PDA

View Full Version : CFL - Top Down or Bottom Up? (Live report from MSP)




Matt Collins
09-01-2008, 10:15 AM
I am sitting here at the CFL leadership summit and will report on various things throughout the day.

There has been a group of people that seem to think that the top down organization of the new CFL will not work. And there are others think that the idea of top down organization is the best way to manage the new emerging organization.


This has caused some friction on the floor and the discussion is still ongoing.


Grassroots control, or top-down control is the issue.

airborne373
09-01-2008, 10:18 AM
Is there room for a combination of both?

Matt Collins
09-01-2008, 10:21 AM
Is there room for a combination of both?Well at this point John Tate who was at the podium decided not to take any more questions from the floor and has moved on to Adam Kokesh who is now giving a motivational speech.

Sally08
09-01-2008, 10:28 AM
Matt,

Will everyone be discussing this issue, instead of participating in the *voting* for the GOP platform?

Or the vote to nominate McCain (by acclamation?) in the next few hours?

I have seen zero "news alerts" to RP delegates/alternates to be at the RNC *NOW*.

How many delegates/alternates are in MN, but don't know the vote is imminent (earliest I've seen for start time, presumably to determine quorum, is 3 p.m. ET):eek:

airborne373
09-01-2008, 10:32 AM
Thanks Matt. Keep up the good work in the end it is all about each individuals efforts.

free.alive
09-01-2008, 10:34 AM
I'm here as well.

Using the CFL name will be a voluntary choice, but as it is a private organization reflecting Ron Paul's values and goals, the man who we have sacrificed much to fight with, it has the right to define at least a minimum criteria for groups to carry their name.

We can, and undoubtedly will have splinter groups, even movements. The leadership seems to welcome it, especially since a major task will be to work with other groups anyway.

However, we must build on the movement we have now, for all obvious reasons including the fact that most of all other movements have at some time died out. Not only is the CFL the best game in town, it's really the only one. Definitely, the only one I think every Ron Paul supporter could happily sign on to.

Matt Collins
09-01-2008, 10:37 AM
Will everyone be discussing this issue, instead of participating in the *voting* for the GOP platform?I am at the CFL event, not the GOP event.

Matt Collins
09-01-2008, 10:45 AM
I have seen zero "news alerts" to RP delegates/alternates to be at the RNC *NOW*.

How many delegates/alternates are in MN, but don't know the vote is imminent (earliest I've seen for start time, presumably to determine quorum, is 3 p.m. ET):eek:We just broke for lunch. And they did make an announcement but I don't know if everyone heard it.

constituent
09-01-2008, 10:49 AM
... And there are others think that the idea of top down organization is the best way to manage the new emerging organization.


i guess that's one way to stagnate...

though from a franchising/brand identity p.o.v. i certainly understand.

guess it depends on what the deep-down nitty-gritty purpose of the organization is, and the ends it seeks to achieve...

it's w/e to me though.

[perhaps i'd be more sympathetic had the "leaders" not consistently proven themselves utterly inept both in terms of imagination and administration.]

LibertyEagle
09-01-2008, 11:05 AM
I'm going to reserve judgment until we see who the Executive Director is going to be.

New York For Paul
09-01-2008, 11:17 AM
alot of interest groups that were very powerful have come and gone over the years.

Especially on the conservative side.

It really depends on us the donors to help decide whether we would like to fund a top down organization or a bottom up organization.

They both have their good points and bad points.

JoshLowry
09-01-2008, 11:23 AM
They're going to start their own forum from what I understand.

They want control! *shakes fist*

It's not that big of a deal, but I originally thought that they were going to promote the grassroots projects, not compete with them.

We'll see what happens.

*splintering sound*

Sally08
09-01-2008, 11:26 AM
I'm going to reserve judgment until we see who the Executive Director is going to be.

Which proves Constituent's post:


[perhaps i'd be more sympathetic had the "leaders" not consistently proven themselves utterly inept both in terms of imagination and administration.]

Who has been in charge of the entire Target Center event? Management by consensus? Management by whoever stepped up to take charge of individual tasks with no coordination among those tasks?

Who signed contracts and has been/will be paying those expenses with how many dollars available?

I don't see how any organization can survive, let alone accomplish anything, without some sort of published organization chart of who is responsible for what ,with a project plan by when, and actual to budget under/over comparisons for how much has been expended vs. how much was available.

Have any of those currently associated with CFL ever run a business or even taken management courses related to the many core corporate functions/processes/procedures?

New York For Paul
09-01-2008, 11:43 AM
Which proves Constituent's post:


Who has been in charge of the entire Target Center event? Management by consensus? Management by whoever stepped up to take charge of individual tasks with no coordination among those tasks?

Who signed contracts and has been/will be paying those expenses with how many dollars available?

I don't see how any organization can survive, let alone accomplish anything, without some sort of published organization chart of who is responsible for what ,with a project plan by when, and actual to budget under/over comparisons for how much has been expended vs. how much was available.

Have any of those currently associated with CFL ever run a business or even taken management courses related to the many core corporate functions/processes/procedures?

That is a great question.

The lack of response may make the answer obvious.

Sally08
09-01-2008, 12:04 PM
They're going to start their own forum from what I understand.

They want control! *shakes fist*

It's not that big of a deal, but I originally thought that they were going to promote the grassroots projects, not compete with them.

We'll see what happens.

*splintering sound*

I keep shaking my head at how much *harm* CFL announcements and actions have done to major grassroots projects:

1. If CFL has its own forum, does that harm RPFs and DailyPaul?

Given the fact that no one appears to be moderating obnoxious CFL blog posts (per RPFs quotes) and I personally reported obnoxious "member names" rotating on the home page (e.g., Hitler and others) the day before the ticket sale bomb, "who's on first" [famous Three Stooges comedy routine] comes to mind.

2. Couldn't the announcement of the campaign ending and the formation of the CFL waited until after *state conventions to elect national delegates* were over? (Couldn't some of the $4+ million in unused Presidential campaign donations been used to "spread the message" in those states?)

3. Couldn't the announcement of the dual convention have waited a few more days until *after* the Sturgis event and the Washington March that was specifically requested by RP?

Or was the dual convention announced before those two events *specifically* to let people decide which event to attend, effectively dividing attendance 3 ways (as Rally ticket sales have proven so far)?

How much money did the promoters of both July grassroots events *lose* due to the timing of that dual convention announcement?

4. How do people who paid for Rally tickets feel to now have CFL giving good tickets away for free? How do those who bought tickets, but can't attend, now, sell them vs. free?

More importantly, how will the MSM report Rally attendance, if it's not full even with free tickets and a performance?

5. Where is the front-page urgency for CFL related to the vote to nominate McCain and the GOP platform occurring in the next 4-5 hours?

6. Even this holiday weekend, how is CFL posting:
The Campaign for Liberty website will host a live webstream of the entire Rally for the Republic. You can watch it all live right here - www.CampaignforLiberty.com.

Given the many grassroots live online audio/video broadcasts scheduled for the Rally and other events these several days, has CFL just harmed all of those efforts?

Is CFL using one of the grassroots networks (e.g., BTM and/or RB and/or ???)? If that's been posted elsewhere, I must have missed it.

Or is CFL hiring professionals with professional equipment and broadcast network with full "insider" access? If so, then why would any CFL member use the grassroots networks for the Rally itself?

Given this thread topic, again, who is making all of these decisions, announcing them, paying for them, ...?

Who will make policy decisions as to who/what/how to promote/publish?

For instance, who hired the instructors/companies for the training classes based on what criteria?

Or is CFL just a "club" vs. an ongoing educational foundation?

I have seen no evidence of the latter since mid-June-

If CFL were a "team" on The Apprentice, how long would it have lasted?

[Constituent - that's more of the analytical side of me:D]

BKom
09-01-2008, 04:32 PM
I keep shaking my head at how much *harm* CFL announcements and actions have done to major grassroots projects:

1. If CFL has its own forum, does that harm RPFs and DailyPaul?

Given the fact that no one appears to be moderating obnoxious CFL blog posts (per RPFs quotes) and I personally reported obnoxious "member names" rotating on the home page (e.g., Hitler and others) the day before the ticket sale bomb, "who's on first" [famous Three Stooges comedy routine] comes to mind.

2. Couldn't the announcement of the campaign ending and the formation of the CFL waited until after *state conventions to elect national delegates* were over? (Couldn't some of the $4+ million in unused Presidential campaign donations been used to "spread the message" in those states?)

3. Couldn't the announcement of the dual convention have waited a few more days until *after* the Sturgis event and the Washington March that was specifically requested by RP?

Or was the dual convention announced before those two events *specifically* to let people decide which event to attend, effectively dividing attendance 3 ways (as Rally ticket sales have proven so far)?

How much money did the promoters of both July grassroots events *lose* due to the timing of that dual convention announcement?

4. How do people who paid for Rally tickets feel to now have CFL giving good tickets away for free? How do those who bought tickets, but can't attend, now, sell them vs. free?

More importantly, how will the MSM report Rally attendance, if it's not full even with free tickets and a performance?

5. Where is the front-page urgency for CFL related to the vote to nominate McCain and the GOP platform occurring in the next 4-5 hours?

6. Even this holiday weekend, how is CFL posting:
The Campaign for Liberty website will host a live webstream of the entire Rally for the Republic. You can watch it all live right here - www.CampaignforLiberty.com.

