A new site vision; a new era [Archive] - Ron Paul Forums / Liberty Forest

View Full Version : A new site vision; a new era

Bryan

04-23-2016, 09:08 AM

.

Same Mission; New Vision
The genesis of this website came in 2007 in support of Ron Paul’s 2008 presidential campaign. While the campaign itself was not successful, it achieved more for liberty than anyone could have imagined. In 2009/2010 the site rallied behind Rand Paul to help him win a seat in the U.S. Senate. Ron Paul’s 2011/2012 campaign again provided new focus and new goals for the site. After Dr. Paul’s campaign ended and he retired from Congress, the movement, and site, did not have a clear direction forward except for the possibility of a Rand Paul 2016 presidential campaign -- which, obviously, came to pass with less than stellar results.

It can be argued that the contraction of liberty support for Rand’s 2016 campaign sent a message that our movement needed to regroup. While a strong liberty candidate may emerge in 2020 to help propel us, such an event is not guaranteed and is also a long way off. Whatever the case may be, sitting around and waiting for something to happen is not a good plan.

While the movement is bigger than any one person or website, we play a role in the big picture and see a need to refocus with a new vision that will aim for us to become a bigger worldly influence; to have more reason to be here and to have a reason to be involved.

The basis of our new vision is founded in the mindset of taking a more holistic approach to achieving our Mission with an aim to address the following:

• We do not have a clearly defined understanding of what needs to be done to achieve our goals.
• We can improve upon the way we organize and support projects.
• We do not have an effective means to aggregate community wisdom.
• We can be more proactive to achieve goals without dependence on an election campaign or other influences.
• We can improve upon the means of identifying and communicating value for potential efforts.
• We can be more proactive in our outreach, as a site.
• We can improve the level of discourse of the site.
• We can better utilize our forum assets.
• We can improve the site's internal structures and presentation.

What is Needed to Achieve Our Goals (base theory; long and skippable)
If one gives extensive thought to our Mission, one can identify four key dilemmas that we face:
1. What exactly is liberty?
2. Why should people support liberty?
3. How do we return to liberty?
4. How can we assure that liberty is preserved?

While point #1 may seem obvious enough, and there are some very clear elements we all agree with, there are constant battles within the liberty movement that show there are many points that are not very clear. Certainly the majority of people in our society don’t have a good grasp of the concepts. Many of these people could be said to have an ideological viewpoint of “We’re going to enslave you in order to keep you free”. So there are certainly a lot of questions on this issue.

Point #2 also seems dead obvious, but there are many subtle points, such that the reasons liberty is important get lost.

Point #3 is another key matter of concern and what has brought us together here. We’re trying to find ways back to liberty, which of course isn’t an easy problem to solve.

Not many people have given point #4 much consideration, in part since it’s not really applicable today, but it is nonetheless a matter of great significance and should have ramifications on what we are trying to achieve. Consider, if we went back to the late 1700s, what would we have done differently? If we were nostalgic and said “nothing”, thinking that everything was done right, then we should also consider what was done lead us to where we are today.

One lesson that I have identified is that there are two key points that are needed to preserve liberty: effective organization and a knowledgeable populace. The need for these two is inversely proportional to preserve liberty. Suppose the entirety of a populace has a clear understand of liberty -- why it should be supported and how it can be preserved -- then they could live happily under a dictator, since, if the dictator ever got out of line, their apparatus of enforcement and control would instantly dissolve and they would be removed from power. Of course, this level of understanding across the board isn’t too likely -- which is why structures that separate power have value.

Ultimately, however, even within an ideal society with a power system as far from a dictatorship as possible, it will eventually turn into a ruthless dictatorship or oligarchy if the populace loses its understanding of the concept of liberty, why it’s important and how to defend it.

In this way, to preserve liberty a society needs the right combination of an educated populace -- and the right amount of defense against an uneducated populace -- with effective organizational structures. This is true for any degree of organizational effectiveness and education; there just needs to be enough of the two to preserve liberty. This highlights the problems we have today, as we have lost the sum total needed to preserve liberty.

From this it should be clear that to preserve liberty we would do best to have the optimal organizational structures and assure the populace stays fully educated on an ongoing basis. Consider that an organizational structure’s only purpose could be to drive the populace to liberty through education.

In considering how to educate the populace, there are several points to consider. First, there are two groups of people: those who have bought in on the concepts of liberty and those who have not. For those who already subscribe to the ideas of liberty, for liberty to be preserved there has to be an accumulated body of knowledge which acts as a guiding point of what liberty is, why it is important and how to defend it. Extensive educational material is also needed to make the information consumable.

Less obvious key points on defending liberty include how to maintain a well adjusted population. Preservation of liberty requires educated, healthy, financially sound people who know how to defend themselves, how to be self-sufficient, how to make wise judgments and more. All of this knowledge and material must be passed down and refined from generation to generation.

Another key element to sustain liberty would be teaching critical thinking which enables one to identify the dilution of material.

For individuals who are not yet in line with the liberty concepts, there need to be outreach campaigns to connect with them and introduce them to pro-liberty educational material.

The Liberty Blueprint
From the previous analysis we can see the following elements are needed to achieve and sustain liberty:

1. Educational guide points on the definition of liberty.
2. Educational guide points on why people should support liberty.
3. Educational guide points on how to defend liberty.
4. Educational programs to teach what liberty is, why it’s important and how to defend it.
5. a) Outreach to connect our educational programs to new people. b) Execution of the programs.
6. a) Strategies and plans on returning to liberty. b) Execution of the plans.
7. a) Organizational structure plans needed to preserve liberty. b) Execution of the plans.

Each of these elements needs to be developed and continuously refined. Again, this is the Liberty Blueprint to achieve and sustain liberty which also equally applies to all elements of our Mission.

The Plan
In the new era of the site, we will address the issues as follows:

Issue: We do not have a clearly defined understanding of what needs to be done to achieve our goals.
New Vision: The Liberty Blueprint will help drive the site into the new era.

Issue: We can improve upon the way we organize and support projects.
New Vision: The site has developed what is being called the Mission Advancement Framework (MAF), which was recently introduced here: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?490530-The-Mission-Advancement-Framework-A-new-site-initiative!

This will be used to help identify specific efforts to undertake for each of the seven steps above. It is also designed to help provide a win/win format that best leverages the site's assets.

Issue: We do not have an effective means to aggregate community wisdom.
New Vision: The first project of the MAF is already underway with the development of the Foundational Knowledgebase. The first goal of the Foundational Knowledgebase will ultimately cover the Liberty Blueprint elements of #1, #2, #3, #6a, #7a.

A key outcome of this effort is to develop the tools to help people think and live better. This point is fundamental to our new vision.

Issue: We can be more proactive to achieve goals without dependence on an election campaign or other influences.
New Vision: Our internal efforts to develop the Foundational Knowledge Base are the start of proactive goals. We will engage in more as the members' demands and site resources allow. Many programs and concepts have already been developed.

Issue: We can improve upon the means of identifying and communicating value for potential efforts.
New Vision: The MAF is designed to help resolve these issues for general purpose projects. For electoral efforts, our newly enhanced Candidate Evaluation system will help us identify value for support.

Issue: We can be more proactive in our outreach, as a site.
New Vision: The site will not sit dormant in a corner of the internet; we will extend effort to better promote it in very specific ways for very specific purposes.

Issue: We can improve the level of discourse of the site.
New Vision: We have recently overhauled our Community Guidelines with a focus on improving the level of discourse. We have started to strongly enforce them and will continue to do so. With a new vision and a new purpose, we have new reason to seek improvements.

Issue: We can better utilize our forum assets.
New Vision: The site’s structure and forum layout will be refined to fit our new direction.

Issue: We can improve the site's internal structures and presentation.
New Vision: The site has recently been overhauled. The default look and now offers additional new color schemes. We have added a handful of new features that improve the user experience, such as profanity filtering and user quote notifications. Numerous additional changes will be forthcoming, including a branding update, per the section below.

Branding Change
In support of the new era and to illustrate our objective of providing educational guides, the site’s secondary branding of “Liberty Forest” will soon be replaced with a new brand, “The Guide Point”. As part of this we have secured the domain name theguidepoint.com. The branding change will also help support an expanded scope of tactical efforts that we will use to support our Mission.

Brand Development
As The Guide Point name on its own does not convey specific values or Mission elements, it will often be used in conjunction with a tagline and some keywords that drive home what we are about. We will have a collection of taglines which include “A clear path in an unclear world.”, “The epicenter of free thought.” and “The greatest assembly of free and independent thinkers the world has ever seen.” are some current considerations.

The keywords will be designed to reflect our community values, what we offer and our Mission. Keywords will generally be used in sets. We may have a collection of keyword sets that we can use for different purposes. One example is “Insight * Success * Wisdom *Fellowship * Peace * Liberty * Justice * Honest Markets”. In some cases, keywords will be combined with our primary branding to help illustrating points, such as “Liberty Guide Point” and the like.

State of the Movement; Where do we go from here? (Personal commentary - skippable)
“The movement is dead.”; “People are burned out.”; “We’ve tried, we’ve failed.”; “We haven’t accomplished much.” This is some of the defeatism that is being passed around the liberty movement, and while I can sympathize to a degree, it’s not going to change our situation; we need a better plan.

So what can we really do? What should we do? What have we done wrong? There is no one person who can answer that, but I will offer my viewpoint.

One key to our success, and how we should look at focusing our efforts, is to work to control the things that we can control. We cannot control how people vote, we cannot dictate commands to the media, we cannot control what the Federal Reserve does, so we shouldn’t lose hope when efforts to do so fail. There are some things that we can control, and to take a broad view, I see the following as a blueprint to thrive:

• Work to have a happy, successful and fulling life, regardless of the geopolitical situation. A positive life outcome is not only paramount in its own regard, it is also necessary for you to be a strong contributor toward our Mission.
• Prepare for hard times. With massive national debt, world conflict and social strife on the rise, the long-term outlook doesn’t seem favorable. We can’t control what is to come, but we can be prepared for what may.
• Contribute to our movement as you can.

So what makes sense to do as a movement? Too many efforts to try to control what we can’t control are contributing to burn-out, as they aren’t working. While there are certainly many side benefits to supporting failed campaigns, focusing more efforts on building what we can build should not be undervalued. For example, in building the Foundational Knowledgebase, every piece of effort is designed to have a permanent, lasting effect. Liberty can be rebuilt piece by piece, brick by brick. Working on efforts we can’t fully control is akin to building a brick house on sand without using mortar -- we can make progress, but we cannot count on success.

Right now, I say we need to focus on our building techniques and find the right place to build before we try to build another house. In this way, we can contribute to efforts we know will have lasting value, which overcomes the defeatism.

This is what I personally will be doing, I’ll be building the Foundational Knowledgebase, brick by brick, for as long as it takes. I am dedicated to it as my efforts will have lasting value and every day's effort can be built upon. It can make a different once it achieves critical mass.

How You Can Help - Support Opportunities
If you are serious about your concerns for the future, if you are serious about our Mission, if you like what you see with our new vision, you will want to help be a part of the solution.

There are numerous open ended opportunities to help, including:

• The refinement of the Mission Advancement Framework, defined here:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?490665-Parameters-of-the-Mission-Advancement-Framework

• The development of the Foundational Knowledgebase. For more information, see this list of threads:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/tags.php?tag=Foundational+Knowledgebase

• There is still work to be done to develop optimal styling, logos and imaging around the new branding. Anyone who is skilled in the arts of marketing, brand development, Photoshop or the like and interested in helping us advance the site and our Mission, please PM.

• Donations provide fuel for our engines, the more we get the more we can accomplish. Our contribute page provides membership / donation links:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/content.php?2014-Contribute

If you have ideas for additional projects, let’s talk.

A New Era; A New Drive
Our shift into a new era is part of a long-term strategic move that has been in the works for quite some time. The changes give us a fundamental new purpose. They help solidify a direction, give reason for people to join in and new energy for the site. If you’ve been paying attention, you’ll have noticed the changes to the site that have already been made.

Our Site: A Holistic View
As a site, we now have or are working toward:

• A well defined Mission.
• A knowledge base that will fully characterize what we stand for to all..
• A blueprint of how to achieve our Mission.
• A framework (MAF) to support projects within the blueprint.
• A knowledge base to characterize the best tactics to use for our projects.
• A defined set of Community Values.
• A defined set of Community Guidelines.
• A formal system to evaluate and grade candidates and public officials.
• A public forum to discuss current events, political viewpoints, and how to find success and to organize efforts.

Even with all of this, there are still some key pieces missing. Perhaps you can identify them.

Why the Chosen Name
There are many factors that go into selecting a brand or website name. As plans to move the site into a new era started to come together, it was acknowledged that fresh secondary branding was needed. Significant effort went into considering this branding. What would the perfect pro-liberty website be called? What was available?

To be certain, no branding is going to be perfect, nothing is going to make everyone happy, but we are very pleased with the selected branding, which satisfies all of our requirements, including:
• Reflects the added direction that the site is moving to, a site to help people think and live better.
• Reflect our leadership in thought and philosophy.
• Reasonably professional (compared to theblaze.com and others)
• Original, doesn’t conflict with others.
• Open ended branding, not tied to just one point or thing.
• Doesn’t alienate members based on a philosophical viewpoint (we’re not "red", “conservative” or "right").
• Not political sounding.
• Doesn’t use the word “liberty” – which doesn’t have broad appeal and is too specific.
• It’s a .com
• Wasn’t expensive.
• Is easy to say and rolls off the tongue well.
• Is easy to remember and spell with no ambiguity in the domain name. There are no questions if it is with an “s”, etc.
• No serious trademark issues.

I understand it generally takes some time to acclimate to a name, and that change won’t resonate with everyone. We are still very excited about the change, hopeful that it appeals to our members and that they can see its value in moving our Mission forward in a new era.

Suzanimal

04-23-2016, 09:14 AM

Why the Chosen Name
There are many factors that go into selecting a brand or website name. As plans to move the site into a new era started to come together, it was acknowledged that fresh secondary branding was needed. Significant effort went into considering this branding. What would the perfect pro-liberty website be called? What was available?

To be certain, no branding is going to be perfect, nothing is going to make everyone happy, but we are very pleased with the selected branding, which satisfies all of our requirements, including:
• Reflects the added direction that the site is moving to, a site to help people think and live better.
• Reflect our leadership in thought and philosophy.
• Reasonably professional (compared to theblaze.com and others)
• Original, doesn’t conflict with others.
• Open ended branding, not tied to just one point or thing.
• Doesn’t alienate members based on a philosophical viewpoint (we’re not "red", “conservative” or "right").
• Not political sounding.
• Doesn’t use the word “liberty” – which doesn’t have broad appeal and is too specific.
• It’s a .com
• Wasn’t expensive.
• Is easy to say and rolls off the tongue well.
• Is easy to remember and spell with no ambiguity in the domain name. There are no questions if it is with an “s”, etc.
• No serious trademark issues.

Did the name change?:confused:

tod evans

04-23-2016, 09:15 AM

I don't know man.....

From here it doesn't seem broken, hence no need to fix it.

Bryan

04-23-2016, 09:16 AM

Did the name change?:confused:
Branding Change
In support of the new era and to illustrate our objective of providing educational guides, the site’s secondary branding of “Liberty Forest” will soon be replaced with a new brand, “The Guide Point”. As part of this we have secured the domain name theguidepoint.com. The branding change will also help support an expanded scope of tactical efforts that we will use to support our Mission.

Bryan

04-23-2016, 09:19 AM

I don't know man.....

From here it doesn't seem broken, hence no need to fix it.
The vision is more that things can be made better.

angelatc

04-23-2016, 09:19 AM

Good luck Bryan! Herding cats is a mighty task, and you're a brave man for stepping up to the plate.

