Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: [1]   Go Down

Author Topic: Drop 7 of the 10 States  (Read 4875 times)

pghpat26

  • FSP Participant
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18
  • Paul Revere re-incarnated
Drop 7 of the 10 States
« on: July 09, 2003, 01:12:12 am »

Alright folks what I have to say might seem a bit out there but I have to say it. So feel free to bash afterwards.  From what I've noticed the past couple of weeks is this push for the top 3 states- NH, WY, and to some extent ID. Not a word about DE has arisen. Maine and VT don't seem to have a big following either. The Dakotas don't have any fans. Some stuff has been said about MT but its playing the roll as spoiler. AK is just not gonna ever happen (maybe a great state for the project but you'll never get the people there.) By knocking out the least likely candidates you dont need all this difficult elimination process. Instead the ballot could have but the 3 states (maybe 4) names and a place to put an X indicating your vote. You would put an X next to your pick, no ranking so you can knock down your biggest oppisition. Tallying these votes could be done very easily and it couldnt cost that much just to have somebody sort them into piles and count them up. The cost to put in 10 state reports with the ballot would be cut because there would be much less paperwork. This might seem ridiculous to some but thats your opinion. Let me know what you think.
Logged
"The communists are coming! The communists are coming!"

ZuG

  • FSP Participant
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 313
Re:Drop 7 of the 10 States
« Reply #1 on: July 09, 2003, 04:02:27 am »

The FSP is designed to find the best compromise state. i.e. if a certain state always ends up 2nd or third to everyone, but never first, the FSP voting system is designed to pick that candidate. So, even though there are some leaders on the boards, this doesn't mean that the leaders will win.

This is also ignoring the fact that only a small minority of FSP members are regular posters to these boards, making any speculation about "leading" states moot.
Logged
Before you post that comment, think. The people you are talking to will soon be your neighbors. Would you talk to your neighbor in the way you are talking to those on the forum?

Number_6

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 108
Re:Drop 7 of the 10 States
« Reply #2 on: July 09, 2003, 09:22:38 am »

It's an interesting idea, but here's why we might not want to try it:

1)  Like ZuG said, the vast majority of the membership don't seem to be posting on these boards.  No one knows their opinions.  For all we know, all of them might want a state that we here never discuss.

2)  It wouldn't save money.  The Project leadership want to avoid any appearance of impropriety, so they are using an outside entity for the vote count.  This will cost money.  For a second vote, they would want to do the same thing for the same reason, and this would cost more money.  After the recent theft of Project money, the last thing it needs is another large expenditure right now.

3)  Discarding less-favored states will be done as a part of the final vote.
Logged

pghpat26

  • FSP Participant
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18
  • Paul Revere re-incarnated
Re:Drop 7 of the 10 States
« Reply #3 on: July 09, 2003, 12:39:17 pm »

ZuG you said that if a state is ranked 2nd or 3rd but never 1st that state COULD be the one chosen. That just doesnt make sense to me. We could all end up in a state that never really had any following. If the west votes for WY 1st and NH last ,and vice versa , those 2 states are clearly the peoples favorites. But because we rank states, people will try any way they can to knock down their biggest competition. Some people will actually put N or S Dakota over another state that is clearly a better match for this project. (Please Lord don't let me end up in Pierre!) Also you said speculating on a "leading" state cant be done at this point. It can. If we voted as I suggested in the previous post the Free State would either be WY or NY. No doubt about it.
Logged
"The communists are coming! The communists are coming!"

onyx_goddess

  • FSP Participant
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 227
  • Choking Screams Their Liquid Dreams
    • Robestone
Re:Drop 7 of the 10 States
« Reply #4 on: July 09, 2003, 12:43:18 pm »

But the whole point is, that if (for example) all WY supporters HATE NH, and all NH supporters HATE WY, but everyone is okay with ID, then ID would be chosen since we're using Condorcet.

So, we don't want a normal vote, I think we're all pretty happy with Condorcet.
Logged
Happiness is fleeting
When your heart is barely beating

Sebastian

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 535
  • Elderado
Re:Drop 7 of the 10 States
« Reply #5 on: July 09, 2003, 12:49:39 pm »

Quote
the vast majority of the membership don't seem to be posting on these boards.
(needed to be repeated)

Also, wouldn't a 2-state choice be like a 2-party system?
Logged
Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for yourself.