Given the many grassroots live online audio/video broadcasts scheduled for the Rally and other events these several days, has CFL just harmed all of those efforts?

Is CFL using one of the grassroots networks (e.g., BTM and/or RB and/or ???)? If that's been posted elsewhere, I must have missed it.

Or is CFL hiring professionals with professional equipment and broadcast network with full "insider" access? If so, then why would any CFL member use the grassroots networks for the Rally itself?

Given this thread topic, again, who is making all of these decisions, announcing them, paying for them, ...?

Who will make policy decisions as to who/what/how to promote/publish?

For instance, who hired the instructors/companies for the training classes based on what criteria?

Or is CFL just a "club" vs. an ongoing educational foundation?

I have seen no evidence of the latter since mid-June-

If CFL were a "team" on The Apprentice, how long would it have lasted?

[Constituent - that's more of the analytical side of me:D]

Abbot and Costello, not the Three Stooges.

Did you like the way the campaign was run? If you did, then you'll love the CFL. Lots of the same people who worked their winning strategy. I think Jeff Greenspan did a nice job. I worked very closely with him and he worked extremely hard against a lot of obstacles, both from above and below.

Jeremy
09-01-2008, 04:36 PM
They're going to start their own forum from what I understand.

They want control! *shakes fist*

It's not that big of a deal, but I originally thought that they were going to promote the grassroots projects, not compete with them.

We'll see what happens.

*splintering sound*

you should have emailed them more

maybe you still can =)

they should just work with you and make RPF official forums

argue that it is well established here already and already has 20k members and millions of posts

MRoCkEd
09-01-2008, 04:38 PM
you should have emailed them more

maybe you still can =)

they should just work with you and make RPF official forums

argue that it is well established here already and already has 20k members and millions of posts
yea

Sally08
09-01-2008, 04:39 PM
Abbot and Costello, not the Three Stooges.

Haha, did I just show my age:D

Sally08
09-01-2008, 04:41 PM
Abbot and Costello, not the Three Stooges.

Did you like the way the campaign was run? If you did, then you'll love the CFL. Lots of the same people who worked their winning strategy. I think Jeff Greenspan did a nice job. I worked very closely with him and he worked extremely hard against a lot of obstacles, both from above and below.

Uh, given my lengthy list of issues, did I sound like I liked the way the campaign was run?:rolleyes:

MsDoodahs
09-01-2008, 05:44 PM
They're going to start their own forum from what I understand.

They want control! *shakes fist*

It's not that big of a deal, but I originally thought that they were going to promote the grassroots projects, not compete with them.

We'll see what happens.

*splintering sound*

I doubt they'll allow cursing and Christian bashing, among other things that are allowed here at RPFs.

For that reason, I expect the C4L forum will appeal to a completely different group than this place does. I also expect there will be some overlap.

Many who post here have expressed their dissatisfaction with C4L, and they'll need a place to continue to express that dissatisfaction. RPFs can continue to fill that need.

As for the C4L forum being "competition" for RPFs....well, the market will decide, right?

DeadtoSin
09-01-2008, 05:48 PM
I can't imagine there being any competition. I go to about 10 different boards, but RPFs will always be my one and only. :D

constituent
09-01-2008, 06:06 PM
I doubt they'll allow cursing and Christian bashing, among other things that are allowed here at RPFs.


you forgot public dissent from middle-management. twenty-bucks says they won't allow that either.

;):p

MsDoodahs
09-01-2008, 06:09 PM
you forgot public dissent from middle-management. twenty-bucks says they won't allow that either.

;):p

And that will appeal to a broad spectrum of supporters - not necessarily the same people who hang out here.

Sally08
09-01-2008, 06:31 PM
I doubt they'll allow cursing and Christian bashing, among other things that are allowed here at RPFs.


Take a look at this current blog thread on CFL - search on "A Sensible One".

http://www.campaignforliberty.com/blog/?p=425#comments


RonPaulForums is home to lots of anti-Paul people.

It would appear that the CFL blog is much more permissive than RPFs mods are about what posts are allowed:D

MsDoodahs
09-01-2008, 06:43 PM
I don't read their blog, thanks anyway. :)

Should be interesting to see how their forum is set up. Anyone know when it is set to debut?

constituent
09-01-2008, 07:02 PM
I don't read their blog, thanks anyway. :)

Should be interesting to see how their forum is set up. Anyone know when it is set to debut?

october i think

PatriotOne
09-01-2008, 07:26 PM
I am as independant as it gets but I see the need for some central control. The grassroots did great work but we hit a ceiling and some guidance from the campaign would have been helpful. Central control does not mean end of creativity within the grassroots.....just a direction on where to focus our creative energies. Besides, not everyone is useful without given some direction but are more than willing to jump in when direction is given.

PatriotOne
09-01-2008, 07:32 PM
They're going to start their own forum from what I understand.

They want control! *shakes fist*

It's not that big of a deal, but I originally thought that they were going to promote the grassroots projects, not compete with them.

We'll see what happens.

*splintering sound*

I agree that they need there own forum. This one has been allowed to be over run with trolls and psyops. Free speech is one thing...allowing people who are just here to do harm is another. I don't imagine that will be tolerated at the new forum.

It does not mean this forum cannot be helpful in promoting the grassroots projects but I think it is time to get serious and get rid of the trolls and psyops. They poisen the well so to speak.

Sally08
09-01-2008, 07:46 PM
I agree that they need there own forum. This one has been allowed to be over run with trolls and psyops. Free speech is one thing...allowing people who are just here to do harm is another. I don't imagine that will be tolerated at the new forum.

It does not mean this forum cannot be helpful in promoting the grassroots projects but I think it is time to get serious and get rid of the trolls and psyops. They poisen the well so to speak.

The problem is who defines what "trolls" and "psyops" are. Isn't that just a new "two party" system, those who agree with me and those who don't?

And, again, should that definition be an "owner" function or a "consensus" decision?

DailyPaul had to remove the "flag" post autodelete function, because the threads that were flagged for deletion were valued highly by others (deletion hack attacks didn't help!)

And if there had been any "top-down" guidance since mid-June, people could have been involved with more positive actions.

Given the fact that CFL has had garbage member names cycling on its home page and has the obnoxious blog thread/posts I linked to previously, why would its new forum be any different?

And a consistent issue with banning, posts edited by others, moving threads to Hot Topics/Vent *is* the issue of free speech.

What posts are allowed? What thoughts are "allowed"? Sounds exactly like what we're trying to eliminate!

Do we even agree on what free speech is "acceptable" (oxymoron?) or what "liberty" means?

I don't think so-

And that will be the ultimate issue for CFL-

MsDoodahs
09-01-2008, 08:14 PM
The problem is who defines what "trolls" and "psyops" are.

I decide for myself who I think are "trolls." Those whose posts are never ever positive, whose every comment here is intended to divide and cause dissention and distrust ... are trolls. We all know who those posters are, don't we? ;)


And, again, should that definition be an "owner" function or a "consensus" decision?

BANNING of "trolls" should be an owner decision. In the case of C4L's forum, I would think it would be up to whomever manages the forum.


Given the fact that CFL has had garbage member names cycling on its home page and has the obnoxious blog thread/posts I linked to previously, why would its new forum be any different?

Again, we'll see when it launches...though you go ahead and try to shit all over their efforts, Sally. It is, after all, what you are here to do. :rolleyes:


And a consistent issue with banning, posts edited by others, moving threads to Hot Topics/Vent *is* the issue of free speech.

When C4L launches its forum, it will be private property - same as this place. What speech is allowed is determined by the owner of said property.


What posts are allowed? What thoughts are "allowed"? Sounds exactly like what we're trying to eliminate!

Good try, but failure. You're allowed to post whatever you want to post AT THE FORUM YOU OWN. You aren't allowed to post whatever you want at a forum that someone else owns.


Do we even agree on what free speech is "acceptable" (oxymoron?) or what "liberty" means?

I don't think so -

And that will be the ultimate issue for CFL-

lol...nope, that isn't the "ultimate issue" for C4L. :rolleyes:

scandinaviany3
09-01-2008, 09:36 PM
I'm going to reserve judgment until we see who the Executive Director is going to be.

Actually we need to know who the board is going to be, how the voting rights are controlled on issues for the 501c4, executive directors, etc.

Only debbie, jeff and a very few others would i keep at all in any effort of leadership.

The others are just not skilled enough to take us to the level of some of the amazing grassroots leaders in the nation...

LibertyEagle
09-01-2008, 09:37 PM
Actually we need to know who the board is going to be, how the voting rights are controlled on issues for the 501c4, executive directors, etc.

Only debbie, jeff and a very few others would i keep at all in any effort of leadership.

They are just not skilled enough to take us to the level of some of the amazing grassroots leaders in the nation...

Okay Tyler. Have you tried asking THEM?

scandinaviany3
09-01-2008, 09:52 PM
They're going to start their own forum from what I understand.

They want control! *shakes fist*

It's not that big of a deal, but I originally thought that they were going to promote the grassroots projects, not compete with them.

We'll see what happens.

*splintering sound*

ughh i had no idea

Paul_Delegate
09-03-2008, 04:04 PM
They're going to start their own forum from what I understand.

They want control! *shakes fist*

It's not that big of a deal, but I originally thought that they were going to promote the grassroots projects, not compete with them.

We'll see what happens.

*splintering sound*


You apparently did not attend the Leadership Conference.

