The Mental Militia Forums

Special Interest => Gulching/Self-Sufficiency => FSP => Topic started by: Kirsten on October 21, 2005, 11:36:33 am

Title: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Kirsten on October 21, 2005, 11:36:33 am
*
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Jeffersoniantoo on October 21, 2005, 11:40:32 am
That documentation no longer exists, unless you printed out the original form ( I did, but I am not sure where it is packed).  They changed the forms on their website.  The agreement I signed up for was 20,000 signed members by September 2006.  I think they realize that they aren't going to make it.  They are also offering an honest opt-out for those of us that signed the earlier agreement. 
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: debra on October 21, 2005, 11:42:18 am
It was originally a deadline (5 years from date of implementation, which was -- ironically -- September 2001), with the caveat of if we're *close* (e.g. 19000 members by then), then we'd extend a little longer. As the membership numbers lagged, the deadline became a loose deadline, then a goal, then an artifact as the online documentation was slowly and quietly redacted.

Debra
(FSP Member #23, Former FSP Founding Board Member, Resident Agent, and Treasurer)
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: debra on October 21, 2005, 11:45:42 am
Quote
They are also offering an honest opt-out for those of us that signed the earlier agreement.


They originally weren't going to, insisting that there was NEVER a formal deadline. Eventually they conceded to the opt-out after a lot of the Ought-Sixers called them on the carpet about it.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Ian on October 21, 2005, 11:46:36 am
Yeah, it was a hard deadline of Sept '06 (5 years from the starting date, which was Sept '01). The documentation has been pretty well purged from the web site, though. Here are a couple articles in the archives that mention the deal:

http://www.freestateproject.org/about/essay_archive/ClarkCounty.php
http://www.freestateproject.org/about/essay_archive/Speech_WYLP.php

Quote
We have a definite timeline. If we don't have 20,000 signatures in 5 years (that's September of 2006), we close up shop. So this won't turn into an unattainable pipedream endlessly sucking away the time and resources of our members.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Joel on October 21, 2005, 12:21:28 pm
Soooo...what, they've decided that it should turn into an unattainable pipedream endlessly sucking away the time and resources of their members?
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: FTL_Ian on October 21, 2005, 12:32:02 pm
Goal or deadline?  It's irrelevant.

The FSP "leadership" is as bureaucratic as the National LP, and have rendered themselves nearly useless.  The only thing the FSP is good for is:

1. A concept worth promoting
2. A tracking mechanism to determine amount of signups

Whether the FSP makes it to 20k doesn't even matter.  We're going regardless of 20k, and so are a lot of other Libery activists.  Many are already there.  As my radio show grows, we'll recruit more and more people who are fed up, and ready to move for Liberty.

If you'd like to see 20k happen sooner rather than later, please help AMP my show at http://amp.freetalklive.com !

Thanks!
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Ian on October 21, 2005, 12:43:08 pm
John, it's more like they've abandoned the idea of ensuring a decent chance at real success before moving. Instead, it's now a typical "if enough people do it, it'll work - so do it now!" plan. Fine for people who don't mind moving to NH and then having the project fizzle, but not good enough for me.

Interestingly, it does sound like it might be making some headway already. My sister goes to school in Vermont. Her boyfriend's family (in NH) has mentioned that they're starting to see FSP members show up on school boards and such...
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: debra on October 21, 2005, 01:17:50 pm
The deadline was originally established based on research of a bunch of past "Freedom Migration" attempts. It's not a new concept -- plenty of people have tried.  In every case, the founders would pick a state (randomly or based on "best chances" as the founders saw it) and then they'd say, "Hey, everyone move here!"  You'd get a few risk-takers who'd jump right  in, but most people -- who are more risk-adverse --  would choose to wait because they didn't want to uproot themselves for something that may or may not work out.  Since everyone was waiting for everyone else,  the project would just sputter to a near-halt.  (I say "near" halt, because technically many  of these projects are still going on, including some that have been going on for decades).

I can't support all of them, so I choose one. Somebody else chooses another. And someone else another. Consequently, the time, money, and resources each of us contribute remain scattered rather than focused, so no one project ever hits that critical mass. FSP didn't want to fall into that same trap, so we created what we believed to be a realistic deadline, where we'd hit X participants by X date. That way, nobody would have to move unless there was a good indicator that they wouldn't be on their own.  If we didn't make it or even come close, it was a pretty good clue that the project -- good idea though it may be -- simply wasn't going to happen, so why continue to waste libertarian resources?

Unfortunately, human nature being what it is, the primary goal of the FSP (IMO)  has changed to first and foremost preserving the organization, which means getting rid of the deadline. (shrug)  Those who don't remember the past ... 

At this point, I don't see a particular reason to support/move to New Hampshire (http://www.freestateproject.org) over, say, Sealand (http://www.sealandgov.com/), The Republic of Molossia (http://www.molossia.org/countryeng.html), The Principality of New Pacific (http://www.newpacificgov.org/), Costa Rica (http://www.limonreal.com/), The Republic of Texas (http://www.republic-of-texas.net/index2.shtml), The Republic of Ganjastan (http://www.philandrews.com/tm/), Wyoming (http://www.freestatewyoming.org/), Freedom Ship City (http://www.freedomshipcity.com/) or even the moon (http://www.asi.org/).  All of them have virtually the same goals and plans (creating a more-or-less libertarian society), just different locations.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Kirsten on October 21, 2005, 01:20:41 pm
*
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: FTL_Ian on October 21, 2005, 01:59:31 pm
Debra,

Costa Rica has been my backup plan, so thanks for that Limon link, I'd never heard of that.

Until then, I'll be supporting NH.  As long as the jackboots don't cart off me and my four co-hosts, my show will continue to grow.  We'll expand to more stations, and influence more newbies to come to NH.  I don't think any of the other movements you list have a nationally syndicated radio show promoting them.  We're already the number one recruiter for the FSP, with us accounting for 10% of recruits in July and 13% in August.

Those numbers will only increase as we grow this radio show.   :mellow:
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: H.M. WoggleBug, T.E. on October 21, 2005, 02:28:11 pm
Quote
They originally weren't going to, insisting that there was NEVER a formal deadline. Eventually they conceded to the opt-out after a lot of the Ought-Sixers called them on the carpet about it.

THAT statement is irrelevant. The fact is that they DID. The reason they did is that members of the board insisted on it. Those that didn't want to acknowledge 9/06 in any manner were voted down. What exactly is wrong with that? The process worked!

Let's call the 9/06 a deadline. It will probably be missed. FSP leadership has modified its position to acknowledge the perception - which DEBRA herself once propagated- is important to those members. People that want that release can go with no ill feelings. What, exactly is the controversy, here?

As for saying that the FSP is now no different than a dozen other efforts going on - that's specious logic at best. But for the sake of argument, let's stipulate that point. Why not leave the FSP alone? Let them do their thing. You do yours.

The FSP is finetuning their idea. You may not like it? Fine, ignore them.

Those people who wish to destroy the FSP - such as Boston T. Party - and mine the membership for their own projects are little more than ghouls. Every time a feeding frenzy takes place in the libertarian community, a few more people get disgusted and rendered incapacitated to do anything. Liberty becomes a little less likely.

All because people hold others to impossible standards, and do not acknowledge reality. I'm not talking pragmatism here; I'm talking modifying tactics and strategies. Nothing at all wrong with that. The FSP is too good an idea, with too much momentum to just piss it all away. Like it or not - it's the most famous libertarian movement in the world today.

The goal of the FSP has always been liberty in our lifetime, as quickly as possible. Yes, they extrapolated from initial intense activity and press coverage that 20,000 signups would occur in five years. Guess what? They were too optimistic. You want them to blow their brains out because of giddy optimism? How were they to know that after the target state vote that the "losers" would attack them so viciously and repeatedly?

And an awful lot of people want to tear the FSP to pieces because Jason Sorens and DEBRA and several others weren't omnicient.

Again, the changes are designed to keep the FSP going. Nobody is making money, here. No careers made here. Just trying to keep the flame alive. WITHOUT compromising principles. The total money flowing into the FSP coffers is miniscule. I would wager that Bureaucrash revenues exceed the FSP!

'Bug
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Jack21221 on October 21, 2005, 02:35:32 pm
Thanks for the Freedom Ship link, by the way. I had seen a Discovery Channel special on it a while back, but Freedom Ship has rarely crossed my mind since. Now, going to their website, I see that many of their residential units will be actually quite cheap compared to the millions of dollars some will be worth.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: FTL_Ian on October 21, 2005, 03:11:55 pm
Agreed, Bug.  I know I'm not making any damn money on my show, and we've been on the air for three years!
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: kbarrett on October 21, 2005, 03:32:51 pm
The FSP needed to get real. Waiting for 20,000 was hurting their organization.

