobedience have hardly been the only acts initiated.  They may have been the ones that made the news, but more minarchist, incrementalist steps are a) happening and b) comparatively boring.  Doesn't mean they won't be the seeds of something great.

Quote
There is no common ground on the fundamental question of the role of the state and that leads to one group hurting not helping the ultimate goal of the other -- to build a majority party to take political power.

Bull.  ;)  As above, the incremental steps toward smaller government can tread in the same steps as the incremental steps toward no government.  I agree that some stunts are more helpful than others, but I saw a lot of great reaction to Mike's manicurist stunt, for example, and while some thought it was silly, it hardly made the law look reasonable.  As a "political power" type, I think the split is overrated.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: kater on October 25, 2005, 03:48:12 pm
well, he got more news coverage for the FSP that week than any of the rest of us.  If it was by accident well then no gold star for him, but it still helped. 

Yeah, news coverage that made people scared of those nutcase libertarians with their guns and meth labs.   ::)  Lol.  Come on, Dave, you can't really think that was *good* press.  If a guy who had FSP literature in his mailbox went sniper and killed innocent people, would you want us to publicize the "connection"?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: artienewport on October 25, 2005, 03:49:59 pm
Maybe I should start mailing FSP literature to inmates at the local county jail.

Hey, we gotta recruit. Right?

Should get the attention of the local paper...


That's new members and press coverage all at once! Who supports me?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 25, 2005, 04:10:45 pm
(http://photos.freestateproject.org/main.php?g2_view=core.DownloadItem&g2_itemId=3677&g2_serialNumber=2)
When I speak for the FSP, I can only offer our mission statement, and perhaps hint at how it applies to a given situation.  But again: the FSP is just the bus.... Kate, you'll notice that this particular howler monkey is pretty short on concrete examples, both of our own failings and his own accomplishments.
You seem to be the one shouting with your large letters. :)
Why do you think the fsp is just the bus? Is that part of the mission statement?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: lloydbob1 on October 25, 2005, 04:25:32 pm
, but more minarchist, incrementalist steps are a) happening and b) comparatively boring.  Doesn't mean they won't be the seeds of something great.

Then post some of these on the front page of the FSP website.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 25, 2005, 04:40:34 pm
"Get the membership more involved" is a great idea... we all agree on it... HOW?
What I do see is some of the same old detractors piping up in their semi-regular manner, criticizing the FSP leadership (nothing new there), and once again, they have no plan just want anarchy or fundmentalism, they only want "something different".
I think you guys are looking at it backwards. Try this: How can we "allow the membership to be more involved"? You should not come up with ideas and then wonder why noone is volunteering. Volunteers are attracted to exciting organizations that do not hassle them.
The fsp doesn't need more central planning. I don't have better ideas than you. I don't recruit as well as others. But the fsp should allow those that are good at those things to have room to manuever.

What I mean by "standing in the way":
- You shoot the pleasant messenger - Friday
- Morey and Dreepa have good ideas, but you will not allow them to happen.
- Dada will be good at linking to news items, but you will not let him do it.
- Larry Fox is good at ..... well ... maybe cleaning guns

I don't expect everyone in the fsp to recruit the way I do. I just want them to have the freedom inside the org. to do it. Don't make us go around you.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: kater on October 25, 2005, 04:42:41 pm
Why? I don't chose to broadcast what I'm doing.  And I don't expect anyone to look down on me for being my kind of activist.  The same goes for everyone else, I would think.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: lloydbob1 on October 25, 2005, 04:43:46 pm
I don't expect everyone in the fsp to recruit the way I do.
???
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 25, 2005, 04:48:01 pm
If a guy who had FSP literature in his mailbox went sniper and killed innocent people, would you want us to publicize the "connection"?
Sure. The fsp is not responsible for his murders, but people will be wondering.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 25, 2005, 04:50:16 pm
I don't expect everyone in the fsp to recruit the way I do.
???
I like to burn things that represent tyranny. I like to think that it attracts other activists. I cannot reveal their identities though. :)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Dreepa on October 25, 2005, 04:52:46 pm
I don't expect everyone in the fsp to recruit the way I do.
???
I like to burn things that represent tyranny. I like to think that it attracts other activists. I cannot reveal their identities though. :)
:o
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: RidleyReport on October 25, 2005, 04:53:41 pm
<<Yeah, news coverage that made people scared of those nutcase libertarians with their guns and meth labs.   Roll Eyes  Lol.  Come on, Dave, you can't really think that was *good* press.>>

I think for us all press is good press , except possibly when coverage goes sour in local NH circles.

<<  If a guy who had FSP literature in his mailbox went sniper and killed innocent people, would you want us to publicize the "connection"? >>

Would you want us to surpress it?

I do have thoughts as to how such things could be handled though...if I were in charge of the media coverage page I might put in a space for FSP leaders to rebutt articles we linked to.   I might also refrain from linking to an article if the subject of the article asked me to, or if folks on the forum overwhelmingly wanted it ignored.  Maybe that is not a pure or principled approach, but that is what I wish to do.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: RidleyReport on October 25, 2005, 04:56:13 pm
BTW...i always think this but never say it...yet I hope those of you on each side will hear it and do it.

Gandhi always tried to fight evil systems without disliking the people behind them.  He was not against individuals.

Same with us...we need to fight for and against systems but we need to not let ourselves dislike each other.

I really like Kate and Adam even tho I am on the opposite side of this debate with them sometimes; Amanda is a blast to be around and argue with, I like Don Gorman who I never agree with on method and heck I can even tolerate the Seth Lord himself!   As long as we don't let it get too personal, we will benefit from fighting!   Where we lose is where we get angry with each other.  Kat you are just too quick to get angry at folks who don't 100% see it your way. Usually you are right in the FSP context, but you're letting it get too personal.  the same could be said for many of us.  Just have fun !
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: kater on October 25, 2005, 05:05:00 pm
Russell, I'm sure some reasonable part of your brain doesn't really agree with what you just wrote.  Are you honestly saying that any press is good press?

Actually, Dada just said that.  Hmm.  Wouldn't you say that press about a murderer with FSP literature might sour the coverage in local NH circles?  When we had that conference in DC, the first question asked by a reporter was about whether or not we did background checks on members to see if we were bringing dangerous criminals into the state.  We're talking about people's homes, and we're a group that (undeservedly) has a reputation for being dangerous and unfriendly.  Apart from it just being more my nature, that's one of the major reasons I chose to act simply as a citizen, by getting to know my neighbors, finding others with similar leanings, and working within the local political structure to create incremental improvement.  MY task wouldn't be made easier by the promotion of more in-your-face activism, and that's the beauty of not labeling my activism or your or anyone else's "FSP activity."  I don't want a situation in which I feel compelled to put down your activism; I want them to coexist independently.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Klaus on October 25, 2005, 05:16:29 pm

I think you guys are looking at it backwards. Try this: How can we "allow the membership to be more involved"? You should not come up with ideas and then wonder why noone is volunteering. Volunteers are attracted to exciting organizations that do not hassle them.
The fsp doesn't need more central planning. I don't have better ideas than you. I don't recruit as well as others. But the fsp should allow those that are good at those things to have room to manuever.


Just dropped in to say that I've been contacted by 12 new volunteers in the last 10 days.  Offering assistance and direction (if they want it) to those who know what they want to do.  Those who don't know what they want to do, but want to help, figuring out what their talents are and giving them something to do that hopefully they will enjoy and be good at.  Trying not to hassle them.

Got to get back to it now.

Nik

P.S.  Interested in helping?
kreuzauge@yahoo.com
612.386.0811
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 25, 2005, 05:18:25 pm
I do agree with Dada.  8)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 25, 2005, 05:24:28 pm
Trying not to hassle them.

Got to get back to it now.

Nik

 8)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: kater on October 25, 2005, 05:27:00 pm
At the risk of sounding like Rodney King, isn't this kind of dispute more destructive than productive at this point?  Do we need to hash out every issue on which we differ?  Can't we *ever* just %$^#$% work together like adults on thing we do agree on?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Friday on October 25, 2005, 05:42:37 pm
Seditious ramblings can be helpful, Sandy... I don't have the time to read your whole message, but I think I can understand some of the frustration at the way the FSP is going, but I also don't think "FSP leadership" as a whole is to blame - except maybe there's not enough communication. We're doing lots of stuff - sending speakers out, writing articles, running ads, manning tables, selling merchandise, planning the annual festival, and the like - but do people know about that stuff? Probably not many. As far as spending the 30K, we're just trying to make sure we make the best decision. We're definitely going with a PR firm, but we have offers from two different firms and are now working on special projects to try them out. Some decisions take a really, really long time to make - and I admit some decisions take longer than I would like. We're trying to do our due diligence, but all of us also have full-time jobs, so it can take a week or two just between each step of the process. That's inevitable, unless some rich person steps up and funds the position of a full-time administrator.

I really would like to know where we can do better - realistically.

Jason, thanks for your measured response.  I don't blame the FSP leadership either; if we had several times as many active members working on recruiting as we do, it wouldn't matter so much what the Board of Directors does.  But since we don't, and since what we've been doing isn't working (and I include myself in the "we"), I think it's time to try something new.  I know you are attempting that by getting rid of the 2006 deadline, although as I posted on the other thread on the subject, I supported a very different strategy.  At the moment, I don't see how getting rid of the 2006 deadline and encouraging people to move ASAP will have much, if any, impact on our recruitment numbers.  Something else has to change.  I'm sure that a lot of ideas will be thrown out here (and, if history is any indication, a lot of mud will be thrown, too  :P ).
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Friday on October 25, 2005, 06:02:25 pm
I'm going to have to address these piecemeal.  There's a lot of ground covered in your post Sandy!

With respect to meeting minutes, there are brief by design.  They are first and foremost a corporate legal requirement.  Secondly, the actual conversations leading to decisions generally happen over email and other venues in advance of the actual meeting.  Finally, the conversations are most unhindered if they are private.  If people worry about curbing their discussion due to it being public that could be a bad thing. 

Elections didn't work out very well.  Very few people voted overall which showed an overall lack of interest.  Drawing in people who have shown dedication and good judgment seemed to work best. 

The money *is* being put to use.  As Jason pointed out we're talking to a couple of PR firms and expect to spend the funds that way.  Being slow to spend it is a bit of a problem but we are actively working on that.

Neil and I *have* moved to New Hampshire.  We are pleased to be here.  And while not everyone values my/our contributions to the FSP we care deeply about liberty in our lifetime and have committed thousands of dollars to help achieve it not including our move costs. 

With respect to neutrality ... that's a difficult stance  I know.  The problem is, as much as we all care about liberty, we all care about it differently.  One early issue was the highway cleanup signs.  The fact is , not everyone wants to support the state by cleaning their highways.  Yes, it's a nice piece of roadway advertising and it is generally considered a nice community volunteer effort.  But not everyone feels that way.  Are we helping our enemy?  These issues are not trivial.  Every "position" we could take could be vilified by folks on the other side.  Every time someone does something remotely controversial we hear from people who didn't like it. 

One of the reasons we seem to end up arguing, imo, is that we all have different ideas about how to achieve liberty and how to make FSP work best.  Those ideas are not always in sync ... actually they're rarely in sync.  Somehow there ends up being sniping and complaining.  And, I guess that's the way of many volunteer organizations.  But I continue to put many hours a week into the FSP.  Getting more movers to the Granite State is a worthy goal.

Jean

Thanks, Jean, for taking the time to respond in detail and with courtesy, both here and by email.  I understand what you're saying about wanting the leadership to feel free to speak their mind. At the same time, I have been involved with plenty of organizations that didn't handle it that way. And due to the unusual nature of this particular organization, I think the current secrecy-based model is particularly inappropriate.  The FSP asks a LOT of its membership. Yet not only are members not allowed to attend (virtually speaking) Board meetings, they're not allowed to know what was said at them after or before the fact.  And they have absolutely no say in the makeup of the body itself.  If things were going great, it would be a waste of all our time even having this discussion.  But unfortunately, they're not. Perhaps a change in staffing would help.  More openness would certainly help morale for some members, and would be ignored by those who don't care.

I think it's depressing that the FSP had low voter participation in Board elections.  Perhaps those numbers are a more accurate indication of our true membership than the count of how many people have ever stopped to fill out the sign-up form. In any case, I see no connection between voter turnout and the goodness/badness of the decision to have elections. 

I'm very glad to hear you and Jason say that you are going with a PR firm. Hopefully soon!!

I know you and your family have moved to New Hampshire. Congratulations, and welcome to the Free State! I'm sure we will be bumping into each other; Porcupines tend to congregate.

Yes, the issue of neutrality is a very difficult one.  Some people will always disagree on that subject. Rather than debating theory, let's talk efficacy.  Maybe ending neutrality would increase recruitment? Granted, some people will be turned off by certain publicity stunts. But others will be attracted.  I'm of the "all publicity is good publicity" school.

Yes, libertarians do tend to argue. A lot. My time is limited, like yours and everyone else's, and I do *not* enjoy arguing.  I'm looking for solutions here.  I don't intend to be dragged into a mudslinging flame war with anyone.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Friday on October 25, 2005, 06:16:25 pm

The FSP's goal is to get people to NH to engage in liberty-loving activities however they choose. But the official FSP response to the actions above? "We have no comment. We take no position. They do not speak for the FSP."

Gee, what's wrong with, "While the FSP doesn't endorse any particular cause or action, we cheer freedom-loving activists who choose to get involved and make a difference in their communities."


Yes!  Another option to a radical change in strategy is changing the way we communicate the current one.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: JasonPSorens on October 25, 2005, 06:17:10 pm
The FSP has moved more self-proclaimed anarchists into NH then have every even existed in the state before.

Wow, sounds like a selling point to me! (And I'm not an anarchist.) Maybe we should use that line in our advertising.  ;D
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Friday on October 25, 2005, 06:25:18 pm
It appears to have analysis paralysis; it has been sitting on over $30,000 in organizational funds for months now, unable to decide whether to spend it on a marketing campaign or a paid employee (resulting in the money being spent on neither).
The Board recently approved the expenditure of money for paid PR/marketing. My sense is that this amount will grow as time goes on.