One question - who is "we?"

tod evans

04-23-2016, 09:22 AM

The vision is more that things can be made better.

I've seen "improvements" to many things over the years..............:o

Please go slow this is a pretty good group of people.

Suzanimal

04-23-2016, 09:24 AM

Bryan

04-23-2016, 09:31 AM

One question - who is "we?"
:D Depends on context. In some cases it's the site membership, others it's the liberty movement in others it's the staff and advisors.

Good luck Bryan! Herding cats is a mighty task, and you're a brave man for stepping up to the plate.
To be clear on a point, the extent to which we (staff) will herd cats will be having site members follow the Community Guidelines. After that, any efforts to help on a site supported Mission advancing project is entirely up to the individual.

Bryan

04-23-2016, 09:36 AM

Please go slow this is a pretty good group of people.
It is a very good group - and with a new vision I think we can continue to attract more to the party. :) We certainly don't have critical mass to achieve our Mission. Some things have been needed to make this happen, some efforts to that end have started with the Community Guidelines update.

Thanks.

Bryan

04-23-2016, 09:39 AM

Ah, sounds nice.
Thanks.

Kind of reminds me of one of those new wave churches. We're not a cult are we?:eek::D
I hope not! :D

Natural Citizen

04-23-2016, 09:40 AM

I'd like to see a library of sorts. A digital archive for specific history and language/terminology and whatnot. A link to an area specific to research only. For instance, if I want to research and learn about a Consitutional Convention, I don't want to have to become annoyed and distracted by some Anarchist complaining about how he wants to buck the system and that I should, too. Of course, then, everyone else chimes in. Sometimes there needs to be areas that are off limits to arbitrary commentary/debate/discussion. Areas just for research and only for research. Nothing else.

Also, are you staying with the current structure? Meaning a public forum. Forums are a dying medium, really. Not particularly effective aside from arguing back and forth in my view. Forums stimulate division. And they have devolved into social networking platforms more than anything. That's just me talking, though. Others certainly will disagree.

presence

04-23-2016, 09:53 AM

Good luck Bryan! Herding cats is a mighty task, and you're a brave man for stepping up to the plate.

One question - who is "we?"

look around

there are less than 100 of us that regularly contribute here

Bryan

04-23-2016, 09:56 AM

I'd like to se a library of sorts. A digital archive for specific history and languange/terminology and whatnot. A link to an area specific to research only.
Sounds like a good concept. Maybe start a new thread with some more detail.

Also, are you staying with the current structure? Meaning a public forum. Forums are a dying medium, really. Not particularly effective aside from arguing back and forth in my view. That's just me talking, though. Othetrs certainly will disagree.
The Foundational Knowledgebase that is being developed is being built with a wiki platform, it could not be effectively done on a forum. Forums (and social media in general) are effective for arguing and sharing real-time information. Our tag system will help bridge the gap with past content but that's not enough. From my analysis, forums are dying only so much as the bar to start, build and maintain an effective forum has been greatly raised over the past 7 years. Well maintained forums are still thriving.

Natural Citizen

04-23-2016, 10:12 AM

Sounds like a good concept. Maybe start a new thread with some more detail.

Yeah, maybe.

The Foundational Knowledgebase that is being developed is being built with a wiki platform, it could not be effectively done on a forum. Forums (and social media in general) are effective for arguing and sharing real-time information. Our tag system will help bridge the gap with past content but that's not enough. From my analysis, forums are dying only so much as the bar to start, build and maintain an effective forum has been greatly raised over the past 7 years. Well maintained forums are still thriving.

I've spent some time reading through those threads. The Foundational Knowledgebase and subsequent discussion that evolved from it. It's headache inducing. Which is okay, I suppose. Is what it is. There is a lot to think about and put together there. Time consuming thought, too.

I'll be up front and honest with you, though, we differ in approach to such things. You tend to ask for input and ideas. I don't. At least not on major things like this. I think too much input fragments and create needless obstacles. This is a very diverse group. As you likely know, libertarian atmospheres tend to be filled with different (even opposing) factions of people. Many with different visions of scope. It's freaking chaos, man.

Bryan

04-23-2016, 10:13 AM

look around

there are less than 100 of us that regularly contribute here

The site certainly thrived around Ron Paul's 2008, 2012 campaigns. There was hope that it would again with Rand Paul's 2016 run. At this point, we need a better plan.

younglibertarian

04-23-2016, 10:30 AM

• Doesn’t use the word “liberty” – which doesn’t have broad appeal and is too specific.

Personally I like it as it is the entire reason for this movement. Personal Liberty.

Just curious I may not have understood this correctly, but are you planning to take Ron Paul out of the title name?

Bryan

04-23-2016, 10:30 AM

I've spent some time reading through those threads. The Foundational Knowledgebase and subsequent discussion that evolved from it. It's headache inducing. Which is okay, I suppose. Is what it is. There is a lot to think about and put together there. Time consuming thought, too.
A lot of the original material was just setting up the framework to work within. Some of the newer discussion are more concrete. It is a massive project, but it's one that has great value and is something that can be 100% controlled. The effort will have long term payback, vs many efforts that have a net positive of near zero.

I'll be up front and honest with you,
Good, that's what I always want. :)

though, we differ in approach to such things.
That's OK. If we did everything the same, I'd be more worried. :)

You tend to ask for input and ideas. I don't. at least not on major things. I think too much input fragments and create needless obstacles. This is a very diverse group. As you likelty know, libertarian atmospheres tend to be filled with different (even opposing) factions of people. Many with different visions of scope. It's freaking chaos, man.
I do ask for input and ideas, and I do so because things are chaos, and I don't have all the knowledge and wisdom to inherently know what the best path forward is. In the process of getting all of the input and ideas, there certainly will be different and opposing views, and with different scope -- all as you say.

It's what happens next that is important; I take all of that input, process it, formulate questions, hash out ideas and then I retreat to think about the situation. I then work to find the deep simplicity of a way forward and package it up. A way forward then gets presented, then fine-tuned, and we're on our way. This process doesn't work well for real-time decision making, such as driving a car but it general works well for the site. Thanks!

Bryan

04-23-2016, 10:45 AM

Personally I like it as it is the entire reason for this movement. Personal Liberty.
Personal liberty is unquestionable the cornerstone of everything, and certainly the biggest issues we face. I have argued (and not seen a strong counter argument) that the correct Mission also includes "honest markets" and "justice". These are constructs that can not be derived from liberty only. Some could even use a liberty only argument to say that they have the liberty to lie to you about something that they are selling to you. So our site Mission includes the support of liberty, justice and honest markets.

I have further argued that there are important elements that are needed to achieve and sustain liberty (and justice / honest markets), in part that we need strong people, families and communities - these things are important, and we support them in part with our Lifestyle forum section. These points also stand alone on their own merit, and aren't just about liberty.

So that's why I argue it's too specific. The cornerstone, yes, but still too specific.

Just curious I may not have understood this correctly, but are you planning to take Ron Paul out of the title name?
No. If that happens in the future remains to be seen.

Thanks!

tod evans

04-23-2016, 10:48 AM

Wouldn't the issue of justice fly in the face of the TOS?

Maybe not in every instance but frequently.........

younglibertarian

04-23-2016, 11:14 AM

Some could even use a liberty only argument to say that they have the liberty to lie to you about something that they are selling to you. So our site Mission includes the support of liberty, justice and honest markets.

I see one major flaw in this, and that is the honesty part.

Technically in a free market which we strive for, businesses have the freedom to advertise their products as they please, even if it is incorrect. This results in the failure of the business due to bad testimonies and track record. The free market adjusts itself.

For example I can sell you a used car that I know is about to have a transmission failure and you can decide to purchase it. Now is that morally right? No but technically speaking it is allowed. This is both our faults to some extent. On your part it would be a lack of knowledge. The positive is that you can tell others and ask for restitution. If I don't give you a refund or change my business practices, my dealership will go under.

So free markets is a better way to put that rather then honest ones.

Just a thought.

Bryan

04-23-2016, 11:16 AM

Wouldn't the issue of justice fly in the face of the TOS?

Maybe not in every instance but frequently.........
If I'm following your logic, I would say no, it doesn't have to.

Justice can be served by putting people on trial for their crimes. The problem is you need a critical mass to support that, but you likewise need a critical mass to do anything on such a scale. So to me, the question becomes, how do we build a critical mass of people?

Bryan

04-23-2016, 11:35 AM

I see one major flaw in this, and that is the honesty part.

Technically in a free market which we strive for, businesses have the freedom to advertise their products as they please, even if it is incorrect. This results in the failure of the business due to bad testimonies and track record. The free market adjusts itself.

For example I can sell you a used car that I know is about to have a transmission failure and you can decide to purchase it. Now is that morally right? No but technically speaking it is allowed. This is both our faults to some extent. On your part it would be a lack of knowledge. The positive is that you can tell others and ask for restitution. If I don't give you a refund or change my business practices, my dealership will go under.

So free markets is a better way to put that rather then honest ones.

Just a thought.
I started a new thread on this:
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?494382-Free-and-honest-markets

VIDEODROME

04-23-2016, 05:19 PM

Would it make everything really simple to just adopt the official Libertarian Party platform? https://www.lp.org/platform

euphemia

04-23-2016, 05:52 PM

I don't think the Libertarian platform would do because we do not have enough citizens who self-govern. Until everyone agrees to be self-governing with consensus, there cannot be a generally peaceful society. There will always be those who disagree, and it is easier to make a rule or a law than to reform and reshape a character. Our society seems to have lost the will to do what is right. The rights of all individuals are important. Until that fact is understood by all, and all live according to that standard, it is useless to say everyone can do whatever they want. The louder and more powerful will continue to violate the rights of others. The only thing that changes is who holds the power.

VIDEODROME

04-23-2016, 06:22 PM

Just make this the Bryan for President 2020 forum :D

opal

04-23-2016, 07:08 PM

I don't know man.....

From here it doesn't seem broken, hence no need to fix it.

here here.. one of my first thoughts

Ah, sounds nice. Kind of reminds me of one of those new wave churches. We're not a cult are we?:eek::D

at least I'm not alone seeing that name and thinking .. outside the box church

HVACTech

04-23-2016, 07:53 PM

Branding Change
In support of the new era and to illustrate our objective of providing educational guides, the site’s secondary branding of “Liberty Forest” will soon be replaced with a new brand, “The Guide Point”. As part of this we have secured the domain name theguidepoint.com. The branding change will also help support an expanded scope of tactical efforts that we will use to support our Mission.

I like your approach to this. and I think that you have correctly identified the "malfunction" of the "Liberty" movement. we have no "brand".

in today's world, we hear a LOT of wailing and gnashing of teeth over the word "Label" that a "brand" can be considered a "Label"
I will hold as self evident. :)

when I first heard this term, "I don't like the use of, or to use, "Labels". it caused a fight. my immediate response was, "WTF are you talking about? what the hell does that even mean?"
this terminology is still quite popular today. and here we are 9 years later, still laboring under this precept.
so, what is a "Label"? :confused:

in my line of work, if you tell me, "my heat is not working" that is not enough information. I am going to ask you to "Label" your equipment for me. :)
is it a heat pump or a gas furnace? (is it a coal stoker? :p) if the person cannot answer this query.. (and frequently they cannot.) this puts me in an awkward position... do I press the issue?

I submit that a "Label" is a classification sir. a category, a genre with distinctive identifying characteristics.

we cannot be a "guide point" if we do not have a Point sir. I submit that the first order of business is to chose a classification for ourselves.

myself, I chose "HVACTech" as my "label" long ago. I took a "position". Ron Paul himself let us down in this manner. HIS position is vague.
(or we would NOT be having this conversation)
consider,
Ron Paul, "I am a champion of the Constitution" would ANY of us.. have supported him... if we thought that what he was talking about... was what we have today?
(stupid question, eh?)

I submit that what lit the fire for the R3volution, was Ron Paul's undying dedication and loyalty to the "original Intent", that this can ONLY be found in the 1791 version. and that the "guide point" is thus synonymous with Original Intent. :)

peace.

HVACTech

04-23-2016, 08:06 PM

VIDEODROME

04-23-2016, 08:44 PM

Seriously though, I'm just thinking shop around for any well established platform. Maybe adopt Ron Paul or Rand Paul's platform. Or Jessie Ventura or even John McAfee. Or Thomas Massie.

Just figure many other people in the political arena have already done the hard job of studying up on this and having this kind of discussion. If different ways, they have all done this already. If you find an already established platform everyone generally agrees on, you've saved yourself a ton of work and forum debate.

I would also suggest this is actually one of the strengths of other political groups. They band together and just support their candidate and spend most of their time arguing against the opposition instead of internally.

So, I would suggest one question to be asked is if people here can be united like this or if people here are to individualist and interested in internal debate. If the latter is the case, maybe run with that and become a political debate forum.

afwjam

04-23-2016, 09:45 PM

younglibertarian

04-23-2016, 09:54 PM

Coalition building, coalition building, COALITION BUILDING. COALITION BUILDING!

We need to become more friendly to outsiders without compromising our ideals, we are libertarians let's be truly tolerant, honest and principled. We have a large opportunity ahead of us with the shutting out of Bernies people and the chaos in the GOP. We can give these people a place where they all belong. There are good elements in the Bernie movement, the Trump movement and the establishment republicans, we can unify these factions in Liberty especially if we can get past all the hate and intolerance. We will need to be like the hydra of Liberty with many tentacles and approaches but a warm mushy center that anyone can call home. Let's sell people on good opportunities not fear. Communication is key, we don't need a majority to win this fight.

Fantastic point here. Often I see ex-Bernie/Trump supports gravitating towards the 3rd party/liberty movement, only to be greeted with scorn and condemnation. "We don't wan't you here" and ect.

Honestly this election season is a great year to spread the message and gain moment due to the "anti-establishment" candidates like Trump and Bernie. We ourselves may know that they are still the status quo. However I think that they are exposing corruption within the electoral system and the disgusting actions of the Democratic and Republican parties. We NEED to educate these people on the true meaning of liberty and freedom, yet without compromise.

It's allot harder then it seems though, sometimes when I see authoritarians:

https://dd2d9j2i66w9u.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/07150000/eyeroll-rand.gif

HVACTech

04-23-2016, 10:42 PM

Bryan

04-24-2016, 01:07 AM

Would it make everything really simple to just adopt the official Libertarian Party platform? https://www.lp.org/platform
It's certainly good for a political party within the US, but it's also tackling a different problem than we are here.

Just make this the Bryan for President 2020 forum :D
No.

:)

Bryan

04-24-2016, 01:17 AM

we cannot be a "guide point" if we do not have a Point sir. I submit that the first order of business is to chose a classification for ourselves.
Our knowledge base will do that, to the best degree possible.

Ron Paul himself let us down in this manner. HIS position is vague.
(or we would NOT be having this conversation)

True to a point, other than it's not inherently his, or anyone elses responsibility. None-the-less, this is part of what the knowledge base will be making clear.

consider,
Ron Paul, "I am a champion of the Constitution" would ANY of us.. have supported him... if we thought that what he was talking about... was what we have today?
(stupid question, eh?)

I submit that what lit the fire for the R3volution, was Ron Paul's undying dedication and loyalty to the "original Intent", that this can ONLY be found in the 1791 version. and that the "guide point" is thus synonymous with Original Intent. :)
I think the original intent is an excellent guide point, and an excellent target to aim for. It is in line with our Mission and has a very pure and simple message that goes with it, which makes it an excellent item for mass consumption. From an intellectual standpoint, I still think that things can be better, but those are different matters.

Thanks!