Paul_Delegate
09-03-2008, 04:10 PM
I keep shaking my head at how much *harm* CFL announcements and actions have done to major grassroots projects:

Did you miss the 16 hours of available training? The CFL IS ONLY ABOUT GRASSROOTS PROJECTS and nothing else.

I did not see one single announcement that caused any harm to grassroots projects I'm working on. In fact, they've been quite a help. Got more dormant supporters out of the meetup groups to leave the newsforwards and bitching out onto the streets to elect some state legislators and PCs.


>>>>>>Couldn't the announcement of the campaign ending and the formation of the CFL waited until after *state conventions to elect national delegates* were over? (Couldn't some of the $4+ million in unused Presidential campaign donations been used to "spread the message" in those states?)


I agree with you on this one! I didn't see the money as the issue. But the announcement was DEVASTATING.

Of course, that has absolutely nothing to do with the C4L.



>>>>> How do people who paid for Rally tickets feel to now have CFL giving good tickets away for free? How do those who bought tickets, but can't attend, now, sell them vs. free?

People paid a lot more in 1776. Our tickets were only 17.76. So the hell what. Get over it. Go meet your neighbors, win some over, and quit your online b*tch session.

>>>>>Who will make policy decisions as to who/what/how to promote/publish?

Not you. So what does it matter.


>>>> For instance, who hired the instructors/companies for the training classes based on what criteria?

Again, I would not want instructions from you, so this question matters zero to me.


>>> Or is CFL just a "club" vs. an ongoing educational foundation?

Again, you must have missed 16 hours of training this weekend. IF you didn't then the training was utterly wasted on you and someone else should have attended in your place.

Paul_Delegate
09-03-2008, 04:12 PM
I am sitting here at the CFL leadership summit and will report on various things throughout the day.

There has been a group of people that seem to think that the top down organization of the new CFL will not work. And there are others think that the idea of top down organization is the best way to manage the new emerging organization.


This has caused some friction on the floor and the discussion is still ongoing.


Grassroots control, or top-down control is the issue.


I wished you wouldn't.

But I was there and it seemed about as bottom up to me as humanly possible:
a skeleton crew providing services, tools, and training for $35 a year to enable people to fulfill Ron's vision of taking back the nation precinct by precinct.

Can't get more bottom up than that.

MsDoodahs
09-03-2008, 04:33 PM
>>>>> How do people who paid for Rally tickets feel to now have CFL giving good tickets away for free? How do those who bought tickets, but can't attend, now, sell them vs. free?<<<<


People paid a lot more in 1776. Our tickets were only 17.76. So the hell what. Get over it. Go meet your neighbors, win some over, and quit your online b*tch session.

Mod hat off:

WOOOT WOOOT!

This is the spirit we need!

>>>>>Who will make policy decisions as to who/what/how to promote/publish?


Not you. So what does it matter.

WOOOOT WOOOOT!

Let me say again, WELCOME TO THE FORUMS! :D

>>>> For instance, who hired the instructors/companies for the training classes based on what criteria?



Again, I would not want instructions from you, so this question matters zero to me.

Mod hat off:

Me, neither.

>>> Or is CFL just a "club" vs. an ongoing educational foundation?


Again, you must have missed 16 hours of training this weekend. IF you didn't then the training was utterly wasted on you and someone else should have attended in your place.

Mod hat off....

WOOOT WOOT.

Can't...stop....laughing....

:D:D:D

Sally08
09-03-2008, 05:37 PM
Have you even bothered to see the many threads/posts (mostly in Hot Topics) about many people questioning what CFL's plans are, THAT WE THOUGHT WERE GOING TO BE ANNOUNCED AT THE RALLY?

I may be wrong, but I think everyone hoped to be off *doing* things based on such direction from CFL today. Yet another major letdown when we know nothing more today than we did on Friday:confused:

Have you seen the other condescending posts from those who attended the "training" about all the insider information they received that is not being shared with grassroots people?

So, exactly what "grass roots projects" is CFL involved in (other than charging precinct captains $35 membership dues), if no one beyond the "500+ who attended training" grass roots people seem to know that? That sounds top down to me-

You state prior mistakes by HQ are not by CFL, except that the same people are in charge:eek:

">>>>>Who will make policy decisions as to who/what/how to promote/publish?

Not you. So what does it matter.

>>>> For instance, who hired the instructors/companies for the training classes based on what criteria?

Again, I would not want instructions from you, so this question matters zero to me."

And that makes my point, exactly. What if I feel the same about the training and classes *you* want?

FYI, based on the real-time blogging from *both* ardent supporters and skeptical people, I would never have made it through the 16 hours of training:rolleyes:

It will be interesting to see what if anything is put into use *before* the November elections.

If not, the training *sidetracked* the RP supporters - certainly, those activists had no time to *network* at the RNC.:eek:


Did you miss the 16 hours of available training? The CFL IS ONLY ABOUT GRASSROOTS PROJECTS and nothing else.

I did not see one single announcement that caused any harm to grassroots projects I'm working on. In fact, they've been quite a help. Got more dormant supporters out of the meetup groups to leave the newsforwards and bitching out onto the streets to elect some state legislators and PCs.


>>>>>>Couldn't the announcement of the campaign ending and the formation of the CFL waited until after *state conventions to elect national delegates* were over? (Couldn't some of the $4+ million in unused Presidential campaign donations been used to "spread the message" in those states?)


I agree with you on this one! I didn't see the money as the issue. But the announcement was DEVASTATING.

Of course, that has absolutely nothing to do with the C4L.

>>>>> How do people who paid for Rally tickets feel to now have CFL giving good tickets away for free? How do those who bought tickets, but can't attend, now, sell them vs. free?

People paid a lot more in 1776. Our tickets were only 17.76. So the hell what. Get over it. Go meet your neighbors, win some over, and quit your online b*tch session.

>>>>>Who will make policy decisions as to who/what/how to promote/publish?

Not you. So what does it matter.

>>>> For instance, who hired the instructors/companies for the training classes based on what criteria?

Again, I would not want instructions from you, so this question matters zero to me.


>>> Or is CFL just a "club" vs. an ongoing educational foundation?

Again, you must have missed 16 hours of training this weekend. IF you didn't then the training was utterly wasted on you and someone else should have attended in your place.

JoshLowry
09-03-2008, 05:40 PM
I think the CFL will be a good thing, they have good intentions imo. They also got some moneys!

Sally08
09-03-2008, 05:41 PM
>>>>> How do people who paid for Rally tickets feel to now have CFL giving good tickets away for free? How do those who bought tickets, but can't attend, now, sell them vs. free?<<<<



Mod hat off:

WOOOT WOOOT!

This is the spirit we need!

>>>>>Who will make policy decisions as to who/what/how to promote/publish?



WOOOOT WOOOOT!

Let me say again, WELCOME TO THE FORUMS! :D

>>>> For instance, who hired the instructors/companies for the training classes based on what criteria?




Mod hat off:

Me, neither.

>>> Or is CFL just a "club" vs. an ongoing educational foundation?



Mod hat off....

WOOOT WOOT.

Can't...stop....laughing....

:D:D:D

CFL is gathering a lot of supporters who have a very strong web presence that the MSM can definitely use against it-

Sound familiar?

Sally08
09-03-2008, 05:52 PM
I think the CFL will be a good thing, they have good intentions imo. They also got some moneys!

Josh, we've been hearing good intentions (vague generalizations) since mid-June, almost 3 months ago. The CFL site indicated Beta until 9/2. It's 9/3. Nada.

When will RPFs members ever hear what such intentions are?

When will good intentions be translated into project plans with budgeted vs. actual time and money with personnel assignments?

Josh, have *you* been giving any "insider" information? If so, is there a valid reason for not letting people know, when there are so many threads in Hot Topics related to concerns about the lack of that very information?

More importantly, will any action be taken *before the November elections*?

And the "got some moneys" has been a major question to many, as well:D

Josh, do you support the posts on RPFs by mods and "recently trained personnel" that are telling people to GTFO and leave, if they dare to question the apparent lack of business practices?

Obviously, such "agree-or-leave" policy mandates will *decrease* the numbers involved in the "movement" and on RPFs/DP.

JoshLowry
09-03-2008, 05:57 PM
Josh, we've been hearing good intentions (vague generalizations) since mid-June, almost 3 months ago. The CFL site indicated Beta until 9/2. It's 9/3. Nada.

When will RPFs members ever hear what such intentions are?

When will good intentions be translated into project plans with budgeted vs. actual time and money with personnel assignments?

Josh, have *you* been giving any "insider" information? If so, is there a valid reason for not letting people know, when there are so many threads in Hot Topics related to concerns about the lack of that very information?

More importantly, will any action be taken *before the November elections*?

And the "got some moneys" has been a major question to many, as well:D

Josh, do you support the posts on RPFs by mods and "recently trained personnel" that are telling people to GTFO and leave, if they dare to question the apparent lack of business practices?

Obviously, such "agree-or-leave" policy mandates will *decrease* the numbers involved in the "movement" and on RPFs/DP.

No insider info. If anything I've gotten a cold shoulder.

I just think that they have an ace up their sleeve.

me3
09-03-2008, 06:01 PM
It's very simple. The CFL from day 1 has been run top down, and it will fail for this reason. Sorry if people don't want to hear that, but RPFers all know that the reason Dr. Paul did as well as he did, was because of the grassroots at DP and RPF, and MeetUp, not because of much the staff did.

