DON'T donate to Broadcast Freedom if you don't want to

[Zydeco]

The campaign should not be setting sub-sub goals like this for online fundraising. We're building our own networks and the intrusion of Broadcast Freedom, well-intentioned as it was, gave us the same effect as centralized planning in other situations: market interference leading to inefficiency.

Let's say they make the 430K goal tonight. How much more would BF have brought in over what might normally have come in? Call it 100K. But now we calculate the cost: there's a lot of talk here now about diverting funds planned for the Ron Paul Money Bomb to making this goal instead. Who can calculate the cost of undercutting RPMB buzz two weeks before it hits? What other ideas were stifled or diminished by Broadcast Freedom?

The campaign has done a great job of providing fundraising data that allows great things like the RPMB and RonPaulGraphs.com to spring up spontaneously. They set an ambitious but doable goal of $12m online for this quarter. They send out an occasional fundraising letter that gets a nice bump. But they shouldn't micromanage the online fundraising process -- they've told us how much money they need, now they should step back and let us do it! Which we are -- we're on pace to earn $7m so far this quarter, but it's trending upward.

So donate to BF if it strikes you as market-worthy, or donate to RPMB, or a chipin, or all 3. But I hope the campaign will reassess whether it wants to run another mini-drive like this again.

[erowe1]

Good. But if you DO want to, then DO donate. And by all means, send the money that you were going to wait until Nov. 5th right now! The more the better, the sooner the better!

[RP4ME]

they set thsi goal for a reason...waiting till teh last minute may leave us short.....

[Ron Paul Fan]

You're telling the campaign not to micromanage and then you micromanage by telling people when they can donate! The campaign can do whatever the hell it wants! They're running it and they know a little bit more about campaigning and politics than we do. Donate now! Donate November 5th! Donate whenever!

[ghemminger]

Remember Remember..........
the fifth of November
Gunpowder, treason and plot.
I see no reason why gunpowder, treason
Should ever be forgot...

[DrNoZone]

Umm, whatever. I think it's a VERY good thing that they're setting sub-sub goals. This particular push motivated people to donate for a specific and quantifiable reason. There was no bad side at all to them doing this.

[LibertyEagle]

:rolleyes:

The campaign has set a fundraising goal of $430K. The deadline for that goal is midnight tonight. We are $120K short of that goal. If we do not reach it, it will be bad PR.

What are we doing here? What are we more interested in? Our little pet projects or in the success of the campaign? Hopefully, everyone agrees that it is the latter.

Let's remember our priorities.

[koob]

The campaign should not be setting sub-sub goals like this for online fundraising

neither should ron paul supporters...

[Mark]

they set thsi goal for a reason...waiting till the last minute may leave us short.....


Was it SUCH a BAD IDEA to divide the 4 months into parts?


I mean.. all the campaign did was say..

"WE spent this much money here".. 'please help us cover it in this block of time'


A little inspiration to donate EARLY in the quarter when donations might normally be slow.


I LIKED IT.. TO SEE A SHORT-TERM GOAL ~~ and WHERE the money was going..


good idea to me..


I donated in this time frame for it.. when..

I had no previous plans to this soon after the end of last quarter..

For now my money's going to help the GrannyWarriors NASCAR fly-overs..

they need more help too y'all.. they took a BIG PERSONAL FINANCIAL RISK..

Please.. $5, $10, $20.. anything will help..

http://grannywarrior.chipin.com/nascarbusch-race-fly-overs

http://grannywarrior.chipin.com/nascarbusch-race-fly-overs




.

[stevedasbach]

Short-term fundraising deadlines always work better than long-term ones, especially with online fundraising. Goals linked to something specific (like buying radio/TV time) work better than non-specific goals.

[Zydeco]

neither should ron paul supporters...

Of course they should, that's the whole point of a free market system. Everyone puts their ideas out there and the best ones rise to the top.