Bryan

04-24-2016, 01:26 AM

I would also suggest this is actually one of the strengths of other political groups. They band together and just support their candidate and spend most of their time arguing against the opposition instead of internally.
I agree, that makes a lot of sense. Ultimately however, it is up to the individual how they spend their time and if they want to support a candidate. The site structure and policies are designed for us to allow for both debating and for activism. Our Think Thank section is more or less designed for debating issues. Our candidates forums are for activism, and attacks on the candidate are off-topic in those areas...

So, I would suggest one question to be asked is if people here can be united like this or if people here are to individualist and interested in internal debate. If the latter is the case, maybe run with that and become a political debate forum.
...so in this regard we have been both a forum for debate and activism. I don't see that changing.

Thanks!

Bryan

04-24-2016, 01:35 AM

Coalition building, coalition building, COALITION BUILDING. COALITION BUILDING!

We need to become more friendly to outsiders without compromising our ideals, we are libertarians let's be truly tolerant, honest and principled.
Agree 100%. This is part of why we are upping the enforcement of the Community Guidelines. There is no question that we must stick to our principles but we will not win people over with a lack of tolerance, being rude or the like.

We have a large opportunity ahead of us with the shutting out of Bernies people and the chaos in the GOP. We can give these people a place where they all belong. There are good elements in the Bernie movement, the Trump movement and the establishment republicans, we can unify these factions in Liberty especially if we can get past all the hate and intolerance.
Agreed again. Leveraging current events is always key.

We will need to be like the hydra of Liberty with many tentacles and approaches but a warm mushy center that anyone can call home. Let's sell people on good opportunities not fear. Communication is key, we don't need a majority to win this fight.
Well said.

You're hitting on areas that we'll want to get into a lot more. Great post!

Warlord

04-24-2016, 02:12 PM

I hope - Bryan - you will continue to evaluate candidates for public office. I really feel we stop getting obsessed with presidential politics

afwjam

04-24-2016, 02:45 PM

I hope - Bryan - you will continue to evaluate candidates for public office. I really feel we stop getting obsessed with presidential politics
This too, bottom up.

Matt Collins

04-24-2016, 04:16 PM

I think this is being over thought, don't try and reinvent the wheel. Just be the best pro-liberty discussion forum you can.

cajuncocoa

04-24-2016, 05:25 PM

I think this is being over thought, don't try and reinvent the wheel. Just be the best pro-liberty discussion forum you can.
I don't agree with Teh Collinz often....but when I do he says things like this.

+rep

Bryan

04-24-2016, 06:17 PM

I hope - Bryan - you will continue to evaluate candidates for public office. I really feel we stop getting obsessed with presidential politics
Certainly, as well, anyone can request for an evaluation to be conducted. Thanks.

Bryan

04-24-2016, 06:18 PM

I think this is being over thought, don't try and reinvent the wheel. Just be the best pro-liberty discussion forum you can.
Naturally I completely disagree, and you'll have to put up a solid argument to change that.

Our aim is to be the best pro-liberty website, not just limited to a forum, so part of the goal is to better build off of it.

The question becomes, how do we work toward that goal? The core of the message is we're communicating our new vision for improvement and we have outlined nine items we will first address. Based on all data, a stay the course plan for the site is not a good plan for the site, or the movement.

So I'm not sure what you are seeing as being over thought and I'm not sure what wheel you see is being reinvented? Could you explain, please?

Thanks for the input.

Natural Citizen

04-24-2016, 07:08 PM

Hey, let's do a podcast. :)

Just put it up in the corner some place.

Natural Citizen

04-24-2016, 07:10 PM

Our aim is to be the best pro-liberty website, not just limited to a forum...

I like this line of thought. Something like a digest. Or journal. A magazinish web site of sorts.

Matt Collins

04-24-2016, 07:43 PM

Naturally I completely disagree, and you'll have to put up a solid argument to change that.

Our aim is to be the best pro-liberty website, not just limited to a forum, so part of the goal is to better build off of it.

The question becomes, how do we work toward that goal? The core of the message is we're communicating our new vision for improvement and we have outlined nine items we will first address. Based on all data, a stay the course plan for the site is not a good plan for the site, or the movement.

My suggestion is this... become the daily news site for the liberty movement... make the front page a drudge style site and keep it updated regularly. This will be nearly a full time job, but in my experimentation I am confident the revenue from ads will allow you to make a full time living off of it.

I tried this for a while but it took 4 hours a day to sift through the news and keep it updated. And to get a big enough audience it would cost some decent marketing dollars to invest. Overall I think within a year or less it would see a return though.

younglibertarian

04-24-2016, 07:47 PM

Maybe someone could conduct video/audio interviews with liberty minded candidates and activists and make it a weekly thing.

My suggestion is this... become the daily news site for the liberty movement... make the front page a drudge style site and keep it updated regularly. This will be nearly a full time job, but in my experimentation I am confident the revenue from ads will allow you to make a full time living off of it.

Fantastic idea but it WOULD take a lot of work.

undergroundrr

04-24-2016, 08:00 PM

Hey, let's do a podcast. :)

Just put it up in the corner some place.

Am I the only guy on earth who still listens to podcasts? I'm terrified all the good ones are going to disappear one day.

I respect Bryan's impulse, intuition and reasoning in nudging the site to the next step. But it's hard not to see the structure stiffening and becoming less resilient with the proposed changes. The vBulletin format is very fluid and reshapes itself according to momentary or metamorphosizing situations. The problem as identified is the site's ebb and flow of traffic (and thus its livelihood) with the public prominence of a strong, national pro-liberty candidate. With the absence of that, the members' interests and motivations have been shown to get a little skewed to say the least.

It's not a given but not impossible that in the coming months McAfee might become a rallying point. To the extent he becomes linked with the Ron Paul ethos, it could liven up things around here again, but I can see the need to chart a more deliberate and less reactionary course.

The words "guide point" mean nothing to me. In fact the word "guide" might even have the anti-liberty connotation of being guided rather than taking one's own course. And the word "point" could imply the exact opposite of the infinity of possibilities that are supposed to open up when one can live according to one's own initiative without hindrance from the forceful means of an arbitrary power. I know those aren't the intended meanings, but fwiw my knee-jerk impression.

younglibertarian

04-24-2016, 08:02 PM

Are there any statistic charts regarding activity and membership that could be published?

Conza88

04-25-2016, 12:56 AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Mb91KYBdRE

Education.

Conza88

04-25-2016, 07:49 AM

Same Mission; New Vision
It can be argued that the contraction of liberty support for Rand’s 2016 campaign sent a message that our movement needed to regroup. While a strong liberty candidate may emerge in 2020 to help propel us, such an event is not guaranteed and is also a long way off. Whatever the case may be, sitting around and waiting for something to happen is not a good plan.

It became pretty clear principles over pragmatism wins in the long run. Education is the first and foremost point of focus for any campaign; that's what made Ron special. That clearly was not Rand Paul's goal or strategy. It was to "win" first. That fails. If you can't understand that; then nothing will help.

• We can improve the level of discourse of the site.

Not burying the philosophical & educational discussions would be a great start.

What is Needed to Achieve Our Goals (base theory; long and skippable)
If one gives extensive thought to our Mission, one can identify four key dilemmas that we face:
1. What exactly is liberty?

No-one makes clear what libertarianism is (https://mises.org/library/what-libertarianism) better than Stephan Kinsella. Although this passage (http://conza.tumblr.com/post/9333256921/libertarianism-is-not-and-does-not-pretend-to-be-a) by Murray Rothbard is hard to surpass:

Libertarianism is not and does not pretend to be a complete moral, or aesthetic theory; it is only a political theory, that is, the important subset of moral theory that deals with the proper role of violence in social life… Libertarianism holds that the only proper role of violence is to defend person and property against violence, that any use of violence that goes beyond such just defense is itself aggressive, unjust, and criminal. Libertarianism, therefore, is a theory which states that everyone should be free of violent invasion, should be free to do as he sees fit except invade the person or property of another. What a person does with his or her life is vital and important, but is simply irrelevant to libertarianism.
— Myth and Truth About Libertarianism (http://t.umblr.com/redirect?z=https%3A%2F%2Fmises.org%2Flibrary%2Fmyt h-and-truth-about-libertarianism&t=MWVmYTI5ZTYzYTBhMTcxODMxMWFiYTc0MTJmZGYwOWNkZDI2 MmVhNSwydEo5dEVGSQ%3D%3D)

That is essentially libertarianism in a nutshell. The above definition provides the big tent perspective. As long as you are attempting to apply the non-aggression principle there can be general agreement about most conclusions. However, what one bases their justifications (http://conza.tumblr.com/post/14775863748/hans-hermann-hoppe-on-justifying-libertarianism) on does matter otherwise the agreement is merely superficial. There is no problem with fellow travellers who differ with their epistemology as long as they are radical (http://conza.tumblr.com/post/4885200879/furthermore-in-contrast-to-what-seems-to-be-true) abolitionists.

Put simply libertarianism begins from first principles with the concept of self-ownership (http://conza.tumblr.com/tagged/self%20ownership), and original appropriation (http://conza.tumblr.com/tagged/homesteading) which necessarily leads to the non-aggression principle. The a priori of argumentation, or argumentation ethics (http://conza.tumblr.com/tagged/argumentation%20ethics) offers the praxeological proof which establishes self-ownership as an axiom. It serves as a negative critique of justifiable norms. It bounds the scope of norms that can be consistently justified without pain of contradiction.

Here the praxeological proof of libertarianism has the advantage of offering a completely value-free justification of private property. It remains entirely in the realm of is-statements and never tries to derive an “ought” from an “is.“ — Hoppe, Economics and Ethics of Private Property, p345.

My entire argument, then, claims to be an impossibility proof. But not, as the mentioned critics seem to think, a proof that means to show the impossibility of certain empirical events, so that it could be refuted by empirical evidence [such as the existence of non-libertarian societies-RPM and GC]. Instead, it is a proof that it is impossible to justify non-libertarian property principles without falling into contradictions … empirical evidence has absolutely no bearing on it. — Hoppe, p406.

Libertarianism is meta-normative, it establishes what you have a right (http://conza.tumblr.com/post/5689067580/laliberty-while-values-and-priorities-are) to do. It does not say what you ought or should do. In this sense, being an axiomatic-deductive legal theory based on action it is not a part of ethics at all. [1 (http://conza.tumblr.com/post/16650847516/for-the-aspiring-austro-libertarian-what-to-read)], [2 (http://conza.tumblr.com/post/12460140660/to-summarize-up-to-this-point-using-a-simple-tree)], [3 (http://conza.tumblr.com/post/12477331423/action-based-legal-theory-provides-tools-to)], [4 (http://conza.tumblr.com/post/12504899606/deductive-legal-theory-when-properly)].

2. Why should people support liberty?

People who are civilized are … concerned about justifying punishment. They want to punish, but they also want to know that such punishment is justified — they want to legitimately be able to punish … Theories of punishment are concerned with justifying punishment, with offering decent men who are reluctant to act immorally a reason why they may punish others. This is useful, of course, for offering moral men guidance and assurance that they may properly deal with those who seek to harm them.
— Stephan Kinsella

Better yet; Rothbard's — Why Be Libertarian (https://mises.org/library/why-be-libertarian)?

https://youtu.be/EKCrLaLChOk

3. How do we return to liberty?

1. Entrepreneurship, which is the fullest expression of liberty, is based on shrewdness, ingenuity, and tactical perspicacity. Political power, which is the diametric opposite of liberty, is ponderous, anachronistic, and perpetually behind the curve. Hence, a great window of opportunity to prove themselves opens up for all those who possess entrepreneurial talent – especially if it is coupled with technological talent – a window of opportunity to create solutions that allow for circumventing political power’s sphere of influence, and thus for undermining the belief in its indispensability. This is precisely how Bitcoin slowly sterilizes the power of central banks, the Internet erodes political control over the flow of information and the enforceability of “intellectual property rights”, and arbitration agencies reduce the role of legislation. In addition, the emergence of such solutions offers a clear illustration of the fact that effective entrepreneurship not only does not need political protection, but actually thrives to the extent that it is free from its influence.

2. One should use every possible opportunity to promote sound economic knowledge, which describes the process whereby individuals and their voluntary associations build their well-being on the basis of free exchange of goods and services in an environment of respect for property rights, unhampered competition, and spontaneously emerging price system. In other words, there is never too much of Bastiat and Hazlitt, be it among family members, friends, or colleagues. The more widespread this knowledge gets, and the more obvious its message becomes, the greater will be the social pressure to regain ever more areas of freedom of action understood as a precondition of personal well-being.

3. It is worthwhile to use every possible opportunity to promote the feeling of self-reliance, self-governance, and entrepreneurial initiative at the most local level possible. The goal of this activity is to bring about the greatest possible fragmentation and decentralization of all kinds of political structures, which is likely to lead to much greater economic integration of the territories under their control. This is a logical conclusion stemming from the fact that the smaller a given political organism is, the less capable it is of draining the vital forces of the local economy and hampering its spontaneous development, and the less resources it can devote to that purpose. In the most optimistic case, the ultimate culmination of such a decentralization process would be the emergence of a genuinely free and genuinely global economy composed of hundreds of thousands or even millions of independent economic zones, neighborhood associations, charter cities, and other forms of contractual, propertarian arrangements integrated through free trade and the global division of labor.

4. It is worthwhile to build in our social circles the most cosmopolitan atmosphere possible, an atmosphere that underscores the moral irrelevance of all affiliations that are not the result of a voluntary choice (including, for instance, ethnic affiliations), the moral universality of the principles of peaceful human coexistence, and the economic benefits stemming from it. It is important to bear in mind that in all likelihood it is precisely the instinctive attribution of moral meaning to ethnic affiliations that is the main driving force of oppressive political entities known as nation-states, together will all the armed conflicts that take place between them. Relegating all sentiments associated with such affiliations to purely aesthetic categories would be a very significant step on the road to initiating the decentralization processes described in the previous point, together with all their positive consequences.

5. Finally, as time and opportunities permit, it is worthwhile to engage in all kinds of charitable and philanthropic activities, especially if one can make one’s efforts in this context truly effective thanks to one’s entrepreneurial talent. The existence of such enterprises is always a clear sign for the broader community that effective help for the needy has its origin not in the will of “political authorities”, but in the grassroots efforts of free individuals and their voluntary associations, whose philanthropic initiative does not die even when the bulk of their resources is confiscated by the “authorities” in question. In other words, it is a signal showing that a consistent diminution of the influence of political power not only increases the scope of freedom of action, but also the scope of the most morally beneficial, natural consequence of this freedom, which is authentic charity.”

— Jakub Wisniewski (http://t.umblr.com/redirect?z=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.facebook.com%2Fjakub. wisniewski&t=ZWFiNTI2OWYzOWI2N2QyMWEzYWI1MjQ4YTlkNDZlNDA4NmUy NzQzZCxLNDJxNWRzZg%3D%3D)

https://youtu.be/56WsSpjPA80

4. How can we assure that liberty is preserved?

“The Role of Subscription-Based Patrol and Restitution in the Future of Liberty” (http://t.umblr.com/redirect?z=http%3A%2F%2Flibertarianpapers.org%2F20 09%2F12-the-role-of-subscription-based-patrol-and-restitution-in-the-future-of-liberty%2F&t=OGFkMDI5YTkyYTVjMTBjOWEzNTIzZDVmN2M4MjFlNThkZDI0 MWU3ZSwwOEd2YWh4Mw%3D%3D) by Gil Guillory & Patrick C. Tinsley

Market voluntarists are often keen to know how we might rid ourselves of the twin evils institutionalized in the state: taxation and monopoly. A possible future history for North America is suggested, focusing upon the implications of the establishment of a subscription-based patrol and restitution business sector. We favor Rothbard over Higgs regarding crises and liberty. We favor Barnett over Rothbard regarding vertical integration of security. We examine derived demand for adjudication, mediation and related goods; and we advance the thesis that private adjudication will tend to libertarianly just decisions. We show how firms will actively build civil society, strengthening and coordinating Nisbettian intermediating institutions.