Quote
Exciting and inspiring things are being done by early movers and friends of our cause in New Hampshire.  This is the proof that our concept is feasible, and must be shared with the rest of the world. However, in a vain attempt to comply with IRS registration standards and to adhere to a concept that the FSP is “merely a bus”, and takes absolutely no positions on anything at all, discussion of such things is verboten here.  Several times when an FSP participant has gained media exposure, they have been ignored or publicly disavowed by the organization.  I don’t know about you, but all of this seems extremely counterproductive to me.  What we need is publicity; why do we run away every time we get some?  I’m referring to the Free Town imbroglio, the Outlaw Manicurist, the Unidentified Flying Objector, and now Lauren Canario.  Our spokesperson recently indicated to a newspaper reporter that the FSP has no position on eminent domain. What?!?!? If we can’t even admit that we do have a position on eminent domain (we’re AGAINST it!!!), what the hell do we stand for? What’s the point of joining this organization?  ???
The point is to move to New Hampshire and work for liberty, knowing that there are others doing the same. We do not all agree on every issue. People have called for "the leadership" to take positions on issues. Do you want us to be "for" everything and against nothing? How will you feel if we say that we are against eminent domain but don't believe the Supreme Court reached the wrong decision in Kelo (because the Bill of Rights is not supposed to be applied to the states)? How will you feel when we're for outlaw manicurists but against UN flag burnings? Or for privacy rights but against HB599?

Quote
What is to be done?  I don’t know.  But I do know that the current system is increasingly not just ineffectual, but idiotic.  And I have far too much invested in the FSP to just walk away now.  I know some of you others have as well, or plan on doing so in the near future.  It's time to try something new, preferably with the sanction of the leadership, but without it if need be.
It is much easier to recognize a problem than to take responsibility for achieving a solution. It will, as you note, take action.

Thank you for your response, Adam.  Taking responsibility for achieving a solution is the entire point of this thread. It's what I'm trying to do, and looking for others who are interested in working with me.

Regarding your "how will I feel" questions, well, actually, I'd be happy with every one you suggested.  But that's not really my point.  My point is that, right or wrong, the current system isn't working.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Friday on October 25, 2005, 06:44:55 pm

People who want to work on getting more liberty-lovers to move to move to NH? If you have some ideas on that, you can share them. If you want to help with that, all the better. If you want to complain about "the leadership" not doing it enough, hey, I'm with you on that, but it doesn't take a takeover to work towards that goal yourself. At the same time, I'd be curious to see the current "leadership" replaced with you, Kat, Dave, Mike, Sandy, and whomever else. Would you be able to ramp up our numbers? How?

The "How" is what I'm here to discuss.  FYI, I'm not fantasizing about taking your job. I'm fantasizing about how to radically increase the FSP's rate of recruitment.  I vent frustration at you and the rest of the Board and Organizers because you are in a position of organizational control, and I am not.  I know it stinks to be on the receiving end of criticism. I've received my share over the past few years, from several different Boardmembers and Organizers.  I hope that you understand that.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Friday on October 25, 2005, 06:52:31 pm

Fine.  Start a website- NHResults.com or something.  Build profiles for all the members that want to be included.  Build profiles for all of the protests, newspaper articles written by FSP members, complete details of all of the elections, etc.  Just get permission from the individuals.  Propose future projects.  Include 101 ways how people outside of NH can help recruit FSP members.  Give tips on how to move to NH quicker.  Put a big disclaimer on the main page of the site about how the things detailed on this page are the actions of pro-freedom people in NH or planing on moving to NH and are not related to the FSP.

I'll send you $100 to help pay for things if you get it going.  Ask Kat or Jason, I'm good for it.  And I'll work my butt off to MAKE sure there is a link to it on the FSP mainpage.

Awesome idea, NH Bound.  I am thinking about doing that. 
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Friday on October 25, 2005, 07:04:19 pm
Jason and others have answered a lot of your issues, so I'm just answering the comments directed at me.

Our spokesperson recently indicated to a newspaper reporter that the FSP has no position on eminent domain. What?!?!? If we can’t even admit that we do have a position on eminent domain (we’re AGAINST it!!!), what the hell do we stand for? What’s the point of joining this organization?  ???

If you had bothered to ask, I would have been happy to clarify. The reporter quoted only part of what I said, and he quoted me out of context. What I said was that while the FSP as an organization has no position on specific political issues, it's safe to say that most of our individual participants strongly oppose eminent domain. The FSP's goal is to move 20,000 libertarians and small-government activists to New Hampshire where we can enhance and expand upon the freedom that already exists in New Hampshire.

I'm glad to hear that.  You're right, I didn't ask you directly about it. I did, however, wait for over two weeks to see if you or the FSP submitted a letter of clarification to the newspaper that misquoted you.  I know that letters of clarification have been submitted plenty of other times.  Did you submit one in this case and the paper refused to print it?

Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Friday on October 25, 2005, 07:10:48 pm
Well, a thought . . .

The Free State Project is a corporation.  A corporation's board is elected by the shareholders.  The officers are elected by the board.

How about selling Free State Project stock?  Those wishing to pony up the most cash will have the most influence on the selection of the board, but if enough shares are issued nobody will be able to get dominant control without giving the FSP enough money to advertise the heck out of itself.

For those donating their time, stock could be awarded as a thank you for efforts expended on behalf of the FSP.

Now THAT is creative!  I know there is a perception amongst some members that they deserve more of a say in setting organizational strategy because they have donated $X.  But the rest of us have no way of knowing how much they give, or if others give equal amounts and for reasons we're unaware of somehow don't obtain the same level of control.  This would make things more open *and* raise funds for the FSP. I like it.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: eukreign on October 25, 2005, 07:11:47 pm

Fine.  Start a website- NHResults.com or something.  Build profiles for all the members that want to be included.  Build profiles for all of the protests, newspaper articles written by FSP members, complete details of all of the elections, etc.  Just get permission from the individuals.  Propose future projects.  Include 101 ways how people outside of NH can help recruit FSP members.  Give tips on how to move to NH quicker.  Put a big disclaimer on the main page of the site about how the things detailed on this page are the actions of pro-freedom people in NH or planing on moving to NH and are not related to the FSP.

I'll send you $100 to help pay for things if you get it going.  Ask Kat or Jason, I'm good for it.  And I'll work my butt off to MAKE sure there is a link to it on the FSP mainpage.

Awesome idea, NH Bound.  I am thinking about doing that. 

Count me in for another $100.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: "Hagrid" on October 25, 2005, 07:20:39 pm
and heck I can even tolerate the Seth Lord himself!   As long as we don't let it get too personal, we will benefit from fighting!

Between these sort of  comments which NHFree's forum thrives on, and Dada's general inability to distinguish good press from bad, I rest my case about the radical fringe's becoming more and more of a problem and not part of the solution.

Dada, please remove my phone number from your cellphone.  I can't tolerate Mr Dave Ridley, media god in his own mind.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Pat K on October 25, 2005, 07:24:56 pm
Gee Seth should he take you off speed dial too? Or just lower you to the number 9 spot?  ;D
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: "Hagrid" on October 25, 2005, 07:26:44 pm
Russell, I'm sure some reasonable part of your brain doesn't really agree with what you just wrote.  Are you honestly saying that any press is good press?

Actually, Dada just said that.  Hmm.

Bingo.  Kate sees the problem.


Quote
I don't want a situation in which I feel compelled to put down your activism; I want them to coexist independently.

We've already been been in that situation, thanks to the radicals, and they've been putting down those of us working with the system, publically and openly from almost the beginning. 

The radical fringe is intolerant of anyone who isn't 'libertarian enough'.... and continues to work against real change in the worst macho flash way possible....   As far as I'm concerned, we have more to fear from the likes of them than we do from the hardcore leftists at this point... because the stabbing attacks from the leftists are from the front, not the back.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Dreepa on October 25, 2005, 07:38:03 pm


We've already been been in that situation, thanks to the radicals, and they've been putting down those of us working with the system, publically and openly from almost the beginning. 

The radical fringe is intolerant of anyone who isn't 'libertarian enough'.... and continues to work against real change in the worst macho flash way possible....   As far as I'm concerned, we have more to fear from the likes of them than we do from the hardcore leftists at this point... because the stabbing attacks from the leftists are from the front, not the back.
Dude that is a quote right out of Russian communism history.  Trotsky vs Stalin vs Lenin
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: "Hagrid" on October 25, 2005, 08:04:16 pm
Dude that is a quote right out of Russian communism history.  Trotsky vs Stalin vs Lenin

Not sure it's quite a parallel, but since I'm not a student of Russian history, maybe you can explain it?

This is not a new battle, by any means, of course... the entire history of the LP is filled with the conflicts of minarchists and anarchists and so on, and it continues to this day.... and it's one of the reasons the LP is a failure.... because it's tried to walk a middle ground and please the radical fringes who then controlled the discussion.

As I've said before, I was considered a radical elsewhere before I moved to NH, but here I'm a moderate : My views haven't changed one bit - but here I'm far more mainstream, because the Traditional Granite State view IS more libertarian in scope and view. 

With 20K, or even 2K _real_ activists for liberty working _politically_ (not flag burning or civil disobediance or non-voting - but real mainstream, within the system, activism thru elections and so on), we can make a difference because we will have many tens/hundreds of thousands of non-activists who do agree in many ways, and will vote and support that process.   But right now, we don't have even 200 real political activists here.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Dreepa on October 25, 2005, 08:41:42 pm
Trotsky vs Lenin vs Stalin vs otehr commies... were all on the same side but they would up going in circles because they would debate about their differences rather than the things that they agreed upon.
(Same thing with the 'White Russian Armies vs the Red Army')

I agree that 2K is probably enough. (Maybe the FSP should lower to 10K-- we can get there faster! and then hope that 20% move?)  Hell I was one of 8 people at the Selectman meeting in my town last night.

Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Friday on October 25, 2005, 08:59:38 pm

FWIW, while I got all worked up when this broke (and am still really annoyed), I think it's laughable to call the ramblings and proddings of the usual cranky blowhards a "violent disagreement."  There is a split of some sort between movers and nonmovers, but the line between the two is far too hazy to identify, and was rightly the subject of another conversation (re: mission statement). 

Thanks for your honesty, Kate, in letting me know that you find my thoughts "laughable" and myself a "cranky blowhard".  Guess we won't be spending a lot of time working together for freedom in New Hampshire. 
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: JonM on October 25, 2005, 09:04:37 pm
I seriously doubt kater was talking about you Friday.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Friday on October 25, 2005, 09:15:51 pm
BTW...i always think this but never say it...yet I hope those of you on each side will hear it and do it.

Gandhi always tried to fight evil systems without disliking the people behind them.  He was not against individuals.

Same with us...we need to fight for and against systems but we need to not let ourselves dislike each other.

I really like Kate and Adam even tho I am on the opposite side of this debate with them sometimes; Amanda is a blast to be around and argue with, I like Don Gorman who I never agree with on method and heck I can even tolerate the Seth Lord himself!   As long as we don't let it get too personal, we will benefit from fighting!   Where we lose is where we get angry with each other.  Kat you are just too quick to get angry at folks who don't 100% see it your way. Usually you are right in the FSP context, but you're letting it get too personal.  the same could be said for many of us.  Just have fun !

Right on, Dada.  Insert often-used Franklin quote about hanging separately here.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: lloydbob1 on October 25, 2005, 09:17:59 pm
I seriously doubt kater was talking about you Friday.

So do I.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: lloydbob1 on October 25, 2005, 09:24:57 pm


The radical fringe is intolerant of anyone who isn't 'libertarian enough'.... and continues to work against real change in the worst macho flash way possible....   As far as I'm concerned, we have more to fear from the likes of them than we do from the hardcore leftists at this point... because the stabbing attacks from the leftists are from the front, not the back.

Your 'off the hip' drivel rhetoric is becoming as sad bad as Russell's,  Seth.  I don't think it's 'libertarian enough', it's 'anarchist enough'.
I don't believe their activism is going to effect your political efforts any more than what you do will effect them.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Morey on October 25, 2005, 09:59:36 pm
First, I was already willing to consider Board elections (and have proposed them), but I would not characterize it as "elected representation." The Board's job is not to represent Participants, but to oversee the organization's mission--getting pro-liberty activists to move to New Hampshire.

Second, I am no longer a member of the Board, having resigned about a week ago.

It isn't important how long you've held the view.  Since it is/was welcome news (at least to me) I felt good about it.

Thank you for all you have done in the past as a board member.  And whatever your reasons for leaving the board, I have to respect you for making that determination of your own volition.  No term limits required  :)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: "Hagrid" on October 25, 2005, 10:07:09 pm
The radical fringe is intolerant of anyone who isn't 'libertarian enough'

Your 'off the hip' drivel rhetoric is becoming as sad bad as Russell's,  Seth.  I don't think it's 'libertarian enough', it's 'anarchist enough'.

I was being generally inclusive, because the 'fringe' is more than just the NHFree crowd... the 'more libertarian than thou' crowd who drive off those who are only 70-80% libertarian minded here on the FSP forum is in the same vein, and hurts the FSP just as much by pushing off potential people who might move except they are seemingly rejected by the radicals as 'not lib enough' before they can commit to moving. 

NHFree is more anarchic in general, but the _rest_ of NH doesn't know the difference... they think it's the "Free Staters", and lump it all together...  And the anarchs wonder why they are getting disowned?

Quote
I don't believe their activism is going to eaffect your political efforts any more than what you do will eaffect them.

Don't believe it...  I've already see it happen, and had to deal with it.  Your belief doesn't match my reality.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Morey on October 25, 2005, 10:21:26 pm
Morey, how do those things get us closer to 20K? What we need are more people *doing* things.  Not rehashing old ideas, not talking, not criticizing, but doing.  There are plenty of open opportunities:
http://www.freestateproject.org/about/organization.php
http://freestateproject.org/getinvolved/activistcenter.php
Not a one of the things you mention above compares with your having created the FSP matchbooks that were so popular at MassCan, or the presence at MassCan of Sandy, Amanda, Lloyd and others, which got us several new signups and the endorsement of Keith Stroup, national director of NORML:
http://photos.freestateproject.org/main.php?g2_view=core.ShowItem&g2_itemId=5019
We need more of this constructive action, not talk.
I agree, Steve.  We have a lot of good things happening, and we need to keep it coming.  I also think we should embrace change.  If the bus driver is asleep at the wheel, let's tuck him or her into a free seat for a nap, and let others have a go at the controls.  Why is that such a bad idea?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: lloydbob1 on October 25, 2005, 10:24:11 pm

Don't believe it...  I've already see it happen, and had to deal with it.  Your belief doesn't match my reality.

details?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: ThomasPaine on October 25, 2005, 10:59:29 pm
and heck I can even tolerate the Seth Lord himself!   As long as we don't let it get too personal, we will benefit from fighting!

