Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[debra]

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.

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?

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.

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. 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?

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?

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!"

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?

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?

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"?

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.

[H.M. WoggleBug, T.E.]

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

[penguinsscareme]

Woggie, please learn to use the quote feature properly.

[H.M. WoggleBug, T.E.]

Sorry PSM, every other board I use, I can put the word "QUOTE" inside the brackets capitalized with no problems. Habit.

'Bug

[Claire]

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.

[Leonidas the Younger]

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

[debra]

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.

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? 

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?

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?

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."

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.

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?

[penguinsscareme]

What's a glasseater?

[Claire]

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."

[H.M. WoggleBug, T.E.]

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

[ZooT_aLLures]

As it is, I'll mellow out

That's a pretty good idea there Bug.....

[RagnarDanneskjold]

Article over at Libertarian Enterprise.

[Persecuted BigCity Capitalist]

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.

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

[Claire]

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.

[Lightning]

Brav-freakin'-issimo, Claire.