They resolved the issue correctly. I wish them luck.

Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: debra on October 21, 2005, 04:10:25 pm
Quote
They originally weren't going to, insisting that there was NEVER a formal deadline. Eventually they conceded to the opt-out after a lot of the Ought-Sixers called them on the carpet about it.
THAT statement is irrelevant. The fact is that they DID. The reason they did is that members of the board insisted on it. Those that didn't want to acknowledge 9/06 in any manner were voted down. What exactly is wrong with that? The process worked!

You believe that whether they did it forthrightly, or under duress (after having deliberately misled people that "it was never a deadline at all, and so there's no 'release' for members who thought there was") makes absolutely NO difference, so long as everything turned out okay? I suppose some could agree with you. Others might say that it perhaps calls their ethics into question. That's for each person to decide for themselves, making my statement relevant.

Quote
Let's call the 9/06 a deadline. It will probably be missed. FSP leadership has modified its position to acknowledge the perception - which DEBRA herself once propagated- is important to those members. People that want that release can go with no ill feelings. What, exactly is the controversy, here?

The perception that 9/06 was a deadline? I still propagate that, since it was. There's no controversy now that they've done the right thing.  Who is saying that there is?

Quote
As for saying that the FSP is now no different than a dozen other efforts going on - that's specious logic at best.

My opinion, as I believe I said. I really don't see any difference between them from a supporter's standpoint. For every single "unique" attribute that the FSP has over other current projects, those other projects have an equal number of "unique" aspects over the FSP (e.g. "The Freedom Ship isn't subject to US laws, so there!").

My point is that they're all trying to do the same thing, they all have about the same level of popular support, and  the libertarian community will continue to divide its resources among them.It's Coke vs Pepsi, and as a result, none IMO will ever succeed.

Quote
But for the sake of argument, let's stipulate that point. Why not leave the FSP alone? Let them do their thing. You do yours.

Again, Kirsten asked, I answered. Or am I not supposed to say anything when someone asks about the FSP?  Granted, it's not like I was privy to its founding, original public discussions, original board discussions ... oh wait. Yes I was. :P Seriously, you can't possibly expect me to not express my opinion simply because it's negative, while you can express yours simply because its positive?

Quote
The FSP is finetuning their idea. You may not like it? Fine, ignore them.

Um, I was until Kirsten asked. Again, am I not supposed to say anything about which I have personal knowledge, simply because you don't like it?

Quote
Those people who wish to destroy the FSP - such as Boston T. Party - and mine the membership for their own projects are little more than ghouls. Every time a feeding frenzy takes place in the libertarian community, a few more people get disgusted and rendered incapacitated to do anything. Liberty becomes a little less likely.


Couldn't any of the freedom movements started prior to 9/01 say the same thing about the FSP? "You guys are just ghouls feeding off OUR idea, mining OUR potential membership!"

Quote
All because people hold others to impossible standards, and do not acknowledge reality. I'm not talking pragmatism here; I'm talking modifying tactics and strategies. Nothing at all wrong with that. The FSP is too good an idea, with too much momentum to just piss it all away. Like it or not - it's the most famous libertarian movement in the world today.

Not sure where you're going with this. What impossible standards? What unacknowledged reality? Who said that there was anything wrong with modifying tactics and strategies? I think the modifications they chose are poor ones and said so. Others don't, and said so. History will tell. What's the problem?

Quote
The goal of the FSP has always been liberty in our lifetime, as quickly as possible. Yes, they extrapolated from initial intense activity and press coverage that 20,000 signups would occur in five years. Guess what? They were too optimistic. You want them to blow their brains out because of giddy optimism? How were they to know that after the target state vote that the "losers" would attack them so viciously and repeatedly?

Actually, "blowing their brains out" was in fact the plan. I pointed out WHY it was the plan originally. I do not think that with their new structure they will succeed, for precisely the same reason all of the other projects are not succeeding. If the deadline had been 7 years or 10 years, maybe it would have succeeded. I don't know. So?

Quote
And an awful lot of people want to tear the FSP to pieces because Jason Sorens and DEBRA and several others weren't omnicient.

Is there a reason you keep putting my name in caps? Seriously, BUG, I'm not sure why the animosity here. Someone asked a question, I gave my answer. How exactly does that translate to wanting to "tear the FSP apart"?  If I said Ganjastan had a poor implementation plan and I don't think it will ever succeed, does that mean I'm "tearing them apart"?

Quote
Again, the changes are designed to keep the FSP going. Nobody is making money, here. No careers made here. Just trying to keep the flame alive. WITHOUT compromising principles. The total money flowing into the FSP coffers is miniscule. I would wager that Bureaucrash revenues exceed the FSP!

I feel fairly confident I know how much money flows into the coffers, and I could probably find more in my sofa cushions. I couldn't care less  if they use it to pay people (since employees tend to be a hell of a lot more reliable and productive than volunteers).  The question is, SHOULD the FSP keep going? Should it continue to accept money/time/resources from supporters who might otherwise give it to an organization that may have a better shot at succeeding? 

And just to head you off on this, I know. NO organization has a better shot at succeeding, because he FSP is special, unique in the annals of history, right? I'm sure all of the other projects say exactly the same thing. Which is precisely my point.

(shrug) Doesn't matter to me what they do at this point, any more than it matters to me whether Prince Lazarus continues to fundraise. It doesn't affect me.  But I'll be damned if I'm going to refuse to offer an opinion on the subject just because someone thinks I'm being a big ol' meanie to the FSP.

Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: H.M. WoggleBug, T.E. on October 21, 2005, 08:07:44 pm
Quote
It's Coke vs Pepsi, and as a result, none IMO will ever succeed.

Actually, BOTH Coke and Pepsi have succeeded - in spades. Coke doesn't acuse Pepsi of putting arsenic in its beverage, and Pepsi doesn't acuse Coke management of strangling stray dogs. Unfortunately, the equivalent cannot be said of ex-FSP members. God save us from disaffected members whose pet state wasn't chosen.

Seems like the only reasonable person on this thread was kbarrett, oddly enough.

I am tired of the constant second guessing, and impugnment of the FSP leadership. I would submit, that compared to many of their opponents, the leadership of the FSP has been more than patient, and more than professional. The FSP doesn't continually impugn the character of the leaders of the other movements. People like myself WILL react to attacks however - in attempts to set the record straight. The FSP hasn't started any of the numerous flame wars that have occurred after the state vote.

I capitalize your name to bring the attention of some here what you said yourself - that you are also a former or possibly current member of the FSP. The FSP had a lot of momentum until the state vote started to tear them apart. The people who "lost" the vote have been at best tepid and quiet (thanks a lot guys), or venomous in their excoriation of the choice, and the people who made it.

If the "famous" people who are or were FSP members had used the power of their voices to edify the FSP - who knows how much more progress could have been made? As it is, those people have been amazingly mute. More's the pity. There's some quote that comes to mind, but I doubt I need to repeat it here.

Freedom and liberty can only happen if the topography is right? Glasseaters such as myself didn't think that way. You don't have to agree, but please quit calling them - and my wife - duplicitous, dishonest, without integrity, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

The FSP is not prevaricating. If the members want to devote their time to the project, nobody is forcing them to. All the cards on are the table. When certain other groups make decisions, do they put the minutes of their meetings on the web? Or is it just made from on high? Is every single conversation YOU'VE had been something out of an Ayn Rand book? No? Didn't think so.

The FSP is pilloried for not supporting one Western group or another. At the same time, one of those groups' leader publicly attacks the ethics and morals of the FSP. Why, exactly, is the FSP supposed to turn around and lick the hand of that leader? Why, exactly, is Coke supposed to endorse Pepsi?, to use your analogy?

Even so, olive branches have been offered repeatedly over a period of two years, and each time the offer was summarily rejected for silly reasons. Apologies given were not accepted. etc. etc. etc. I, myself, have tried several times to "get along". After a while, it gets too taxing to continue. Now that same leader trolls on the *open* FSP boards, trolling and wreaking havoc calling the FSP dishonest - while at the same time using the very fora owned by the group he seeks to destroy.

So, yes. I'm tired of all the foxes screaming about sour grapes - because "their" state wasn't chosen. Yes indeed, those grapes ARE sour. Get over it already. Grow your own grapes wherever.

'Bug
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: penguinsscareme on October 21, 2005, 08:31:40 pm
Woggie, please learn to use the quote feature properly.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: H.M. WoggleBug, T.E. on October 21, 2005, 09:35:43 pm
Sorry PSM, every other board I use, I can put the word "QUOTE" inside the brackets capitalized with no problems. Habit.

'Bug
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Claire on October 21, 2005, 10:04:28 pm
The people who "lost" the vote have been at best tepid and quiet (thanks a lot guys), or venomous in their excoriation of the choice, and the people who made it.