And those same folks are with the CFL, including Don, who recently posted that 100%ers aren't what is needed, and that 100%ers can't be effective.

That is the arrogant mentality that everyone is looking to for leadership.

I suggest people get back to doing what they have always done at RPF. Organize your own sites, your own news and your own groups. That way we don't have to risk being compromised by the future defection of the current staff to the GOP or LP and we don't have a single point of failure with the CFL hierarchy.

Dr. Paul is for the market, and for decentralization, for personal responsibility and self-motivation. Stop looking for leaders and BE a leader. Stop looking for training and train yourself.

You know what liberty is. Now go get it.

JoshLowry
09-03-2008, 06:04 PM
Well regardless of how well the CFL does, RPF will be here. ;)

Sally08
09-03-2008, 06:05 PM
No insider info. If anything I've gotten a cold shoulder.

I just think that they have an ace up their sleeve.

But the big question is: When will the poker hand start:rolleyes:

Josh, thanks for all your efforts with RPFs! I think the Liberty Forest forums will be a pretty successful "transition".

me3
09-03-2008, 06:07 PM
As for the C4L forum being "competition" for RPFs....well, the market will decide, right?
And I can tell you now that the C4L forums will fail, because it will be based on narrow values and censorship, and it will stagnate under central planners who want to act like a petit government.

RPF should Josh carry it on, will always be the cradle of liberty for young people, the tech savvy and the creative.

LibertyEagle
09-03-2008, 06:08 PM
Just FYI, it is my understanding that Don was on contract only to make the Rally happen. I doubt he is still on the payroll, or he won't be for long.

MsDoodahs
09-03-2008, 06:13 PM
MOD HAT OFF.


Have you even bothered to see the many threads/posts (mostly in Hot Topics) about many people questioning what CFL's plans are, THAT WE THOUGHT WERE GOING TO BE ANNOUNCED AT THE RALLY?



Probably so, they're not deleted or anything. :D



I may be wrong, but I think everyone hoped to be off *doing* things based on such direction from CFL today. Yet another major letdown when we know nothing more today than we did on Friday:confused:

That's a frikken lie. And you damn well know it. You and many others - in those very posts you want sooooooo badly for the new member to see - have BOLDLY and OPENLY stated that you WILL NOT BECOME INVOLVED until Ron and the C4L proves itself to your personal satisfaction.

So this little claim of yours, that you soooo badly wanted to hit the streets TODAY, is nothing but a damn lie.



Have you seen the other condescending posts from those who attended the "training" about all the insider information they received that is not being shared with grassroots people?

Smart move on C4L's part. Since you can't get the info and start more efforts to hurt C4L, you're having hissy fits. I'm telling ya, this move by C4L is BRILLIANT! lol...


So, exactly what "grass roots projects" is CFL involved in (other than charging precinct captains $35 membership dues), if no one beyond the "500+ who attended training" grass roots people seem to know that? That sounds top down to me-

Pretty desperate, eh, Sally? lol....


You state prior mistakes by HQ are not by CFL, except that the same people are in charge:eek:

C4L isn't the campaign. The campaign is over. You've said you have a problem with Ron's choices to run his org - fine, don't be involved.

I'm sure you'll be .... sorely missed.



">>>>>Who will make policy decisions as to who/what/how to promote/publish?

Not you. So what does it matter.

>>>> For instance, who hired the instructors/companies for the training classes based on what criteria?

Again, I would not want instructions from you, so this question matters zero to me."

And that makes my point, exactly. What if I feel the same about the training and classes *you* want?

Then you made the right choice in not attending and have made the right choice in not being involved with C4L. I wish you much luck in your endeavors to reclaim the country. By the way...what are they? ;)



FYI, based on the real-time blogging from *both* ardent supporters and skeptical people, I would never have made it through the 16 hours of training:rolleyes:

Then again, you made the right choice in not attending and have made the right choice in not being involved with C4L.


It will be interesting to see what if anything is put into use *before* the November elections.

If not, the training *sidetracked* the RP supporters - certainly, those activists had no time to *network* at the RNC.:eek:

From what I'm hearing, the RP supporters who attended don't feel they were sidetracked at all. But good try, Sally.

JoshLowry
09-03-2008, 06:13 PM
And I can tell you now that the C4L forums will fail, because it will be based on narrow values and censorship, and it will stagnate under central planners who want to act like a petit government.

RPF should Josh carry it on, will always be the cradle of liberty for young people, the tech savvy and the creative.

If it does not fail and the CFL is successful then hopefully it will be because they took posts like these into consideration.

:)

Sally08
09-03-2008, 06:21 PM
Just FYI, it is my understanding that Don was on contract only to make the Rally happen. I doubt he is still on the payroll, or he won't be for long.

Maybe they'll hire these RPFs members as moderators for the CFL forum:rolleyes:

GunnyFreedom:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1647238&postcount=14
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1647208&postcount=212

MsDoodahs:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1643873&postcount=142
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1643916&postcount=160

MsDoodahs
09-03-2008, 06:23 PM
And I can tell you now that the C4L forums will fail,

Could you put that clairvoyance to real work, and tell me what the price of oil will be in three years?

:D

me3
09-03-2008, 06:23 PM
If it does not fail and the CFL is successful then hopefully it will be because they took posts like these into consideration.

:)
All they have to do is learn some Austrian economics brother. Private property always defeats socialism. You won't go down without a fight, they have no stake in having the best possible forum, nor do they necessarily understand what it should cost, how it should be run etc.

Plus, you guys have done an amazing job, I am a BIG BIG fan! Think about all of the ideas hatched and promoted at DP and RPF!

The Philly rally. Money Bombs. Blimp! Winning post debate polls. Attacking negative and yellow journalism. Social campaigns.

The only real question in my opinion, is whether or not you are strong enough and committed enough to keep being a leader. I hope you are. And Bryan (is he still around?). LibertyEagle. The rest of the staff.

You guys are the bonafide Campaign for Liberty.

Scary hunh? :D

Sally08
09-03-2008, 06:25 PM
Add this new post by MsDoodahs:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1647948&postcount=49:rolleyes:

Not what I consider normal behavior by moderators, "hat on or hat off":D


Maybe they'll hire these RPFs members as moderators for the CFL forum:rolleyes:

GunnyFreedom:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1647238&postcount=14
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1647208&postcount=212

MsDoodahs:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1643873&postcount=142
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1643916&postcount=160

Sally08
09-03-2008, 06:29 PM
And Bryan (is he still around?).

I believe Bryan has been in MN:)

Make sure you see Bryan's current project, the LibertyStrawPoll (link on home page of RPFs). http://www.ronpaulforums.com/index.php

Josh, shouldn't that button go somewhere:confused:

http://www.libertystrawpoll.com/

JoshLowry
09-03-2008, 06:30 PM
What button?

MsDoodahs
09-03-2008, 06:30 PM
If it does not fail and the CFL is successful then hopefully it will be because they took posts like these into consideration.

:)

From what I've heard, those who actually get active will have more input than those who aren't active....which is as it should be IMO. Regardless of whose ass that chaps.

Also, those who join will have more input than those who don't join...which again, is as it should be.

I don't think those who aren't joining should have any say. Why should they?

me3
09-03-2008, 06:31 PM
Could you put that clairvoyance to real work, and tell me what the price of oil will be in three years?

:D
Get on the Austrian economics train, and you will know when to short the market, and when it will bubble. Dr. Paul has accurately predicted so much, because he has a sound understanding of human action. He knows that the more top down an organization is, the more it alienates it's supporters. In the end, due to limiting creativity, demanding compliance with (potentially) unpopular policies, the organization will shrink, and the only way to maintain it's power is to get authoritative and abusive.

Do you guys read the C4L blog? They ask people to social market articles on a certain day. They don't even know that I socially market all of their good stuff, I don't need orders, and neither does anyone else. They are trying to teach us to do what we were doing over a year ago.

Or they choose to have a ticket bomb when tickets become available, instead of setting a later date. Instead of selling out, the ticket sales stagnated after the premature bomb, and because they were running the bombs, independent actors did not want to get in their way.

Remember how everyone criticized the finance guy in the PCC (sorry dude, forgot your name). It wasn't his job to tell us WHEN, only how much.

I can make a dozen examples like this.

constituent
09-03-2008, 06:32 PM
I don't think those who aren't joining should have any say. Why should they?

couldn't agree more.

JoshLowry
09-03-2008, 06:32 PM
From what I've heard, those who actually get active will have more input than those who aren't active....which is as it should be IMO. Regardless of whose ass that chaps.

Also, those who join will have more input than those who don't join...which again, is as it should be.

I don't think those who aren't joining should have any say. Why should they?

http://i36.tinypic.com/rs7j89.jpg

MsDoodahs
09-03-2008, 06:32 PM
Well regardless of how well the CFL does, RPF will be here. ;)

Hey, by the way...I said the other night that RPFs would still be here and still be free.....and a couple of people told me that you were considering charging membership fees for posting here.

Could you clarify on that one, please?

Thanks!

constituent
09-03-2008, 06:33 PM
They are trying to teach us to do what we were doing over a year ago.


yep.

constituent
09-03-2008, 06:34 PM
I said the other night that RPFs would still be here and still be free.....and a couple of people told me that you were considering charging membership fees for posting here.



THAT i would pay for.