The present paper explores the possible historical consequences of the successful establishment of a subscription patrol and restitution business sector. In support of the story we posit, we first address a number of topics to set the tone and clear up misconceptions about what is meant by free market provision of defense and law.

An outline follows:

Entrepreneur as Agent of Social Change
The Law Enforcement Paradigm and Vertical Integration
Search and Arrest
Does Free-Market Adjudication Provide Justice?
Development of the SPR Model—Social Strength and Derived Demand
Crisis and Liberty

In a sense, it is essentially a business plan for liberty. Normal customers (people not specifically interested in philosophy & non radicals) paying to read about voluntarism, surely not?!

Branding Change
In support of the new era and to illustrate our objective of providing educational guides, the site’s secondary branding of “Liberty Forest” will soon be replaced with a new brand, “The Guide Point”. As part of this we have secured the domain name theguidepoint.com. The branding change will also help support an expanded scope of tactical efforts that we will use to support our Mission.

Not a fan. Think the severing of ties to RP will kill the site entirely tbh. You've established as the remnant of sorts. When SHTF again (matter of when, not 'if' - as per ABCT), folks will again be looking for like minded individuals. They won't be going to 'theguidepoint.com'.

Why the Chosen Name• Doesn’t use the word “liberty” – which doesn’t have broad appeal and is too specific.

I like the Liberty Forest; Tree of Liberty angle. Don't think the above is correct at all. EVERYONE tries to appeal to liberty. It's not specific at all.

Bryan

04-25-2016, 07:58 AM

Hey, let's do a podcast. :)

Just put it up in the corner some place.

I like this line of thought. Something like a digest. Or journal. A magazinish web site of sorts.

Thanks, these are all good things, and good goals for the site to work on. It's all a matter of priorities and resources.

Bryan

04-25-2016, 07:59 AM

My suggestion is this... become the daily news site for the liberty movement... make the front page a drudge style site and keep it updated regularly. This will be nearly a full time job, but in my experimentation I am confident the revenue from ads will allow you to make a full time living off of it.

I tried this for a while but it took 4 hours a day to sift through the news and keep it updated. And to get a big enough audience it would cost some decent marketing dollars to invest. Overall I think within a year or less it would see a return though.
Thanks, Matt. I agree that would be a good thing, it's also not something that could be done without keeping the forums or adding in other ways. As you note, there has to be a good plan to make this happen.

Bryan

04-25-2016, 08:01 AM

Maybe someone could conduct video/audio interviews with liberty minded candidates and activists and make it a weekly thing.
I actually almost got this going in 2013 but pulled back for a few reasons, there are some things that we'll do related to this moving forward, so good call. I've done a few video interviews in the past (including a sitting congressmen), we won't go this route since it's best to be on location, which means high travel costs.

Thanks!

Bryan

04-25-2016, 08:07 AM

I respect Bryan's impulse, intuition and reasoning in nudging the site to the next step. But it's hard not to see the structure stiffening and becoming less resilient with the proposed changes.
I'm not following you here, can you explain?

The words "guide point" mean nothing to me. In fact the word "guide" might even have the anti-liberty connotation of being guided rather than taking one's own course. And the word "point" could imply the exact opposite of the infinity of possibilities that are supposed to open up when one can live according to one's own initiative without hindrance from the forceful means of an arbitrary power. I know those aren't the intended meanings, but fwiw my knee-jerk impression.
Thanks for the analysis. When we started to look for alternate branding there were three main path that were ID'ed:
- have a name that explains your mission
- have a name that is completely abstract
- have a name that can infer some things but is mostly abstract.

I completely ruled out the first option and thought the third would be the best in that the URL words have a defined meaning but they combine to an abstract construct, so it is designed to mean nothing in a sense. I understand there are a lot of different possible connotations, but that is part of why the tag line and keywords are important.

Bryan

04-25-2016, 08:08 AM

Are there any statistic charts regarding activity and membership that could be published?
What I said in the OP basically explains it. We started in May 2007, activity got very high during that 2008 campaign, it died down a good bit but had a good bump for Rand's Senate run in 2010. In 2012 we saw another big rise of activity, which far exceeded what we saw with Rand in 2016.

opal

04-25-2016, 08:12 AM

so.. when you go with the new domain - what will happen to ronpaulforums.com? Are you selling it? Going to maintain the domain registry?
Could just be me, but I'd rather be a part of this one than theguidepoint - which still.. after contemplating it for a few days sounds like a publication that the Jehovah's witnesses would leave at the front door.

AZJoe

04-25-2016, 09:16 AM

Good luck Bryan! Herding cats is a mighty task"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pk7yqlTMvp8

undergroundrr

04-25-2016, 10:10 AM

I'm not following you here, can you explain?

In your discussion about a Foundational Knowledgebase, you mentioned building it on a wiki platform. I got the impression that would displace or at least lessen the prominence of the web forum side of things. Am I reading that right? Wikis are useful for me, but I've never been able to see them as communities. I'll dip into a wiki on, say, Frank Zappa's music to pick up information on a band member's involvement on a certain track, and then I'm gone. Maybe that's just me. I frequent other wiki/database sites that have full forums, but the forums are never very vibrant.

When the Mises Institute shuffled off its forum (now the very sparse libertyhq.freeforums.org), it was to purify a knowledge platform so that it could proactively provide information with little opportunity for unedited feedback. Instead of a 50 or 100 people posting multiple times a day (as with rpf), mises.org has 15 or 20 people who provide a post once a week or once a month. That to me is stiffer and less resilient.

I would also point out that "Liberty Forest" didn't become a very significant brand for anybody here that I know of. Nobody seems to refer to it as such. I presume everybody still thinks of it as Ron Paul Forums. And I think that's because the words "Ron" and "Paul" when joined together don't really encapsulate an individual human's identity any more as much as they are shorthand for a kind of compassionate conservatism where all the stupid fascist bits have been corrected by sensible libertarian and constitutionally derived solutions. Replacing "Liberty Forest" with "Guide Point" is neither here nor there. Replacing "Ron Paul Forums" with "Guide Point" presents a couple of problems -

1. It will seem like a little bit of a betrayal to some.
2. You will unnecessarily have to build public perception of a brand from the ground up, probably with no significant marketing capital, instead of just using the words "Ron Paul" to signify the same brand.

It's very valuable to know there's a place I can go where people are trying their best to perpetuate the ideals that Ron Paul espoused in the 2008 & 2012 presidential elections and during his terms as congressman. I have only once seen one instance in which RPF has seemed to violate the spirit of Ron Paul's ideas, and that was when trumpmania was at its worst and seemed to be proceeding unabated. The situation was subsequently corrected. RPF is my newspaper, because I know if something happens in the world that champions or threatens my values, I can pop onto the forums and people are probably already actively commenting on it and sharing information. That said, if it can't earn its keep on that basis the owners have the right and legitimate motivation to change it how they see fit.

Bryan

04-25-2016, 10:57 AM

It became pretty clear principles over pragmatism wins in the long run. Education is the first and foremost point of focus for any campaign; that's what made Ron special. That clearly was not Rand Paul's goal or strategy. It was to "win" first. That fails. If you can't understand that; then nothing will help.
I largely agree, education certainly is fundamental and I think we need a lot more of it. The “win first” strategy can have a time and place, obviously it didn’t work for Rand. It seems to do better in congress and other positions.

Not burying the philosophical & educational discussions would be a great start.
What would you suggest? We did make the Philosophy forum open to the public back in 2013, I didn’t see any reason to keep it members-only.

Not a fan. Think the severing of ties to RP will kill the site entirely tbh. You've established as the remnant of sorts. When SHTF again (matter of when, not 'if' - as per ABCT), folks will again be looking for like minded individuals. They won't be going to 'theguidepoint.com'.

There has been no decision to sever ties with Ron Paul. It was first identified back in late 2007 that developing alternate branding has value for potential long term sustainability, which was why we have Liberty Forest. Up until 2012 a main part of our goal was to help build the brand equity of Ron Paul, now that he is retired, is that still valid? As stated previously, what the best path forward remains to be seen. Of course we have no intention of changing our agreement with Ron Paul, but conversely, maintaining a site just for the remnant is not a good plan.

Of course no one is inherently going to go to theguidepoint.com any more than they would any other site that doesn’t have a specific and limited agenda in the URL. The key for anything is building brand equity, why do people go to google to do a search? We have built up very little brand equity in Liberty Forest over the last 8+ years.

There are a few key points that put us down in this direction of using “guide” in the branding; one outcome of this site that was not fully expected was the level and degree that people have learned from their time here. I have been very surprised with the number of people stating their views have been reshaped by participating here.

The other interesting point is our search engine traffic, which we get a lot of due to our 6+ million posts. Within that, theres an underlying theme in that people are looking for information (of course), and often, deeper answers. So the question becomes, how can we best structure the site to best serve these people and our Mission? A bigger question is, when you’re doing a search, what URL are you most likely going to click on.

EVERYONE tries to appeal to liberty. It's not specific at all.

I use to think this way, but can no longer agree; too many people want things their way, and they want things easy and free. They want a society engineered to their desires. They are happy to sacrifice your liberty for their security. Education on why this is a failed path is necessary.

Bryan

04-25-2016, 11:01 AM

so.. when you go with the new domain - what will happen to ronpaulforums.com?* Are you selling it?* Going to maintain the domain registry?
Could just be me, but I'd rather be a part of this one than theguidepoint - which still.. after contemplating it for a few days sounds like a publication that the Jehovah's witnesses would leave at the front door.
The Jehovah’s Witnesses publication is “The Watchtower”, so I’m not seeing a strong correlation. Yesterday I found a pretty good list of new age type churches, I didn’t see any that really correlated to guide point. This is something that I am concerned about, per the point of not conflicting with others, so I understand the issue and concern, I’m just not sure if it is a big enough concern in this case. My bigger concern is something that would have a left or right connotation.

We’re approaching this change in a very pragmatic manner, there is no emotional attachment to any new branding; if something better comes up before a roll-out we can go with that. At this point we at least have a baseline, and people can be prepared for Liberty Forest to go away, which, BTW, we will maintain that URL as well.

Thank you for the input.

jllundqu

04-25-2016, 01:11 PM

I like this line of thought. Something like a digest. Or journal. A magazinish web site of sorts.

I like this idea. We should have many planks... A forum for discussion. A "Liberty News Aggregate" (something like a Drudge Report for Liberty-related news stories). An education section... etc etc.

We SHOULD be so much more than simply a forum.

I do think we should honor Dr. Paul's name, but the lead site-name should be more general as to appeal to the most people possible.

jllundqu

04-25-2016, 01:22 PM

Bryan

04-25-2016, 06:01 PM

In your discussion about a Foundational Knowledgebase, you mentioned building it on a wiki platform. I got the impression that would displace or at least lessen the prominence of the web forum side of things. Am I reading that right?
That would not be the intent nor hope. The base idea with the wiki would be to collect the wisdom of the forum for very stable subject matters. In a certain way, it is designed to enhance and leverage the forum since that is where the debate and discussion on the content of the wiki will take place, vs. using the wiki discussion pages.
The wiki certainly won’t touch the news cycle or any specific activism effort, the forum is ideal for that.

Wikis are useful for me, but I've never been able to see them as communities. I'll dip into a wiki on, say, Frank Zappa's music to pick up information on a band member's involvement on a certain track, and then I'm gone. Maybe that's just me.
Different people can end up with different reasons to read our knowledgebase. One main purpose will be to pick up information on a specific topic, but the design will allow to picking up other information in an easy way as well. Others may be interested to learn on a deeper level, while others could have interest to contribute to the knowledgebase development. All of this will become clearer once it starts to take shape, it’s had to take a little bit of a back seat to deal with a few other site issues first.

When the Mises Institute shuffled off its forum (now the very sparse libertyhq.freeforums.org), it was to purify a knowledge platform so that it could proactively provide information with little opportunity for unedited feedback. Instead of a 50 or 100 people posting multiple times a day (as with rpf), mises.org has 15 or 20 people who provide a post once a week or once a month. That to me is stiffer and less resilient.
I have no real information on why mises removed their forum, but can speculate that it was too low of a return for their effort, it generally is for any business or group with their level of funding. User content can also conflict with their core message.

I would also point out that "Liberty Forest" didn't become a very significant brand for anybody here that I know of. Nobody seems to refer to it as such.
It hasn’t, and you won’t find it on the web either (do a search). So it’s seen as expendable. It’s not a bad name but it hasn’t added much either, we can do better.

I presume everybody still thinks of it as Ron Paul Forums. And I think that's because the words "Ron" and "Paul" when joined together don't really encapsulate an individual human's identity any more as much as they are shorthand for a kind of compassionate conservatism where all the stupid fascist bits have been corrected by sensible libertarian and constitutionally derived solutions.
Interesting perspective, food for thought.

Replacing "Liberty Forest" with "Guide Point" is neither here nor there. Replacing "Ron Paul Forums" with "Guide Point" presents a couple of problems -

1. It will seem like a little bit of a betrayal to some.
2. You will unnecessarily have to build public perception of a brand from the ground up, probably with no significant marketing capital, instead of just using the words "Ron Paul" to signify the same brand.

As said, there has been no decision to this end, but changing the main URL in the future is not out of the realm of possibilities. Per point one, I’d understand that, but Ron always said it was about the message and not the person. He wants to see liberty, so the question is how do we best pick up the torch? I could certainly see a betrayal if we started to trash him on the site; we haven’t and won’t, even if he’s not perfect.

Point two is certainly a strategical matter, and something well considered. There are many pieces needed to determine a best path; for starters, consider how many people are coming in and going out with our current branding? How many people are searching for “Ron Paul”? (I can tell you that). How many people are leaving, thinking, “OK, this campaign failed, time to move on.” So if a new brand helps here, we’re a step ahead. Another part is our outreach, and being pro-active as a site. As I mentioned previously, I put the brakes on reaching out to candidates back in 2013, this was in part due to our branding, candidates were/can be hesitant to be associated with Ron Paul due to how badly he was smeared in the media. This is one of the consequences of having a legacy.

If there is a complete change in the URL (which remains to be seen) we will first be developing out the alternate branding first, build brand equity, and when the balance is right, we would switch. We would not just switch without some criteria and analysis. As an example, one consideration is to put the wiki on the new site and then later have the forum move over to it-- if it ever makes sense. Again, to be seen.

It's very valuable to know there's a place I can go where people are trying their best to perpetuate the ideals that Ron Paul espoused in the 2008 & 2012 presidential elections and during his terms as congressman. … RPF is my newspaper, because I know if something happens in the world that champions or threatens my values, I can pop onto the forums and people are probably already actively commenting on it and sharing information.
Thanks, and we certainly don’t intend to change that.

That said, if it can't earn its keep on that basis the owners have the right and legitimate motivation to change it how they see fit.
It’s hard to know this for sure, but the trends aren’t favorable. It’s worthy of discussion and contemplation.

Thanks.

Bryan

04-25-2016, 06:45 PM

I like this idea. We should have many planks... A forum for discussion. A "Liberty News Aggregate" (something like a Drudge Report for Liberty-related news stories). An education section... etc etc.

We SHOULD be so much more than simply a forum.
Agreed.