If the "famous" people who are or were FSP members had used the power of their voices to edify the FSP - who knows how much more progress could have been made? As it is, those people have been amazingly mute.

I'm one of the tepid and quiet ones, 'Bug. Maybe I even qualify as one of the "famous" members who isn't using the power of my voice for the FSP.

I was one of the very first writers to publicize the FSP -- writing two of the earliest articles in praise of it. And I'm not going to join the public grousing about it, though I have my private thoughts this way and that.

But the one thing I absolutely can't do is pretend enthusiasm for something about which I no longer have any. I'm also a "glasseater" in the old definition. If the FSP gets 20,000 genuine signers before September 2006 -- or even gets close -- I'll pick up and move to NH. But the idea that "famous" silent people have an obligation to be steadfast (and vocally so) when the organizers of the project have themselves not been steadfast isn't right. It's like "My country right or wrong." It's being loyal above and beyond the loyalty expected from normal members when in fact the organization itself isn't loyal to its own principles.

I wish the FSP well, 'Bug, and I understand your frustration. I also realize you may be speaking more of BTP than me. But nobody should be asked to lead cheers when they're not sincerely excited.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Leonidas the Younger on October 22, 2005, 08:12:38 am
Quote
People like myself WILL react to attacks however - in attempts to set the record straight.

Isn't "setting the record straight" what this thread is about?

I signed up for the FSP before the vote. My primary vote was for Alaska - for reasons that don't need to be gone into here.

Instead, as a matter of history now, the FSP chose New Hampshire. Fine by me.

But the pledge I remember taking was not "I'll move within five years of the vote"; it was "I'll move within five years of the FSP becoming officially active, as defined by there being 20,000 members (or real close) by the deadline of september ought six. And if that deadline is not reached, I recognize I am released from this pledge."

So, thats my record. Anything to set straight, there?

I also notice that the FSP's opinion on this has morphed a bit; I don't like that. My pledge was specific, and I consider it binding. So how is it the words can be retroactively altered by the FSP?

Oh wait, they can't.

Alright, thats my POV. Agree or disagree, blah blah, but please don't flame, it'd be pointless.

-- Leonidas
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: debra on October 22, 2005, 11:51:03 am
I'm not sure how this thread came from "was there a deadline?" to "pro vs anti FSP". 

'Bug, I'm a glasseater too. No, my top state wasn't chosen (Alaska, too, weirdly enough. Looks like its you and me, Leonidas). So what? -- that wasn't what this thread nor my response was about. I answered the question and included background information on how and why the deadline/goal was implemented/de-implemented.  I also made the apparently-heinous mistake of offering my opinion on the viability of their new structure. Mea culpa.

Quote
If the "famous" people who are or were FSP members had used the power of their voices to edify the FSP - who knows how much more progress could have been made? As it is, those people have been amazingly mute. More's the pity. There's some quote that comes to mind, but I doubt I need to repeat it here.

Let me make sure I understand you. You're upset because I say something negative, saying I should "just ignore them if you don't like it" or "grow your own grapes wherever." But if I remain silent, you're upset because I'm not actively  cheerleading for them. WTF? 

Quote
Freedom and liberty can only happen if the topography is right?

Who said that? Who even IMPLIED that in this thread? As I *am* a glasseater and as I said that all the projects were (IMO) the same, obviously I DON'T think topography has ANYTHING to do with it.  So where are you getting that?

Quote
You don't have to agree, but please quit calling them - and my wife - duplicitous, dishonest, without integrity, etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.

Again, who said that you and your wife were??? I said that the earlier prevarication on releasing members who signed up under the understanding of a 2006 deadline could be considered by some unethical. That's the ONLY FSP issue I had a problem with, the only one about which I've been vocal, and the only one I've ever cared about. That's been resolved, as you pointed out, so what's your beef with ME?

Quote
The FSP is not prevaricating. If the members want to devote their time to the project, nobody is forcing them to. All the cards on are the table. When certain other groups make decisions, do they put the minutes of their meetings on the web? Or is it just made from on high? Is every single conversation YOU'VE had been something out of an Ayn Rand book? No? Didn't think so.

What in sweet Jesus' name are you *talking* about???? If you're trying to imply that I didn't think they had the "right" to change their structure, I'd like to know what you're basing that on, since I've never said nor even implied that. They can do anything they want. That hardly means I have to vacuously nod my head and say, "The FSP is mother, the FSP is father, all hail the FSP."

Quote
The FSP is pilloried for not supporting one Western group or another. At the same time, one of those groups' leader publicly attacks the ethics and morals of the FSP. Why, exactly, is the FSP supposed to turn around and lick the hand of that leader? Why, exactly, is Coke supposed to endorse Pepsi?, to use your analogy?

Even so, olive branches have been offered repeatedly over a period of two years, and each time the offer was summarily rejected for silly reasons. Apologies given were not accepted. etc. etc. etc. I, myself, have tried several times to "get along". After a while, it gets too taxing to continue. Now that same leader trolls on the *open* FSP boards, trolling and wreaking havoc calling the FSP dishonest - while at the same time using the very fora owned by the group he seeks to destroy.

Again, where is this coming from? Seriously? Who said anything about supporting the FSW?! I know you and the FSW have had your issues. It's not like I'm endorsing them, for crying out loud, nor asking anyone else too. Did you NOT see the part where I said "they're all the same, IMO"?  You got a problem with them, take it up with them. But don't attack me nor lump me in with them simply because I -- gasp -- no longer support the FSP in its current incarnation.

Quote
So, yes. I'm tired of all the foxes screaming about sour grapes - because "their" state wasn't chosen. Yes indeed, those grapes ARE sour. Get over it already. Grow your own grapes wherever.

Sour grapes? Over the state? Oh for the love of God. I didn't *CARE* what state was chosen (hence the glasseater thing).  You seem to think that anyone who says *anything* negative about the FSP is somehow the enemy, darkly plotting its downfall. Spare me. I've said several times that I would like them to succeed. Hell, I'd like ALL of the projects to succeed. I just don't think they're going to. So what?

You wanna be pissed at the FSW, have a great time. But I have NO association with them and don't endorse them any more than any other freedom project, including the FSP. So you might want check the sights on your flamethrower, 'kay?
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: penguinsscareme on October 22, 2005, 03:25:43 pm
What's a glasseater?
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Claire on October 22, 2005, 03:47:09 pm
What's a glasseater?

The glasseaters are FSP members who agreed that, no matter what our personal vote or state prejudices, we'd move to any state chosen by the FSP, once the critical mass of members had been attained. We're the people who didn't opt out of any states when we joined or who (like me) later removed our opt-outs.

In otherwords, we'd "eat glass if it would make us more free."
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: H.M. WoggleBug, T.E. on October 22, 2005, 11:15:08 pm
For what it's worth, Debra, most of my commentary was in response to the original "Broken Promises" post from Sunni's site. I'm a bit sensitive to inaccurate criticism, and have decided that it's not necessary to defend the FSP from such uninformed posts.

To reiterate, Debra, the accusations of deception have been flying fast and furious from a certain party on the FSP fora. Juxtaposed with the completely ridiculous post from Sunni's site, and I cross posted or cross replied, or whatever, and got my targets crossed, too.

As it is, I'll mellow out. Even if others don't. My blood pressure doesn't need it, and I have to start a new contract next week anyway.

'Bug
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: ZooT_aLLures on October 23, 2005, 02:56:28 am
Quote
As it is, I'll mellow out

That's a pretty good idea there Bug.....
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: RagnarDanneskjold on October 30, 2005, 08:04:11 pm
Article (http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2005/tle343-20051030-02.html) over at Libertarian Enterprise.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Persecuted BigCity Capitalist on November 01, 2005, 09:14:00 pm
I happened to notice the following that was placed on the FSP website today, what do you all think of the changes?  I'm not a signer but was (and I guess I still am somewhat slightly open to the idea) seriously considering it back in the day.  However, I was informed that the property and dividends taxes are pure BS in NH, so I'm kinda so-so on it.

Quote
Statement by the Free State Project Board of Directors
As we pass the two year anniversary of the choice of New Hampshire as the Free State, and our four year anniversary as an organization, we have paused to take stock of our progress.

One of our longstanding goals has been to reach 20,000 signatures by the end of 2006. While not outside the realm of possibility, this goal now seems unlikely to be reached. The reason for this is apparently a much lower level of national media attention since the state vote in 2003. The good news is that our growth rate remains steady, that Free Staters are already moving to New Hampshire, and finally, that we think we can improve our media attention substantially in the coming months.

Armed with these facts, we decided to take stock of where we are and of what we need to do to move forward toward the extraordinary goal we all share – a truly free society.

First of all, we have dropped our goal of reaching 20,000 signatures by the end of 2006. While this was an informal part of the Project we recognize that some found this an important element of their commitment. We're requesting that people who thought this goal was essential to their participation contact us to let us know of their intentions.