Between these sort of  comments which NHFree's forum thrives on, and Dada's general inability to distinguish good press from bad, I rest my case about the radical fringe's becoming more and more of a problem and not part of the solution.

Dada, please remove my phone number from your cellphone.  I can't tolerate Mr Dave Ridley, media god in his own mind.


Amen brother!

TeePee
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: KBCraig on October 26, 2005, 12:50:44 am

NHFree is more anarchic in general, but the _rest_ of NH doesn't know the difference... they think it's the "Free Staters", and lump it all together...  And the anarchs wonder why they are getting disowned?


You mentioned earlier in the thread how you were seen as a radical before moving to NH, and now you're considered middle of the road.

Actually, I think you were radical before seeking public office, and now you're afraid of being "tainted" by any association --even a passing aquaintance-- with the more radical elements of the freedom movement.

I'm not one of the anarchists; while I think true anarchy would be a good idea, I believe it's against human nature, and so I strive for minarchy. But having watched what seems to be a change in attitude by some of those seeking office, I understand the anarchists' penchant for eschewing the system and working outside of politics.

It's true that not much political change can be effected without electing those who agree with our views. But if those who get elected become too much a part of the system, will they really effect change?

Good luck with your run for school board. I truly hope you make it. I truly hope you're able to push through some incremental changes, or at least stanch the flow. But more than that, I hope you will stop being so sensitive, and stop worrying that you'll be accused of having FSP Disease.

Kevin
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 26, 2005, 05:33:39 am
I don't mind porcupines running for office or working for incremental change. I am just not impressed. ;D
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 26, 2005, 05:38:00 am
I agree with this guy:

"Those who profess to favor freedom, yet deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground. They want rain without thunder and lightening. They want the ocean without the awful roar of its many waters. This struggle may be a moral one; or it may be a physical one; or it may be both moral and physical; but it must be a struggle. Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will." – Frederick Douglass

I am just afraid to stand up to the beast myself most of the time. :-[
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 26, 2005, 05:42:33 am
Your 'off the hip' drivel rhetoric is becoming as sad bad as Russell's,  Seth.
NHFree is more anarchic in general, but the _rest_ of NH doesn't know the difference... they think it's the "Free Staters", and lump it all together...  And the anarchs wonder why they are getting disowned?

Quote from Charles A. Beard
"One of the best ways to get yourself a reputation as a dangerous citizen these days is to go about repeating the very phrases which our founding fathers used in the great struggle for independence."

Watch out Sandy ..... you were quoting Franklin earlier. :D
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 26, 2005, 05:58:29 am
To me the free state project is radical. Our country needs radical change and I have loved sharing the struggle with all my new friends in NH whether previous residents or new arrivals. Moving across the county is a big deal for people and standing up to the government is even more so. I assumed that anyone willing to uproot their lives and move was ready to tackle the world and I have rarely been disappointed.

I am looking forward to all the rest of the freedom fighters that will move to NH over the coming years. I don't want the stick-in-the-muds to slow down this revolutionary movement, but I can't pull you along. Please join the wild-eyed radicals who "demand" change like Douglass said. It will be a risky struggle, but it is the right course of action. :)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Steve on October 26, 2005, 06:06:19 am
KB wrote:

<<Gee, what's wrong with, "While the FSP doesn't endorse any particular cause or action, we cheer freedom-loving activists who choose to get involved and make a difference in their communities.">>

Right, and what's wrong with posting links to the front page news coverage that free staters inside NH are generating?

There was a front page article about us in the Concord Monitor last month, why is that not listed on the FSP website?

If the webmaster doesn't have time to do that, no problem.  Just post a permanent link to NHfree.com near the top of the FSP index page.   Russell and Kat will take care of the rest.
Tom (the webmaster) has been posting ALL news containing references to the FSP in Newswire:
http://www.freestateproject.org/news/newswire/
I count three articles in the Concord Monitor--is yours one of them? Tom has probably been the single most reliable and responsive contributor to the FSP since its inception, and probably deserves a word of thanks.

Again, I don't see where you are being blocked.  You certainly haven't contacted me about putting anything up on the web site.  But is that really the only or even the best way to improve our recruiting numbers?  The FSP should be a self-organizing system, facilitated by infrastructure, with all the participants associating freely and contributing according to their abilities and desires.  This is *NOT* a top-down hierarchy in any but the most minimal of ways.  As of now, the budget is controlled centrally, but the new web infrastructure that we are developing will allow project-specific donations.  You'll be free to start your own project and get it financed directly, bypassing any budget decisions.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: "Hagrid" on October 26, 2005, 07:12:44 am
You mentioned earlier in the thread how you were seen as a radical before moving to NH, and now you're considered middle of the road.
Actually, I think you were radical before seeking public office

Have you ever met me?  No.
Have you ever heard me speak about my beliefs?  No.
At PorcFest, the best comment was someone expected me to look like Gandalf.  Don't confuse my internet persona with my in person persona.

I moved from a heavily leftist state (Oregon) where being libertarian at all was 'radical', because the mainstream view is left toward socialist.   Here in NH, I'm far more moderate, because the mix here is a lot closer to my views... In other words, I didn't change, the landscape did.

Don't confused having ideals with being radical or moderate.  I can test on the Nolan chart as strongly Libertarian, and still understand that political change and political reality means taking baby steps and accepting a slice instead of a loaf.

Quote
and now you're afraid of being "tainted" by any association --even a passing aquaintance-- with the more radical elements of the freedom movement.

Nope, far from it... See http://www.nhinsider.squarespace.com/chaz-proulx/2005/6/29/the-dark-side-of-the-free-state-project.html#comments
for one recent example (and there are others) where I've defended them and acknowledged them.

Of course, they've mostly continued to shit on me, but that's beside the point here.

Quote
But more than that, I hope you will stop being so sensitive, and stop worrying that you'll be accused of having FSP Disease.

Kevin, when you move here and you run for office, and I hope you will.... perhaps you will understand.  Till then, you just don't have the perspective.  It's not a worry when it's happening to you already.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: "Hagrid" on October 26, 2005, 07:17:47 am
Don't believe it...  I've already see it happen, and had to deal with it.  Your belief doesn't match my reality.

details?

I'd be glad to discuss it in person, in private.  I'm not going into it on a forum or email at this time.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Dreepa on October 26, 2005, 07:31:53 am
and heck I can even tolerate the Seth Lord himself!   As long as we don't let it get too personal, we will benefit from fighting!

Between these sort of  comments which NHFree's forum thrives on, and Dada's general inability to distinguish good press from bad, I rest my case about the radical fringe's becoming more and more of a problem and not part of the solution.

Dada, please remove my phone number from your cellphone.  I can't tolerate Mr Dave Ridley, media god in his own mind.


Amen brother!

TeePee
TP ypu never did answer my question-- are you a member of the FSP?  Or are you considering joining?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: RidleyReport on October 26, 2005, 07:45:06 am
Steve wrote:

<< Tom (the webmaster) has been posting ALL news containing references to the FSP in Newswire:
http://www.freestateproject.org/news/newswire/ >>

OK good, thanks...I was looking at "Media Coverage:" from
http://www.freestateproject.org/news/media_archive/

Don't see why we have such separated media pages but I withdraw my other complaint regarding media pages and apologize for the error.
Are you giving Tom complete latitude to add stuff or does he have to request permission? 



Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: lloydbob1 on October 26, 2005, 08:10:41 am
Don't believe it...  I've already see it happen, and had to deal with it.  Your belief doesn't match my reality.

details?

I'd be glad to discuss it in person, in private.  I'm not going into it on a forum or email at this time.

Again, exactly the response I expected.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Steve on October 26, 2005, 08:42:26 am
Don't see why we have such separated media pages
We get gazillions of media mentions, sometimes of questionable value. For example, articles about ChristianExodus typically mention its FSP origins, but only tangentially.  Sometimes articles are highly negative.  Sometimes there are many variations of an article (e.g. of an AP release), all available from Google News for 30 days.  Tom got tired of the good-article/bad-article debate, and proposed the Newswire section for ALL articles referencing the FSP, regardless of people's opinions.

Quote
Are you giving Tom complete latitude to add stuff or does he have to request permission?
Under the current system, which we hope to replace soon (especially if we could get some more web help), everything goes through Tom, who has wide latitude and knows who is responsible for what pages.  For example, I screen all essays, and merchandise items go through Phil.  Under the coming system, I expect the web site to be structured to correspond directly to the org chart departments, and each department head will be *responsible* for maintaining his areas, e.g.:
Activist Center (Volunteer Coordinator), http://www.freestateproject.org/getinvolved/activistcenter.php
Press Center (Media Representative), http://www.freestateproject.org/about/for_the_press.php
Merchandise Center (Merchandise Coordinator), http://www.freestateproject.org/store
Photo Gallery (Photo Librarian), http://photos.freestateproject.org

One of our problems has been the failure of department heads to take ownership of their parts of the site, but that is partly a result of the site not being structured to facilitate that.  You will soon see some dramatic changes.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 26, 2005, 08:48:31 am
" Tom got tired of the good-article/bad-article debate, and proposed the Newswire section for ALL articles referencing the FSP, regardless of people's opinions."

So are all the mentions of Lauren on the fsp site now? Tom didn't want to put them up for me at the time.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: kater on October 26, 2005, 09:00:36 am
Thanks for your honesty, Kate, in letting me know that you find my thoughts "laughable" and myself a "cranky blowhard".  Guess we won't be spending a lot of time working together for freedom in New Hampshire. 

Friday, I wasn't talking about you at all.  Your letter, while not what I might have written myself, had little in it that troubled me.  It was the later "discussion" attacking people personally that pissed me off.  I'm sorry if that wasn't clear.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 26, 2005, 09:39:42 am
(http://www.soulawakenings.com/inquirer.jpg)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: "Hagrid" on October 26, 2005, 09:41:35 am
Again, exactly the response I expected.

See the answer here: http://forum.freestateproject.org//index.php?topic=11037.msg148440#msg148440

Stop expecting me to answer you in public. It won't happen, because I know who else reads the forums.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: "Hagrid" on October 26, 2005, 09:45:58 am
http://www.soulawakenings.com/inquirer.jpg

Yup, nothing like backstabbing....  Thanks for the validation, Russell.  Keep proving my point... I expect nothing less and nothing more from the radical fringers.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Steve on October 26, 2005, 10:01:00 am
"Tom got tired of the good-article/bad-article debate, and proposed the Newswire section for ALL articles referencing the FSP, regardless of people's opinions."

So are all the mentions of Lauren on the fsp site now? Tom didn't want to put them up for me at the time.
We had a dilemma: on the one hand, she was acting way outside the FSP mission (in another state), but on the other, she was bringing us publicity.  As to the legitimacy of the Supreme Court's decision, libertarians are also split: even though the practical result sucked, the Supreme Court acted in favor of states rights, *restricting* the power of the federal government.  Some libertarians support the idea of Eminent Domain as a necessary evil, though I disagree with them.  You can read about these issues, and yes, Lauren herself, on the ED Issue page and Newswire:
http://www.freestateproject.org/news/issues/eminent_domain.php
http://www.freestateproject.org/news/newswire/
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: eukreign on October 26, 2005, 10:08:59 am
Some libertarians support the idea of Eminent Domain as a necessary evil, though I disagree with them.

Are there any FSP members who support eminent domain as a necessary evil?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: lloydbob1 on October 26, 2005, 10:12:18 am
Again, exactly the response I expected.

See the answer here: http://forum.freestateproject.org//index.php?topic=11037.msg148440#msg148440

Stop expecting me to answer you in public. It won't happen, because I know who else reads the forums.

I have stopped, Seth, I can only wonder why.  Perhaps seeing proof that individual activities harm the FSP, would get the people performing them to start thinking about their actions.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: "Hagrid" on October 26, 2005, 10:22:11 am
Perhaps seeing proof that individual activities harm the FSP, would get the people performing them to start thinking about their actions.

You have far more confidence in their thinking process.  Perhaps you can make it happen.
I'm not tilting at windmills any longer.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Steve on October 26, 2005, 10:26:09 am
Some libertarians support the idea of Eminent Domain as a necessary evil, though I disagree with them.
Are there any FSP members who support eminent domain as a necessary evil?
I can't answer that question, but the Holdout Problem link on the ED page
http://www.freestateproject.org/news/issues/eminent_domain.php
will take you to an article that originally appeared in The Free Liberal:
http://www.freeliberal.com/archives/001168.html

Again, I disagree with the author (and I exchanged several e-mails with him about it), but I acknowledge his point.  I can imagine having ED allowed/disallowed at the local level, and we would be free to choose the cities we live in. Time would show whether the ED cities were better or worse off.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: eukreign on October 26, 2005, 10:31:39 am
will take you to an article that originally appeared in The Free Liberal:
http://www.freeliberal.com/archives/001168.html

I stopped reading at about this part:

Quote
The rights of homeowners to do whatever they want with or on their land has always been heavily restricted, and always will be in any workable society (the alternative would be that each landowner is the ruler of his own sovereign nation).