I do think we should honor Dr. Paul's name, but the lead site-name should be more general as to appeal to the most people possible.
This will be a more pressing question for us moving forward.

Yeah I don't know if I like the sound of "The Guidepoint"... doesn't have much bite or appeal or even any reference to our aims. Can't we think of something more appealing than that? Just my opinion...
The general problem is that if you go with a name that has a lot of bite or appeal for a certain group it will equally turn off another group. If you really consider our Mission, we have a message that appeals to everyone. So how do we encapsulate that? Encapsulate our message with “liberty” seems to make sense, but I don’t see it working. With such great appeal, why hasn’t Campaign for Liberty taken off? Everyone should be on board, right? I think it's time for a different approach.

There are a lot of brand names that have no inherent appeal. Why would Dell have appeal? Or HP? Or Google? Or Adobe? Or The Blaze? Or Breitbart? What’s important is the associations which the company is able to develop. With success, the brand name becomes more than what the names is.

Part of the problem with a political site, which is only part of our Mission, is that if you have a political sounding name within it you are at the mercy of how the media characterizes the words in your name. What may sound good today could be the next terrorist group. If we picked something too overused, it will end up being too left or right and we are turning people off at the start.

So these are part of the reasons why I don’t like names that have a direct and specific characterization. It is easier to up start, but for long term value and sustainability, building your own brand is a very good route.

Of course one of the biggest problems is that you not only need a good name, you need the URL to go with it. Of all of the TLDs out there, I only liked .com. A .org name is good, but we’re not an org. I like .us in some ways, but it also implies just a United States web site, which we’re not. The .com namespace has been pretty well picked over.

tod evans

04-25-2016, 07:13 PM

I'd like to set forth the idea of plagiarizing Ron Paul's slogan for a new moniker if it must be changed;

http://www.azquotes.com/picture-quotes/quote-truth-is-treason-in-the-empire-of-lies-ron-paul-36-26-69.jpg

Bryan

04-25-2016, 08:42 PM

As a general FYI, I'm not going to get into a public discussion on potential URLs, and posting something will only do harm to an idea.

If you have a serious idea PM or e-mail me, just remember the criteria in the OP. I also would exclude anything that has any sort of negative connotation such as fighting against the government or whatnot.

Thanks.

politicsNproverbs

04-26-2016, 12:44 PM

The Jehovah’s Witnesses publication is “The Watchtower”, so I’m not seeing a strong correlation. Yesterday I found a pretty good list of new age type churches, I didn’t see any that really correlated to guide point. This is something that I am concerned about, per the point of not conflicting with others, so I understand the issue and concern, I’m just not sure if it is a big enough concern in this case. My bigger concern is something that would have a left or right connotation.

We’re approaching this change in a very pragmatic manner, there is no emotional attachment to any new branding; if something better comes up before a roll-out we can go with that. At this point we at least have a baseline, and people can be prepared for Liberty Forest to go away, which, BTW, we will maintain that URL as well.

Thank you for the input.

Sorry but I had to chuckle at Opal's comment as I thought the same thing, though not re the JWs (because, as you say, their magazines are Watchtower & Awake!). What GuidePoint.com made me think of is another Christian magazine(s) publisher/group that has been around for 71 years called GuidePOSTS.org. From their "About Us" page:

"Our Founders' Timeless Vision: Dr. Norman Vincent Peale and his wife Ruth Stafford Peale cofounded Guideposts in 1945. They envisioned an organization that would help people from all walks of life achieve their maximum personal and spiritual potential. The Peale legacy continues powerfully today in our vision for the future — to offer people products and services that inspire, encourage, and uplift..."
https://www.guideposts.org/about-us

So I'm not sure if the masses-in-general would ever confuse the two...(?) and/or whether it might help vs. hinder.

I'm all for .com's vs. ALL the other TLDs. .COM is the original & perpetual ace, no doubt about it. True about slim pickings in .com's, though.

I was looking at the thesaurus for synonyms for liberty. There were pages & pages, so I didn't look through all of the associated possibilities. But the word Independence stuck out, though looking at .com's, it's pretty much covered, such as:

IndependencePoint (sounds like a mountain peak, I suppose; the .com is taken, but the .net is available, defeating my own argument).

IndependenceSquare (a gathering place to meet & share knowledge; .com is taken, though .net is available).

IndependenceSchool (sold out, .com, .net, .org).

My favorite, since having two words begin with the same letter is always a good memory enhancer:

IndependenceIntel.com is available ($8.99 at namesilo.com; the entire string of TLDs for that are available: .com, .net, .org, .biz, .info, .us, .pro, .club, .co).

Ditto the longer version, IndependenceIntelligence.com, all the above TLDs are also available for this one.

Independence has a historic, nostalgic, "Founding Fathers" ring to it (maybe only for us "old-timers"?), and the Intel part is for your database of knowledge. It also signifies "self-reliance," self-determination, etc.

Just an idea. I confess I'm more inclined toward "niche marketing" (specifics-branding) than the "open-ended" non-specific, but I understand your point that being "too specific" will turn-off one group or another, especially those Bernie-Brainwashed youngins'. :)

Lastly, this was a hot & hopping place when I first discovered it in the Fall of 2007 and it was a blast! Though RP turned out to be a heartbreaker for many. (Whatever happened to Granny with the big RP Class-A RV painted red-white-blue who traveled all over the country with her monkey?)

Even though I haven't commented much since then, I have continued to visit here over the years knowing I could find great discussions & opinions by the RPF "old-timers" on various news topics of the day, including the most recent Rand vs. Trump vs. Cruz, etc.

So thank you for all the chills & thrills! :)

Bryan

04-26-2016, 09:50 PM

Sorry but I had to chuckle at Opal's comment as I thought the same thing, though not re the JWs (because, as you say, their magazines are Watchtower & Awake!). What GuidePoint.com made me think of is another Christian magazine(s) publisher/group that has been around for 71 years called GuidePOSTS.org. From their "About Us" page:

"Our Founders' Timeless Vision: Dr. Norman Vincent Peale and his wife Ruth Stafford Peale cofounded Guideposts in 1945. They envisioned an organization that would help people from all walks of life achieve their maximum personal and spiritual potential. The Peale legacy continues powerfully today in our vision for the future — to offer people products and services that inspire, encourage, and uplift..."
https://www.guideposts.org/about-us

So I'm not sure if the masses-in-general would ever confuse the two...(?) and/or whether it might help vs. hinder.
Thanks for all of the input -- and you should post more. :)

I'm well aware of the guidepost site as I did a lot of research on usage of the word "guidepost" - which was an earlier base word that was considered. It was ruled out for a variety of reasons but its association to the Christian site never come up as an issue with the advisors and experts I talked with. Guidepost is a common dictionary term with a concrete meaning and is well used in many things. So while there is a minor connection I don't see it as very strong, and I'm not seeing how they have a bad reputation that we'd want 100% distance from. Most people don't know about it.

Champ

04-26-2016, 11:58 PM

Hey, let's do a podcast. :)

Just put it up in the corner some place.

This 100x.

This is what people want nowadays. Convenient and entertaining content. They want something they can listen to while they are busy with their career or life in general or a video to look at while lounging at home in front of the tv/computer. Some type of video podcast that keeps us in the loop on current events from a liberty minded perspective.

We already have the Ron Paul Channel and excellent podcasts like the one Tom Woods provides, but there is still no comprehensive video podcast that incorporates both techniques that would appeal to an average citizen. The Young Turks appeals to progressive lefties, Glenn Beck appeals to tea party conservatives, yet there is still nothing like either of those for true libertarians. We have a mish mash of that content among many different podcasts, it just needs to get consolidated and easily accessible via Youtube.

Easier said than done, I know. Start small, see where it goes, work on it, build it up.

Still, I can't think of a better way to spread the message using popular modern forms of media and technology. I had high hopes that Truth In Media, Ben Swann's project was going to become something like this, it was arguably well funded, using kickstarter cash, but it ended up being just a basic news site, with a greater emphasis on articles, rather than videos and Ben is now working with another local news station. Ah well.

Just my two cents.

BUTSRSLY

04-27-2016, 02:03 AM

Yeah I don't know if I like the sound of "The Guidepoint"... doesn't have much bite or appeal or even any reference to our aims. Can't we think of something more appealing than that? Just my opinion...

I'D HAVE GONE WITH 'BLACK LIVES MATTER'

ANYONE WHO WON'T CLICK ON THAT IS HOPELESS ANYWAY

BUTSRSLY

04-27-2016, 02:36 AM

BUTSRSLY,

THE FIRST QUESTION IS

IS IT GOOD FOR PEOPLE TO DO FORUMING

THE NEXT QUESTION IS

WHERE SHOULD I LOCATE MY FREE HUGS CONVENTION

osan

04-27-2016, 11:20 AM

My question in all this is what will you contrive that stands some chance to have an actual, palpable effect?

Look at Black Lives Matter. Someone vomited forth this idiot hashtag from their shriveled intellect and it caught. Now, countless dullards of all manner of denominations are on board this derailed freight train to hell, marching, whining, threatening, demanding, twittering, mastur... oh never mind.

The point is that all high-minded philosophizing aside, a simple, clear thing is what is needed. Something that will cause people to act. Something that will catch people's imaginations. This is a tall order because you do not have stupidity on your side, which makes things tons easier in a culture now and apparently hopelessly addicted to idiocy of almost any form.

Is there anything sane, rational, and decent that would bring people together to make themselves heard and felt to the end of furthering the cause of human freedom?

That is the question you need to answer.

Natural Citizen

04-27-2016, 11:51 AM

Unknownuser

04-27-2016, 12:22 PM

Natural Citizen

04-27-2016, 12:33 PM

Bryan

04-27-2016, 01:26 PM

My question in all this is what will you contrive that stands some chance to have an actual, palpable effect?

Look at Black Lives Matter. Someone vomited forth this idiot hashtag forth from their shriveled intellect and it caught. Now, countless idiots of all manner of denominations are on board this derailed freight train to hell, marching, whining, threatening, demanding, twittering, mastur... oh never mind.

The point is that all high-minded philosophizing aside, a simple, clear thing is what is needed. Something that will cause people to act. Something that will catch people's imaginations. This is a tall order because you do not have stupidity on your side, which makes things tons easier in a culture now and apparently hopelessly addicted to idiocy of almost any form.

Is there anything sane, rational, and decent that would bring people together to make themselves heard and felt to the end of furthering the cause of human freedom?

That is the question you need to answer.
An excellent question, which I will examine within framework of the Liberty Blueprint that I put forward.

You are correct that the high-minded philosophizing won’t get the job done, but it does serve as a foundation for all other things to come from it. The Foundational Knowledgebase, Part #1 of the Liberty Blueprint [1. Educational guide points on the definition of liberty.], will have two level of explanation, one is a short form that is easy to read and gives simple explanations of the material. The long form will get into the cutting edge of liberty thought and be geared for the die-hard high-minded philosophizing type. The simple form however is still not a tool to win people over to liberty beyond being used as an educational point for a single issue. The Foundational Knowledgebase can serve as an education system for certain analytical learning styles but the point stands, the high-minded philosophizing won’t get the job done.

To seize the moment or capture an audience, we do need as you say, something that will catch peoples imagination. This is Part #5 of the Liberty Blueprint [5. a) Outreach to connect our educational programs to new people. b) Execution of the programs], where Part a) is the development of the marketing campaign material and Part b) is the executing of the campaign. Exactly what that is, how it will look like is something that no one person can define. This is its own process and can change daily based on the news cycle. Ideally the site and the liberty movement can do better to coordinate with this.

What we have found however, is that this is not enough. In the “state of the movement” thread presence pointed out (to which I’d agree) that a lot of the liberty movement was lost since they did not get entrenched into the liberty mindset, some were single issue voters, some just caught on to the Ron Paul campaign. This is why Part #4 of the Liberty Blueprint is important [4. Educational programs to teach what liberty is, why it’s important and how to defend it.] Once we do capture peoples imagination, then what? We can’t just send them off to the Foundational Knowledgebase and say “read all of this” – no, we need structured and well thought out educational material and pathways that will drive people to change their viewpoints on a fundamental level.

One key however is that all of the material within Part #4 and Part #5 of the Liberty Blueprint has to be philosophically sound within the Foundational Knowledgebase, Part #1. Without this, the message gets confused and obfuscated; people in our own ranks won’t even be aligned.

This also assures we have real substance to our Mission and campaigns. With lots of other movements, if you look under the hoods, they aren’t based on much substance; we are, we just have to communicate that.

So in this way there are three very separate layers of effort and material: captivate, educate and foundation. The captivate layer is very dynamic and creative. The educate layer is stable but adapts to the times, technology and learning styles. The foundation layer is left for the high-minded philosophizing and should hit a very stable state. Without all three, we get nowhere, or gains are limited. This can be seen within the Ron Paul 2008/2012 campaigns; the campaigns were part of the outreach (part #5), but we lacked in the other areas.

Another important part of #5 is that once we have someone’s attention and they are in our camp, we need a way to make sure that people progress within the education material. This can be done with having mentors, structured programs, progress tracking and monitoring and the like. This also has to be done in a palpable manner, but the point is, once someone is done with an education program the success rate that they are really onboard the movement is much higher. Putting together a successful educational system is also its own challenge. Of course there is a lot of education material out there within Part #4, it wouldn’t make sense to redevelop that, but it’s not well structured, vetted or packaged up within a system that is easy to use.

So in a nutshell, we need lots of pieces to come together. I can’t do it all, but want to structure the site to be a hub to get this done for the people who actually want to make a difference. This is where the Mission Advancement Framework (MAF) comes in, which really has a few goals:

-- Make it desirable for people to want to contribute.

-- Plan before action is taken, including setting goals, expectations and making sure efforts play a proper role within the big picture.

-- Make it easy for people to contribute by having connecting workflows between different functional needs. In this way, it’s easy to do one small thing and have that effort benefit the whole; it can be similar to an assembly line, but not exactly either.

-- Limit failure points within groups.

If someone has a better plan, great, let’s discuss it. If someone can develop a better Liberty Blueprint, I’ll be willing to debate that too.

Rather than seeing thing as being over-thought, as some here have suggested, I think the movement has done the exact opposite, these issues have been completely under-thought. We need a holistic master plan; I submit the Liberty Blueprint as being it.

Kade

04-27-2016, 02:37 PM

younglibertarian

04-27-2016, 02:57 PM

Great thread Bryan. This almost makes me feel like I want to be back and involved... I know the liberty movement is very right leaning, I also know it was not always the case. I will always claim that you need liberty minded liberals to bring perspective and passion.

Everyone has their input about what...caused some of all this... I don't know how it started, but seeing things written on this board like "I think Left wing political positions of any kind should be banned" was a nice, firm, and 'point taken' sorta ending for me.

I'm very effective at getting Bernie Supporters to our way of thinking.. so my activism has been mostly focused there.

Society will never be ruled by one reality.

This is one of the common problems I see these days. People throwing these Bernie supporters to the sideline. We know that their socialist beliefs are opposite to our free market individualistic philosophy, but many of us do share one crucial element. That is hate for the status quo. Just look at how mad Bernie supporters are at the current electoral government system. We need to find an effective way to tell these people that yes, the government is corrupt, but what you want to replace it with is not a realistic and free solution.

I personally find it hard to appeal to these people as they love entitlement rather then independence. I just know there must be a way.

Kade

04-27-2016, 03:01 PM

This is one of the common problems I see these days. People throwing these Bernie supporters to the sideline. We know that their socialist beliefs are opposite to our free market individualistic philosophy, but many of us do share one crucial element. That is hate for the status quo. Just look at how mad Bernie supporters are at the current electoral government system. We need to find an effective way to tell these people that yes, the government is corrupt, but what you want to replace it with is not a realistic and free solution.