Karl

  • Guest
Re:Drop 7 of the 10 States
« Reply #6 on: July 09, 2003, 12:56:22 pm »

ZuG you said that if a state is ranked 2nd or 3rd but never 1st that state COULD be the one chosen. That just doesnt make sense to me. We could all end up in a state that never really had any following. If the west votes for WY 1st and NH last ,and vice versa , those 2 states are clearly the peoples favorites. But because we rank states, people will try any way they can to knock down their biggest competition. Some people will actually put N or S Dakota over another state that is clearly a better match for this project. (Please Lord don't let me end up in Pierre!) Also you said speculating on a "leading" state cant be done at this point. It can. If we voted as I suggested in the previous post the Free State would either be WY or NY. No doubt about it.

Please read about the Condorcet method in the FAQ:

http://www.freestateproject.org/faqs.htm

It is designed to pick the most acceptable state for the most people.  Right now, the debate rages about what people's 1st picks will be.  But its possible that our 2nd or 3rd pick will be morst acceptable to the most people.

An extreme over-simplified example: If 3000 vote NH first, and 2000 vote WY first, but all 5000 people select MT 2nd, then MT will win; none of us got our first choice, but we all got a choice we could live with.
Logged

pghpat26

  • FSP Participant
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 18
  • Paul Revere re-incarnated
Re:Drop 7 of the 10 States
« Reply #7 on: July 09, 2003, 01:39:46 pm »

So what are you going to do when all is said and done and the compromise state ends up being AK? Are you gonna move. I know my ass won't. And i might go out on a limb here and say there are going to be quite a few others that won't be going there. This just might happen if AK is ranked in the middle on most ballots.
Logged
"The communists are coming! The communists are coming!"

Sebastian

  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 535
  • Elderado
Re:Drop 7 of the 10 States
« Reply #8 on: July 09, 2003, 01:47:47 pm »

Quote
the compromise state ends up being AK? Are you gonna move. I know my ass won't.
Opt out of AK.
Logged
Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for yourself.

Karl

  • Guest
Re:Drop 7 of the 10 States
« Reply #9 on: July 09, 2003, 01:53:08 pm »

So what are you going to do when all is said and done and the compromise state ends up being AK? Are you gonna move. I know my ass won't. And i might go out on a limb here and say there are going to be quite a few others that won't be going there. This just might happen if AK is ranked in the middle on most ballots.

Yes -- that is members have agreed to do when the signed up, who have not opted out of that state.  But I suspect that a large number of members feel as you do about AK, and it will be consistently ranked near the bottom.
Logged

freedomroad

  • Guest
Re:Drop 7 of the 10 States
« Reply #10 on: July 09, 2003, 02:17:28 pm »

Alright folks what I have to say might seem a bit out there but I have to say it. So feel free to bash afterwards.  From what I've noticed the past couple of weeks is this push for the top 3 states- NH, WY, and to some extent ID. Not a word about DE has arisen. Maine and VT don't seem to have a big following either. The Dakotas don't have any fans. Some stuff has been said about MT but its playing the roll as spoiler. AK is just not gonna ever happen (maybe a great state for the project but you'll never get the people there.) .

I do not know about all of that.  However, there is a state report that compares just ID, NH, and WY.  It is around 25 pages long and here,
http://www.freestateproject.org/StateComparisons_25mar03.htm

Here is the opener,
"With the Free State Project (FSP) closing in on the 5,000-member mark, the time for the state vote is close at hand. After rigorous research and debate, a few states have slowly migrated their way to the top of our list of candidates, and it is time that we took a good, hard look at these states to see which might make the best candidate for a future free state: Idaho, New Hampshire, and Wyoming (in no particular order).

Many feel that all three of these states possess various virtues that rank them as the most liberty-friendly states in the country, but the question remains: which is best for liberty along the lines of what the FSP has in mind? "

Here is the closer,
"Wyoming – the Best State for Liberty?
All of these elements working together, and combined with the fact that Wyoming allows the FSP a chance at the maximum possible saturation of activists to residents, places Wyoming head-and-shoulders above the other nine candidate states. Nowhere else do we have this number of benefits and liberty-friendly elements along with so low of a burden for each FSP activist.