MsDoodahs
09-03-2008, 06:36 PM
Add this new post by MsDoodahs:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showpost.php?p=1647948&postcount=49:rolleyes:

Not what I consider normal behavior by moderators, "hat on or hat off":D

Mod hat off:

Aw, Sally. It appears that you now regret suggesting that I note when I'm posting my opinion so I would be free to post what I really think.

That's a damn shame.

;)

MsDoodahs
09-03-2008, 06:41 PM
THAT i would pay for.

I felt really bad for saying that it would be free once people started telling me Josh was thinking of charging. I had no idea.

:o

LibertyEagle
09-03-2008, 06:42 PM
Uh, me3, my understanding is that the C4L is going to do what the grassroots could not. Move us from the internet, to the real world.

JoshLowry
09-03-2008, 06:45 PM
Hey, by the way...I said the other night that RPFs would still be here and still be free.....and a couple of people told me that you were considering charging membership fees for posting here.

Could you clarify on that one, please?

Thanks!

Never heard of it.

Bryan and I talked about allowing a bigger pm box, custom titles, and pics in signature as a possible way to pay for server costs in the future for members that want it.

It will always be free to join and post.

me3
09-03-2008, 06:47 PM
Uh, me3, my understanding is that the C4L is going to do what the grassroots could not.
With more time, the grassroots could have done anything. ANYTHING.


Move us from the internet, to the real world.
Yes, and Hillary Clinton can stop global warming.

Last time I checked, the internet grassroots got Ron Paul tons of earned media. Last time I checked, the internet organized MeetUps hung banners on overpasses and had a visible presence in hundreds of towns and cities.

Last time I checked, the internet raised a crap ton of money, money which is now being used to pay the salaries of the people who are going to teach us how to, yep you guessed it, raise a crap ton of money.

Last time I checked, the internet made a book a bestseller on the New York Times list. Last time I checked, the internet exposed Ron Paul to millions of people around the world.

So I am very curious, to know exactly what the C4L will add to the mix. What value it will bring in return for division, secrecy and oaths of fealty.

Sorry if I seem so negative about the C4L, it's just led by the very people who flopped during the PCC, didn't provide grassroots leadership for the last year, or do it for a wage, while literally 10s of thousands of us do it for liberty.

constituent
09-03-2008, 06:48 PM
Uh, me3, my understanding is that the C4L is going to do what the grassroots could not. Move us from the internet, to the real world.

edit: me3 about covered all the bases.

Sally08
09-03-2008, 06:50 PM
I'm going to reserve judgment until we see who the Executive Director is going to be.

Can we have a betting pool for how much longer it will be before one is announced:D

Sally08
09-03-2008, 06:53 PM
Mod hat off:

Aw, Sally. It appears that you now regret suggesting that I note when I'm posting my opinion so I would be free to post what I really think.

That's a damn shame.

;)

Who is correct, you or LE? Did you start doing "hat on/off" on your own initiative or because Josh, as owner, agreed that would be wise?

Just one "hat off" at the beginning is enough:)

Please continue to post what you really think - I'll trust the intelligence of those who still visit RPFs to make their own judgments relative to your thoughts:rolleyes:

JoshLowry
09-03-2008, 06:56 PM
I think hats are unnecessary.

http://www.southparkstuff.com/images/stories/epiimgs/epi609/609_img_17.jpg

afmatt
09-03-2008, 06:57 PM
From what I've heard, those who actually get active will have more input than those who aren't active....which is as it should be IMO. Regardless of whose ass that chaps.

Also, those who join will have more input than those who don't join...which again, is as it should be.

I don't think those who aren't joining should have any say. Why should they?

Well Said

constituent
09-03-2008, 06:58 PM
Hey, by the way...I said the other night that RPFs would still be here and still be free.....and a couple of people told me that you were considering charging membership fees for posting here.

Could you clarify on that one, please?

Thanks!

maybe i'm misreading, but as of late you seem to really have a problem w/ this place and are actively working to undermine it.

...

care to clarify?

LibertyEagle
09-03-2008, 07:00 PM
Me3, yes we have passion and lots of it and we made things happen. In some cases, I'm not totally sure all those things were something we should have made happen, but w/e. :p

What we're not good at, right now, is knowledge of how to play the political game. Most of us are political neophytes. That is where the C4L can help us.

I agree with you that a heavy-handed top down organization would not work, but that is not what it sounds like to me what the C4L is all about. I keep hearing about it being setup as a Constitutional Republic and what I've heard, sounds good. Everything is still going to happen at the grassroots level and it will be up to us, if it does happen or whether it doesn't. All the C4L is going to do is to offer us tools and training, if we want them.

I don't see them standing in our way at all.

I guess we would both know more, if we had attended the training and the Rally, eh? Nice to see you back here, BTW. We've missed you around this place. :)

me3
09-03-2008, 07:01 PM
edit: me3 about covered all the bases.
Thanks.

At everyone in general:

I am very concerned that some of the grassroots leaders are looking to group and party affiliations for direction, when they have provided stellar leadership themselves.

The last thing needed is another GOP or LP, a centralized command structure that can be infiltrated or subverted, taking everyone offline from campaigning.

It's very important to be self-organizing, because the C4L people like Tate are going to teach stuff, but in case anyone hasn't been paying attention, guys like Tate have lost more caucuses than they have won. There is a limit to how far the C4L and it's leadership (which will inevitably want raises, and to add more and more and more and more on top of the original mission) can take us. The reason why the decentralized internet campaign was so effective, was that we were always one step ahead of the MSM, we were always one step ahead of the GOP. We were light, like the revolutionary army, we used hit and run tactics, and while many people may be unsophisticated politically, that was turned into a strength, called enthusiasm and creative risk taking.

After all, the last thing we want to be, are sophisticated party operators like the neocons or the democrats. When we become like them, and try to play on their field, we're allowing them to dictate the terms of engagement. They should have to fight us where WE choose to attack, and believe me, they will never ever be able to cover every flank, and for every exposed flank, someone will be stuffing liberty up their asses.

There is a reason why fund raising gurus fail online. It's not a tactic or method, it has to be genuine, viral and unrestricted. If you try to control it, you will kill it. If you let it be free, you might get an amazing result. My only regret about the grassroots, is that more people are not getting a proper sound education about political philosophy and economy. The movement needs to endure beyond the words of Dr. Paul, after all he is carrying on the example of many men who came before him, and kept the flickering candle of liberty going in the coldest of neocon storms.

MsDoodahs
09-03-2008, 07:05 PM
I think hats are unnecessary.

http://www.southparkstuff.com/images/stories/epiimgs/epi609/609_img_17.jpg

Mod hat off:

See, Sally? JOSH does not feel hats are needed.

YOU requested that we stop posting our OPINIONS unless we specified that what we were saying WAS our opinon. We did as you requested. You THANKED US for it.

Now, it seems you're having a bit of difficulty with your choice. :cool:

me3
09-03-2008, 07:07 PM
What we're not good at, right now, is knowledge of how to play the political game. Most of us are political neophytes. That is where the C4L can help us.
It's your greatest strength.

It's like a kid who doesn't know that they can't win, that they can't be a cop/fireman/astronaut when they grow up.

When people lose that for the so-called maturity of being politically sophisticated, many of them will be like so many well intentioned people who went to Washington and became despot trough feeding pigs.

Idealism is not weakness. We have to believe we can be free, without having to sell our souls to get there.

I missed you guys too. The forum got ugly for awhile there with so many people arguing that Dr. Paul could still win. When will people understand, Dr. Paul has totally changed his rhetoric in the last few months, he no longer says that supporters should work in the GOP anymore.

I wouldn't be surprised if he breaks with the party shortly after this election.

MsDoodahs
09-03-2008, 07:08 PM
Never heard of it.

Bryan and I talked about allowing a bigger pm box, custom titles, and pics in signature as a possible way to pay for server costs in the future for members that want it.

It will always be free to join and post.

Thank you! I backed away from saying it would always be free because the guys telling me that you were considering charging membership freaked me right out, and I thought maybe I missed something. :)

LibertyEagle
09-03-2008, 07:17 PM
It's your greatest strength.

It's like a kid who doesn't know that they can't win, that they can't be a cop/fireman/astronaut when they grow up.

When people lose that for the so-called maturity of being politically sophisticated, many of them will be like so many well intentioned people who went to Washington and became despot trough feeding pigs.

Idealism is not weakness. We have to believe we can be free, without having to sell our souls to get there.

I missed you guys too. The forum got ugly for awhile there with so many people arguing that Dr. Paul could still win. When will people understand, Dr. Paul has totally changed his rhetoric in the last few months, he no longer says that supporters should work in the GOP anymore.

I wouldn't be surprised if he breaks with the party shortly after this election.

No one said anything about selling our souls. Passion can get us far. That's for sure. But, here's an analogy for you.

If you were getting ready to play a football game, obviously against another team. And there was a very small team of people, willing and eager to teach you some moves and plays, so that you knew the rules of the game and some moves to outwit your competition --- would it be wise to listen? Or, is it smarter to just run out on the field, with all your passion and NOTHING ELSE and hope upon hope that you can somehow win the game?

To me, I'd rather have some knowledge of how to play the game under my belt, along with all of my passion. Because that seems like it would have a higher likelihood of producing a winning result.

me3
09-03-2008, 07:22 PM
If you were getting ready to play a football game, obviously against another team. And there was a very small team of people, willing and eager to teach you some moves and plays, so that you knew the rules of the game and some moves to outwit your competition --- would it be wise to listen? Or, is it smarter to just run out on the field, with all your passion and NOTHING ELSE and hope upon hope that you can somehow win the game?