We are not setting a new goal for reaching 20,000, but we expect to increase our recruitment rate (more on that below) and reach that goal within a reasonable time frame.

Our second decision is that changing the existing Statement of Intent is not warranted at this time. We considered allowing a variable or additional threshold for moving, but realized that moving sooner or at a lower threshold is possible without any new, complicating Statements of Intent. We can always revisit this issue at a later time, but it would be premature to make any fundamental changes now.

Third, we recognize that the success of the Free State Project really depends on actual movers, and we are now actively encouraging all participants to move as soon as they are able. We are expanding our New Hampshire Information efforts and will provide focused help to liberty-minded movers on finding jobs, housing, and the right community to fit their needs. The more people move now, the sooner the freedom community will make an even greater difference in New Hampshire, and the more people will be willing to sign up and move. We want to increase the pace of that virtuous circle.

Finally, the Board has decided to hire a public relations company for a specific project of developing local media stories. We will need your help to make these stories happen! Some of you will be hearing from us shortly. If you get a message from us about this project, please make yourself available. We are actively considering hiring a public relations firm on a permanent basis to help us improve our messages and create a consistently high level of excitement and interest. This strategy should help us increase recruitment dramatically, getting us ever closer to 20,000 and to liberty in our lifetime.



FSP Board of Directors
11/01/05
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Claire on November 02, 2005, 08:15:18 am
That statement Capitalist quoted finally went over the line. Couldn't keep my mouth shut any more.

http://www.clairewolfe.com/wolfesblog/00001775.html

Sorry, 'Bug.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Lightning on November 02, 2005, 08:21:58 am
Brav-freakin'-issimo, Claire. 
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Jeffersoniantoo on November 02, 2005, 08:41:08 am
Quote
First of all, we have dropped our goal of reaching 20,000 signatures by the end of 2006. While this was an informal part of the Project we recognize that some found this an important element of their commitment. We're requesting that people who thought this goal was essential to their participation contact us to let us know of their intentions.

An "informal part"?!?  I distinctly remember it being in writing on the "Statement of Intent" that I signed an delivered to the FSP.  That makes it a pretty FORMAL part of the deal.

If the FSP is this flexible with plain language agreements, how flexible are they going to be about "Liberty in our Lifetime"?  Sheesh...
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Persecuted BigCity Capitalist on November 02, 2005, 08:45:49 am
I am assuming the membership will now be halved...

Ah well, it was a good dream.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Claire on November 02, 2005, 09:17:50 am
I am assuming the membership will now be halved...

Ah well, it was a good dream.

It was a great dream -- and in its early stages very well executed.

I don't think membership will halve, though -- or at least not until September 2006. A lot of us who are mad still aren't resigning. We made our commitments and are sticking to them.

Besides that, the FSP has had problems in the past with keeping "phantom" members on its rolls, even after it knew those members didn't exist. When the ballots were sent out to choose the state, hundreds came back "address unknown" (which likely indicated people signing up with false info for malicious or joking purposes). I don't know whether those pseudo-members were ever removed from the FSP stats. Debra might know that. I do know they weren't removed for quite a while after the vote.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Ian on November 02, 2005, 09:32:25 am
They still haven't been removed, Claire. In total, about 2500 "members" didn't vote. Prior to the vote, the Board had said that any non-voters would be assumed to no longer be members, and would be removed from the rolls. When they saw how many people would be removed, they balked and left them there. For many months, when asked, they came up with excuses revolving around sending postcards to the nonvoters and need to wait in case they came back. Eventually people quit bothering to ask, and the nonvoting "members" stayed in the tally.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: FTL_Ian on November 02, 2005, 09:43:10 am
While the FSP "leadership" leaves something to be desired, I don't think their decisions will make or break the concept.  It's the membership who will make this happen.

Until a better idea comes along, the FSP, with all its faults, is still the best thing going.

According to the activists who are already there, if only 2,000 real activists were in the state, that would be enough to move mountains.  My co-hosts and I are going no matter what the FSP decides to bumble around doing.

Putting aside the FSP, how many other libertarian/anarchist groups in other states are engaging in active civil disobedience like the NH Underground is doing?

If it's happening elsewhere, I've not heard the news.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Ian on November 02, 2005, 09:53:33 am
Actually, FTL_Ian, their decision just did break the concept. Just because they're the most visible group doesn't mean that they're worth moving to NH for if they don't have a realistic plan in place - which they no longer do.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Jeffersoniantoo on November 02, 2005, 09:57:26 am
I engage in active civil disobedience everyday.  But I don't recommend doing so as a group.  That invites infiltration and "special" targeting by "the man". 

That aside,  FSP is bleeding members faster than the Republican Party because it has made the same mistake and taken its membership for granted as well as disregarding base beliefs.  You can't insult the membership by changing rules, definitions and "goals" in midstream and then expect everyone to just tag along because .."its the best thing going".  That is what is said about America today...and it doesn't fly any better than the manhole cover that FSP has become.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: FTL_Ian on November 02, 2005, 10:50:01 am
Actually, FTL_Ian, their decision just did break the concept. Just because they're the most visible group doesn't mean that they're worth moving to NH for if they don't have a realistic plan in place - which they no longer do.

There never was a plan beyond moving people who love Liberty to NH.  Once moved, it's up to each individual what they want to do.  The idea to move us all to the same state is still intact. 

Also, I'm not moving to NH for the FSP.  I'm moving for me.  I'm moving to be more free, and to be around others who feel the same way.  I'm tired of being surrounded by statists.  I don't care if the FSP dissolves itself, there is still going to be a mass movement of liberty activists to NH.  The NH Underground and my show will accomplish this with or without them.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: FTL_Ian on November 02, 2005, 10:52:41 am
I engage in active civil disobedience everyday.  But I don't recommend doing so as a group.  That invites infiltration and "special"
targeting by "the man".

While that may be true, there are CDs that you cannot do alone, or if you did would result in big trouble for you.  What if you wanted to sell raffle tickets in front of the State Lotto Bureau?  Sure, you could do this alone, but if you did it with 20 other people your odds of all being arrested are much lower.

This is the kind of stuff going on in NH.  That kind of activity excites me.

When you say you do CD every day, what do you mean?  Speeding? 
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Jeffersoniantoo on November 02, 2005, 11:17:52 am
Actually I speed as a manner of the way I drive.  I would do it whether it was state approved or not, as long as it wouldn't endanger others.

Many of the other things I do I will not list here as it would immediatley make me a target.  I don't believe in licensing.  I don't believe in taxes.  I don't believe in getting anyones permission to use my property in any way I see fit.  Most have nothing to do with travel.  For more info, buy and read Claire's Book The Freedom Outlaw Handbook.  I had been doing things before I read that and its predecessor, but it has a large range of things to choose from.  Also check other freedom boards if you need ideas (not that you do).  Don't make the mistake of thinking the FSP is the beginning and end of the freedom movement.  Its not.  There are thousands, if not hundreds of thousands quietly pursuing freedom and getting in the way of the state everyday.  The people who post or blog on the internet represent a very small percentage of those who want and strive for freedom.  Many are not on the internet at all and are completely unaware of the efforts of you or I or organizations like the FSP.  I have talked to them and seen their efforts.  And it continues to grow everytime the government tightens its grip around the people.  While some are discouraged by setbacks and disgruntled by in-fighting, many know that this is always going to be an individual fight and continue on uncaring what anyone else thinks.  Count me in this group.  I wish liberty for everyone who wants it, but they have to take it.  No one is going to give it to you and anyone who could can just as easily take it away again.

 :brave:

Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Claire on November 02, 2005, 11:30:14 am
There never was a plan beyond moving people who love Liberty to NH.  Once moved, it's up to each individual what they want to do.  The idea to move us all to the same state is still intact. 

I believe Ian is refering to the plan of getting 20,000 members by September 2006 and having them all move to NH within the following five years. Or the alternate plan of disbanding the FSP if the 20k goal wasn't acheived by that date.

The idea for a lot of libertarians to move to one state is still intact, but it's becoming as vague as some other past libertarian "free area" schemes -- like the disastrous (but fortunately small-scale) notion (it would be overly charitable to call it a "plan") that left a dozen or so hopeful freedom seekers unemployed and desperate in Ft. Collins, CO a few years back.

Quote
Also, I'm not moving to NH for the FSP.  I'm moving for me.  I'm moving to be more free, and to be around others who feel the same way.  I'm tired of being surrounded by statists.  I don't care if the FSP dissolves itself, there is still going to be a mass movement of liberty activists to NH.  The NH Underground and my show will accomplish this with or without them.

The idea of moving to be around people who want to live free and enable others to do so is great. But again, if that's the only goal, it can be achieved in New Hampshire, Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, Arizona, etc. And fortunately it IS being achieved as we speak.