The alternative sounds excellent to me :-) Why would anyone believe otherwise?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: kater on October 26, 2005, 10:34:05 am
Actually, the more likely point is that a libertarian could think that Kelo was rightly decided because it shouldn't have been a federal issue.  As much as my sympathies run in the other direction, I find it hard to logically dispute this point; if you take federalism seriously, you have to take all of it, and incorporation (enforcing the Bill of Rights against the states) is a pretty obvious encroachment on state authority.  State eminent domain belongs in state courts regarding state law--where the citizens of that state can threaten to oust their entire legislature come November if the law isn't fixed.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Steve on October 26, 2005, 10:42:54 am
Actually, the more likely point is that a libertarian could think that Kelo was rightly decided because it shouldn't have been a federal issue.  As much as my sympathies run in the other direction, I find it hard to logically dispute this point; if you take federalism seriously, you have to take all of it, and incorporation (enforcing the Bill of Rights against the states) is a pretty obvious encroachment on state authority.  State eminent domain belongs in state courts regarding state law--where the citizens of that state can threaten to oust their entire legislature come November if the law isn't fixed.
And in fact there has been a huge reaction in many states to restrict ED. 
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Steve on October 26, 2005, 10:45:25 am
will take you to an article that originally appeared in The Free Liberal:
http://www.freeliberal.com/archives/001168.html

I stopped reading at about this part:

Quote
The rights of homeowners to do whatever they want with or on their land has always been heavily restricted, and always will be in any workable society (the alternative would be that each landowner is the ruler of his own sovereign nation).

The alternative sounds excellent to me :-) Why would anyone believe otherwise?
I know what you mean.  I argued with the guy that these so-called "market failures" are usually rather "imagination failures", but oh well.  I'm an anarchist, and do have these edge-case disagreements with minarchists. But I linked to his article as a good reference for the Holdout Problem, and a good overview of the opposing side's case.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 26, 2005, 10:52:11 am
Yup, nothing like backstabbing....  Thanks for the validation, Russell.  Keep proving my point... I expect nothing less and nothing more from the radical fringers.
I was helping people identify you as Harry Potter not Gandalf
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: JonM on October 26, 2005, 10:55:16 am
If the Supreme Court had actually supported states rights in all the cases they decided then, like say California's medical marijuana, it would be different.  But they're picking and choosing.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: kater on October 26, 2005, 10:58:37 am
I completely agree.  That's the problem; if you enforce half of the Constitution, you destroy the good that the Founders were trying to do. 
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 26, 2005, 11:03:03 am
So then we can support Lauren and the Kelo 7 8)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: JonM on October 26, 2005, 11:03:46 am
So then we can support Lauren and the Kelo 7 8)
Nobody is stopping you Russell.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: KBCraig on October 26, 2005, 11:07:02 am
Yup, nothing like backstabbing....  Thanks for the validation, Russell.  Keep proving my point... I expect nothing less and nothing more from the radical fringers.
I was helping people identify you as Harry Potter not Gandalf

Ridley does sort of favor Gollum...
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Dreepa on October 26, 2005, 11:48:38 am
The radical fringe is intolerant of anyone who isn't 'libertarian enough'

Your 'off the hip' drivel rhetoric is becoming as sad bad as Russell's,  Seth.  I don't think it's 'libertarian enough', it's 'anarchist enough'.

I was being generally inclusive, because the 'fringe' is more than just the NHFree crowd... the 'more libertarian than thou' crowd who drive off those who are only 70-80% libertarian minded here on the FSP forum is in the same vein, and hurts the FSP just as much by pushing off potential people who might move except they are seemingly rejected by the radicals as 'not lib enough' before they can commit to moving. 

NHFree is more anarchic in general, but the _rest_ of NH doesn't know the difference... they think it's the "Free Staters", and lump it all together...  And the anarchs wonder why they are getting disowned?

Quote
I don't believe their activism is going to eaffect your political efforts any more than what you do will eaffect them.

Don't believe it...  I've already see it happen, and had to deal with it.  Your belief doesn't match my reality.

Maybe it is that the FSP is just attracting the 'fringe' crowd.
The goal of the FSP is to recruit people to move to NH etc etc etc. 
Many people can disagree with Russell's action ( re flag burning and UFO) but if nothing else he is doing the things that he believes to further the cause of liberity.  How can people get mad at that?  He is doing what the FSP brought him to NH to do.

Now you can take umbrage (that is a 50 cent word) at his attacking the FSP etc but I think that the two should be clearly distinct.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: jeanius on October 26, 2005, 11:53:17 am
Amusing 'zine Russell.   :P

For what it's worth, I don't think that the state of New Hampshire is an enemy.  And, I actually argued in *favor* of the roadway signs.  I thought it was a good citizenship thing to do, showed Kat's (et al) commitment to her new home state, and was some advertising in addition.  However, I was convinced by others that actions by individuals in the FSP shouldn't be credited to the FSP and I continue to be convinced of that.

Jean
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: "Hagrid" on October 26, 2005, 11:53:44 am
I was helping people identify you as Harry Potter not Gandalf

No, that's Jason.  Hermione and Ron are taken too: http://www.livejournal.com/users/amanda42/398074.html
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: freedomroad on October 26, 2005, 11:56:15 am
Some libertarians support the idea of Eminent Domain as a necessary evil, though I disagree with them.

Are there any FSP members who support eminent domain as a necessary evil?

I do if it protects life or liberty or property, but I've never know of a case where it has done any of those things.  However, I don't know any libertarians or FSP members that have told me they are happy about the Kelo case results.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Rocketman on October 26, 2005, 12:47:00 pm
However, I don't know any libertarians or FSP members that have told me they are happy about the Kelo case results.

I've heard several libertarians agree with the case results because they believe the federal government shouldn't have jurisdiction over a local government action.  Some very moderate libertarians might think ED is okay if used very sparingly and responsibly, but no libertarian would support the government stealing homes and selling them to Pfizer.   ::) :'(

Really, that should be obvious.  Why would the FSP need to take a position on ED when it's freaking well obvious participants oppose it?  Other organizations should handle the task of publicizing individual action.  The FSP as an organization should only cheerlead individual action if doing so is in the FSP's interest.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Rocketman on October 26, 2005, 12:51:18 pm
 
The FSP as an organization should only cheerlead individual action if doing so is in the FSP's interest.

Oh, and by the way, the FSP's interest is specific and clearly defined -- the FSP exists for the purpose of attracting liberty activists to New Hampshire.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: eukreign on October 26, 2005, 01:01:48 pm
The FSP as an organization should only cheerlead individual action if doing so is in the FSP's interest.

Which actions are in the FSP's best interest? How do you determine?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: lloydbob1 on October 26, 2005, 04:28:59 pm
Actually, the more likely point is that a libertarian could think that Kelo was rightly decided because it shouldn't have been a federal issue.  As much as my sympathies run in the other direction, I find it hard to logically dispute this point; if you take federalism seriously, you have to take all of it, and incorporation (enforcing the Bill of Rights against the states) is a pretty obvious encroachment on state authority.  State eminent domain belongs in state courts regarding state law--where the citizens of that state can threaten to oust their entire legislature come November if the law isn't fixed.

I don't see how anyone could combine libertarian-think-rightly when the subject is taking property from  people who own it and don't want to part with it.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 27, 2005, 06:54:04 am
So then we can support Lauren and the Kelo 7 8)
Nobody is stopping you Russell.
We (as in the fsp) stopped me from putting excellent articles and video clips about Lauren on the front page of the FSP website. The most exciting thing a member of the FSP had done this year was ignored for a while and then relegated to some other page. People across america do not get fired up about lame meeting minutes. They do get revved up when one of us stands up to the government.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 27, 2005, 06:54:51 am
I was helping people identify you as Harry Potter not Gandalf

No, that's Jason.  Hermione and Ron are taken too: http://www.livejournal.com/users/amanda42/398074.html

I am glad you think it is funny now.  8)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Friday on October 27, 2005, 06:58:47 am
Thanks for your honesty, Kate, in letting me know that you find my thoughts "laughable" and myself a "cranky blowhard".  Guess we won't be spending a lot of time working together for freedom in New Hampshire. 

Friday, I wasn't talking about you at all.  Your letter, while not what I might have written myself, had little in it that troubled me.  It was the later "discussion" attacking people personally that pissed me off.  I'm sorry if that wasn't clear.

I'm glad to hear that, kater.   :)

I'm starting to think that what the FSP really needs is a MEDIATOR!  :P  Come on, all of you.  We disagree over strategy, but none of the people participating in this discussion are blowhards.  Dada was there at MassCANN too and helped us get those several new members.  JonM was there, too.  Just this past weekend, Russell participated in a highway cleanup project, and his daughter documented the event with some nice pictures showing what a friendly, non-threatening bunch the Free Staters are, and how they spent their Saturday morning volunteering to make part of the Free State a little cleaner.  That same day, he and Kat hosted a party and a group outing to the Keene Pumpkin Festival.  More great photos, showing off one of the quirkier aspects of the Free State.  As for Morey, Christ, just this year the guy travelled all the way to Las Vegas, paid for his own attendance at FreedomFest, then spent a good part of the conference manning an FSP table.  He also spent several hours on his hands and knees in my parking lot, helping to paint the tax day banner, and was the only other NorCal person willing to help me hoist it and get yelled at by cops for our efforts.  Seth is a madman of activity for the FSP. So is Lloyd.  So is Jean, who, besides myself, was the only person who bothered to show up for the last volunteer coordination conference call.  Steve lives very far away, in a terribly inconvenient time zone, but he does what he can from afar, designing publicity materials and providing a lot of financial backing for other activists' projects.  Jason and Amanda, I've already talked about.  If I've left anyone out, it's only because I'm trying to type with a 9-week old kitten on my shoulder and it's a bit of a distraction.   ;)

When I have more time, I intend to sift through the sandbox that is this thread, scooping out the clumps for more detailed discussion.  OK, perhaps that wasn't quite the analogy I was looking for.   
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 27, 2005, 07:09:47 am
However, I was convinced by others that actions by individuals in the FSP shouldn't be credited to the FSP and I continue to be convinced of that.
This is one thing wrong with the current leadership. You sit in virtual board meetings and scare each other out of taking any stands.

So what happens if one of us becomes a 1-man recruiting machine? Say .... Badnarik wrote his next book about the fsp and started touring the country proclaiming the good news of our movement and then ran for governor in NH and won. Would that be credited to the fsp? ....of course it would...because you 7 could agree on it.


The fsp is full of individuals recruiting and acting. If we do not attach any of this activity to the fsp, then the fsp looks dead. An activist does not need to have unanimous support of all the members for their work to be acknowledged by the rest of us. The fsp has more going on than what 7 board members can agree on.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: "Hagrid" on October 27, 2005, 07:43:17 am
I am glad you think it is funny now.  8)

Considering I was one of the first to make the Jason/Harry connection, I always found that funny.

Your sad attempts at humor through insults and quotes pulled out of context are not.  Go back to your cave, troll.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 27, 2005, 08:54:37 am
I was thinking that we need to hold a vote for our new leadership. We are not going to let the fsp die and the current direction is lousy. Some of my co-conspiritors and I were thinking that we could get rid of all the board meetings by just having 1 office - "President". We could nominate people for a couple of days and then vote.
What do you think?.... not so fast current leadership 8)

I nominate Sandy aka "Friday" ...... she wrote the "memo" ala Jerry McGuire. ;D
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: lloydbob1 on October 27, 2005, 09:12:11 am
However, I was convinced by others that actions by individuals in the FSP shouldn't be credited to the FSP and I continue to be convinced of that.
This is one thing wrong with the current leadership. You sit in virtual board meetings and scare each other out of taking any stands.

So what happens if one of us becomes a 1-man recruiting machine? Say .... Badnarik wrote his next book about the fsp and started touring the country proclaiming the good news of our movement and then ran for governor in NH and won. Would that be credited to the fsp? ....of course it would...because you 7 could agree on it.


The fsp is full of individuals recruiting and acting. If we do not attach any of this activity to the fsp, then the fsp looks dead. An activist does not need to have unanimous support of all the members for their work to be acknowledged by the rest of us. The fsp has more going on than what 7 board members can agree on.


Not Drivel, although I don't think everyone should have ability to change the dront page of the website.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Dreepa on October 27, 2005, 09:16:50 am
Here is something I was thinking of this morning.

Why is everyone so mad at the board?

Can't we just get one person per serious job?

For example:  People think that the Porcfest is important.  Varrin ran the Porcfest.  By all accounts it went great. Talk to Varrin if you were mad or upset about Porcfest you have one person to talk to.

Who cares what the board does or doesn't do?  Let's get people to take one role (one they like/are willing to do) and hold that person accountable for that one job.

Recruiter
Local Groups
Media person etc.

Boards on Corporations don't do much... it the the people underneath the Presidents the VPs the developers etc, that do the jobs.
Boards set the tone and hire the competent people to do the jobs.

Just some random thinking.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 27, 2005, 10:19:36 am
If you were in charge, you could do it that way.

I also nominate Chris aka Dreepa 8)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: "Hagrid" on October 27, 2005, 10:20:47 am
Let's get people to take one role (one they like/are willing to do) and hold that person accountable for that one job.

The open spots are quite visible on http://freestateproject.org/about/multimedia/images/orgchart.png
Discuss your interest with the VP in charge of the section, whoever is otherwise 'above' the position if any, and with Nik, the Volunteer Coordinator.

Anyone complaining about leadership who isn't on that chart already is part of the problem, not part of the solution.
There are twenty spots open on that chart....  There are less than 20 people complaining on this thread.
Some of us are already listed on that chart... and our opinions are the ones that matter: we are the leadership, we are the ones putting our butts out there and doing the work, and being held accountable.  If you are listed on there, like Sandy or JonM or Dreepa or Kate or Jean or myself, etc... you do have the ear of the rest of leadership.  Sometimes it doesn't seem like it, due to differences of opinion, but you do get heard.

(Mind you, I don't really expect most of the hardcore complainers to volunteer, because they don't really want a solution... they just want to protest which is quite sad and disheartening... because they should be better than that.)



Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 27, 2005, 10:24:13 am
I don't want to work within your broken system. I do not want to write status reports to someone like Steve Cobb.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: ThomasPaine on October 27, 2005, 11:24:51 am
I don't want to work within your broken system. I do not want to write status reports to someone like Steve Cobb.

In other words:

"I don't want to work within ANY system or follow ANY leadership because YOU should mirror the society I want to create - anarcho-capitalism - and ANY engagement by YOU with the state in movement towards MY goal is participating in an act of theft from ME and thus evil"

TeePee
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 27, 2005, 12:35:15 pm
Not exactly 8)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 27, 2005, 01:36:20 pm
This is a bloodless coup. You can just loosen the reigns and let people have access. 8)

I wonder why all the leaders have run for cover again? Do they not want to communicate with the rabble anymore?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Morey on October 27, 2005, 01:47:53 pm
For those who didn't get the memo, Amanda has said - how can I paraphrase this nicely? - she has said, well, that she won't be participating in the forums.  <insert tongue-biting emoticon here>

Let's hope that she changes her mind.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Morey on October 27, 2005, 02:37:37 pm
Boards on Corporations don't do much... it the the people underneath the Presidents the VPs the developers etc, that do the jobs.
Boards set the tone and hire the competent people to do the jobs.