To me, I'd rather have some knowledge of how to play the game under my belt, along with all of my passion. Because that seems like it would have a higher likelihood of producing a winning strategy.
Don't play football. It's like RPF trying to organize a team against the New England Patriots, and the referees are all ex-Patriot players as well.

Make them play your game, whatever that is. Play the game you can win.

I guess what I am saying is, they want you to play their game, and as long as you acknowledge that they control the game by trying to take over their conventions, caucuses and committees, they will be able to steer you wherever they want you to go.

Just like the C4L, all you have to do is occupy the upper couple seats of power, as long as everyone is plugged into YOUR system, and not an independent one, you will control and rule them.

Sally08
09-03-2008, 07:24 PM
With more time, the grassroots could have done anything. ANYTHING.

My reaction to "walking the streets" is how incredibly inefficient. Maybe at train station stops, Union Station in Chicago, malls, etc. I received a handout for Tancredo that way-

But door-to-door in neighborshoods? And to expect a political discussion?

Not in my neighborhood-

Also, the world has changed.

I simply will not answer the door to a stranger, let alone after dark. I'm not even sure that leaving literature at the door is allowed in my city.

I can understand college kids having time to go door-to-door. But the parents I know are working 50-60 hour work weeks before the commutes both ways, so they're not even *home* to answer the door.

Many people have second jobs on the *weekends* to make ends meet.

The way I found out about RP was education "loops" (long before Yahoo groups) who forwarded his online speeches.

The way I found out about RP *ending his campaign* was one of those many-year online activists - I didn't hear a thing from HQ or CFL.

amy31416
09-03-2008, 07:27 PM
My reaction to "walking the streets" is how incredibly inefficient. Maybe at train station stops, Union Station in Chicago, malls, etc. I received a handout for Tancredo that way-

But door-to-door in neighborshoods? And to expect a political discussion?

Not in my neighborhood-

Also, the world has changed.

I simply will not answer the door to a stranger, let alone after dark. I'm not even sure that leaving literature at the door is allowed in my city.

I can understand college kids having time to go door-to-door. But the parents I know are working 50-60 hour work weeks before the commutes both ways, so they're not even *home* to answer the door.

Many people have second jobs on the *weekends* to make ends meet.

The way I found out about RP was education "loops" (long before Yahoo groups) who forwarded his online speeches.

The way I found out about RP *ending his campaign* was one of those many-year online activists - I didn't hear a thing from HQ or CFL.

So what's your suggestion for this day and age?

MsDoodahs
09-03-2008, 07:29 PM
maybe i'm misreading, but as of late you seem to really have a problem w/ this place and are actively working to undermine it.

...

care to clarify?

How is telling people RPFs will not charge membership - being told that I'm wrong because Josh is considering charging membership - then recanting and saying "Josh has not told me that" and not saying it anymore - then asking Josh about it here - undermining RPFs?

me3
09-03-2008, 07:31 PM
Obviously RPers can rule the net, and traditional news media is dying. This is the place to fight, this is the battleground. On the net, Ron Paul is the President.

To turn away from the growing internet influence on politics, to get involved in the dying party and committee structure seems counter-intuitive to me.

But then if there was ever an organization that did things counter-intuitively, it was the PCC people. It's like they were running a campaign from the 19th century, but with a fancy online donation counter.

LibertyEagle
09-03-2008, 07:32 PM
Don't play football. It's like RPF trying to organize a team against the New England Patriots, and the referees are all ex-Patriot players as well.

Make them play your game, whatever that is. Play the game you can win.

I guess what I am saying is, they want you to play their game, and as long as you acknowledge that they control the game by trying to take over their conventions, caucuses and committees, they will be able to steer you wherever they want you to go.

Just like the C4L, all you have to do is occupy the upper couple seats of power, as long as everyone is plugged into YOUR system, and not an independent one, you will control and rule them.

Nope. I never thought we could win by caucus/convention games. This is going to be a long, tough effort, that in my opinion, is going to require us to infiltrate at the very least, the GOP at all levels. When we become the GOP, we will have a lot of input in creating the rules.



Just like the C4L, all you have to do is occupy the upper couple seats of power, as long as everyone is plugged into YOUR system, and not an independent one, you will control and rule them.
Not sure what you mean here. Are you thinking this is where we should focus our efforts? :confused:

LibertyEagle
09-03-2008, 07:34 PM
Obviously RPers can rule the net, and traditional news media is dying. This is the place to fight, this is the battleground. On the net, Ron Paul is the President.

To turn away from the growing internet influence on politics, to get involved in the dying party and committee structure seems counter-intuitive to me.

But then if there was ever an organization that did things counter-intuitively, it was the PCC people. It's like they were running a campaign from the 19th century, but with a fancy online donation counter.

No one is saying that we should abandon our efforts on the internet. But, if we want to make progress, we have to do MORE than solely focus on the internet.

Sally08
09-03-2008, 07:34 PM
Mod hat off:

See, Sally? JOSH does not feel hats are needed.

YOU requested that we stop posting our OPINIONS unless we specified that what we were saying WAS our opinon. We did as you requested. You THANKED US for it.

Now, it seems you're having a bit of difficulty with your choice. :cool:

I don't give a F* what you do. I care even less what you think of me, because I only care about opinions of people who I *respect*. You're just another "Internet phantom" who has been given a small amount of power.

Look what that has done:rolleyes:

*YOU* posted that you don't make such changes by choice, *that Josh makes that decision*. (Do I need to find that quote?)

Yet, now Josh indicates he doesn't care what you say as *his* representative.

Which is it? Huh?

If Josh didn't think a "disclaimer" is appropriate, when you personally attack and *INSULT* forum members as you have done throughout these several threads today/yesterday *and* tell people to LEAVE, then why did you start doing so?

LibertyEagle
09-03-2008, 07:35 PM
When will people understand, Dr. Paul has totally changed his rhetoric in the last few months, he no longer says that supporters should work in the GOP anymore.

Source please. Because this is not my understanding at all.

Sally08
09-03-2008, 07:53 PM
So what's your suggestion for this day and age?

Actually, me3 has documented the success of online promotion (there's a reason eHarmony exists, as well).

The grassroots attempts to come up with online broadcast media is a major step.

Yet, look at the viciousness of the many competitive factions in that arena:eek:

How can CFL have members of those factions "in the same tent", then?

In addition to the Meet-Up groups, there are already IL4RP Yahoo Groups (substitute state).

That means I can be in immediate contact with other people *in my state or city* without spending commute time (and commute *costs*) to "physically meet".

Have my phone conversations with Bryan been worthless, because we have never met?

Are my e-mail interactions with Devvy Kidd, Lew Rockwell, Charlotte Iserbyt and others worthless, because we have never met? How would I have ever met them in the first place:confused:

In fact, are you aware of Live Meeting situations that corporations are routinely using *instead* of expensive transportation/hotels for business travel for meetings across the country/across the world?

Even Internet marketers are using such techniques-

To succeed in politics, it has been drilled into us that it starts at the precinct level.

That means the ethical or unethical politicians are specific to my precinct. How can CFL teach me how to earn respect at that level with unique people?

As I've posted elsewhere, what Chicago or Illinois needs is drastically different than what Los Angeles or California needs or what Detroit or Michigan needs.

How can a "generic" CFL approach address such disparate "politics"?

And shouldn't activist funds be spent locally vs. donated to CFL and get a percentage back (sounds like the IRS??)

me3
09-03-2008, 07:55 PM
Nope. I never thought we could win by caucus/convention games. This is going to be a long, tough effort, that in my opinion, is going to require us to infiltrate at the very least, the GOP at all levels. When we become the GOP, we will have a lot of input in creating the rules.

Not sure what you mean here. Are you thinking this is where we should focus our efforts? :confused:
Keep working the young people. They are the ones who are going to make the change, not the blue hairs who are drooling at Social Security paid for by the younger working class that will get nothing when they retire.

me3
09-03-2008, 07:58 PM
No one is saying that we should abandon our efforts on the internet. But, if we want to make progress, we have to do MORE than solely focus on the internet.
Sure. But that doesn't mean emulating the institutions and structures of government. This isn't an accident that bad people are running the show, sane, moral people are not attracted to power or the ability to tax, legislate over people. Such power attracts the most morally deficient and corrupt people in society. That is why Dr. Paul is such a wonderful person, for being able to resist that, and yet he is only one of 535.

me3
09-03-2008, 08:01 PM
Source please. Because this is not my understanding at all.
I can't source what he has not said or written.

I don't want to piss off the forum, but go back and read Lew's speech. It was posted on LRC today.

LibertyEagle
09-03-2008, 08:06 PM
Keep working the young people. They are the ones who are going to make the change, not the blue hairs who are drooling at Social Security paid for by the younger working class that will get nothing when they retire.

I'm going to work BOTH. The young people don't tend to vote. It's the older people who do.

I don't think you give enough credit to the baby boomers and older. They are, after all, who has been keeping Dr. Paul in office over these past 30 years. Not to mention the fact that this country would have fallen long ago, had it not been for them.

As far as Social Security goes, I don't think anyone is "drooling" to go on it. What you may not understand is that when SS was setup to many's dismay, the money was setup as a Trust Fund. The money that was taken from our paychecks was to be invested and slowly given back to us when we retired. Unfortunately, the scumsuckers in D.C. stole our money and spent it.