I personally find it hard to appeal to these people as they love entitlement rather then independence. I just know there must be a way.

Among other things, they are ripshit. I see more anger and motivation in this group than the post Boston 2007 liberty movement. We need each other, it just means compromising on things, like, I don't know, Theocracy language, banning people from speaking language (both sides FFS?!)... the usual suspects.

Natural Citizen

04-27-2016, 03:58 PM

I'm very effective at getting Bernie Supporters to our way of thinking.. so my activism has been mostly focused there.

Hm. Me, too. It's interesting that you bring that up. But even before Bernie came along. I've found that a lot of young people accept the label of "liberal" or "socialist"without really understanding what it means. And so many of them really do like Ron Paul particularly, I've found. Of course, that's without even getting into discussion on a deeper level. Seems like you have to kind of help them to better understand what it is that they already know and want but in a way that leads them to accept that they've done so on their own. Maybe you know what I mean by that. Is weird, really. Tough to explain.

Democracy is an interesing term that a lot of them just don't understand yet have been kind of trained to use and forward onto others. Is simple coercion but so many young people (and even older folks, I suppose) kind of get sucked into becoming robots. Of course, most don't understand coercion either. Although they have been trained to participate in it. So, then, that's a small task to help them figure out on their own, too.

Bryan

04-27-2016, 05:47 PM

I'll tell you something, osan. I read most of your postings. I don't disagree with you too often. But they're too damn wordy. So is Bryan. In fact, I'm still wading through the fundamental knowledgebase stuff. Between the two of you in the same thread yuns give me a headache sometimes.
:) As I've said, much of the knowledgebase material is just setting up the framework, it's not the actual content (and a bit dry). More content is coming. Otherwise, yes, when osan and I get after it, it's not going to be easy reading. :)

To your other points, you're right that we need to talk a language that others understand, and some people are really good at that. For others, they fit in better with the deep philosophy material. It's good to be able to do both.

Bryan

04-27-2016, 05:53 PM

Great idea! I hope it works out!

However, I personally think the time for Liberty is past and we as a nation are far beyond repair. It was a good run guys but I think our time should now be spent trying to survive what's to come.
One can argue that liberty has past us as nation, but the real question is, has it past your heart? If it has not, the only question is how you will fight. If you think it has past us as a nation and it is beyond repair, spread liberty outside of politics, don't bother with elections and such. Such an effort will always been necessary, and when done right, will always bear fruit.

Otherwise, per my OP, I do agree that it's good to plan for hard time that may come to pass. Let's hope they don't, but there can still be room to do more.

Bryan

04-27-2016, 06:02 PM

Great thread Bryan. This almost makes me feel like I want to be back and involved...
Thanks, great to hear from you.... so what will it take to remove that "almost"? :)

I know the liberty movement is very right leaning, I also know it was not always the case. I will always claim that you need liberty minded liberals to bring perspective and passion.
Agreed, we do need liberty minded liberals. In a certain sense, we learn some to the right, but we also lean in other ways too. :)

Everyone has their input about what...caused some of all this... I don't know how it started, but seeing things written on this board like "I think Left wing political positions of any kind should be banned" was a nice, firm, and 'point taken' sorta ending for me.
I'm not aware of that ever being a site policy, it all depends on the situation and what someone brings to the table.

I'm very effective at getting Bernie Supporters to our way of thinking.. so my activism has been mostly focused there.

Society will never be ruled by one reality.
Nice, agreed with the point. Could you start a new thread and talk about your experiences with Bernie supporters? What motivates them? How educated are they? Etc, etc, etc...

Thanks!

Natural Citizen

04-27-2016, 06:30 PM

:) As I've said, much of the knowledgebase material is just setting up the framework, it's not the actual content (and a bit dry). More content is coming. Otherwise, yes, when osan and I get after it, it's not going to be easy reading. :)

To your other points, you're right that we need to talk a language that others understand, and some people are really good at that. For others, they fit in better with the deep philosophy material. It's good to be able to do both.

Yeah, I know. On both points. But I'm glad that you didn't take that the wrong way. As I'd mentioned, my thought there wasn't meant to be critical of anyone. I agree that it's good to be of the means to do both depending on the circumstance. But, again, this is a forum. Which means that there is a lot of debate. Disagreement. Intellectual contests more often than not these days. And that's where it tends to get freaking Einsteinian. You know? No way that isn't intimidating to new people trying to blend in and whatnot. Of course, the platform itself and the vision you've introduced are two different beasts. I get that. My thoughts on it were geared more toward the former, I suppose.

younglibertarian

04-27-2016, 07:43 PM

Maybe gear up for Adam Kokesh?

http://adamkokesh.com/adamkokeshdotcom%20background.jpg

Natural Citizen

04-27-2016, 07:48 PM

Heh. I saw that Adam was logged in here a few days ago. Folks gave him the business last time he was active here if I recall correctly.

Anyway. Maybe better to think about what we can do for and among ourselves for the moment instead of looking to follow others' plan/vision/platforms that may exist and function outside of our little circles. If Adam wants to join in, then, he knows where we are.

osan

04-27-2016, 08:03 PM

An excellent question, which I will examine within framework of the Liberty Blueprint that I put forward.

You are correct that the high-minded philosophizing won’t get the job done, but it does serve as a foundation for all other things to come from it. The Foundational Knowledgebase, Part #1 of the Liberty Blueprint [1. Educational guide points on the definition of liberty.], will have two level of explanation, one is a short form that is easy to read and gives simple explanations of the material. The long form will get into the cutting edge of liberty thought and be geared for the die-hard high-minded philosophizing type. The simple form however is still not a tool to win people over to liberty beyond being used as an educational point for a single issue. The Foundational Knowledgebase can serve as an education system for certain analytical learning styles but the point stands, the high-minded philosophizing won’t get the job done.

To seize the moment or capture an audience, we do need as you say, something that will catch peoples imagination. This is Part #5 of the Liberty Blueprint [5. a) Outreach to connect our educational programs to new people. b) Execution of the programs], where Part a) is the development of the marketing campaign material and Part b) is the executing of the campaign. Exactly what that is, how it will look like is something that no one person can define. This is its own process and can change daily based on the news cycle. Ideally the site and the liberty movement can do better to coordinate with this.

What we have found however, is that this is not enough. In the “state of the movement” thread @presence (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/member.php?u=36577) pointed out (to which I’d agree) that a lot of the liberty movement was lost since they did not get entrenched into the liberty mindset, some were single issue voters, some just caught on to the Ron Paul campaign. This is why Part #4 of the Liberty Blueprint is important [4. Educational programs to teach what liberty is, why it’s important and how to defend it.] Once we do capture peoples imagination, then what? We can’t just send them off to the Foundational Knowledgebase and say “read all of this” – no, we need structured and well thought out educational material and pathways that will drive people to change their viewpoints on a fundamental level.

One key however is that all of the material within Part #4 and Part #5 of the Liberty Blueprint has to be philosophically sound within the Foundational Knowledgebase, Part #1. Without this, the message gets confused and obfuscated; people in our own ranks won’t even be aligned.

This also assures we have real substance to our Mission and campaigns. With lots of other movements, if you look under the hoods, they aren’t based on much substance; we are, we just have to communicate that.

So in this way there are three very separate layers of effort and material: captivate, educate and foundation. The captivate layer is very dynamic and creative. The educate layer is stable but adapts to the times, technology and learning styles. The foundation layer is left for the high-minded philosophizing and should hit a very stable state. Without all three, we get nowhere, or gains are limited. This can be seen within the Ron Paul 2008/2012 campaigns; the campaigns were part of the outreach (part #5), but we lacked in the other areas.

Another important part of #5 is that once we have someone’s attention and they are in our camp, we need a way to make sure that people progress within the education material. This can be done with having mentors, structured programs, progress tracking and monitoring and the like. This also has to be done in a palpable manner, but the point is, once someone is done with an education program the success rate that they are really onboard the movement is much higher. Putting together a successful educational system is also its own challenge. Of course there is a lot of education material out there within Part #4, it wouldn’t make sense to redevelop that, but it’s not well structured, vetted or packaged up within a system that is easy to use.

So in a nutshell, we need lots of pieces to come together. I can’t do it all, but want to structure the site to be a hub to get this done for the people who actually want to make a difference. This is where the Mission Advancement Framework (MAF) comes in, which really has a few goals:

-- Make it desirable for people to want to contribute.

-- Plan before action is taken, including setting goals, expectations and making sure efforts play a proper role within the big picture.

-- Make it easy for people to contribute by having connecting workflows between different functional needs. In this way, it’s easy to do one small thing and have that effort benefit the whole; it can be similar to an assembly line, but not exactly either.

-- Limit failure points within groups.

If someone has a better plan, great, let’s discuss it. If someone can develop a better Liberty Blueprint, I’ll be willing to debate that too.

Rather than seeing thing as being over-thought, as some here have suggested, I think the movement has done the exact opposite, these issues have been completely under-thought. We need a holistic master plan; I submit the Liberty Blueprint as being it.

OK, that's pretty good, but I must reiterate a point - not to be downer, but to be certain we are all aware of that against which we seek to move: a mindset that wants wants wants without having to work. Why do so many people want to have Bernie Sanders' babies? Because he is telling them what they want to hear. They want it all to happen on someone else's back so they can be there to reap the benefits. We are talking about a nation dangerously infested with lazy, avaricious people who have no knowledge of the basics of proper human relations, no interest in such knowledge when it conflicts with their wants or requires work to obtain, and have no moral compunction so see their desires fulfilled through the application of force against those who have that which they desire to obtain without work.

I believe the truth of this is far worse than most people realize, even in these forums. We are talking about a huge, brutishly inarticulate mob driven by unvarnished avarice, unabashed lassitude, and unwavering hatred of anything that calls them to account for themselves. Such people would watch you killed through the agency of their paid tax goons and say you deserved it. Why? Because the superior man is, in their eyes, intolerable as he is the constant sore reminder of the average man's low character, inferior attitude, and his resultant lack of ability for anything worthy of valid praise. The superior man constantly spotlights the reasons the inferior man should loathe himself. That reminder sears his weak and over-inflated buffoon's ego, prompting him to seek and accept as valid the flimsiest pretexts upon which their nemeses are sent to burn in the flesh through the agency of third party hands.

How does one compete with the likes of a Sanders or a Clinton who preach free unicorn-poo for everyone while promising death to the wealthy? They are reinforcing the base instincts that draw them inexorably in the direction of "free shit", playing upon envy, while redirecting and projecting what should be shame for one's own miserable inadequacies and translating it into blind, red-raging hatred. The question of competition is the one that needs to be answered - not how to compete, initially, but rather whether you can. I am no longer certain it is possible. Be that the case, any attempts to win such people to your cause is likely to prove fruitless, leaving you to ask whether there are enough "superior" men remaining such that one could realistically make an attempt to keep this vessel we call "America" afloat.

The task is enormously difficult because you have damned near everything against you, including the majority who would see you burned alive as soon as tell you to screw off.

Keep that in mind.

younglibertarian

04-27-2016, 08:27 PM

osan

04-27-2016, 08:31 PM

I'll tell you something, osan. I read most of your postings. I don't disagree with you too often. But they're too damn wordy.

I see how this is a problem for some - many even - but consider what it is many of us are attempting to do here. We are trying to find a path toward the reestablishment of human freedom on a planet that has become a huge prison. The enormity of this task, were it realized in its fullness, would likely drive people into their living rooms to break out the beer and cocaine and just say "fuck it".

This regression to freedom, which was man's original natural state, is so radical that we cannot hope to accomplish it in any meaningful way without first establishing and understanding the philosophical basis for such a quantum shift in the way people live. We are here essentially reinventing that basis, and doing so (at least in my case) with the understanding that words matter and are devilishly tricky. In order to assemble a clear, complete, and correct philosophical "platform" upon which to base one's material efforts, precision becomes paramount and that usually requires a lot of words in order that all bases are covered sufficiently that those who play word games are put before the tallest and most unscalable barriers imaginable. Without precision in every detail covering the basic structural elements of a philosophy for freedom, especially in a world of carpet-bagger filth, the door is left ajar for those very people to ply their deceit. Just look at the hopelessly weak Constitution. It's very structure all but guaranteed the outcome to which we have been treated. It may be "small and elegant", but it is also hopelessly vague in critical areas such that even to this day "scholars" argue the precise meanings of this passage or that.

Granted, there is only so much the written word can accomplish, the rest being up to us. But if we are to take up the reins we dropped so long ago, we must understand what it means to be a governor, and that means understanding well the basic philosophical underpinnings of the nation. Without that, there is far less to stop yet another generation of filthy hippies and other useful idiot stooges to come and begin sowing the seeds of doubt in the minds of strong people. We have gone so wrong in so many ways that it makes my head hurt when the torrent-vision overwhelms my waking mind with its reality.

We do need to be "government", even if we are an anarchy... especially so. We need the attitude of a governor of ourselves, as well as that of sentinel and guardian of the rights of all men. But we also must have understanding of that which we are defending, and that requires fools such as myself get all wordy about things, such that all bases are covered and precise. I wish it were otherwise - I would have to type a whole lot less - but alas, I see no way around it, save to leave too much unspecified with insufficient clarity and detail so that evil men would be able to bend words to false meanings.

Does that make sense? Have I been too wordy, even here? Seriously.

Natural Citizen

04-27-2016, 09:03 PM

I see how this is a problem for some - many even - but consider what it is many of us are attempting to do here. We are trying to find a path toward the reestablishment of human freedom on a planet that has become a huge prison. The enormity of this task, were it realized in its fullness, would likely drive people into their living rooms to break out the beer and cocaine and just say "$#@! it".

This regression to freedom, which was man's original natural state, is so radical that we cannot hope to accomplish it in any meaningful way without first establishing and understanding the philosophical basis for such a quantum shift in the way people live. We are here essentially reinventing that basis, and doing so (at least in my case) with the understanding that words matter and are devilishly tricky. In order to assemble a clear, complete, and correct philosophical "platform" upon which to base one's material efforts, precision becomes paramount and that usually requires a lot of words in order that all bases are covered sufficiently that those who play word games are put before the tallest and most unscalable barriers imaginable. Without precision in every detail covering the basic structural elements of a philosophy for freedom, especially in a world of carpet-bagger filth, the door is left ajar for those very people to ply their deceit. Just look at the hopelessly weak Constitution. It's very structure all but guaranteed the outcome to which we have been treated. It may be "small and elegant", but it is also hopelessly vague in critical areas such that even to this day "scholars" argue the precise meanings of this passage or that.

Granted, there is only so much the written word can accomplish, the rest being up to us. But if we are to take up the reins we dropped so long ago, we must understand what it means to be a governor, and that means understanding well the basic philosophical underpinnings of the nation. Without that, there is far less to stop yet another generation of filthy hippies and other useful idiot stooges to come and begin sowing the seeds of doubt in the minds of strong people. We have gone so wrong in so many ways that it makes my head hurt when the torrent-vision overwhelms my waking mind with its reality.

We do need to be "government", even if we are an anarchy... especially so. We need the attitude of a governor of ourselves, as well as that of sentinel and guardian of the rights of all men. But we also must have understanding of that which we are defending, and that requires fools such as myself get all wordy about things, such that all bases are covered and precise. I wish it were otherwise - I would have to type a whole lot less - but alas, I see no way around it, save to leave too much unspecified with insufficient clarity and detail so that evil men would be able to bend words to false meanings.

Does that make sense? Have I been too wordy, even here? Seriously.