I believe that is Jason's position.  The reason it doesn't hold water is because we're playing with semantics.  In our case, we don't have a distinctly separate BoD.  The officers and the board are one in the same, Jason being the one exception.  The criticism leveled here, for the most part, is directed to these people in their capacity as officers.  They should be the people in the org who do the most outreach.  The rest of us should be motivated by their example.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: artienewport on October 27, 2005, 07:42:16 pm
Let's hope that she changes her mind.

To something like RESIGNATION perhaps.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: artienewport on October 27, 2005, 07:49:28 pm
Do they not want to communicate with the rabble anymore?

If they don't have time to read a few sentances on here, or even reply with something besides what basically amounts to "shut up", then they need to move on.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Dreepa on October 27, 2005, 08:12:41 pm
So I am looking for the phone number for the conference call on Thursday nights... can't find it posted anywhere.

There is a ton of info on the FSP website.  Did you guys know that?

But everything is 40 clicks away. We need to fix that.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 27, 2005, 10:04:23 pm
I don't have any time for volunteering for the fsp .... too busy being a wild-eyed crazy. 8) You guys are good though. :)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: FreeBoB on October 27, 2005, 11:16:37 pm
I've been reading this thread from its first moments.  I tend not to want to participate in public discussions that might harm others, it's just not productive in my life to go there.  There have been some good thoughts presented here though.

My efforts to help to change and improve the FSP have grown as I've seen needs and stepped forward to try to solve them.  While my name is on the list of volunteers holding a 'position', for me it's all about getting jobs done that I think have value. I endeavor to be professional and courteous in accomplishing my FSP responsibilities. 

If you want to make changes and contributions to help the FSP accomplish its mission, contact Nik, the Volunteer Coordinator volunteer@freestateproject.org  A great way to effectively make changes and foster FSP success is to be a part of it in whatever way you choose.  There are many opportunities to make things happen.

Brian
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Friday on October 28, 2005, 06:34:19 am
The very people screaming the loudest about my "unprofessional" and "discourteous" behavior are the same ones who have repeatedly IGNORED me when I've emailed them, sometimes about time-sensitive issues directly related to recruitment activities for the FSP.  I politely and courteously requested access to the Organizers list so that I could participate in private strategic discussions with the rest of the leadership.  Then I asked again.  Then I asked again.  I'm aware of at least two other very active members who have both contributed a lot over the past year or more who requested admission to that list and were also refused.  So my emails get ignored, I'm denied access to private discussion lists, I have absolutely no way to judge if my posts on this forum are read and/or discussed by the leadership (for example, on the thread about changing the mission of the FSP), because they don't respond on the forum, the meetings are closed, and the minutes are empty.  And then I get pilloried for saying what needs to be said, and discussed, and DEALT WITH, on the only remaining place available to me.

Meanwhile, the oft-heard cry of "Don't just bitch, DO something, and then you'll be considered trustworthy" is tossed about.  I can name at least three times where I volunteered to do something and was either ignored or was told flat out "No thanks, we don't need your help with that." Look around on this forum if you don't believe me. I've seen it happen to other people, too. Hell, on this very thread, Dada offerred to help post FSP news mentions on the website. Not only was his offer not accepted, he was insulted for offering! 

I need a fresh horse.

Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: lloydbob1 on October 28, 2005, 07:48:48 am
I've been reading this thread from its first moments.  I tend not to want to participate in public discussions that might harm others, it's just not productive in my life to go there.  There have been some good thoughts presented here though.

My efforts to help to change and improve the FSP have grown as I've seen needs and stepped forward to try to solve them.  While my name is on the list of volunteers holding a 'position', for me it's all about getting jobs done that I think have value. I endeavor to be professional and courteous in accomplishing my FSP responsibilities. 

If you want to make changes and contributions to help the FSP accomplish its mission, contact Nik, the Volunteer Coordinator volunteer@freestateproject.org  A great way to effectively make changes and foster FSP success is to be a part of it in whatever way you choose.  There are many opportunities to make things happen.

Brian

Love ya, Brian :-*
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 28, 2005, 08:59:03 am
I guess we will just have to work around the FSP leadership Friday.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Rocketman on October 28, 2005, 09:56:54 am
Can this organization survive another year?  

A better question would be, "Can this movement be destroyed?"  There are hundreds of us who are planning our moves, and more will follow once a pattern of successes is established in NH.  The FSP requires little organization; it is merely an agreement between thousands of individuals.  Why is that so hard for people to grasp?  I don't care much about the board, simply because the board is NOT the FSP.

Meanwhile, the oft-heard cry of "Don't just bitch, DO something, and then you'll be considered trustworthy" is tossed about. I can name at least three times where I volunteered to do something and was either ignored or was told flat out "No thanks, we don't need your help with that." Look around on this forum if you don't believe me. I've seen it happen to other people, too. Hell, on this very thread, Dada offerred to help post FSP news mentions on the website. Not only was his offer not accepted, he was insulted for offering!

I need a fresh horse.

Friday, I'm grateful to you for bringing these issues to people's attention.  Some of the nasty comments by others were inevitable, but you aren't to blame.  If the leadership doesn't appreciate your efforts to help the FSP, that's unfortunate, but I hope you won't be discouraged.   :) 

And Lloyd, stop kissing Brian this instant!   Disturbing image!  :o
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: "Hagrid" on October 28, 2005, 10:15:19 am
The very people screaming the loudest about my "unprofessional" and "discourteous" behavior are the same ones who have repeatedly IGNORED me when I've emailed them, sometimes about time-sensitive issues directly related to recruitment activities for the FSP.

Since I wasn't one of the ones screaming, I can't directly comment on this.  My personal experience is mixed, but I tend to get emails from some of the leadership on near daily manner, and others I never hear much from.  I'm not saying the leadership is perfect, in fact, I've said the opposite: the way to fix it is to get more involved.  I'm not known for being meek... If I feel I'm getting ignored, I tend to cc people I know will light a fire under the butt of whoever it is.... with mixed results, but results none the less.

Sandy, please feel free to cc: me if you ever want butt fires lit.... (grin).

Quote
I politely and courteously requested access to the Organizers list so that I could participate in private strategic discussions with the rest of the leadership.  Then I asked again.  Then I asked again.  I'm aware of at least two other very active members who have both contributed a lot over the past year or more who requested admission to that list and were also refused.

This one I can comment on... I was strongly in favor of adding you and others.  I was overruled by the majority opinion... When I cc:ed 'outsiders' to discussions I felt they should be part of, I was told to stop that.  I won't name names, but suffice it to say, I agree with you: yur complaint _was_ a valid one.

The organizer list is now closed (kicking me and others off it, leaving it for the Board alone, with plans to shut it down fully), and Doers is the only real 'organizer' list.   You are on the Doers list, so at this point, it's moot.

Quote
So my emails get ignored, I'm denied access to private discussion lists, I have absolutely no way to judge if my posts on this forum are read and/or discussed by the leadership (for example, on the thread about changing the mission of the FSP), because they don't respond on the forum, the meetings are closed, and the minutes are empty.  And then I get pilloried for saying what needs to be said, and discussed, and DEALT WITH, on the only remaining place available to me.

1) Some do respond on the forum.  Not everyone, but percentage-wise MOST do.
2) There are plenty of open meetings - the weekly volunteer conference call for one...
3) The entire minutes question is pointless.  Discussion isn't in the minutes and shouldn't be, except noted as 'Discussion followed'.
The vote is what matters.  If you feel that you want to know the discussion, ask someone on the board privately.  Stop asking for dirty laundry to be aired in public, it wastes your time and pissed off those who have to wear the clothes dirty or clean.


Quote
Meanwhile, the oft-heard cry of "Don't just bitch, DO something, and then you'll be considered trustworthy" is tossed about.  I can name at least three times where I volunteered to do something and was either ignored or was told flat out "No thanks, we don't need your help with that."

Nik is doing a great job.  No argument that in the past, getting new people involved was difficult.  Nik and Tim are changing that, with the support and blessing of many of us.

Quote
Look around on this forum if you don't believe me. I've seen it happen to other people, too. Hell, on this very thread, Dada offerred to help post FSP news mentions on the website. Not only was his offer not accepted, he was insulted for offering! 

Dave doesn't know the difference between bad press and good press.  Sorry, but it's true.  He's a bad choice, and many of us are opposed to putting the PR reins in his hands.  This isn't new, he's gotten that same message before, numerous times from of us, and he has yet to acknowledge the lesson.  Tom posts things just fine... and the next gen of the website will be more automated (so that when Google News picks something up, any of a number of trusted people can put it on the front page OR not, depending on the PR value of it.)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: FreeBoB on October 28, 2005, 10:37:41 am
Can this organization survive another year?   

A better question would be, "Can this movement be destroyed?"  There are hundreds of us who are planning our moves, and more will follow once a pattern of successes is established in NH.  The FSP requires little organization; it is merely an agreement between thousands of individuals.  Why is that so hard for people to grasp?  I don't care much about the board, simply because the board is NOT the FSP.

Excellent point Matt.  And, there are hundreds more who are actually making real plans to move that we NEVER hear from.  I 'found' 5 recently moved Participants just last month who were not yet counted as movers and I'm sure there are many more in NH*.  There are thousands out there who are genuinely thrilled to escape their respective states and are making real concrete plans to make moves in the short to medium term!  I know that to be true because every day I talk to them on the phone and by email and they don't care or even know about the FSP leadership!   :o

* contact FSP Welcome Wagon when you are planning to visit and move! http://www.freestateproject.org/community/welcomewagon/

Brian 
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Rocketman on October 28, 2005, 12:21:57 pm
Excellent point Matt. And, there are hundreds more who are actually making real plans to move that we NEVER hear from. I 'found' 5 recently moved Participants just last month who were not yet counted as movers and I'm sure there are many more in NH*. There are thousands out there who are genuinely thrilled to escape their respective states and are making real concrete plans to make moves in the short to medium term! I know that to be true because every day I talk to them on the phone and by email and they don't care or even know about the FSP leadership! :o

* contact FSP Welcome Wagon when you are planning to visit and move! http://www.freestateproject.org/community/welcomewagon/

Brian
 
Love ya, Brian :-*
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Steve on October 28, 2005, 02:45:46 pm
The very people screaming the loudest about my "unprofessional" and "discourteous" behavior are the same ones who have repeatedly IGNORED me when I've emailed them, sometimes about time-sensitive issues directly related to recruitment activities for the FSP.  I politely and courteously requested access to the Organizers list so that I could participate in private strategic discussions with the rest of the leadership.  Then I asked again.  Then I asked again.  I'm aware of at least two other very active members who have both contributed a lot over the past year or more who requested admission to that list and were also refused.  So my emails get ignored, I'm denied access to private discussion lists, I have absolutely no way to judge if my posts on this forum are read and/or discussed by the leadership (for example, on the thread about changing the mission of the FSP), because they don't respond on the forum, the meetings are closed, and the minutes are empty.  And then I get pilloried for saying what needs to be said, and discussed, and DEALT WITH, on the only remaining place available to me.

Meanwhile, the oft-heard cry of "Don't just bitch, DO something, and then you'll be considered trustworthy" is tossed about.  I can name at least three times where I volunteered to do something and was either ignored or was told flat out "No thanks, we don't need your help with that." Look around on this forum if you don't believe me. I've seen it happen to other people, too. Hell, on this very thread, Dada offerred to help post FSP news mentions on the website. Not only was his offer not accepted, he was insulted for offering! 

The way you describe it, it sounds like *everyone* ignored your e-mails, and that Dada's comments were totally blown off.  Could you at least acknowledge that I generally exchange e-mail with you freely, and that I answered Dada's post with courtesy, pointing out that ALL FSP news mentions (from Google News) are already appearing on the site?  Dada himself apologized for the error.  ALL of us, me included, can name occasions when we have been insulted by others here, but it requires a very selective memory to suggest that this is the rule and not the exception.  There are a very few people here for whom invective is a normal mode of speech; you should just ignore them, and exercise your freedom of association to work only with the cooperators.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 28, 2005, 05:13:31 pm
Dave doesn't know the difference between bad press and good press.  Sorry, but it's true.  He's a bad choice, and many of us are opposed to putting the PR reins in his hands.  This isn't new, he's gotten that same message before, numerous times from of us, and he has yet to acknowledge the lesson. 

Bad activist! Haven't you learned your lesson yet? >:(
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 28, 2005, 05:14:25 pm
and the next gen of the website will be more automated (so that when Google News picks something up, any of a number of trusted people can put it on the front page OR not, depending on the PR value of it.)

can you say "vaporware"?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: freedomroad on October 28, 2005, 11:19:13 pm
I know that some of you have bad feelings for another member of the Free State Project.  I know it seems like it may be hard to work with them in NH.

Well, I used to be in the same situation.  Keith M. and I were highly involved in the great state debate.  I backed WY and he backed NH.  Well, we both did some things that might be considered less than honorable.  We both thought that we would never work with each other. 

However, time past and we both gained some insight on the situation.  I saw in while I was in NH for the 2005 PorcFest.  We got along quite well and currently hold no bad feelings for each other. 

Remember, we are all working for liberty.  We are all on the same team.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on October 29, 2005, 03:37:36 am
Some of the polititians are not on my side.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: freedom's ideologue on October 31, 2005, 01:15:02 pm
Quote
Like the government, we are expected to serve all your needs and vilified when we do not. The success of the FSP mission depends on indvidual actions, not the collective power of corporate office-holders. If you want something done, then do it. If you have an idea of what you would like "the leadership" to do, please share it. We are not deaf, but the recurring message is complaining without any guide to corrective action.

For my part, when I moved to NH, I pretty much washed my hands of the FSP.  Not because I hate the FSP or think that it is corrupt or worthless, just simply because the goal of the FSP is to recruit people from outside of NH to join, and since I'm already in NH, the FSP no longer applies to me.