The FSP once had a more sweeping goal than that. And as I perceive it the major objection here is that the FSP board is not merely changing that goal; they're doing so in a way that asks us all to pretend that the original goal never existed.

"Hey, guys, let's just all move to X state!" isn't new among libertarians. The FSP, with its research, well-considered plan, and its promise to disband if it couldn't reach its aims was -- in the past -- something different and better.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: FTL_Ian on November 02, 2005, 11:34:19 am
I agree with you, Jeffersonian, and have read TFOH, and reviewed it on my radio show.

While valuable, I don't consider monkeywrenching to be civil disobedience.

CD by its nature should be visible, the main participants identifiable, and intended to induce change.  It's an agitator activity for sure. 

Perhaps saying you monkeywrench every day would be more accurate...  :ph34r:
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Jeffersoniantoo on November 02, 2005, 11:50:52 am
I will not bandy words... What you are describing is a kind of warfare.  The state occupies your existance.  I am distancing myself from the state, such that I can, that I my live without its distraction.

As Henry David Thoreau said, "...the government does not concern me much, and I shall bestow the fewest possible thoughts on it. It is not many moments that I live under a government, even in this world. If a man is thought-free, fancy-free, imagination-free, that which is not never for a long time appearing to be to him, unwise rulers or reformers cannot fatally interrupt him."

http://www.cs.indiana.edu/statecraft/civ.dis.html

The best thing to do with the state is ignore it.  Live your life...don't let the state stop you.  If it comes to war, let the state start it, then you finish it.  And most of all...be cool....    :mellow:
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: FTL_Ian on November 02, 2005, 11:59:49 am
I believe Ian is refering to the plan of getting 20,000 members by September 2006 and having them all move to NH within the following five years. Or the alternate plan of disbanding the FSP is the 20k goal wasn't acheived by that date.

Ahh, see when I joined the FSP I'd never heard of the 2006 thing.  After I started hearing people gripe about it, I wondered why they cared so much.  I suppose if it means that much to you, bail out when the time comes.  There are plenty of others who are committed to the idea and who will be moving with or without you.  Hopefully you'll change your mind when you notice all of the exciting things happening in the state.

Quote
The idea for a lot of libertarians to move to one state is still intact, but it's becoming as vague as some other past libertarian "free area" plans -- like the disastrous (but fortunately small-scale) plan that left a dozen or so hopeful freedom seekers unemployed and desperate in Ft. Collins, CO a few years back.

Admittedly, I don't know much about that idea, but the FSP is large scale, there are already movers.  They are already making a difference.  A few hundred more could make a huge impact.  Also, most of the other free area plans occurred without the internet to help in spreading the word.  Plus, none of them had a nationally syndicated radio show giving them copious on-air plugs.  (I know our talking about TFOH sold at least a few copies for you.)  Sure, we only have 8 affiliates, but imagine the impact we can have with 80 affilates, or 200.

Quote
The idea of moving to be around people who want to live free and enable others to do so is great. But again, if that's the only goal, it can be achieved in New Hampshire, Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, Arizona, etc. And fortunately it IS being achieved as we speak.

I haven't heard much about the competing movements.  I'd like to know more.  Competition is good for everyone.

Quote
The FSP once had a more sweeping goal than that. And as I perceive it the major objection here is that the FSP board is not merely changing that goal; they're doing so in a way that asks us all to pretend that the original goal never existed.

That's not the impression I get, and I'm no defender of the FSP "leadership".  I get the impression that they are giving people the chance to opt out, but are otherwise just asking everyone else to recommit to moving without a deadline.  To some people this is a big deal.  For me, it's inconsequential.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Ian on November 02, 2005, 12:26:53 pm
Quote
I haven't heard much about the competing movements.  I'd like to know more.  Competition is good for everyone.

If your goal is, like JeffersonianToo's, to distance yourself from the state rather than attempt to change the state (which is what FSP members tend towards), then you wouldn't want any publicity. A small group of people came find a hell of a lot of freedom in a gulch, but they aren't going to be talking about it much.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Claire on November 02, 2005, 12:52:06 pm
There are plenty of others who are committed to the idea and who will be moving with or without you.  Hopefully you'll change your mind when you notice all of the exciting things happening in the state.

I'd love to see exciting developments for freedom happening in New Hampshire -- or any other state. 

As is, I haven't changed my mind at all; I'll go to NH if the FSP has 20k serious project participants by 9/06. (Sorry; mistyped 05 originally.)

Quote
I haven't heard much about the competing movements.  I'd like to know more.  Competition is good for everyone.

I should clarify. I wasn't thinking of competing free-state projects. I was thinking simply of small groups of people gravitating to each other in the hopes that they and theirs could live more free. This is happening all over the west -- but as Ian notes happening quietly and without anything like the FSP's original goal of changing the political culture of an entire state.


Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Kirsten on November 02, 2005, 12:56:10 pm
*
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: FTL_Ian on November 02, 2005, 12:58:58 pm
Claire,

Sorry, I mistyped.  I understand you're still on board, but I have one critique.  You'll never know if there are 20,000 participants, let alone whether or not they are "serious".

As has already been pointed out, the current membership number is questionable at best.  Would you really be feeling better about the FSP if the number was at 19,293?  It's still just as questionable.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: FTL_Ian on November 02, 2005, 01:05:05 pm
I say go with what's more concrete: the activity.  It's happening, it's growing.  I don't care if the member number is 200, 2,000, or 20,000.  It's the activity that is the attraction.  Sure there are allegedly 7,000 signers, but a more definite number is the over 100 that have moved early.  That's 100 more activists that NH has, that the other states lost.  I'm easily the best activist in my area of Florida.  I'm moving, as are many of my friends and other activists.

To those of you gulching, I respect that, and am interested in pursuing a similar idea in NH.  However, spending one's whole life in a gulch is not something I want to do.  Since I must interact with the world around me, I'm going to do what I can to encourage that world to be more friendly to freedom.  Yes, it will draw attention, but someone has to do it.  Might as well be me.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: DTOM on November 02, 2005, 01:18:05 pm
To those of you gulching, I respect that, and am interested in pursuing a similar idea in NH.  However, spending one's whole life in a gulch is not something I want to do.  Since I must interact with the world around me, I'm going to do what I can to encourage that world to be more friendly to freedom.  Yes, it will draw attention, but someone has to do it.  Might as well be me.

Good luck!! You will most likllikelythe first ones the police state rounds up to put into the concentration camps, unless you are a very cleaver mole.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: FTL_Ian on November 02, 2005, 02:13:54 pm
Good luck!! You will most likllikelythe first ones the police state rounds up to put into the concentration camps, unless you are a very cleaver mole.

Maybe we will, but at least we'll turn on thousands of people to Liberty beforehand.  We already have enlightened many.  As slow as the state moves, we may be able to reach millions first.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Claire on November 02, 2005, 02:24:55 pm
As has already been pointed out, the current membership number is questionable at best.  Would you really be feeling better about the FSP if the number was at 19,293?  It's still just as questionable.

That's a very good point. Mere numbers on a website don't necessarily tell us that 20k (or however many) will move. If the FSP actually has, or is approaching, that number of signers by 9/06, it would be prudent, for everyone's sake, for the FSP to verify that all those are still onboard and willing to move. But I realize that's a tricky (and potentially costly) issue. It's probably also a moot issue, since the numbers aren't likely to add up by 9/06.

If political activity alone is enough attraction, even with small numbers, then more power to you. I definitely don't oppose your eagerness to get to NH and get going. But I'm a weary old vet of political activity -- enough so that I've become completely cynical about action for action's sake. For me the prospect of altering a state's culture for a greater appreciation of freedom was the real attraction. I fear cultural change won't happen without a substantial population of adamant freedom seekers. And without cultural change, political activity won't have any long-term beneficial effect.

I also fear that by failing to keep its own commitments and by behaving like a self-perpetuating institution rather than the "term-limited" project it set out to be, the FSP will actually drive many freedom seekers away, not attract more.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: FTL_Ian on November 02, 2005, 02:31:32 pm
I also fear that by failing to keep its own commitments and by behaving like a self-perpetuating institution rather than the "term-limited" project it set out to be, the FSP will actually drive many freedom seekers away, not attract more.

Possible, but they'll really have to screw it up to make the numbers drop lower than they have been!   :rolleyes:
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: atr on November 02, 2005, 03:08:21 pm
I also fear that by failing to keep its own commitments and by behaving like a self-perpetuating institution rather than the "term-limited" project it set out to be, the FSP will actually drive many freedom seekers away, not attract more.