No, I understand your points clearly and perfectly. Thanks for following up on what I'd mentioned. And I do agree with you in large part there. It is vague, for sure. And its shortcomings have certainly been used against Individual liberty more so than in its favor. And some warned of the outcome upon our framing. So, yeah. That's where we are. Is what it is, I suppose. Of course, the nature of man and in terms with freedom is complex. What's your view on that, osan? Specifically that. Where does it come from? Man's natural state of freedom, that is. We live in a very secular society or culture. A secular civilization even. Very worldly.

Where, in your view, does freedom come from, osan? That's a good of a place to start as any. What is man's natural state? I'd like to better understand your view of what surmises a truly "natural citizen".

osan

04-28-2016, 11:04 AM

Of course, the nature of man and in terms with feedom is complex.

Actually, I see it as eminently and elegantly simple. The complexities arise as part and parcel of the nature, but of its perversion.

The reason things get complicated is because some people want that to which they are not entitled. "I want my interstate highways, and by GOD I will have them, dammit!" When that is one of your positions, complexity has been artificially injected into the broader issues of free living because interstates do no build themselves. They require great resources and if you are going to have them built, those resources do not simply fall from Jed Clampett's butt, ready to assemble themselves into ready-made highways. If the resources are not available for the free taking, then they must be acquired from... well, YOU. Now add the presumed fact that John Dough has no interest in superhighways. All righteousness would then say "leave Mr. Dough alone". But that leads to shortfalls, which leads to no highways, and by GOD you will have them. That leads irrevocably to force and robbery, which are of course complexities in that they are conceptually disguised and called "taxation" and justified as "one's fair share". I now want to spit obscenities for where all this leads my mind.

And so it goes, issue upon issue arises where people want that to which they have no ability to obtain on their own or even in voluntary cooperation with others. But by GOD they will have them, and so they confound and pervert the good with the evil that is their avarice and the will to engage in whatever steps are deemed necessary to get what they want. Everyone knows this is evil, which is precisely why they contort words, turning murder into love-making. It is classic 1984 tactics that have been used for thousands of years since Empire arose out of the lowest and most rank muck of the mind of someone who by all rights should have been eaten by a wild predator when still a child for the sake of humanity's better fate.

F.A.I.L. (http://freedomisobvious.blogspot.com/2014_12_01_archive.html) has gotten the better of us, and has become so deeply normalized that most people are now incapable of seeing it in their own most basic perceptive assumptions. They don't see taxation as robbery, because the tired and clapped-out "fair share" and "roads" assumptions are so deeply entrenched in their psyches that they are incapable of realizing that these are not absolute, universal truths applicable in even the farthest observable galaxies. Therefore, it is a literal impossibility for such people to see beyond the superficial conflicts of interest between individuals on such matter, which leads to "complexity" in their minds. They cannot - WILL not - accept an alternative viewpoint on what for them are basic truths of the universe, and are thereby hamstrung by the prison their own minds have erected for them and the world becomes complex.

What's your view on that, osan? Specifically that. Where does it come from? Man's natural state of freedom, that is.

We live in a very secular society or culture. A secular civilization even. Very worldly.

Where, in your view, does freedom come from, osan? That's a good of a place to start as any. What is man's natural state? I'd like to better understand your view of what surmises a truly "natural citizen".

Try this on for starters: What is "Freedom"? (http://freedomisobvious.blogspot.com/2009/11/what-is-freedom.html)

Then this: Degrees of Freedom (http://freedomisobvious.blogspot.com/2009/11/degrees-of-freedom.html)

Somewhat tangential, but still relevant: A Few More Reasons Why Humanity's State Of Inheren... (http://freedomisobvious.blogspot.com/2013/04/a-few-more-reasons-why-humanitys-state.html)

And finally, this - a work still in progress, methinks: The Canon of Proper Human Relations (http://freedomisobvious.blogspot.com/2015/04/the-canon-of-proper-human-relations.html)

When one's eyes fix upon the correct context and assumption, the inherent nature of mens' freedom becomes obvious such that it shouts itself at you. One of the problems for so many people such that they confuse freedom with horror and slavery with freedom, is that true and proper human freedom demands things of the individual that a vast plurality of humanity is no longer willing to provide.

Freedom provides itself as a benefit - something most people appear to want. In return, it demands of the individual both accountability and courage - something about three people on the planet are willing to give in return. If you are to be free, you must have the spheres to assume the risks of being free. Few are willing to do this in the fullest measure. They may be willing to ski off an 80' high cornice, but they are not willing to risk allowing their fellows to carry firearms. True freedom demands both, and much more, of the individual. The same man who will ski off that cornice, rather than accepting his fate when his impact on the snow below sets off a huge avalanche, demands others risk their lives bailing his sorry hide out of the mess he's gotten himself into. The thrill of extreme skiiing was all the rage for him until he found himself buried under 9 feet of snow. All of a sudden he wants mommy to come make the booboo all better. This is not a free man. This is a cowering, whiny, self-important, entitled little poseur whose tune changes from his strong, if hollow, C-Major Freedom March to a cacophonous, ear-splitting symphony of diminished fourths (malum in musica).

IOW, people want all the benefits of freedom without having to pay any of the costs of having it. They are unaccepting of the universal reality that there ain't no such thing as a free lunch (TANSTAAFL). They simply reject it out of hand in a manner tightly analogous to a situation where they stand on a heavy rail line, denying the 125-car freight train that is bearing down on them at 70 miles per hour, now only 1/4 of a mile distant saying, "it will not harm me, I shall not move". Okee dokee.

Proper human freedom is terrifying to the Meaner. He relabels it as "insanity", usually plastering "Anarchy" on the notion. As a MereCog, he is heavily vested in his flavor of pretty-slavery/pretty-tyranny. He wants wants wants, but refuses to pay pay pay. Therefore, he steals steals, steals through the agency of his well-armed tax-goons and sleeps well at night because he has justified it all in his mind by any number of phony baloney pretexts including the aforementioned "fair share" doctrine. Freedom means nothing to such men, wanting only to get what they can at the lowest possible cost (zero, ideally) to themselves. It's that sweet-spot for which they strive because to go any further is usually either unfeasible or too costly. So they settle for their miserable little brass-washed cages, lying to themselves that they are made actually of gold.

This is the reality to which humanity has been so thoroughly trained. The prospect of breaking them of this addiction to corruption in favor of Jefferson's "animating contest" are just this side of zero. And that is why I am so doubtful that free status for even meager populations will be unattainable without very serious bloodshed; we are talking about thrusting huge masses of people of the most timid and corrupt character into an environment so depthlessly terrifying to them that they will sell what remains of their souls to the devil in a heartbeat in return for his lie that everything will remain the same. Such people would see you and your children killed in ways that would leave even the most demented ISIS "warrior" on his side, quaking and vomiting in shock and disgust, before allowing themselves to be dragged into the horror of actual freedom. There is NO POSSIBLE WAY that at least 150 million Americans would allow it. They would whine like banshees for men with guns to save them from what for them is a fate far worse than death. And those men would come to their aid and the rest of us would be faced with a very real and immediate choice to fight to the death or lay down and become nothing worthy of so much as contempt.

That is the barrier that we here face, and it is truly daunting.

Bryan

04-29-2016, 01:09 AM

OK, that's pretty good, but I must reiterate a point - not to be downer, but
Pointing out reality isn't a downer.

How does one compete with the likes of a Sanders or a Clinton who preach free unicorn-poo for everyone while promising death to the wealthy? They are reinforcing the base instincts that draw them inexorably in the direction of "free shit", playing upon envy, while redirecting and projecting what should be shame for one's own miserable inadequacies and translating it into blind, red-raging hatred. The question of competition is the one that needs to be answered - not how to compete, initially, but rather whether you can. I am no longer certain it is possible. Be that the case, any attempts to win such people to your cause is likely to prove fruitless, leaving you to ask whether there are enough "superior" men remaining such that one could realistically make an attempt to keep this vessel we call "America" afloat.
All IMO... for some people, you can't complete. Most others aren't going to turn on a dime, it can nominally take around six months or more for someone to go from getting a seed of liberty and turning it into a new world outlook. Within that six months there is a lot of person reflection, withdraw from past ties, leaning new things and then starting to articulate new views. One key is to recognize when you are just planning seeds that you need to accept that you are doing just that, don't expect the quick change. Otherwise, there are a lot of do's and don'ts to this; another major topic. These things are doable for most people, and it's the people that are important, the vessel comes after that.

The task is enormously difficult because you have damned near everything against you, including the majority who would see you burned alive as soon as tell you to screw off.

Keep that in mind.
While working towards it, I understand the scope of the problem, so it's in mind. The key however, is that it has to be planned for, and it's why we need better plans. The Liberty Blueprint is just the first layer of plans.

r3volution 3.0

04-30-2016, 12:52 AM

The basic problem here and in the liberty movement generally is quite simple.

Ron Paul is gone.

Sometimes we don't want to talk about that, because it's an insolvable problem.

It takes ~40 years to make a Ron Paul, and we won't have another for several decades, if ever.

Ron drew in the general "anti-establishment" types.

...who are now for Trump or Bernie.

Ron drew in the hardcore, purist libertarians.

...who are now, many of them, anti-political and apathetic.

The former need libertarian education, the latter need inspiration.

There's no obvious way to do this.

Those of us who remain are the more pragmatic libertarians, but it turns out there just aren't that many of us.

So that's the problem. As for solutions, I have no thoughts at the moment.

LibertyEagle

04-30-2016, 04:07 AM

Thing is, this isn't a "libertarian" movement. Liberty isn't owned by libertarians. The constant pronouncements on this forum by some individuals to the contrary is very off-putting to those who are not part of the "clan". Nor is it a cover for hating the country, the Constitution, our Founders, or for the unfettered illegal alien invasion of the U.S.

luctor-et-emergo

04-30-2016, 04:17 AM

Thing is, this isn't a "libertarian" movement.
You feel very strongly about that, how come ? It's just a word, it doesn't have a whole lot of meaning without a context. I'd argue that compared to all of the other people, our movement is a libertarian-ish movement.

The constant pronouncements on this forum by some individuals to the contrary is very off-putting to those who are not part of the "clan".
Promoting an authoritarian liar on a forum that's named after the most honest and least authoritarian politician ever is off-putting to some people as well.

opal

04-30-2016, 07:56 AM

r3volution 3.0

04-30-2016, 10:59 AM

dude.. really.. choose some words more carefully
how about *Ron Paul is done with politics*
or
*Ron Paul isn't on the ballot*
he's not gone.. go on youtube.. you'll find him

Of course

He's gone in the sense that he's largely retired from public life, not that he's dropped off the face of the Earth.

In any event, we've lost a major unifying force for the liberty movement.

To be clear, I'm not really pessimistic about this. It's a problem, but not an insurmountable one.

We haven't yet found the right post-Ron formula, but I'm confident that we will, sooner or later.

younglibertarian

04-30-2016, 11:23 AM

While informational warfare is effective, it pretty much needs to be carried out through a presidential election. That is how you get publication and the like.

Daveforliberty

05-01-2016, 12:16 PM

In reading this thread, I notice that in some of the better posts, the subject being discussed is being passively defined as "Human Freedom". I like this term, and hope you would consider it for a new name for the site. It cannot be attacked as political, cannot be attacked as arrogant: The Truth", or dare I say it, "Guide Point"; it is "big tent", and lends itself to practical forum topics such as "What is human freedom?" "Why is human freedom important?" etc.

By the way, the fact that maybe 100 people "regularly contribute" is, I think irrelevant. There are many more of us here who have been around for a very long time, who read every day, but who do not often add more words simply for the sake of adding more words.

phill4paul

05-01-2016, 12:40 PM

Great idea! I hope it works out!

However, I personally think the time for Liberty is past and we as a nation are far beyond repair. It was a good run guys but I think our time should now be spent trying to survive what's to come.

Knowledge is the basis for survival. If that is your focus we could use your input in these sub-forums...

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/forumdisplay.php?65-Freedom-Living

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/forumdisplay.php?112-Personal-Security-amp-Defense

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/forumdisplay.php?179-Personal-Health-amp-Well-Being (regarding health tips/remedies that would apply in a shtf scenario)

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/forumdisplay.php?8-Privacy-amp-Data-Security ( staying out of the governments cross-hairs, etc.)

scrosnoe

05-10-2016, 07:54 AM

This thread makes me smile :) reminds me of the early days and yet with new vision -- special thanks to Bryan for stimulating this conversation!

I think the most important thing I could add is that it is the diversity within our midst that makes us different from all the rest of political fiefdom out there. It is the fact that we really work at having a real conversation on real topics. And most of the time we succeed in taking care of one another with a lot of wisdom and love. If the body kills it's wounded parts, it will die sooner instead of later. We need each other and it does matter how we treat one another. We need to know our heavenly Father and we need to know how the system operates. He will show us IF we ask and even try to follow His Way.

I find that everyone in our midst is a truth seeker. That is a good thing, because the bible tells us that if we seek; we will find:

Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: Matthew 7:7

The Guide Point (http://theguidepoint.com) can be a part of that process that is IF we all work together to make it so!

Blessings,
Sandie

tod evans

05-10-2016, 07:58 AM

FYI

https://www.guideposts.org/

Natural Citizen

05-15-2016, 12:43 PM

FYI

https://www.guideposts.org/

Hm. Well, that's interesting irony there. I really would like to see more people with this view participate more here. We do have friends here who understand and place into practice this aspect of libertarian outreach. It goes hand in hand with liberty by its very nature. But our peace through religion platform has become counter-intuitive to these particular principles. A boxing ring of varying philosophy. To the point that we've lost some of these people here. Talented people. People whose contributions/ideas on direction are valuable in scope. There is more I want to say about this but I'll leave it alone for now.

But I did bookmark your link, tod. I like sites like that. And liberty is certainly a lifestyle as much as it is a group of principles.

cjsanford5

05-20-2016, 07:18 PM

I have been coming here since 2008 to check the pulse of the movement. I don't post much but browse daily to see what like minded individuals think about current events. Don't change too much please!

Suzanimal

05-20-2016, 07:43 PM

I have been coming here since 2008 to check the pulse of the movement. I don't post much but browse daily to see what like minded individuals think about current events. Don't change too much please!

Nine posts since 2008. Obviously, you feel strongly about this.:D

Suzu

05-21-2016, 05:05 PM

Nine posts since 2008. Obviously, you feel strongly about this.:D

It's entirely possible. I have a friend who lives in Colorado who joined this forum years ago and has only posted a few times. But he's very much a pro-liberty, Ron Paul / Libertarian guy.

Suzanimal

05-21-2016, 05:08 PM

It's entirely possible. I have a friend who lives in Colorado who joined this forum years ago and has only posted a few times. But he's very much a pro-liberty, Ron Paul / Libertarian guy.

I wasn't doubting his/her sincerity. I just found it amusing.:)

Suzu

05-21-2016, 05:12 PM

I wasn't doubting his/her sincerity. I just found it amusing.:)

Okay. And I wasn't implying that you doubt the person, either; I was just commenting about my friend. BTW here is one of his posts -- and he's only made three posts since he joined in April of 2008 -- worth a look:

http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?32-Introduce-yourself!-Who-What-Where-Why!&p=1393879&viewfull=1#post1393879

kill the banks

06-01-2016, 06:12 PM

good luck brian search toward truth and loving wisdom

the basics that the freemasons failed and the secret boys clubs

we need a complete restart

wizardwatson

10-10-2017, 09:07 PM

You want to know exactly what's wrong with the "movement" and what caused it's downfall, Bryan?