So no, me3, I don't think those on SS would have a problem with Ron's plan. As long as we don't approach them like we have thus far as "droolers". Ron has clearly said that he won't drop anyone that had already had their money stolen from them their entire careers and who had already made plans, per the governments theft promises, that it would be returned to them upon retirement.

If we make everyone but the young who are now clamoring at Obama's Marxist feet, our enemies, we will surely fail in our endeavors.

LibertyEagle
09-03-2008, 08:06 PM
I can't source what he has not said or written.

I don't want to piss off the forum, but go back and read Lew's speech. It was posted on LRC today.

Lew is not affiliated with C4L and does not speak for Ron.

Sally08
09-03-2008, 08:08 PM
Keep working the young people. They are the ones who are going to make the change, not the blue hairs who are drooling at Social Security paid for by the younger working class that will get nothing when they retire.

Wow, I've thought you were intelligent until this major flub!:eek:

It's statements like these that also may have harmed RP's failure to get the older vote-

Given the level of illiteracy on these forums, I don't hold out much hope for the "younger working class".

I've already lived through the Sixties and Ross Perot. What will be different this time? Why?

Funny thing about having a fulltime job and a family - surviving day-to-day becomes the challenge:rolleyes:

me3
09-03-2008, 08:16 PM
Lew is not affiliated with C4L and does not speak for Ron.
I don't want to go here. You win, ok?

LibertyEagle
09-03-2008, 08:18 PM
I don't want to go here. You win, ok?

Nah. Lets just call it a draw. :) We're on the same side anyway.

MsDoodahs
09-03-2008, 08:25 PM
I don't give a F* what you do. I care even less what you think of me, because I only care about opinions of people who I *respect*. You're just another "Internet phantom" who has been given a small amount of power.

Look what that has done:rolleyes:

Mod hat off:

Evidently you have a real problem with what I do, else you'd not have posted yet another diatribe about it. ;)



*YOU* posted that you don't make such changes by choice, *that Josh makes that decision*. (Do I need to find that quote?)

Yes, please do. You'll see that I said Josh makes the call on the kinds of changes I suggested in yet another effort to appease you (you were complaining about threads being locked before the post you wanted to put up got included, as I recall.) You had asked that we EITHER just start using the changes OR get Josh's approval. I informed you that such changes REQUIRE Josh's approval, that there was no either/or to it. :)

I also told you that Josh did not have a problem with my using "mod hat off" when I used it before, so I didn't think he would now. And I do think Josh said he doesn't even think hats are necessary, but since you asked that I make clear when I'm posting my opinion.... :) It does seem that now, you're pretty unhappy that I'm posting my opinions. But ... I think you had a great idea there, Sally! Thanks again! :D



Yet, now Josh indicates he doesn't care what you say as *his* representative.

Where did Josh say that I'm his "representative?" :eek: I missed that one! lol!




Which is it? Huh?

Uh...you know how you said C4L people have ignored your repeated emails? Maybe you should check your tone. Just a suggestion. ;)



If Josh didn't think a "disclaimer" is appropriate, when you personally attack and *INSULT* forum members as you have done throughout these several threads today/yesterday *and* tell people to LEAVE, then why did you start doing so?

You asked me to indicate when I'm posting my opinion, Sally. Josh doesn't think I should have to do that, he said he doesn't think hats are necessary. I started including it to appease you.

And, I've not told anyone to leave RPFs.

I've told people who have said they will not join C4L that they should not join.

I'm supporting their free choice not to join C4L.

You've spent a lot of time here, exposing the ways in which C4L is riddled with problems.

I would think that you'd be thrilled to have me supporting the decisions of those your very own hard work might have influenced! ;)

me3
09-03-2008, 08:28 PM
Wow, I've thought you were intelligent until this major flub!:eek:
If you're not a bluehair drooling for Social Security, then it shouldn't bother you. And bluehairs who are drooling for social security off someone else's back while they allowed the government to grow out of control, certainly don't deserve a whole lot of pandering or respect.

There are a lot of idiots out there who want to "kill dem ay-rabs" and "nuke those commies", while they allowed their retirement to be spent on the military industrial complex. And now they expect someone else to pick up the tab. Sickening.


It's statements like these that also may have harmed RP's failure to get the older vote-
Ok, I gotta go. Now we're about pandering to groups, which Ron calls collectivism.

As far as I know, Ron delivers pretty much the same speech to everyone. Liberty is one message, not a series of slogans generated by focus groups and demographics. If it was, Bob Barr would be kicking ass. :p

me3
09-03-2008, 08:30 PM
Nah. Lets just call it a draw. :) We're on the same side anyway.
yes we are. http://www.ronpaulforums.com/gfx_RedWhiteBlue/icons/icon14.gif

Sally08
09-03-2008, 08:47 PM
Sigh. Such blithering nonsense. I hope you never have to testify in court about what you (think) you saw or heard:D

And this isn't in Hot Topics, is it:rolleyes:


Mod hat off:

Evidently you have a real problem with what I do, else you'd not have posted yet another diatribe about it. ;)



Yes, please do. You'll see that I said Josh makes the call on the kinds of changes I suggested in yet another effort to appease you (you were complaining about threads being locked before the post you wanted to put up got included, as I recall.) You had asked that we EITHER just start using the changes OR get Josh's approval. I informed you that such changes REQUIRE Josh's approval, that there was no either/or to it. :)

I also told you that Josh did not have a problem with my using "mod hat off" when I used it before, so I didn't think he would now. And I do think Josh said he doesn't even think hats are necessary, but since you asked that I make clear when I'm posting my opinion.... :) It does seem that now, you're pretty unhappy that I'm posting my opinions. But ... I think you had a great idea there, Sally! Thanks again! :D



Where did Josh say that I'm his "representative?" :eek: I missed that one! lol!




Uh...you know how you said C4L people have ignored your repeated emails? Maybe you should check your tone. Just a suggestion. ;)



You asked me to indicate when I'm posting my opinion, Sally. Josh doesn't think I should have to do that, he said he doesn't think hats are necessary. I started including it to appease you.

And, I've not told anyone to leave RPFs.

I've told people who have said they will not join C4L that they should not join.

I'm supporting their free choice not to join C4L.

You've spent a lot of time here, exposing the ways in which C4L is riddled with problems.

I would think that you'd be thrilled to have me supporting the decisions of those your very own hard work might have influenced! ;)

Sally08
09-03-2008, 08:52 PM
If you're not a bluehair drooling for Social Security, then it shouldn't bother you. And bluehairs who are drooling for social security off someone else's back while they allowed the government to grow out of control, certainly don't deserve a whole lot of pandering or respect.

Define the characteristics of a "bluehair drooling for Social Security", please, considering the fact that to qualify for it in the first place means they contributed to it over their own entire working careers-:rolleyes:

Try those social security payments with the current gas and food price increases-

me3
09-03-2008, 09:46 PM
Define the characteristics of a "bluehair drooling for Social Security", please, considering the fact that to qualify for it in the first place means they contributed to it over their own entire working careers-:rolleyes:

Try those social security payments with the current gas and food price increases-
Social Security is a ponzi scheme. Peter Schiff covers it in his book, Crash Proof.

The people who contributed early, got more in retirement than they paid in, and the people who paid in all of their lives, also allowed their government to go to war and debt spend it all away.

One can't say they paid into it, if they supported Reaganomics. Or Korea. Or Vietnam. Or the Drug war. Or the Iraq War. Or the bombing of Serbia. Gulf War I. Or the Department of Education, Agriculture, Commerce, etc. etc. etc.

That;s like saving your money in a jar while maxing out your credit cards, and then when the credit debt is due, clutching your jar and saying "No, it's my precious!"

It don't work that way. Now maybe people didn't understand, maybe they don't watch politics or economics. But it's a lesson someone is going to have to pay for, why should the next generation bear the burden for corruption, inflation and carpet bombing of the past?

Don
09-03-2008, 09:56 PM
And those same folks are with the CFL, including Don, who recently posted that 100%ers aren't what is needed, and that 100%ers can't be effective.

That is the arrogant mentality that everyone is looking to for leadership.

I actually said that we cannot build a governing coalition with ONLY 100%ers (myself included). I don't like being misquoted and then being attacked based on the lie. Please provide a link proving your claim or concede the point.

Sally08
09-03-2008, 10:08 PM
Don't preach to me.

No matter what we supported or not, we were required to put *our* money into Social Security over our entire lives.

So you think my generation should get caught with the Ponzi scheme so *yours* won't have to? Sounds pretty self-centered to me. Will that impact your parents? Will they have to move in with you?

And I don't believe RP believes with your throwing out the senior citizens-

And given the fact that those "bluehairs" were part of the much larger Sixties movement and possibly the Ross Perot movement, on what basis do you think that there will be any change whatsoever based on the actions of your generation?

Exactly what has changed or will change with any item on your list: Reaganomics. Or Korea. Or Vietnam. Or the Drug war. Or the Iraq War. Or the bombing of Serbia. Gulf War I. Or the Department of Education, Agriculture, Commerce, etc. etc. etc.

Congress hasn't been able to accomplish *anything*.

Wasn't it Schiff who stated that the next *two* generations won't be able to retire at all?


Social Security is a ponzi scheme. Peter Schiff covers it in his book, Crash Proof.