Was the alternative to reinforce the September 2006 deadline rather than officially terminate it? Would that attract more people to NH?
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: atr on November 02, 2005, 03:13:04 pm
Quote
First of all, we have dropped our goal of reaching 20,000 signatures by the end of 2006. While this was an informal part of the Project we recognize that some found this an important element of their commitment. We're requesting that people who thought this goal was essential to their participation contact us to let us know of their intentions.

An "informal part"?!?  I distinctly remember it being in writing on the "Statement of Intent" that I signed an delivered to the FSP.  That makes it a pretty FORMAL part of the deal.

If the FSP is this flexible with plain language agreements, how flexible are they going to be about "Liberty in our Lifetime"?  Sheesh...

Your memory is wrong. The Statement of Intent has never included any deadline whatsoever. Nor have the Participation Guidelines or organization bylaws.

This is not to say that people weren't led to believe there was a deadline. They were, and that's why we decided to let them opt out. No one is being held to a deal that they haven't agreed to.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Kirsten on November 02, 2005, 03:22:05 pm
*
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: rockchucker on November 02, 2005, 03:37:27 pm
like the disastrous (but fortunately small-scale) notion (it would be overly charitable to call it a "plan") that left a dozen or so hopeful freedom seekers unemployed and desperate in Ft. Collins, CO a few years back.

A bit off track for this topic, I know. But I'd like to hear a little more about that.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Jeffersoniantoo on November 02, 2005, 03:45:27 pm
Quote
Your memory is wrong. The Statement of Intent has never included any deadline whatsoever. Nor have the Participation Guidelines or organization bylaws.

With all due respect, ATR, you are either simply wrong or are lying...

Using the WayBackMachine...

http://web.archive.org/web/20020810193610/http://freestateproject.org/faqs.htm#22Q

This FAQ question is answered:

22Q. What is the time frame for the Free State Project?
22A. The Participation Guidelines state that a signature on the Statement of Intent becomes void if three years pass before we reach 5,000 members and select the state. The Participation Guidelines also state that once we reach 20,000 members, everyone has five years to move to the selected state. The Participation Guidelines do not specify a requisite time period between reaching 5,000 members and reaching 20,000 members. However, the assumption has always been that if 20,000 is not close at hand within five years of the launch of the Free State Project (officially September 1st, 2001), the Project will fold. To get 20,000 signers within five years, we will need approximately 11 new signatures per day on average. In the month of February 2002 we averaged 4 new signatures per day. Once we expand our publicity efforts to print advertising, an average of 11 per day should be well within reach.

In addition...the original "Statement of Intent" can be found here...

http://web.archive.org/web/20020810194628/http://freestateproject.org/files/Statement_Intent.pdf

It states (in part; I can't cut and paste because it is a PDF):

"I hereby State my solemn intent to move to a state of the United States as designated by the Free State Project (FSP) participants as specified in the Participation Guidelines of the FSP."

The gudielines were not available in the archive, but the FAQ was, and it directly references the participation guidlines.

Let me state for the record that I am an FSP member and will move to NH if the FSP completes its requirement.  However, the obfuscation and direct lying by members of the FSP is PISSING ME OFF.

You might consider whether it is worht it to try to trick or treat your way to convince people to move or if it might be better to pursue a path of rightousness without all the political rhetoric.

Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: sorens on November 02, 2005, 03:47:47 pm
The Participation Guidelines do not specify a requisite time period between reaching 5,000 members and reaching 20,000 members.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Jeffersoniantoo on November 02, 2005, 03:53:52 pm
Hello Jason, (unless someone has hi-jacked your name)

The participation guidelines were quite clear, as my spouse and I had many a discussion before agreeing to them.  Do you have a counter to this? 


EDIT:  I need to make something clear.  I support the idea of the Free State Project.  However, this forum is like a second home to me.  I don't post irrationally or without regard to the facts.  ATR and Sorens have challenged me on the facts of the matter.  My honor demands that I defend that position, based on all that I know and all that I agreed to.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: sorens on November 02, 2005, 04:04:08 pm
Hello Jason, (unless someone has hi-jacked you name)

The participation guidelines were quite clear, as my spouse and I had many a discussion before agreeing to them.  Do you have a counter to this? 

Yes, Jason here... I was quoting that part of the original FAQ. The Wayback Machine also has the original Participation Guidelines:
http://web.archive.org/web/20021002223909/http://www.freestateproject.org/part_guidelines.htm

You'll note that there is no deadline for reaching 20,000 in the Participation Guidelines. There was a deadline for reaching 5,000. The deadline for reaching 20,000 was merely stated in the FAQ, so it wasn't technically a part of the original agreement. Nevertheless, this debate is really moot, because we're letting people opt out anyway, just as if it had been a part of the Participation Guidelines.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Jeffersoniantoo on November 02, 2005, 04:11:49 pm
Hi Jason,

I couldn't get the link to the paticipation guidelines to work. Thanks for providing a link.   Can you explain the difference between the FAQ reference to the "Participation Guidlines" and the linked set.  While the point is moot, I agree, there seems to be a discrepancy.

Thanks...
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: sorens on November 02, 2005, 04:19:34 pm
Hi Jason,

I couldn't get the link to the paticipation guidelines to work. Thanks for providing a link.   Can you explain the difference between the FAQ reference to the "Participation Guidlines" and the linked set.  While the point is moot, I agree, there seems to be a discrepancy.

Thanks...

Maybe this link (http://web.archive.org/web/20021002223909/http://www.freestateproject.org/part_guidelines.htm) will work better?

There's no discrepancy between the original FAQ and the original PG. The original PG set a deadline for reaching 5K but none for reaching 20K (except that if 20K were "never" reached, the move would be aborted). The original FAQ noted these two things and then went on to say that we in the FSP leadership still plan to shut this thing down if we're not reasonably close to 20K by the end of 2006. Here's the quote again:

The Participation Guidelines do not specify a requisite time period between reaching 5,000 members and reaching 20,000 members. However, the assumption has always been that if 20,000 is not close at hand within five years of the launch of the Free State Project (officially September 1st, 2001), the Project will fold.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Jeffersoniantoo on November 02, 2005, 04:24:14 pm
Uh, Jason, I posted the link to the original FAQ along with the text, relevant to this discussion.   THERE IS A DISCREPANCY.  The new link you posted goes to the same place you posed before.

Please provide a counter to:

22Q. What is the time frame for the Free State Project?
22A. The Participation Guidelines state that a signature on the Statement of Intent becomes void if three years pass before we reach 5,000 members and select the state. The Participation Guidelines also state that once we reach 20,000 members, everyone has five years to move to the selected state. The Participation Guidelines do not specify a requisite time period between reaching 5,000 members and reaching 20,000 members. However, the assumption has always been that if 20,000 is not close at hand within five years of the launch of the Free State Project (officially September 1st, 2001), the Project will fold. To get 20,000 signers within five years, we will need approximately 11 new signatures per day on average. In the month of February 2002 we averaged 4 new signatures per day. Once we expand our publicity efforts to print advertising, an average of 11 per day should be well within reach.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: sorens on November 02, 2005, 04:35:41 pm
Where is the discrepancy? Are you reading the parts I'm quoting carefully?

* The FAQ says the PG have no deadline for reaching 20K.
* The PG says nothing about a deadline for reaching 20K.
* The FAQ says the PG have a deadline of three years (2004) for reaching 5K.
* The PG says there is a deadline of three years (2004) for reaching 5K.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: DTOM on November 02, 2005, 04:38:31 pm
The words "Free" and "State" should not be said together.


 :puke:
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Jeffersoniantoo on November 02, 2005, 04:40:43 pm
I guess this is the part that is causing the problem...

"However, the assumption has always been that if 20,000 is not close at hand within five years of the launch of the Free State Project (officially September 1st, 2001), the Project will fold."

Jason,  I support the project, just not the manner in which it is currently being conducted...    :mellow:
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Steam970 on November 02, 2005, 04:42:15 pm
Well once again we show what rugged individuals we are, we don't take it from the MAN and we don't take it from the FSP either. My aren't we independent,thank god we are not gonna let them use up all those vast resources we have.

All that work we were doing whew, boy glad thats over, yep couldn't get 20k in a couple years what losers, what with their huge budget and vast network of  folks working full time on it.


Now we can all go back to getting ready to hang separately.

Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: atr on November 02, 2005, 04:47:36 pm
Quote
Your memory is wrong. The Statement of Intent has never included any deadline whatsoever. Nor have the Participation Guidelines or organization bylaws.

With all due respect, ATR, you are either simply wrong or are lying...

No, actually the Statement of Intent has never included any deadline, nor have the Participation Guidelines. So when you wrote that you "distinctly remember it being in writing on the "Statement of Intent" that I signed an delivered to the FSP," that is not an accurate characterization of the Statement of Intent that anyone has submitted.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: thistle on November 02, 2005, 04:48:26 pm
Quote
Should the Project never attract 20,000 signers, the move shall be aborted.