[me3]

The campaign has set a fundraising goal of $430K. The deadline for that goal is midnight tonight. We are $120K short of that goal. If we do not reach it, it will be bad PR.
Enough with the F.U.D.

A Nov 5 money bomb of 500k is going to wipe out any bad PR for coming up $120k short. They set the goal for 3 of the worst fund raising days of the week. It's gone from having achievable goals to trying to artificially set high marks. I hope the campaign is raising money offline and can save some face.


neither should ron paul supporters...
Funny how we all regress to acting like bureaucrats when it suits our agenda... :rolleyes:

Human nature I suppose.

[Elwar]

It's how campaigns work...people feel that their money is worth more when they know it's going toward a certain thing such as radio or TV commercials. Then when they see the results from it they can say "I helped to make that happen".

[Zydeco]

You're telling the campaign not to micromanage and then you micromanage by telling people when they can donate! The campaign can do whatever the hell it wants! They're running it and they know a little bit more about campaigning and politics than we do. Donate now! Donate November 5th! Donate whenever!

I suspect the tens of thousands of Ron Paul supporters know a lot more about fundraising than the campaign does. Which is the whole point of having it be a free market of ideas.

I'm not micromanaging anyone -- I'm arguing that the campaign should not micromanage the free market of fundraising ideas that has spring up.

[Chibioz]

I see the sub goal as a good thing. The 4 million monthly goal was a bit much and I think a smaller goal is helpful for building momentum and encouraging donors because they can see a campaign goal and know they are helping the campaign to reach it. I don't see it as a top down thing at all.

[Zydeco]

Short-term fundraising deadlines always work better than long-term ones, especially with online fundraising. Goals linked to something specific (like buying radio/TV time) work better than non-specific goals.

Ok Steve, but short-term goals can and have been springing up spontaeously from the supporter network.

I'm not arguing against short term goals, I'm arguing against short-term goals imposed from the campagin down.

After all, the grassroots campaign that governs least, governs best.

[koob]

Of course they should, that's the whole point of a free market system. Everyone puts their ideas out there and the best ones rise to the top.

okay, maybe they shouldn't have set the goal when it was obvious ron paul supporters had their own plans at raising money.

but it's too late. they set the goal.

now as supporters of the campaign we can never, ever want the campaign to seem as if it's failing or losing steam in any way. as supporters it's our job to do all we can to meet their latest demands.

[Ron Paul Fan]

I suspect the tens of thousands of Ron Paul supporters know a lot more about fundraising than the campaign does. Which is the whole point of having it be a free market of ideas.

I'm not micromanaging anyone -- I'm arguing that the campaign should not micromanage the free market of fundraising ideas that has spring up.

Excuse me, but I think the campaign knows a little better than us about how much they're spending, how much they need, and when they will need it. The campaign can do whatever it wants and set whatever goals it wants. They can micromanage it as much as they want! Whatever they think is best to get more money and get Ron Paul the nomination. You encouraging people not to donate is micromanaging. Donate whenever the hell you want! Let the campaign do whatever the hell they want! That is a truly free market my friend.

[Thomas_Paine]

Ok Steve, but short-term goals can and have been springing up spontaeously from the supporter network.

I'm not arguing against short term goals, I'm arguing against short-term goals imposed from the campagin down.

After all, the grassroots campaign that governs least, governs best.

I agree with your Zydeco, but we should give HQ some slack here, let's wait and see what happens before you decide that there will definitely be a negative impact.

[Zydeco]

It's how campaigns work...people feel that their money is worth more when they know it's going toward a certain thing such as radio or TV commercials. Then when they see the results from it they can say "I helped to make that happen".

Well, it's how campaigns have been run in the past, top-down...doesn't mean it's best, or that we have to do it that way.

And no one's arguing that people will donate more if they know exactly what it's going to -- that's what chip-ins are all about. But I suggest the campaign use this sort of mini-drive sparingly -- surprisingly for a libertarian crowd, few here seem interested in pondering the opportunity costs of Broadcast Freedom, which are always harder to calculate.