The people who contributed early, got more in retirement than they paid in, and the people who paid in all of their lives, also allowed their government to go to war and debt spend it all away.

One can't say they paid into it, if they supported Reaganomics. Or Korea. Or Vietnam. Or the Drug war. Or the Iraq War. Or the bombing of Serbia. Gulf War I. Or the Department of Education, Agriculture, Commerce, etc. etc. etc.

That;s like saving your money in a jar while maxing out your credit cards, and then when the credit debt is due, clutching your jar and saying "No, it's my precious!"

It don't work that way. Now maybe people didn't understand, maybe they don't watch politics or economics. But it's a lesson someone is going to have to pay for, why should the next generation bear the burden for corruption, inflation and carpet bombing of the past?

Matt Collins
09-03-2008, 10:50 PM
I'm going to reserve judgment until we see who the Executive Director is going to be.Isn't that John Tate?

Matt Collins
09-03-2008, 10:53 PM
Did you like the way the campaign was run? If you did, then you'll love the CFL. I am hoping that it'll be handled a lot better. But unfortunately some of the same people that FUBARD the campaign are in the CFL. Cautious optimism perhaps? Skeptical? Wanting to be pleasently suprised? Yah.

Matt Collins
09-03-2008, 10:57 PM
I decide for myself who I think are "trolls." Those whose posts are never ever positive, whose every comment here is intended to divide and cause dissention and distrust ... are trolls. So you ban dissent, constructive criticism, and other opinions? :confused:

And how can you tell what someone's intentions are besides guessing?

Not every time someone has something negative to say means that they are trying to undermined the efforts of others or divide people.

Jumping to conclusions perhaps?

Matt Collins
09-03-2008, 10:59 PM
Have you even bothered to see the many threads/posts (mostly in Hot Topics) about many people questioning what CFL's plans are, THAT WE THOUGHT WERE GOING TO BE ANNOUNCED AT THE RALLY?

I may be wrong, but I think everyone hoped to be off *doing* things based on such direction from CFL today. Yet another major letdown when we know nothing more today than we did on FridayI know a little more than I did last week, but yes, the CFL definitely hasn't decided on a great many details as of this point. I think all of their energy was focused on this week.

Sally08
09-03-2008, 11:03 PM
I actually said that we cannot build a governing coalition with ONLY 100%ers (myself included). I don't like being misquoted and then being attacked based on the lie. Please provide a link proving your claim or concede the point.

Boy, do I ever understand your reaction:D

Lots of hearsay gossip is getting posted these days-

Matt Collins
09-03-2008, 11:03 PM
I wished you wouldn't. And why is that?

Paul_Delegate
09-03-2008, 11:48 PM
It's very simple. The CFL from day 1 has been run top down, and it will fail for this reason. Sorry if people don't want to hear that, but RPFers all know that the reason Dr. Paul did as well as he did, was because of the grassroots at DP and RPF, and MeetUp, not because of much the staff did.



Where do you get this from? Did you not just attend the Rally for the Republic? Did it ever occur to you that all they did was prepare for this weekend? How is that top down? Did you want to be paid staff or something helping to organize the rally? Is that what this is about? That you're ticked off because you didn't get in the VIP section at that bar we went to after the rally?

I think you need to spend some nights sleeping on the ice in Valley Forge park this winter. It will yield a positive attitude adjustment.

I GUARANTEE it.

Paul_Delegate
09-03-2008, 11:49 PM
[QUOTE=me3;1647928]And I can tell you now that the C4L forums will fail, because it will be based on narrow values and censorship, and it will stagnate under central planners who want to act like a petit government.[QUOTE]


First of all, you don't know that. You PRESUME that. Which means zip.

That being said, I hope you are right. That way moles and trolls can be booted and I can get down to business with some REAL patriots.

Paul_Delegate
09-03-2008, 11:59 PM
My reaction to "walking the streets" is how incredibly inefficient. Maybe at train station stops, Union Station in Chicago, malls, etc. I received a handout for Tancredo that way-

But door-to-door in neighborshoods? And to expect a political discussion? .


You don't get it. Walking neighborhood going door to door is proven to yield votes. Because you don't know that, you will not be a CFL leader. If you did it, you'd know it.

I don't think you have any intention of doing it.

By the way, did you miss the part about phone surveying, if you can't go door to door?

Either you missed it or have no intention of doing that either. (I believe the latter.)



>>>>I can understand college kids having time to go door-to-door. But the parents I know are working 50-60 hour work weeks before the commutes both ways, so they're not even *home* to answer the door.


I work 50-60 hours/week and still walk door to door.

Why can't you? Or why can't you do phone surveys?

I know. Because you believe you are too good for it. And because you want a shiny badge to lord over other people with. Or you just like bitching online and not doing anything.

Paul_Delegate
09-04-2008, 12:03 AM
How can a "generic" CFL approach address such disparate "politics"?

And shouldn't activist funds be spent locally vs. donated to CFL and get a percentage back (sounds like the IRS??)


How? Did you not catch the 16 hours of training about LOCAL people creating relationships with LOCAL people?

Or did you deliberately ignore it?

Or are you just trying to cause division?

As far as donations go, you dont need one red cent in order to go out and do what the CFL said it would provide the tools and training to enable you to do.

But, as we can see from your previous posts, you have no intention of doing any actual work - just bitch and cause division online to the maximum extent possible.

Matt Collins
09-04-2008, 12:12 AM
Or are you just trying to cause division?
Why do you keep accusing people of this?


And yes going door-to-door seems to be one of the most effective ways to get votes.

Sally08
09-04-2008, 12:12 AM
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/search.php?searchid=2460180

I will be forwarding this search result link in a PM to admins as evidence that 23 out of 23 posts of a new forum member are in violation of forum posting guidelines about insulting another forum member.

Not one, not two, but *three* different forum members.

What a troll. And you are another example of the type of people CFL is attracting:eek:

MsDoodahs
09-04-2008, 12:22 AM
If THIS is the kind of PATRIOT that C4L is attracting, by God, they'll get another thousand dollars from me in the morning.

:D

Paul_Delegate
09-04-2008, 01:06 AM
Why do you keep accusing people of this?


And yes going door-to-door seems to be one of the most effective ways to get votes.


Not people. Just you. You stated that going door to door was stupid. I pointed out with evidence that you don't know what you are talking about and are just trying to cause division as you seek your shiny badge.

Matt Collins
09-04-2008, 01:08 AM
You stated that going door to door was stupid.Quote?


you are just trying to cause division as you seek your shiny badge.Why are you attacking me personally? What's your real name?

MsDoodahs
09-04-2008, 01:10 AM
Who cares what Paul Delegate's real name is?

Why do you want it?

Matt Collins
09-04-2008, 08:56 AM
Who cares what Paul Delegate's real name is?

Why do you want it?Because if I am being personally attacked by him for some reason he should have the integrity to provide me with his real name.

Paul_Delegate
09-04-2008, 09:11 AM
Because if I am being personally attacked by him for some reason he should have the integrity to provide me with his real name.


You have no integrity. Therefore, I will not indulge you. I do not cast pearls before swine.

angelatc
09-04-2008, 09:16 AM
No insider info. If anything I've gotten a cold shoulder.

I just think that they have an ace up their sleeve.

I hope you're right.

But I absolutely thought that during the campaign. I can't help but have some reservations now.

angelatc
09-04-2008, 09:25 AM
couldn't agree more.



So, using that model, if I donate $10,000, my opinion should be more important than thatn of a $35 member.

Cool. That's a system I'm used to.


(Now who can loan me $10,000?)

Matt Collins
09-04-2008, 09:34 AM
You have no integrity. Wow. Another personal attack against me. So why won't you stand up and tell me your real name since almost every one of your posts seem to be attacking me?

JosephTheLibertarian
09-04-2008, 09:36 AM
You have no integrity. Therefore, I will not indulge you. I do not cast pearls before swine.

That one was creative lol.

pepperpete1
09-04-2008, 10:06 AM
I have read through all 13 pages of posts on this thread and even though there is dissension I could see where everyone here has at some point in their posts had valid points.

I do feel we should forgo the name calling while expressing our views.

The CFL is going to be a good thing and let's hope the administration is a little more structured than the campaign.

I think that if the CFL had been around to guide us in trying to obtain our delegate seats and what we would encounter when we bravely jumped into the foray we would have done a whole lot better than we did. Cudos to those who were quick to study the procedures needed and were successful, and many thanks to those who tried, but died, politically, in their efforts.

Had this training been there in the beginning, the GOP state conventions would not have been able to steal our votes and disenfranchise us,disqualify us, and break the law and party rules to gain their own end.

I would have been so happy to know that upon entering the battlefield, that my gun was loaded with the ammunition of an education that an organization like CFL, could have provided.

I think there is enough work to go around for ALL age groups. There is a job that everyone can do, if they want to do it.

To be able to continue the fight, it is imperative to have the education available to those that feel they need it. Not everyone is politically savvy. Heck, I am still trying to figure out how to maintain as a Republican delegate and still vote for Chuch Baldwin. Any ideas there?

Let's drop the personal attacks on each other and let's go after the establishment and make some true changes.

constituent
09-04-2008, 10:08 AM
How is telling people RPFs will not charge membership - being told that I'm wrong because Josh is considering charging membership - then recanting and saying "Josh has not told me that" and not saying it anymore - then asking Josh about it here - undermining RPFs?

this is not an isolated incident. who knows, maybe you just need some Alprazolam?