Anticipated abort date is was September 2006
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: atr on November 02, 2005, 04:50:51 pm
Quote
Should the Project never attract 20,000 signers, the move shall be aborted.

Anticipated abort date is was September 2006

Yes, it was anticipated by some people, including some members of the FSP leadership, but it was never part of the Statement of Intent or Participation Guidelines that constitute the commitment of FSP Participants.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Kirsten on November 02, 2005, 04:51:38 pm
*
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Jeffersoniantoo on November 02, 2005, 05:00:15 pm
ATR, I have posted the links to the FAQs involved, the "Statement of Intent" and Jason has provided a link to the original Participation Guidelines (Thanks again, Jason).  There is clearly a discrepancy about "assumptions".  Now we can all agree that this "contract" was non-binding.  I have been challenged on what I agreed to.  It appears to be a moot point.  However, my honor will not let me accept someone calling me a liar, without defense.  This has become personal, which is something I wished it hadn't done.

If you all want me to vacate, i will.  But I will not concede a single point I have made without irrefutable fact that I am wrong about what was proposed when I signed the FSP agreement.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: thistle on November 02, 2005, 05:14:35 pm
Quote
Yes, it was anticipated by some people, including some members of the FSP leadership, but it was never part of the Statement of Intent or Participation Guidelines that constitute the commitment of FSP Participants.

Yes it was part of the committment. In the phrase: "Should the project never attract 20,000 signers".

The point where we would determine whether or not the project would reach 20,000 was September 2006.

Edit: My first choice was NH.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: FTL_Ian on November 02, 2005, 05:20:01 pm
I've never seen so much strife over such a trivial matter!  Can't we all just get along?   :angry:
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Jeffersoniantoo on November 02, 2005, 05:29:03 pm
Thanks,  i was looking for an honest appraisal...


I'm outta' here...
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: thistle on November 02, 2005, 05:45:28 pm
Quote
I'm outta' here...

Right behind you...
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: sorens on November 02, 2005, 07:29:09 pm
I guess this is the part that is causing the problem...

"However, the assumption has always been that if 20,000 is not close at hand within five years of the launch of the Free State Project (officially September 1st, 2001), the Project will fold."

Yup, that's the bit that's caused all the problems.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Leonidas the Younger on November 02, 2005, 08:48:48 pm
I am fairly sure I kept a copy of the SOI I signed.

I have a member number in the low 2000s methinks, and I am a glasseater.

If I can find that copy I will scan it in and post the jpg.

Given how many gorram boxes of papers of miscellaneous shit^h^h^h^h, er stuff I have (yes, I am a packrat ..) I wouldn't hold your breath though! :lol:

Now, as to my memory of the SOI I signed, I remember that my understanding was that there would be a self abort if 20k wasn't reached, and I remember it would be about five years after the vote; that is to say, I do not think my memory is very far off at all, but I am not certain it is directly on, either.

As to the import of all this, it is the import of keeping one's word. And frankly, saying that "it's okay to bail" is a touch .. on the distasteful side. "It's okay to part ways" would be a more neutral and diplomatic way to put it. AFAIC, I will honour the SOI I signed. I gave my word. But do NOT, please, imply I am "bailing" or "quiting" because I changed my mind after the project morphed.

-- Leonidas
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Ted Nielsen on November 02, 2005, 09:50:13 pm
I've never seen so much strife over such a trivial matter!  Can't we all just get along?   :angry:

I second that!!!
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Steam970 on November 02, 2005, 10:58:42 pm
Pretty obvious we can't get along not even to save our necks.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Persecuted BigCity Capitalist on November 02, 2005, 11:47:36 pm
What would you expect from a bunch of individualists?   :laugh:
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Leonidas the Younger on November 03, 2005, 12:07:17 am
So honour and keeping one's word are trivial matters?

Is this not a large part of what is so wrong with society today, that keeping one's word is not looked upon as a big deal?

Is not HALF of the non aggression principle about the fact of it being immoral to initiate FRAUD?

We can be individualists and unite as groups to perform activities that no single one of us can - in fact, that is what we do through the free market on a daily basis.

But we can only unite as a political force if we first agree on what principles we stand behind.

I for one stand behind keeping my word. Anyone wish to stand with me?

-- Leonidas
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Roy J. Tellason on November 03, 2005, 12:20:54 am
Some years back I was a participant in a number of fairly active online conferences,  in fidonet,  and there was a certain amount of back-and-forth nonsense in some of them, especially the busier ones.  At one point somebody started bitchin' and asking why the heck things always seemed to go the way they did,  and in response to that one person (one Kay Shapero if I'm remembering right) pointed to an essay she'd written that was spot on in some respects.  I can't recall the exact title of the essay,  but it included the words "hobby group dynamics".  And group dynamics is what it was all about.

It seems that no matter what the group is,  you eventually end up with a polarization,  with two bunches of people.  On the one side you have the people who are in the group for the love of whatever it was that brought them together in the first place,  just like we're all here for some fairly similar reasons.  And then on the other side of things you have the folks for whom the group itself is the thing,  their "uber alles",  and it's thinking that folks like this might be in the picture that got me to thinking about this essay from way back when.

At one point in time a while back,  a number of years ago,  I was a member of a few computer user groups,  locally.  Also some other stuff,  too,  so I guess I can be pretty sure that I saw some of these dynamics in action.  That and the way that the same people end up doing all the work time after time,  but that's another aspect of things.

We have government at all sorts of levels,  and it's real difficult not to deal with those folks,  if you don't want to.  It's also not all that trivial to get the "people in charge" out if there's a problem in that regard.  When dealing with other organizatoins you're faced with a different set of choices,  but there are always at least choices available,  even if they're not the ones you want.  And I think that going into something with one understanding of what it's all about and then having *somebody* change that to some other understanding of what it's all about without your agreement or consent,  really,  really sucks.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Mike Lorrey on November 03, 2005, 02:25:51 pm
Quote
Should the Project never attract 20,000 signers, the move shall be aborted.

Anticipated abort date is was September 2006

Yes, it was anticipated by some people, including some members of the FSP leadership, but it was never part of the Statement of Intent or Participation Guidelines that constitute the commitment of FSP Participants.

The emphasis being on "SOME" people. I always disputed that statement in the FAQ, because it never documented where that 'assumption' was made, or who made it, because it certainly was NOT a consensus opinion. Besides, isn't there some rule about what happens when you make assumptions?
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: DigitalWarrior on November 03, 2005, 03:31:56 pm
I differ with the decision to continue as though nothing happened but am still on board with the project.  We cannot maintain our integrity by ignoring this question.

http://web.archive.org/web/20030812172804/http://www.freestateproject.org/faqs.htm#when

The Participation Guidelines do not specify a requisite time period between reaching 5,000 members and reaching 20,000 members. However, the assumption has always been that if 20,000 is not close at hand within five years of the launch of the Free State Project (officially September 1st, 2001), the Project will fold.

I saw this and it was one of the best reasons I joined, the explicit pass/fail criteria. 
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: FTL_Ian on November 03, 2005, 10:25:34 pm
The remaining 13,000 will never even know of this "controversey", so it's all wasted bits.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: ZooT_aLLures on November 04, 2005, 03:19:27 am
All that matters is the dedication of those who are moving regardless of whether it's 1 or 100,000
Like I've said before.....I'm not a member of any of these projects......but in my mind, it's not numbers that count, but the content of the hearts and heads of those  involved.......
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Lloyd on November 11, 2005, 11:24:29 am
You are correct Zoot, the project will always exist in the people who actually move.  I don't think it is possible that the project will fold because several people will be likely to pick it up and keep, at least, some fuel in the bus.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: simplulo on November 11, 2005, 04:27:54 pm
I admit I don't read a lot of fine print, but, the way I remember it was that we had 5 years from the date we chose a state to reach 20 grand.

The Participation Guidelines do not specify a requisite time period between reaching 5,000 members and reaching 20,000 members. However, the assumption has always been that if 20,000 is not close at hand within five years of the launch of the Free State Project (officially September 1st, 2001), the Project will fold.

I saw this and it was one of the best reasons I joined, the explicit pass/fail criteria. 

While there might be participants who needed a deadline, there are certainly FSP activists (probably all of them) for whom a deadline would have been a show-stopper.  I am one of the original FSP organizers, the only one besides Jason still active in the leadership, and I can say that had a deadline been declared, I would have instantly ceased all my FSP activism and dropped out.  Why would I invest thousands of hours and thousands of dollars into a venture with a high likelihood of failure?  “Liberty-loving” free-riders that refuse to contribute while others shoulder the load are not worth such a sacrifice, especially the ones who throw rocks from their armchairs.  A deadline allowing people to opt out might make sense, but a deadline leading to dissolution of the project would have been moronic.