But everybody seems to be taking the criticisms too personally.  I think what those who are criticising are trying to say is that it doesn't do any good to ask people to leave their home state and come to New Hampshire if they aren't being told what is being done in NH.

It's sort of like Jesus.  One of his disciples is asked, "Can anything good come out of Galilee?" and the disciple said, "Come and see!"  But it wasn't just the admonition to come and see, it was to come and see what he had ALREADY HEARD!  So if you want to encourage someone in Idaho to come and move to NH, then I think it makes sense to say, "Come and see!  We're doing this and that.  If you like politics, John Doe is doing this.  If you like civil disobedience, Jane Doe is doing this.  There's lots going on."  You don't have to take a position.  You're right, different people have different ideas about what should be done, but if you give examples of different actions that people are doing, then it becomes a case of telling people, "However you want to fight ... we have people doing it in NH."  And they can get excited by real examples, and not about "possibilities".  It's about what we're DOING, not what we MIGHT DO ONE DAY.

I think its a little disingenuous too for the leadership to pretend that they are above the fro on this one.  What I hear from the leadership is claims of "we don't discriminate, its whatever people want to do," but then they speak out of both sides of their mouths because then they say that "What some people are doing is destructive to our cause."  So they admit that they do have biases.  The leadership is just like everyone else:  They have a specific way that they think it ought to be done, and hence anyone who isn't doing it their way is just going about it completely wrong.  But if you want to lead a group with diverse opinions, you can't let those private beliefs affect the way you treat those who go about it differently than you want them to.  You're not going to get 20,000 people who all believe the same thing and want to work in the exact same way to move.  You're just not.  But you might get 20,000 people who all believe in Liberty, and just have different ideas.  And if your attitude is that those who differ from you are "wasting their time" or worse, "harming the movement", than you've lost before you even begin.

Caleb
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Dreepa on October 31, 2005, 01:29:04 pm
So if you want to encourage someone in Idaho to come and move to NH, then I think it makes sense to say, "Come and see!  We're doing this and that.  If you like politics, John Doe is doing this.  If you like civil disobedience, Jane Doe is doing this.  There's lots going on."  You don't have to take a position.  You're right, different people have different ideas about what should be done, but if you give examples of different actions that people are doing, then it becomes a case of telling people, "However you want to fight ... we have people doing it in NH."  And they can get excited by real examples, and not about "possibilities".  It's about what we're DOING, not what we MIGHT DO ONE DAY.
Caleb

Well put Caleb!
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: lloydbob1 on October 31, 2005, 02:58:08 pm

For my part, when I moved to NH, I pretty much washed my hands of the FSP.  Not because I hate the FSP or think that it is corrupt or worthless, just simply because the goal of the FSP is to recruit people from outside of NH to join, and since I'm already in NH, the FSP no longer applies to me.

Well, you can leave the state, once in a while, and do some recruiting.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: JonM on October 31, 2005, 03:20:34 pm
Leave the Free State?  Are you mad?!?!
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: lloydbob1 on October 31, 2005, 04:54:39 pm
Just for a few hours, once in a while, and back to NH.  Although most of us at Hempfest were not from NH, I believe Dennis was.  Come to think of it, has anyone heard from him since?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: lloydbob1 on October 31, 2005, 05:40:44 pm
I'm sorry I forgot to include you as a NH person at Hempfest.  I guess you made it back to NH.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: RidleyReport on October 31, 2005, 07:03:25 pm
kater wrote:

<< It was the later "discussion" attacking people personally that pissed me off.>>

*Everything* pisses you off, kate :P   
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: RidleyReport on October 31, 2005, 07:11:20 pm
If any of you sent me messages on this thread I've been away from it for a few days...will catch up and respond soon as I can...
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 01, 2005, 12:40:51 am
I think its a little disingenuous too for the leadership to....

Caleb

Disingenuous? Is that high fallootin' polititian talk?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Rearden on November 01, 2005, 01:09:06 am

Remember, we are all working for liberty.  We are all on the same team.

Amen, Keith.  Speaking for myself, while I still check in on this forum once a week or so, 99% of my attention is focused on making a difference here in the Free State.  I'm running for local office right now, and am considering a run -- with major party support -- for a more powerful office next year.  I'm obviously still trying to help the NHLA, and I'm still trying out all the new freedoms I gained with the move.  <straps on Walther .380 ACP>

All this crying about the FSP leadership...  some of it I think is valid, and some I don't.  I think everybody that's written on this topic means well.  But at the end of the day I think it's irrelevant.  What's going to bring pro-liberty people here, whether through the FSP or not, is the early successes of those already here.  That's what I'm working on, and it's what most people here are working on in some way or another. 

Sorry, I can't spare a lot of effort or time to contribute to this discussion.  There's real work to be done here, and real progress to be made. 
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Friday on November 01, 2005, 07:18:08 pm
The way you describe it, it sounds like *everyone* ignored your e-mails, and that Dada's comments were totally blown off.  Could you at least acknowledge that I generally exchange e-mail with you freely, and that I answered Dada's post with courtesy, pointing out that ALL FSP news mentions (from Google News) are already appearing on the site?  Dada himself apologized for the error.  ALL of us, me included, can name occasions when we have been insulted by others here, but it requires a very selective memory to suggest that this is the rule and not the exception.  There are a very few people here for whom invective is a normal mode of speech; you should just ignore them, and exercise your freedom of association to work only with the cooperators.

Steve, I seriously doubt that anyone besides yourself interpreted my saying "The people screaming the loudest..." to mean "everybody".  I have previously posted on the forum that I have found you to be the most responsive member of the Board to me, personally, and you still are (Jason and Jean are also good in that regard).  I wasn't referring to you in regards to Dada being insulted, I was referring to Seth.  There seems to be some "history" between them which I am not aware of. I feel badly that Seth got upset about Dada's joke, and I hope that they can work out their differences in time.  I don't think it was intended to be mean-spirited.  As for my suggesting that being insulted is the rule, once again, I don't know how you interpreted what I said that way.  As for freedom of association to work only with those I choose... works for me.  ;D
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Friday on November 01, 2005, 07:26:32 pm
Sandy, please feel free to cc: me if you ever want butt fires lit.... (grin).

Thanks, Seth, I'll keep that in mind!

This one I can comment on... I was strongly in favor of adding you and others.  I was overruled by the majority opinion... When I cc:ed 'outsiders' to discussions I felt they should be part of, I was told to stop that.  I won't name names, but suffice it to say, I agree with you: yur complaint _was_ a valid one.

Thank you very much, I appreciate hearing that.

1) Some do respond on the forum.  Not everyone, but percentage-wise MOST do.
2) There are plenty of open meetings - the weekly volunteer conference call for one...
3) The entire minutes question is pointless.  Discussion isn't in the minutes and shouldn't be, except noted as 'Discussion followed'.
The vote is what matters.  If you feel that you want to know the discussion, ask someone on the board privately.  Stop asking for dirty laundry to be aired in public, it wastes your time and pissed off those who have to wear the clothes dirty or clean.

We will have to agree to disagree.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: RichW on November 02, 2005, 07:41:39 pm
For my part, when I moved to NH, I pretty much washed my hands of the FSP.  Not because I hate the FSP or think that it is corrupt or worthless, just simply because the goal of the FSP is to recruit people from outside of NH to join, and since I'm already in NH, the FSP no longer applies to me.

Caleb

I don't understand this mentality.  Do you want 130 FSP'ers in NH or 1,300?  1,300 or 13,000?  13,000 or 130,000?  Do you want people to join you, or do you want to be stranded?  Recruiting new members must NEVER end.

I appreciate the efforts of the early movers.  And, I think that progress, in-state, helps to recruit new members.  But, understand, that the movement dies if we do not recruit a significant number of new members.  So, if you will pardon my advice, do what you can to change things in NH now.  But, DO NOT stop recruiting.  Run for office AND recruit.  Burn flags AND recruit.  Protest AND recruit.

Most of us disagree with the leadership about something.  So what?  Do we disagree about the concept of the FSP, that we must concentrate our numbers to be effective?  NO.  So, recruit, recruit, recruit.

Let us not let petty in-fighting derail the noble goals of our cause.  Be true to your philosophy -- self responsibility.  If someone puts up a road block before you, move around it, over it, or under it, and keep going.  Even though we are all rampant individualists, we succeed or fail as a group.  Do not forget that.  Let's put aside our differences now and work toward our common cause of individualism and liberty.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Steve on November 03, 2005, 03:41:08 am
Most of us disagree with the leadership about something.
Most of the leadership disagrees with most of the leadership about something, but the FSP is structured to permit a maximum amount of free association and self-organization.  I had to laugh at Claire's recent blog entry
http://www.clairewolfe.com/wolfesblog/00001775.html
where she criticizes "you".  Who is the you?  How can someone who professes to be a libertarian speak in collectivist terms?  The FSP collects no dues, and the "leadership" is unpaid and wields no power.  We can speak only minimally on behalf of the FSP; porcupines are as solitary an animal as cats, but their prickliness make them harder to herd.  Anybody who wants can participate and move into leadership positions; we are begging for volunteers.  The essence of the FSP's mission is coordination of libertarian activism in a manageabley small territory: what is the alternative?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: cathleeninnh on November 03, 2005, 09:14:22 am
[
I appreciate the efforts of the early movers.  And, I think that progress, in-state, helps to recruit new members.  But, understand, that the movement dies if we do not recruit a significant number of new members.  So, if you will pardon my advice, do what you can to change things in NH now.  But, DO NOT stop recruiting.  Run for office AND recruit.  Burn flags AND recruit.  Protest AND recruit.



I don't think the movement dies if recruitment ends. Not that I want recruitment to end, or the FSP to stop trying. As long as ANY liberty action goes on in NH, seekers of liberty will take note and some will respond by moving. As long as ANY loss of liberty is felt elsewhere, NH will naturally attract those that want to improve their situation.

That is our appeal, an improved current and future life. As long as someone values their current situation more, they will not move. We can't attempt to devalue what someone has worked hard for and have any real success. When they come to dissatisfaction on their own, they will look for improvement. NH already has what many will be looking for.

The movement will not die.

Cathleen
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 03, 2005, 03:11:55 pm
I had to laugh at Claire's recent blog entry
http://www.clairewolfe.com/wolfesblog/00001775.html
That "you" is kindof funny.
I get the feeling from many people that they would never actually move to NH even if we got to 20,000 quickly. She talks about NH being expensive. That doesn't sound like a person who is waiting for that 20,000 bell to ring and then move. It is good to hear what people's intentions are and to let them out of their commitment. The fsp's goal of moving people really separates the talkers from the freedom fighters.
Hopefully soon we can get a feel for how many people are serious about moving here and when.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: jgmaynard on November 03, 2005, 04:14:27 pm
"But without the 20,000, you're merely substituting feelgood propaganda for reality."

<Bugs Bunny voice>
Evi...dent..allly, she's never been to New Hampshire before.... At least not in de action, dere, bub.....
</Bugs Bunny voice>

20k? that's 4x overkill........ Even if the FSP reaches 1/2 that goal (10k) and only 1/2 of those people move (5k), we're still as powerful as the Dems and Repubs put together.....

JM
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Dreepa on November 03, 2005, 04:46:22 pm
"But without the 20,000, you're merely substituting feelgood propaganda for reality."

<Bugs Bunny voice>
Evi...dent..allly, she's never been to New Hampshire before.... At least not in de action, dere, bub.....
</Bugs Bunny voice>
20k? that's 4x overkill........ Even if the FSP reaches 1/2 that goal (10k) and only 1/2 of those people move (5k), we're still as powerful as the Dems and Repubs put together.....
JM

Then maybe we should change the SOI to 10K and then have phase II be 20K.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: JasonPSorens on November 03, 2005, 05:46:09 pm
Claire opted out of NH, then opted in near the vote as a reconciliation gesture between East and West. She's definitely not enthused about NH. I think she is feeling a little guilty for unfairly slamming the FSP, though. I posted a reply on her forum:
http://tcftalk.com/clairefiles/index.php?topic=7427.0
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Rocketman on November 03, 2005, 06:04:11 pm
Then maybe we should change the SOI to 10K and then have phase II be 20K.

Aw, please... Dreepa, even if you're kidding, I can hardly bear any more talk about changing the SoI.  We need less changing and more moving.

Claire Wolfe obviously never wanted to move to NH in the first place.  Oh well... the "you go first" problem has already been addressed by the 120-150 folks who have already moved.  The goal of concentrating liberty activists in New Hampshire should be self-perpetuating, not some BS idea we mull over for a couple years and just give up on. 

Whoops, there went my inclination to buy one of Claire's books!
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: FTL_Ian on November 03, 2005, 10:50:10 pm
To her credit, joining the FSP is one of the things in her "179 things to do til the revolution".

To those uppity folks who are getting their panties in a bunch about this whole 2006 thing, I say, good riddance, shut up, and let us succeed without you.

By the way, here's the fastest way to 20,000:
http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?topic=11073.0
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 04, 2005, 01:42:50 am
To her credit, joining the FSP is one of the things in her "179 things to do til the revolution".

Instead of "join the fsp" how about "move to NH"? 8)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 04, 2005, 01:44:32 am
20k? that's 4x overkill........ Even if the FSP reaches 1/2 that goal (10k) and only 1/2 of those people move (5k), we're still as powerful as the Dems and Repubs put together.....
.... and we carry pitchforks.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: KBCraig on November 04, 2005, 02:10:31 am
20k? that's 4x overkill........ Even if the FSP reaches 1/2 that goal (10k) and only 1/2 of those people move (5k), we're still as powerful as the Dems and Repubs put together.....
.... and we carry pitchforks.

... or potato forks.  ;)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 04, 2005, 04:05:15 am
I will "open carry" my pitchfork at the SS card burn next saturday. :D
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Dreepa on November 04, 2005, 06:46:05 am
Then maybe we should change the SOI to 10K and then have phase II be 20K.

Aw, please... Dreepa, even if you're kidding, I can hardly bear any more talk about changing the SoI.  We need less changing and more moving.

Only partially kidding... I am already here... and love it!
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Friday on November 07, 2005, 07:54:10 pm
Friends,

It has been two weeks since I started this thread.  Where has it led?