Nowhere else could we have so great an impact so very quickly – simply by being there and voting. And nowhere else will our natural opposition be as weak (the NEA, and other unions and special interests – both in sheer numbers and political machinery). Wyoming is also located farther away from the statist media and political elements (including special interest groups) that could damage us so badly if we were located closer to statist enclaves like Boston and New York.

Again, consider the notion that the FSP could fall short of 20,000 participants; or even if it gets all 20,000 that they might not be as activist as necessary for one of the larger states. Even 20,000 libertarians who confined their activism to voting could make an impact of some sort in any of these states, or gather together and hold influence over a few towns or counties, but could they achieve a free state? And when you consider that 8,000 to 10,000 in Wyoming could accomplish as much if not more than 20,000 in Idaho or New Hampshire, consider what 20,000 in Wyoming could do!

As has been pointed out in our discussions already, a few libertarians forming a township or gaining a majority influence in a county might be able to enact a number of reforms; however, the extent of what they could accomplish could be severely curtailed by the state government. States simply have much more political power than town and county governments. They also have representation in the United States Congress. Thus, if it is at all possible, we should try our best to go somewhere that would allow us a greater voice in the state government.

Wyoming presents us with a very real chance at achieving a majority representation in a state legislature and thus a very real chance at "liberty in our lifetime." Overall, it makes us less reliant upon the various unknown elements that we face in other states such as: "will we have enough?" or "will they really move?" or "will they do the work that's necessary to succeed?" Any of these elements could be fatal to our efforts in the higher population states. In Wyoming, they hurt us the least because our numbers count for so much more even before anything else is considered."
Logged

JasonPSorens

  • Administrator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5724
  • Neohantonum liberissimum erit.
    • My Homepage
Re:Drop 7 of the 10 States
« Reply #11 on: July 09, 2003, 03:20:02 pm »


Please read about the Condorcet method in the FAQ:

http://www.freestateproject.org/faqs.htm

It is designed to pick the most acceptable state for the most people.  Right now, the debate rages about what people's 1st picks will be.  But its possible that our 2nd or 3rd pick will be morst acceptable to the most people.

An extreme over-simplified example: If 3000 vote NH first, and 2000 vote WY first, but all 5000 people select MT 2nd, then MT will win; none of us got our first choice, but we all got a choice we could live with.


Actually, Condorcet isn't quite that pro-compromise.  If 3000 vote NH first, it will win, because it has an absolute majority over all other states. ;)  But your general point is well-taken.  It's likely that no state will have a majority of first-place votes.
Logged
"Educate your children, educate yourselves, in the love for the freedom of others, for only in this way will your own freedom not be a gratuitous gift from fate. You will be aware of its worth and will have the courage to defend it." --Joaquim Nabuco (1883), Abolitionism

Radar

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 192
  • Constitutional Scholar
Re:Drop 7 of the 10 States
« Reply #12 on: July 09, 2003, 04:26:22 pm »

I think the vote on August 15th should just narrow us down to the top 3 states.  This would give new sign-ups a chance to have some say in which state is chosen.  I'm sure those who may not have heard of the FSP would want to participate in the decision.  
Logged
Work like you don't need the money.
Love like you've never been hurt.
Dance like nobody's watching.

--Satchel Paige


Oh yea, and New Hampshire Sucks!  It's the worst choice for a free state because it offers us the worst chance for success.  - Me

Mickey

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 155
  • Libertarian, Objectivist, head-banger
Re:Drop 7 of the 10 States
« Reply #13 on: July 11, 2003, 12:24:39 am »

I think the vote on August 15th should just narrow us down to the top 3 states.  This would give new sign-ups a chance to have some say in which state is chosen.  I'm sure those who may not have heard of the FSP would want to participate in the decision.  

I don't think that would really change the outcome. With 5000, we have enough to get the opinion of the full spectrum of liberty lovers. Now we need to pick a state and eliminate the uncertainty so that people will be more likely to sign up and comit to the project.
Logged
Ubi libertas ibi patria
Where there is Liberty, there is my homeland.
Pages: [1]   Go Up