There was no deadline.  There was a target, which is a common business tool for guiding one’s activities and measuring one’s performance.  We’re going to miss the target, so fine: don’t pay the leadership our year-end bonuses (10% of zero), but do kick some libertarian whiners out of their armchairs.  Feel free to get involved and replace us.

Unlike some libertarian pundits I have a day job, so I’m not going to throw good time after bad and investigate this further, but one might start by googling FSP + the magic 2006 year:
http://www.google.com/search?q=%22free+state+project%22+2006&num=100
It produces, for example, this quote from Jason speaking at a panel discussion at the AEI in February 2004
http://www.aei.org/events/filter.,eventID.754/summary.asp
“…we hope to get twenty thousand commitments by September 2006.”

A hope is not a goal, and a goal is not an official deadline leading to liquidation of a huge amount of valuable progress.  If Jason were to announce a deadline today, it might cause similar disruption, but it would be similarly invalid: Jason is one of the few people authorized to speak for the FSP, but he is not able to make unilateral decisions.  If any organization’s spokesman makes an erroneous statement, the organization will eventually issue a retraction, but it does have to suffer consequences.  Fine, nail us all to crosses, and then go pursue all those other likely means to liberty in your lifetime.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: fisher on November 12, 2005, 05:57:41 am
If any organization’s spokesman makes an erroneous statement, the organization will eventually issue a retraction, but it does have to suffer consequences.  Fine, nail us all to crosses, and then go pursue all those other likely means to liberty in your lifetime.
So when did the FSP issue a retraction for this official press release
http://www.freestateproject.org/news/releases/1000members.php
Quote
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

CONTACT:

Jason Sorens, President
Free State Project, Inc.
Phone: 828-273-8863
Email: info@freestateproject.org
Web site: www.freestateproject.org

Free State Project Reaches Membership Milestone

September 3, 2002 – The Free State Project, a plan in which 20,000 or more liberty-oriented people will move to a single state of the U.S. to secure there a free society, this week reached an exciting milestone of 1000 members.

Since the FSP's founding in September of 2001, over one thousand people have decided that this route represents the most viable strategy toward the creation of a free state. According to Jason Sorens, the project’s founder, "This exciting milestone is a confirmation that we have a feasible solution that resonates with the politically disaffected."

The membership numbers over the past year indicate that the project will meet its self-imposed deadline of September 2006 for the beginning of the move. The Free State Project has grown on average 25% each month; at this rate, the ultimate goal of 20,000 will be reached by the middle of 2003. As long as the membership continues to grow by at least 10% each month, the Project will reach its goal by early 2005 at the latest.

The Free State Project, recently endorsed by respected economist Walter E. Williams in a widely syndicated column, is a new strategy for freedom. Founded by Jason Sorens, a Yale doctoral student in Political science, the Free State Project aims at liberty in a single state. The FSP membership favors cuts in state taxes and elimination of wasteful state government programs, an end to collaboration between state and federal law enforcement officials in enforcing federal drug and gun laws, the privatization of utilities, and the abolition of inefficient regulations and monopolies.

For more information, please go to www.freestateproject.org.
When I talk about a  "deadline of Sept. 2006", I am quoting a statement in a FSP press release that was never retracted
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: Lloyd on November 12, 2005, 08:06:32 am
Probably just a big typo.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: simplulo on November 12, 2005, 08:20:50 am
When I talk about a "deadline of Sept. 2006", I am quoting a statement in a FSP press release that was never retracted
Good find, keep it coming.  The word "deadline" is meaningless without noting the consequences.  For example, at work I have a deadline of 22 November to deliver a report; if I fail to do it, the consequences will not be my termination or the dissolution of our project, but rather a reprimand from my boss and a hit to our award fee from the customer.  Even those people who were paying attention might not have seen a problem with such an ambiguous statement, since they knew the context.  Once we recognized the problem, we agonized over it for a long  time, and finally issued the recent statement, which constitutes your retraction.

I haven't read through this entire thread, but I hope that somewhere you made some kind of constructive recommendations for moving forward.  Given your moniker (for those who don't know, a fisher is the only animal that can kill a porcupine) I have to question your motives.
Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: fisher on November 16, 2005, 04:52:11 pm
When I talk about a "deadline of Sept. 2006", I am quoting a statement in a FSP press release that was never retracted
Good find, keep it coming.  The word "deadline" is meaningless without noting the consequences.
I disagree. Let's look at the definition of deadline.

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=deadline
Quote
deadline
n.
   1. A time limit, as for payment of a debt or completion of an assignment.
   2. A boundary line in a prison that prisoners can cross only at the risk of being shot.

deadline
n : the point in time at which something must be completed

http://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deadline
Quote
A deadline is a time by which some task must be done. It is imposed by an authority.

Quote
For example, at work I have a deadline of 22 November to deliver a report; if I fail to do it, the consequences will not be my termination or the dissolution of our project, but rather a reprimand from my boss and a hit to our award fee from the customer.
I would say you do not have a deadline, you have a target date. The difference is what happens when the date is not met. A deadline implies that the task *must* be completed in a certain time limit. If a deadline is missed, there is no longer any point in completing the project. An example of a deadline would be filing to run for a political office. If you miss the filing deadline, you are not running. Game over. When a target date is missed, it may have dire consequences, but you still have to finish the job. An example would be a target software release date. Those target dates are never met, but the product is almost always released after the original target date.
Check this out this link:
Project Deadlines and Target Dates:
5 Guidelines for Avoiding Disaster (http://www.idinews.com/deadline.html)

Quote
Even those people who were paying attention might not have seen a problem with such an ambiguous statement, since they knew the context.  Once we recognized the problem, we agonized over it for a long  time, and finally issued the recent statement, which constitutes your retraction.

I disagree that the recent statement constitues a retraction. It calls the "deadline" an informal goal.

Some shifty things have happend over on the FSP website. Take the 10/01/03 press conf. video on the FSP site (http://www.freestateproject.org/archives/state_vote/AnnounceNHPressConferenceVideos/), for example. Why was this Q&A edited out?
From the press conference held 10/01/03 in New York(video (http://63.111.27.21/sept2006.WMV))
Quote
Donna Delacruz, Associated Press:
"What happens if within 5 year you do not get the 20,000 people to move to New Hampshire?"

Jason P Sorens, President and Founder of FSP:
"If we don't get 20,000 by September 2006, then people don't necessarily, they aren't held to their obligations for signing up. So, many have said they are going to move whether or not we reach 20,000 and our current projections show that we will reach 20,000 by 2006. So, if we don't meet the 20,000, the movement may fold into some other form, though it looks as if we will."
To me, it looks like someone is trying to hide the September 2006 issue.

Quote
I haven't read through this entire thread, but I hope that somewhere you made some kind of constructive recommendations for moving forward.
No, I haven't. Are you going to pay me as a consultant if I do?
My free constructive recommendations would be:
   1. Come Sept. 2006, if there are not 20,000 participants, change the name to FSP part deux, or FSP reloaded, and have participants opt-in if they wish to remain in the group. You may want to start the opt-in process 6 months prior to the deadline. Those who don't opt-in get dropped from the rolls. Jason calls this "rebooting" the project.
   2. Dump the current president. You can hire me part time(20 hours a week*50 weeks) for the $30K the FSP has. I will make a  go-foward plan for the FSP, something it seems to lack. I also live in NH, and I know Jason said at the 10/03/03 press conf. that one of the reasons he was stepping down as president is because the FSP wanted a president that lives in NH. Amanda doesn't plan on moving to NH in the next couple of years.


Quote
Given your moniker (for those who don't know, a fisher is the only animal that can kill a porcupine) I have to question your motives.
I'm just wondering what you think my motives would be.
Do you question the motives of the http://nhfishercats.com/ too?

Porcupine predators include the fisher, the mountain lion, bobcat, and the coyote.
http://www.zoo.org/educate/fact_sheets/fisher/fisher.htm
Quote
Fishers kill all prey, except porcupines, by biting them through the back of the head. The fisher is one of the few predators that eats porcupines. The hunting of a porcupine is hard work and a successful kill may take half an hour. The arrangement of quills on a porcupine protects it from an attack to the back of the neck. To counter this pointy defense, the fisher circles the porcupine and bites at its face until the porcupine suffers shock or is unable to protect itself. The fisher then overturns the porcupine and begins to feed on its belly. As would be expected, fishers may sustain some injury from the quills of their victims, but even though quills sometimes penetrate a fisher's intestines, they seldom appear to cause serious damage to the animal. Porcupines are not an essential part of the fisher's diet because fishers live in areas not inhabited by this prey species.




Title: Re: Free State Project- Goal or Deadline?
Post by: ZooT_aLLures on November 28, 2005, 01:41:32 am
Ain't you folks got anything better to do than to grind this thing into the mud over and over again?