I have heard from a lot of people, both on this forum, via email, by phone, and in person.  Overall, the responses have been predictable.  Some of them have been heartwarming, and others have been demoralizing.  I'm happy to say that the positive responses have outnumbered the negative.  :)

As far as getting the issues I raised seriously addressed, well, what you see on this thread is what you get, as far as I can tell.  :-\ According to this thread, the Organizers list is no more.  I am on the Doers' list, and I can tell you that there has not been one word of discussion of Board elections, Board meeting minutes, publicizing the actions of in-state members, the Underground/NHFree, hiring a PR firm, etc.  As per this thread, I'm happy to hear that a PR firm will soon be retained by the FSP, and I sincerely hope it bears some fruit in increased recruitment numbers.  I'm also happy to hear that at least a few Boardmembers were supportive of at least partial elective representation in the past.   It's good to know that all media references to the FSP are included somewhere on the website, if not particularly prominently.

I had hoped to stop the rift between the "party" FSP'ers and the Undergrounders from widening into an unleapable chasm.  But that doesn't look like it's going to happen. For my part, I have no intention of cutting ties with Kat, Russell and the other Monadnock Porcupines, any more than I would from the Seacoast Porcupines or my neighbors in the Merrimack River Valley. I guess if other FSP Participants choose to do so, that's out of my hands.

At this point, my feelings are in line with Amanda's: discussions on this forum are unproductive, and I intend to minimize my time here. (Note how much more self-control I have now, though: I'm not going to delete my account in a rage, then sheepishly reinstate it after I've calmed down.  ;) )  I'm in New Hampshire now, and am no longer dependent on this forum to provide my primary means of contact and interaction with my fellow FSP'ers.  I see them every day, face to face, and have been working hard with some of them for greater liberty in New Hampshire (you can read about my adventures on my blog: http://fridaysblog.blogspot.com/

As for the assorted cries that I shouldn't just "whine" and "gripe", I should do something, well, what can I say? Reference my first-ever post on an FSP list:
March 27, 2002 - #2423 on the freestateproject Yahoo list http://groups.yahoo.com/group/freestateproject/  (http://groups.yahoo.com/group/freestateproject/)), and my earliest remaining (due to archiving) post on this forum:
http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?topic=1471.15  I proactively took over leadership of the Northern California Local Group, and was approved after the fact.  I was appointed Events Coordinator after contacting all 50 state Libertarian Parties about opportunities for FSP vendor tables and speakers. It's no secret I've worked on lots of other projects. I've been a proactive go-getter for the FSP for 3 1/2 years now.

To all those whom I have angered, insulted and/or offended on this forum over the years by expressing a dissenting opinion, all due apologies.  I like to think that the action-oriented, friendly, appreciative, helpful, welcoming or just plain funny posts have greatly outnumbered the offensive ones.  I sometimes enjoy participating on the Underground forum, so if you enjoy sparring/kvetching/joking with me, look for me there: http://www.nhfree.com/

To those of you who are doing anything at all to encourage liberty-loving activists to move to New Hampshire and/or to increase liberty within the state, I salute you! Please keep it up.  The FSP sure needs your help. 

Here's to Liberty in Our Lifetimes, to whatever degree it may be achieved!  :D
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: jgmaynard on November 07, 2005, 08:37:59 pm
Claire opted out of NH, then opted in near the vote as a reconciliation gesture between East and West. She's definitely not enthused about NH. I think she is feeling a little guilty for unfairly slamming the FSP, though. I posted a reply on her forum:
http://tcftalk.com/clairefiles/index.php?topic=7427.0

Yeah, I remember when all us pro-NHer's signed the thing re-opting into every state, Claire opted-back-in to NH, kudos to her for that.

I also read your reply on Claire's forum. Nice job, Jason.

JM
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 07, 2005, 09:26:15 pm
Thanks for the great thread and ending post Friday.
I have to agree that I will have to mostly work outside and around the fsp and this forum.
I have met and enjoy so many friends because of the fsp, but I can communicate with them in other ways.
I look forward to meeting people as they move to NH. Feel free to join our discussions and plans on the underground. We have a revolution to accomplish.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: CP ridgerunner on November 12, 2005, 06:38:07 pm
Ok, this is your alls game, I would like to see you all do well in NH. but I really don't have a dog in the fight. I know the project is open to others besides libertarians but I feel that is where my duty is to keep libertarian authority fiqures on the straight and narrow especially those who  hold office( this group much more so), run for office, holds a party post or  has authority in a libertarian organization.               
                Ok enough on the Speach making, now for the questions.                                                                               
            Was the statment of intent upon the founding an agreement, not a contract but adults giving their word?                 
   If so did that agrrement  from 9/01 to 12/02 have as a requirement 20,000 members by 2006?                 
    Was that  droped as a requirement and changed to  a goal in 12/02?                                                                                                                   
    How many members did you have just before the change that agreed to the 20,000 as a requirement?                   
     Is it  unkoser( adults  going back on their word) to change a founding agreement unless everyone who made the agreement agreed to change it?                   
    If you did not get full agreement to the change would it have been better for those who wanted the change to reorganize under a new name and allow those who did not want the change to keep the FSP name and requirements?                   
   Would it be better to re organize today under a new name, maybe The Free New Hampshire Project?
Claire opted out of NH, then opted in near the vote as a reconciliation gesture between East and West. She's definitely not enthused about NH. I think she is feeling a little guilty for unfairly slamming the FSP, though. I posted a reply on her forum:
http://tcftalk.com/clairefiles/index.php?topic=7427.0
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 22, 2005, 11:41:27 am
I will "open carry" my pitchfork at the SS card burn next saturday. :D
I forgot my pitchfork, but it was a very successful burn.

http://keenefreepress.editme.com/SSCardBurn

http://www.politicalgraffiti.com/nhfree/NHfree-SS_Card_Burn.mov nice video
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: FTL_Ian on November 22, 2005, 12:37:42 pm
Nice video!   ;D  It should be on the front page of the FSP site.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: politicalGRAFFITI on November 22, 2005, 05:31:59 pm
Nice video!   ;D  It should be on the front page of the FSP site.

Glad you liked it Ian... thanks for the Radio Call-in Audio :)

Russell, check it out, they are talking about you in the Czech Republic already. ;D
http://forum.libinst.cz/viewtopic.php?t=809

Too cool...

The Revolution Starts Now!
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: FreeBoB on November 22, 2005, 06:16:23 pm
politicalGRAFFITI,

The video is excellent - well done!   8)

What else have you done?

Brian
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: politicalGRAFFITI on November 22, 2005, 09:12:50 pm
politicalGRAFFITI,

The video is excellent - well done!   8)

What else have you done?

Brian

For the freedom movement in NH...

Getting alot of activity for the SS Card Burn video.
http://www.politicalgraffiti.com/nhfree/NHfree-SS_Card_Burn.mov

Got a couple hundred views of the Porc Fest video.
http://bureaucrash.politicalgraffiti.com/

Getting some traffic for the Open Carry video.
http://www.politicalgraffiti.com/nhfree/Open_Carry_11-12-05.mov
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: FreeBoB on November 22, 2005, 09:51:39 pm
Nice.  Your website front page is very cool too.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: honza928 on November 24, 2005, 03:41:46 pm
Quote from: politicalGRAFFITI
Russell, check it out, they are talking about you in the Czech Republic already. ;D
http://forum.libinst.cz/viewtopic.php?t=809

Too cool...

It was me. I've signed up for the FSP more than a year ago, am one of the four recent czech FSP participants (held here in cz by the US immigration policy only).
The Lib.institute is the only institution in this country, where libertarians gether, organize meetings, lectures, discussions, tax freedom day (June 14 :P), publish Hayek's, Rothbard's, Mises's boks etc.
Their forum.libinst.cz is one of the few places, where I can get in touch with the few (too few) libertarians in this country online. I tried to introduce the FSP there, explain to the other guys, what it is.

BTW, one reaction was: Is burning flags and irritating cops all what FSP is about ?   ;)

Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: politicalGRAFFITI on November 24, 2005, 09:06:37 pm
Quote from: politicalGRAFFITI
Russell, check it out, they are talking about you in the Czech Republic already. ;D
http://forum.libinst.cz/viewtopic.php?t=809

Too cool...

It was me. I've signed up for the FSP more than a year ago, am one of the four recent czech FSP participants (held here in cz by the US immigration policy only).
The Lib.institute is the only institution in this country, where libertarians gether, organize meetings, lectures, discussions, tax freedom day (June 14 :P), publish Hayek's, Rothbard's, Mises's boks etc.


Their forum.libinst.cz is one of the few places, where I can get in touch with the few (too few) libertarians in this country online. I tried to introduce the FSP there, explain to the other guys, what it is.

BTW, one reaction was: Is burning flags and irritating cops all what FSP is about ?   ;)



Thanks for posting the link ;D

Several people have clicked through from your posting.

The 'Social Security Card Burn' was just a good visual... I thought it deserved to be covered. You can learn more about the "civil disobedience" approach to attempt to restore our freedoms at www.NHfree.com

Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Friday on January 01, 2006, 07:17:52 am
The Board of Directors meeting minutes show a lot of improvement!  Thank you!!   :)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: jeanius on January 01, 2006, 11:31:54 am
You're welcome! ;)

Jean
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on January 01, 2006, 12:44:44 pm
So who is on the board nowadays?
What is happening with the pr firms?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: jeanius on January 01, 2006, 04:10:23 pm
The current board consists of:  Jason, Jean, Varrin, Amanda and Steve.  One empty slot is going to be filled by a vote of the coordinators this month.  The other empty slot will likely be filled by the board this month.  If anyone is interested in running for the board seat you should contact Jason. Any candidate must be a FSP participant and of the age of maturity in the state of NV.

We have a trial project in motion with one PR firm to generate some local stories.  We should get an update on that soon.

Jean
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on January 01, 2006, 07:00:45 pm
 8)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Dreepa on July 14, 2006, 12:31:21 pm
/bump

I just reread Friday's first post.
Friday give us an update on the good and bad....  ;D
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Dreepa on July 14, 2006, 12:32:55 pm
I really would like to know where we can do better - realistically.

Jason.. we (FSP) fail in that we don't do anything with new members.  After they join that is it.  See ya 5 years after we hit 20K.
How about a welcome letter signed by you and Amanda?  How about a packet full of NH details, websites with job postings, real estate details, news from NH?
Hell at the rate we are going we could probably get a personal phone call to each new member by the board.
 

Welcome letters are now being sent out.
With a real live autograph from V.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Friday on July 14, 2006, 06:22:07 pm
/bump

I just reread Friday's first post.
Friday give us an update on the good and bad....  ;D

How DARE you hold me accountable for something I posted on a public forum??  ;)  Anyway, I'm in power now, I don't have to answer to peons like you.  ;D

Kidding... let me reread my initial post and formulate a response.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Friday on July 15, 2006, 09:04:24 am
Alright, Dreepa, since you asked...

FSP Participants, Friends, libertarians, lend me your eyeballs, and let us discuss what is to be done with our beloved FSP.

As has been discussed at great length on this forum and elsewhere, the FSP has �issues�.  :P

Here is my current assessment of the progress that has been made on the issues I elucidated back in October.

Quote
The current configuration of the Board of Directors is self-appointed and meets in secret.

This is still largely the case.  Of the seven current Directors (Jason, Steve, Varrin, Morey, Brian, Jon and myself), only Morey and I were elected by a group other than the Board itself.  This issue has been discussed by the Board at various times, but an official decision has not been made.  Jean spent some time formulating guidelines as to which group of FSP volunteers would qualify as the "voting body" in director elections, but I think we never followed through on finalizing that either.  There's actually a Board meeting today, but the agenda is absolutely gi-normous.  I will put this topic on the agenda for the August Board meeting, and make a motion.  It will then go into the minutes exactly how the current incarnation of the BoD comes down on this issue.

Quote
The minutes of its meetings are a joke, IMHO.

I believe this issue has been resolved.  Former Secretary Jean made an effort to provide more verbose, informative minutes.  I'm Secretary now, and I attempt to not only provide minutes that are informative to non-attendees, but even include information that, strictly speaking, isn't applicable (for example, I include comments such as "The Board discussed this prior to the meeting").  Minutes are posted promptly on the FSP website:  http://freestateproject.org/about/bod_minutes  If you have any questions or concerns about the minutes, feel free to bring them to my attention.  I like to think I'm responsive to those who elected me (Dreepa!  ;) ).

Quote
Some Directors and department heads go MIA for months at a time

This has been fixed.  All seven sitting Directors are VERY active and participate on this forum.  As for department heads, there are a few who, for whatever reason, aren't really into the forum, but in my experience, if you email them, they respond promptly.  I'm really not aware of a single person on the Org chart who is MIA anymore.  This is a good thing.  :)

Quote

yet retain access to internal leadership discussion lists, while other very active members are refused admittance.

This is still an issue.  There is a private, invitation-only mailing list called the "Organizers List" (or the O-List for short), the purpose of which is to advise the Board on policy decisions.  Jason controls this list and has the discretion to add people to it (although he generally asks the other Directors for their opinions first).  The size of the list is currently fixed at 15 (I think?).  There are people on the list who haven't said a word in months.  There are other very active and thoughtful FSP volunteers who have not been invited onto the list.  Perhaps if a particular individual would like to be on the list, the appropriate action to take is to lobby Jason?

Quote
There hasn�t been a board election since the summer of 2004.

There have been two elections since I posted that.  See above for more on the issue of electing Directors.

Quote
The winner of that election became so disgruntled, for reasons that were never publicly spelled out, that she not only quit the Board, she quit this forum.

You may have already noticed the recent return of Kat!  Hooray!!  Welcome back, Kat.  :-*

Quote
Several other Boardmembers and officers have disappeared over the years.

This is still an issue.  I find it mysterious, the number of people who used to spend gobs of time on the FSP, and now no longer weigh in at all.  I think it might be helpful to make a friendly gesture to some of those people.  Maybe time has healed their wounds, or their personal situations have changed, or whatever, and they'd now be willing to help out with the FSP again.   I'm thinking of people like Kelton, and Michelle, and Eddie, and Doug (aka Stumpy).  Any really old-timers with good people skills want to volunteer to take a stab at this?

to be continued... (man, I do ramble on at times, don't I?  :P )
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Friday on July 15, 2006, 10:19:50 am
Even public DISCUSSION of BoD elections has been relocated to the Participants Only section, preventing prospective members from being fully informed about the history of an organization that, let�s face it, asks for a rather large dose of personal sacrifice.