[LibertyEagle]

After all, the grassroots campaign that governs least, governs best.

Yeah, that probably explains why we're at 2% in the national polls. :rolleyes:

[LibertyEagle]

Well, it's how campaigns have been run in the past, top-down...doesn't mean it's best, or that we have to do it that way.

And no one's arguing that people will donate more if they know exactly what it's going to -- that's what chip-ins are all about. But I suggest the campaign use this sort of mini-drive sparingly -- surprisingly for a libertarian crowd, few here seem interested in pondering the opportunity costs of Broadcast Freedom, which are always harder to calculate.

ZYDECO HAS SPOKEN!!!!!

ALL HAIL, ZYDECO!

He knows more than the campaign!

[Zydeco]

okay, maybe they shouldn't have set the goal when it was obvious ron paul supporters had their own plans at raising money.
but it's too late. they set the goal.
"now as supporters of the campaign we can never, ever want the campaign to seem as if it's failing or losing steam in any way. as supporters it's our job to do all we can to meet their latest demands."

"Excuse me, but I think the campaign knows a little better than us about how much they're spending, how much they need, and when they will need it. The campaign can do whatever it wants and set whatever goals it wants. They can micromanage it as much as they want! Whatever they think is best to get more money and get Ron Paul the nomination."

Wow, Animal Farming already and we haven't even won yet.

If the campaign does something I feel is harmful to the campaign's overall goal and principles, it is correct to constructively criticize the campaign so they may refrain from such destructive behavior in the future.

No one argues whether the campaign knows more than us about "how much they're spending, how much they need, and when they will need it." Of course they do, and they've told us how much they need and when they need it by. And we have formed networks to achieve these goals. Broadcast Freedom-style mini-drives are the unfunded federal mandates of the fundraising world and we don't need them anymore.

Campaign should: keep providing donation data, keep setting quarterly or monthly goals so we know what they need, keep using cool graphics on the homepage, keep sending out an occasional fundraising letter

Campaign should not: micromanage online fundraising, there are 10s of 1,000s of us and a handful of you, we will come up with better ideas!!

[davidhperry]

Umm, whatever. I think it's a VERY good thing that they're setting sub-sub goals. This particular push motivated people to donate for a specific and quantifiable reason. There was no bad side at all to them doing this.

Like other have said, I like having a mixture of short and long-term goals. The $12M goal is great since it gives a vision of what we have to hit in the future but it's a lot to bite off if that's all we have to go on. The shorter-term goals help us to keep pace. Besides, a bunch of people have been asking them to break it down into smaller chucks so it looks like they're listening to us.

[Zydeco]

ZYDECO HAS SPOKEN!!!!!

ALL HAIL, ZYDECO!

He knows more than the campaign!

Liberty Eagle, you can't be missing my point.

It is not "Zydeco knows better than the campaign"

It is "thousands of Ron Paul supporters will (and are) come up with better fundraising ideas than a handful of Ron Paul staff"

[steph3n]

This is a great goal, they just bought a lot of TV spots too!!!!

[ronpaulyourmom]

Liberty Eagle, you can't be missing my point.

It is not "Zydeco knows better than the campaign"

It is "thousands of Ron Paul supporters will (and are) come up with better fundraising ideas than a handful of Ron Paul staff"

What you fail to appreciate is that most Ron Paul supporters are not part of the grassroots, they're just on the outside looking in and when the official campaign does a fundraiser they hear about it, if we do it they probably dont.

[Zydeco]

What you fail to appreciate is that most Ron Paul supporters are not part of the grassroots, they're just on the outside looking in and when the official campaign does a fundraiser they hear about it, if we do it they probably dont.

I'm sure these is some money that fits that description, but if there wasn't a big overlap then erowe1 wouldn't have to be openly poaching here from the RPMB, would he?

For the record, I'm not connected to or even signed up for the RPMB. But I think it's a good idea (I'm maxed or I'd donate)