Recently, Jon (who is in charge of this forum) asked for opinions re: reopening the archives.  I'm not sure what came of that.  Jon?  In any case, I believe the plan is to completely replace this forum in the near future.  Seth and/or Jon has the best info on that.

Quote
It appears to have analysis paralysis; it has been sitting on over $30,000 in organizational funds for months now, unable to decide whether to spend it on a marketing campaign or a paid employee (resulting in the money being spent on neither).

This has been fixed.  We'll be spending money on a new winter conference.  I'll be spending money any minute now placing more print ads for First 1000 in some liberty-oriented publications.  The Board voted to continue using the PR firm PIC after the trial period ended, because it seems to be doing great work for us.  FYI, the head PR guy, Brian Gottstein, attended PorcFest. 

Quote
Exciting and inspiring things are being done by early movers and friends of our cause in New Hampshire.  This is the proof that our concept is feasible, and must be shared with the rest of the world.
This continues to be a topic of heated debate.  There are two main factions: the one that wants to advertise the goings-on in NH loudly and proudly, and the one that believes that it's best to not advertise any goings-on, for fear of implying endorsement of some groups/individuals/activities and not others.  This item is on the agenda for today's BoD meeting.  I believe a decision is about to be made.

Quote
There�s a growing schism between those who, officially, hold the reins of power over FSP policy, publicity and funds, and those of us who have actually put our lives where our mouths are by moving to New Hampshire and becoming political activists, in some cases at enormous personal cost.

Mixed bag on this one.  The Board now consists of 3 Directors who already have moved to NH, or will be doing so within a few months (Varrin, Brian and myself), and four directors with no immediate plans (to my knowledge; feel free to correct me if I'm wrong) to move (Jason, Steve, Morey and Jon).  Frankly, I'm not sure what to do about this.  I still think it's reasonable to ask leaders to do that which they ask others to do. 

Quote
The denizens of the FSP forum, and those of the NH Underground forum, each pretend that the other doesn�t exist.
My sense is that this has improved somewhat.  There are numerous individuals who "hang out" on both fora.  There are a few FSP'ers who used to avoid the Underground, but now do occasionally make an appearance.  And vice versa.  It would be cool if certain Undergrounders would stop posting on this forum about how much it stinks in comparison to the other one, and how weak and ineffectual the FSP is in comparison to the Underground.  I don't believe that, and I can't think of any FSP'ers who are posting on the Underground forum in such a hostile and antagonistic manner.  We're not in competition with each other!

Quote
The FSP leadership seems repulsed or frightened by the radicalism expressed on the Underground; yet, as far as I can see, the majority of regular posters there are bonafide FSP early movers, or NH natives friendly to our cause, or FSP participants who seem serious about relocating within the next few years.  The official forum, meanwhile, is dominated by nonmembers engaged in endless discussion that has nothing to do with the FSP.
Relations between the FSP leadership and the Underground "leadership" have improved.  Note that Varrin recently made Russell one of the lead people for PorcFest 2007.  There has also been serious discussion of selling the Political Graffiti DVD, which features video shorts of various Underground demonstrations, on the FSP website; this is also on the agenda for today's BoD meeting.  And as mentioned above, this forum is much livelier than it used to be.
Quote

The early movers who are running for political office (or have already won) post in neither place, and we therefore lose the ability to point to their successes (or noble defeats) as a recruitment tool.
This remains a serious issue.  Several early movers running for political office have gone to great lengths to ensure that their names aren't publicly linked to the FSP, I guess for fear that it would hurt their chances of being elected.  But perhaps others simply haven't thought about it.  I think we should approach some of these people and ask them to write essays for the website, or post on the forum about how they've been elected to such and such (Dreepa!  :D ), or write for the monthly newsletter.

re: President who doesn't appear to be moving to New Hampshire any time soon
Fixed. Hi Varrin!  :)

re: Chairman who doesn't appear to be moving to New Hampshire any time soon
Jason has discussed this openly quite recently: http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?topic=12117.msg157893#msg157893.  And, just my personal observation, but Jason seems more enthused recently about getting himself to NH (I'd comment on how much fun he had at PorcFest, but, you know what they say, WHAPFSAPF  ;) ).  Let's all keep our fingers crossed, and maybe one of the Poli Sci professors at Dartmouth will get trampled by a rabid moose, providing Jason with a golden career opportunity.

Quote
The concept of the FSP will succeed or fail by our actions.  Let�s discuss this, and take action.  I welcome all ideas.  Please post them here, IM me, email me, or call me (I�m in the Porcupine directory).  If you�re *really* paranoid, I�ll even meet you in a crowded pub and remove all my bugged fillings first.   ;D
I can also be found at Bickford's in Manchester on the first Saturday of every month.  :D

Quote
(This message will also be posted on the Underground forum, for the benefit of those early movers who have become so frustrated with the FSP leadership that they won't even look at this forum anymore.)
I will do this again.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Dreepa on July 15, 2006, 10:47:45 am
uh Rah!!!

So as people might notice... things have improved since October!!!!  In fact I think that the FSP is in for a great run the for the next year.
Let's BOOST our activitism.  If you haven't volunteered .... do so.  Get the word out at local events.  You never know who you will meet and how quickly they will sign up and move. (Someday I will post my weird introduction to the FSP...Hearing to moving <10 months).

Thanks Sandy!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: freedom's ideologue on July 15, 2006, 07:20:44 pm
Quote
It would be cool if certain Undergrounders would stop posting on this forum about how much it stinks in comparison to the other one, and how weak and ineffectual the FSP is in comparison to the Underground.  I don't believe that, and I can't think of any FSP'ers who are posting on the Underground forum in such a hostile and antagonistic manner

with all due respect, Sandy, I don't think any undergrounders are complaining about the FSP forum (although I admit that its hard for me to keep up with every single post).  But I haven't seen that.  Some undergrounders put in a plug for other organizations (for instance, I plug my Republic of NH site www.republicofnh.org ), but I don't think that is meant as a slight to your forum here, just a little marketing for our pet projects.

Actually, I told Russell today that his forum is getting boring, compared to the FSP forum.   :D 
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on July 15, 2006, 07:32:22 pm
 8) update .... some of the things are better.

Brian says we can drag him to NH in October if necessary. Maybe we should elect new board members every year and then force them to move. ;D

Who are these rogue underground posters pointing to nhfree.com? (dreepa, nick?) .... if they post here aren't they also FSP forum denizens?
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on July 15, 2006, 07:47:46 pm
Actually, I told Russell today that his forum is getting boring, compared to the FSP forum.   :D 
As has been proven on this forum ..... your instincts and analysis are lacking.

Dave Mincin said,
"For those who know me, know I make it my business to keep a hand on the pulse of the folks.� Truth is you and a few others, with your talk of session, and US flag burning are making it much more difficult for the folks who are quietly, humbly working to promote real growth in our freedom here in NH.� I know who they are and my respect for them grows daily.�

I say this because I believe in freedom and believe you do too.� You current selfrighteous, I know everything, and only my way is the right way, attitude is making lots of enemies...and destroying any credibility you might hope to attain in NH.� Not only with freestaters, but with lots of our
neighbors.� "

The Seth Lord said,
"You really are a moron, Caleb.  I said that _I_ was, and in fact still am, not a Zionist.  Rich will attest to that fact, since we spent a good half-hour arguing about it.
By your moronic backwards logic, I'm anti-semitic, and a racist.  Neither of which I am, so QED, your logic is broken."

'nuff said. :-X
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: FreeBoB on July 15, 2006, 07:53:00 pm
8) update .... some of the things are better.

Brian says we can drag him to NH in October if necessary. Maybe we should elect new board members every year and then force them to move. ;D

Who are these rogue underground posters pointing to nhfree.com? (dreepa, nick?) .... if they post here aren't they also FSP forum denizens?

I wish I could enlist you guys to help me get out this house ready to sell and get out of here!  I need a paint crew!

Brian
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: freedom's ideologue on July 15, 2006, 07:54:53 pm
Quote
As has been proven on this forum ..... your instincts and analysis are lacking.

WHAT??

This coming from an acknowledged kleptomaniac and Ghandi wannabe.  Mr. Revolutionary God in his own mind.

Did you finally decide to stop tilting at windmills just long enough to take a stab at me, before heading off for a new round hassling airline employees?

I can’t help it that your forum is stagnant.  Don’t shoot the messenger, Russ.

Caleb
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on July 15, 2006, 08:21:32 pm
Quote
As has been proven on this forum ..... your instincts and analysis are lacking.

WHAT??

This coming from an acknowledged kleptomaniac and Ghandi wannabe.  Mr. Revolutionary God in his own mind.

Did you finally decide to stop tilting at windmills just long enough to take a stab at me, before heading off for a new round hassling airline employees?

I can’t help it that your forum is stagnant.  Don’t shoot the messenger, Russ.

Caleb

This "Russ" guy sounds like a real heel. I will steer clear of him.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Dreepa on July 15, 2006, 09:09:50 pm

This "Russ" guy sounds like a real heel. I will steer clear of him.
Almost as bad as RK.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Friday on July 16, 2006, 08:41:56 am
Quote
It would be cool if certain Undergrounders would stop posting on this forum about how much it stinks in comparison to the other one, and how weak and ineffectual the FSP is in comparison to the Underground.  I don't believe that, and I can't think of any FSP'ers who are posting on the Underground forum in such a hostile and antagonistic manner

with all due respect, Sandy, I don't think any undergrounders are complaining about the FSP forum

Caleb,
Here are a few links demonstrating what I'm talking about.  These are all from within the past few months.  Although, to be fair, things have mellowed a bit; it used to be worse.

http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?topic=11947.msg156642#msg156642

http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?topic=11952.msg156532#msg156532

http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?topic=11631.msg154090#msg154090

http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?topic=11631.msg153983#msg153983
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: freedom's ideologue on July 16, 2006, 09:24:07 am
Sandy,

I'm sure sometimes things get said.  I read the links you posted me.  And I can understand why you might feel a little slighted.

But maybe just a word in defense.  Most of the posts you referred to were by Dada.  I looked at his number of posts, and he's posted, on this forum, 2612 times.  By contrast, I've posted 302 times.  You've posted 178 times.  Russell Kanning (the great instigator) has posted only 1448 times.  Compared to Dada, we're all FSP Forum neophytes.  A few posts here and there that are critical are surely outweighed by his enormous contributions on this very forum.

Dada also spends enormous energy promoting this site on countless other forums, to be fair to him, probably more so than any other member of the FSP.  That's not a slight to other members, its a tribute to how much energy he directs towards the goal of recruitment.

If Dada has a few posts now and then that direct attention to another forum and comment on how "dead" this forum has been (in the past), from what I know of him that was probably said with a twinge of sadness, not glee.

Caleb
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Ward Griffiths on July 16, 2006, 11:36:49 am

Maybe we should elect new board members every year and then force them to move. ;D
Initiation of force is still the One Crime.
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Dave Mincin on July 16, 2006, 01:40:08 pm
Dave Mincin said,
"For those who know me, know I make it my business to keep a hand on the pulse of the folks.� Truth is you and a few others, with your talk of session, and US flag burning are making it much more difficult for the folks who are quietly, humbly working to promote real growth in our freedom here in NH.� I know who they are and my respect for them grows daily.�

I say this because I believe in freedom and believe you do too.� You current selfrighteous, I know everything, and only my way is the right way, attitude is making lots of enemies...and destroying any credibility you might hope to attain in NH.� Not only with freestaters, but with lots of our
neighbors.� "

_______________________________________________________________________________________________

Hmmm...Russell...seems to me you got it wrong...and this is a case of the kettle calling the pot black! ???

Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Friday on August 18, 2006, 07:11:47 am
Alright, Dreepa, since you asked...

Quote
The current configuration of the Board of Directors is self-appointed and meets in secret.

This is still largely the case.  Of the seven current Directors (Jason, Steve, Varrin, Morey, Brian, Jon and myself), only Morey and I were elected by a group other than the Board itself.  This issue has been discussed by the Board at various times, but an official decision has not been made.  Jean spent some time formulating guidelines as to which group of FSP volunteers would qualify as the "voting body" in director elections, but I think we never followed through on finalizing that either.  There's actually a Board meeting today, but the agenda is absolutely gi-normous.  I will put this topic on the agenda for the August Board meeting, and make a motion.  It will then go into the minutes exactly how the current incarnation of the BoD comes down on this issue.


As promised, I requested that Board elections be placed on the agenda for this Sunday's Board meeting.  I also requested that one year terms of office be instituted.  Those of you who love to bitch about the "FSP Leadership" better hope these items fail, or it'll be time for you to put up or shut up.  For the record, I intend to vote for both.  ;D
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: JasonPSorens on August 18, 2006, 09:48:54 am
Alright, Dreepa, since you asked...

Quote
The current configuration of the Board of Directors is self-appointed and meets in secret.

This is still largely the case.  Of the seven current Directors (Jason, Steve, Varrin, Morey, Brian, Jon and myself), only Morey and I were elected by a group other than the Board itself.  This issue has been discussed by the Board at various times, but an official decision has not been made.  Jean spent some time formulating guidelines as to which group of FSP volunteers would qualify as the "voting body" in director elections, but I think we never followed through on finalizing that either.  There's actually a Board meeting today, but the agenda is absolutely gi-normous.  I will put this topic on the agenda for the August Board meeting, and make a motion.  It will then go into the minutes exactly how the current incarnation of the BoD comes down on this issue.


As promised, I requested that Board elections be placed on the agenda for this Sunday's Board meeting.  I also requested that one year terms of office be instituted.  Those of you who love to bitch about the "FSP Leadership" better hope these items fail, or it'll be time for you to put up or shut up.  For the record, I intend to vote for both.  ;D

I'll probably vote against both.  8)
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: Russell Kanning on November 28, 2009, 08:29:29 am
something happened here, but now it is gone

i guess some things don't change
Title: Re: Seditious Ramblings
Post by: artienewport on December 14, 2009, 11:26:17 am
something happened here, but now it is gone

i guess some things don't change

Time to start over.