Just listen to the strategic moron (Hans Herman Hoppe) in this video here originally posted by Conza88 in post #51. What he says in this minute and 17 second video pretty much sums up the problem (not that he addresses the problem, but that his attitude toward knowledge IS the problem):

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EKCrLaLChOk

Rothbard addresses these do-nothing people in Ethics of Liberty Chapter 30:

It might be thought that the libertarian, the person committed to the
"natural system of liberty" (in Adam Smith's phrase), almost by definition
holds the goal of liberty as his highest political end. But this is often not
true; for many libertarians, the desire for self-expression, or for bearing
witness to the truth of the excellence of liberty, frequently takes precedence
over the goal of the triumph of liberty in the real world. Yet surely,
as will be seen further below, the victory of liberty will never come to pass
unless the goal of victory in the real world takes precedence over more
esthetic and passive considerations.

In other words, until the Bryan's of the world take precedence over the Hoppe's of the world, it's going to be a hard journey.

wizardwatson

10-13-2017, 07:59 AM

Can anyone part of site staff, or associated with this year+ old initiative comment on the status of this "new site vision"/initiative?

Are there still plans to have new branding with The Guide Point? Any work being done on this front in general? Anyone still interested?

I'm currently refining Bryan's ideas into a solid plan, and just wondering what overall level of activity is that I might not be seeing just as a forum member.

I've read this thread through along with all Bryan's threads associated with Foundational Knowledgebase and the MAF.

wizardwatson

10-17-2017, 09:06 PM

So yeah, bumpy bump 'n stuff. Still kinda wanna know if this is still a thing. (see post #112)

https://www.intrepidtravel.com/adventures/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/16queue.gif

dannno

10-17-2017, 10:13 PM

It's not the Mod's/etc. job to create the content although they certainly can if they want.. what initiatives do you want to promote?

Natural Citizen

10-17-2017, 11:03 PM

I'm gonna go through the OP line by line tomorrow when I have time. Thanks for the bump, wiz.

First things first really should be definition. And not just definition of liberty.

wizardwatson

10-18-2017, 09:51 AM

It's not the Mod's/etc. job to create the content although they certainly can if they want.. what initiatives do you want to promote?

Well, I was just asking on the status of the new "The Guide Point" branding. If that was still a thing, and if there's any organizational initiatives still under consideration. I am working on something myself, have been for a little over a week, that is in the same spirit of what Bryan was getting at, only defines a solid process using the forum as a workspace.

Should be done by the end of the weekend.

But not asking "what is everyone doing" in general, but specifically with the "The Guide Point" branding. More like, is this active or abandoned. So non-answer kind of gives me a clue.

wizardwatson

10-18-2017, 09:55 AM

I'm gonna go through the OP line by line tomorrow when I have time. Thanks for the bump, wiz.

First things first really should be definition. And not just definition of liberty.

I should have my write up on Bryan's thing, together with a defined process, by the end of the weekend. Essentially, Bryan's idea for a "Wiki" is really just developing a process for consensus on a mission/platform/definition document. I'm essentially writing up a very simplified forum-based "wiki" workflow that doesn't require anything fancy, and is easy for everyone to understand.

It will be like the Fisher Price version of Roberts Rules of Order, only implemented on a forum, with "meeting minutes" and reports via a Google Sheet that I've created, that does some basic reporting. That's the abstract.

Won't go into details, since it will be a time waste since I'm only a few days out from showing the whole thing. Better to spend time finishing than responding to questions about "where I'm at." I've been working on it since Oct. 10th.

Natural Citizen

10-18-2017, 11:55 AM

I never started. It's kind of all in my head. Though, I've recently discovered the critical need for loyalty to that which we define and place into application (mission). Simply put, without definition, there can not be 1 - a mission, and 2 - loyalty to said mission.

For example. As a store owner, I might support competition next door. And I might even invite my competition over to discuss how we may grow the market itself in synergy. But why would I invite my competition into my store if he's only going to walk down my aisles knocking my product off the shelves and switch all of the labels around? Why would I invite him into my store if I know that he and his employees go back to his store to discuss how they're going to wreck my store in the future just by way of the fact that I let them in? Or discuss how they're going to recruit my employees. Hm? Why?

To expand on that single factor alone, a current guideline that we've established in support of our mission is that - Attempts to undermine the value of electoral politics or the legitimacy of the US constitution is in opposition of our mission.

That said, we spend a great deal of time fighting people who signed up in agreement of this principle by contract yet systematically work against it (walk down my aisles knocking my product off the shelves and switch all of the labels around.) This is counterproductive and a burden.

But there's so much more to say about other things, too, so there are points to be made specific line by line with regard to the OP.

But definition is number 1. And, again, not just a functional definition of liberty. There needs to be a functional definition of a few isms as well as their value to mission.

I should have my write up on Bryan's thing, together with a defined process, by the end of the weekend. Essentially, Bryan's idea for a "Wiki" is really just developing a process for consensus on a mission/platform/definition document. I'm essentially writing up a very simplified forum-based "wiki" workflow that doesn't require anything fancy, and is easy for everyone to understand.

It will be like the Fisher Price version of Roberts Rules of Order, only implemented on a forum, with "meeting minutes" and reports via a Google Sheet that I've created, that does some basic reporting. That's the abstract.

Won't go into details, since it will be a time waste since I'm only a few days out from showing the whole thing. Better to spend time finishing than responding to questions about "where I'm at." I've been working on it since Oct. 10th.

Jamesiv1

10-18-2017, 12:08 PM

Shouldn't we take a poll about this?

undergroundrr

10-18-2017, 12:26 PM

To expand on that single factor alone, a current guideline that we've established is in support of our mission is that - Attempts to undermine the value of electoral politics or the legitimacy of the US constitution is in opposition of our mission.

"More people are discovering that the system is all rigged, and that voting is just pacification for the voters and it really doesn’t count.” - Ron Paul

"Our Constitution, which was intended to limit government power and abuse, has failed. The Founders warned that a free society depends on a virtuous and moral people. The current crisis reflects that their concerns were justified." - Ron Paul

Natural Citizen

10-18-2017, 12:34 PM

Ron Paul introduces himself as the champion of the constitution. This ideal still exists within our guidelines which exist in support of our mission.

If somebody slashed my tires, I don't throw my car away. I fix it. And I put my watchdog in there with the windows down in case they get the notion to try it again.

And that's what those quotes mean.

The key point in your quotes is simple. The Founders warned that a free society depends on a virtuous and moral people. The constitution isn't the problem. It's the people who were left with the responsibility of defending it that are the problem.

Again, definition.

"More people are discovering that the system is all rigged, and that voting is just pacification for the voters and it really doesn’t count.” - Ron Paul

"Our Constitution, which was intended to limit government power and abuse, has failed. The Founders warned that a free society depends on a virtuous and moral people. The current crisis reflects that their concerns were justified." - Ron Paul

r3volution 3.0

10-18-2017, 01:46 PM

The Founders warned that a free society depends on a virtuous and moral people. The constitution isn't the problem. It's the people who were left with the responsibility of defending it that are the problem.

Suppose I said that the problem with communism is that people don't behave selflessly. That statement would be true, but incomplete. The greater problem with communism is that it relies on people behaving selflessly (a decidedly unrealistic expectation). Similarly, though the failure of the republic can be attributed to the people not being sufficiently virtuous and moral, a more comprehensive explanation of our problems would be that it was unreasonable for the Founders to expect people to be virtuous and moral, and that a system which relies on them being so is inherently unworkable.

Natural Citizen

10-18-2017, 02:07 PM

Well, if we read any of their thoughts on the nature of man, they were succinct in acknowledging the nature of man.

One immediate example which comes to mind are the words of Thomas Jefferson when he proclaimed in the Kentucky Resolutions that ''In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution."

Washington, in his Farewell Addressed proclaimed that weaknesses of human nature in governmentare conducive to "love of power and proneness to abuse it"

So, they did acknowledge this error in the ways of men in power. And there are pages and pages of these same sentiments from their pens and mouths.

Now it is fair to submit the anology which you provide. Especially in looking at the current state of things as a consequence of an out of control government. But they can be countered by the fact that, yes, the founders did acknowledge the nature of man to be prone to abuse power. I ask if it is not reasonable to say that the means which were penned in order to secure our liberties against this proness to abuse power is workable. To that extent, I say yes. But this requires the support of wise men and society itself and the acceptance of the fact that, yes, it is out of control and that their Just Power needs to be checked.

We have the authority to check that Just Power. And we should be thankful that we do. The problem is that we aren't.

For the purpose of the thread itself I think that developing and securing an ideal vision moving forward is reasonable.

Suppose I said that the problem with communism is that people don't behave selflessly. That statement would be true, but incomplete. The greater problem with communism is that it relies on people behaving selflessly (a decidedly unrealistic expectation). Similarly, though the failure of the republic can be attributed to the people not being sufficiently virtuous and moral, a more comprehensive explanation of our problems would be that it was unreasonable for the Founders to expect people to be virtuous and moral, and that a system which relies on them being so is inherently unworkable.

r3volution 3.0

10-18-2017, 02:15 PM

Well, if we read any of their thoughts on the nature of man, they were succinct in acknowledging the nature of man.

On immediate example which comes to mind are the words of Thomas Jefferson when he proclaimed in the Kentucky Resolutions that ''In questions of power, then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down from mischief by the chains of the Constitution."

Washungton, in hisFarewell Addressed proclaimed that weaknesses of human nature in governmentare conducive to "love of power and proneness to abuse it"

So, they did acknowledge this error in the ways of men in power. And there are pages and pages of these same sentiments from their pens and mouths.

Now it is fair to submit the anology which you provide. But they can be countered by the fact that, yes, the founders did acknowledge the nature of man to be proneness to abuse power. I ask if it is not reasonable to say that the means which were penned in order to secure our liberties against this proness to abuse power is workable. To that extent, I say yes. But this requires the support of wise men and society itself.

I would never call the Founders dense or uneducated, to the contrary, but I would call them wishful thinkers. They appreciated the true, very imperfect, nature of man (as your quotes indicate) and yet still built a political system which they knew could only function if man acted contrary to his very imperfect nature. It's rather puzzling. As for the "chains of the Constitution," that takes us in circles. The Constitution is a piece of paper. It does not and cannot *do* anything. It is effective only insofar as *people* choose to enforce it. If people are virtuous, there is no need for a Constitution; if they aren't, there's no use in having one.

Natural Citizen

10-18-2017, 02:45 PM

I would never call the Founders dense or uneducated, to the contrary, but I would call them wishful thinkers. They appreciated the true, very imperfect, nature of man (as your quotes indicate) and yet still built a political system which they knew could only function if man acted contrary to his very imperfect nature. It's rather puzzling. As for the "chains of the Constitution," that takes us in circles. The Constitution is a piece of paper. It does not and cannot *do* anything. It is effective only insofar as *people* choose to enforce it. If people are virtuous, there is no need for a Constitution; if they aren't, there's no use in having one.

I don't disagree. So I cannot debate the point. Nor will I attempt it.

Rev, I contend that only worthy men can be free men. So we have two choices. 1 - Do we raise the black flag and start slitting throats? or 2 - Do we make an attempt to work within the political system of which the American heritage is derived with reservation of option 1?

I'd like to avoid option 1. I'm geting old, Rev. And I cannot trust the youth.

Natural Citizen

10-18-2017, 02:55 PM

I'll say something else. I had asked Bryan to mark my account closed and tear up my contract just because I found the forum to be an addiction that I simply couldn't bring myself to overcome more than any kind of applicable, functional, method to work toward any vision in synergy. The fact of the matter is that we have a lot of people that choose to exist here for no other reason than to be contrary to the site mission and to misrepresent the site mission and that's where I spend the majority of my time debating. Then they run back to their other forum or whatever and laugh about how they trashed our place and then plan on how to do so again in the future. I see no benefiit to wasting my time with that anymore given that there really are honest people out there interested in learning true liberarian, small government, principles as opposed to trashing them and redefining it to suit an indulgence. Though, he didn't give me the courtesy of a response.

Reason being is that you cannot move forward in synergy when you systematically disagree on a defined vision from within. In other words, a bunch of monkeys trying to hump a football with no referee. Respectfully. It just won't work.

I found it more practical (still do as things are) to use this board as an example of showing others elsewhere interested in libertarian things what not to do. To use the board as a means of demonstrating what is not liberarian. Unfortunately, it's the gift that keeps on giving.

Now, if we could secure a site mission, I'd have a different outlook. And I'm willing to help with doing that.

An example of what is not helpful is when people who use our platform to advertise the notion of burning down federal buildings as a means of activism. They not only represent their own reckless view of what surmises a solution to problems, they represent me by their very presence. This is irresponsible. It's a liability to cause. Though, most of the time I think it's purposeful by the mere fact that they choose not to do that on their own respective sites. Unfortunately, this is popularly how we're defined. We're defined by the worst of the worst among us because we permit for their presence and we permit them to speak for us. We permit ourselves to be misrepresented.

Definition is necessary. Securing any ideal is also important, however. It's far more important actually. An that's where we fall short. We don't secure it.

r3volution 3.0

10-18-2017, 04:12 PM

I don't disagree. So I cannot debate the point. Nor will I attempt it.

Rev, I contend that only worthy men can be free men. So we have two choices. 1 - Do we raise the black flag and start slitting throats? or 2 - Do we make an attempt to work within the political system of which the American heritage is derived with reservation of option 1?

I'd like to avoid option 1. I'm geting old, Rev. And I cannot trust the youth.

I'm also definitely opposed to the black flag. And I'm 100% in favor of trying to work within the system as it exists (hence my support for Rand, for instance). But, at the same time, if liberty is to triumph in the long run, it is critical that we recognize the inherent flaws of the present system - its inherently illiberal tendencies - so that we can begin thinking about a better alternative. You and I almost certainly won't see an opportunity for bringing about a better system, but someone will, eventually. It's our job - as we work now within the present system - to build the intellectual foundation for those future generations. That's the proper strategy as I see it, anyway.

I'll say something else. I had asked Bryan to mark my account closed and tear up my contract just because I found the forum to be an addiction that I simply couldn't bring myself to overcome more than any kind of applicable, functional, method to work toward any vision in synergy. The fact of the matter is that we have a lot of people that choose to exist here for no other reason than to be contrary to the site mission and to misrepresent the site mission and that's where I spend the majority of my time debating. Then they run back to their other forum or whatever and laugh about how they trashed our place and then plan on how to do so again in the future. I see no benefiit to wasting my time with that anymore given that there really are honest people out there interested in learning true liberarian, small government, principles as opposed to trashing them and redefining it to suit an indulgence. Though, he didn't give me the courtesy of a response.

Reason being is that you cannot move forward in synergy when you systematically disagree on a defined vision from within. In other words, a bunch of monkeys trying to hump a football with no referee. Respectfully. It just won't work.

I found it more practical (still do as things are) to use this board as an example of showing others elsewhere interested in libertarian things what not to do. To use the board as a means of demonstrating what is not liberarian. Unfortunately, it's the gift that keeps on giving.

Now, if we could secure a site mission, I'd have a different outlook. And I'm willing to help with doing that.

An example of what is not helpful is when people who use our platform to advertise the notion of burning down federal buildings as a means of activism. They not only represent their own reckless view of what surmises a solution to problems, they represent me by their very presence. This is irresponsible. It's a liability to cause. Though, most of the time I think it's purposeful by the mere fact that they choose not to do that on their own respective sites. Unfortunately, this is popularly how we're defined. We're defined by the worst of the worst among us because we permit for their presence and we permit them to speak for us. We permit ourselves to be misrepresented.

Definition is necessary. Securing any ideal is also important, however. It's far more important actually. An that's where we fall short. We don't secure it.

If you're referring to the "alt right" types who've infiltrated this site and the movement generally, I completely agree. Libertarians are never going to agree completely on everything, but we must draw a line, at some point, between libertarians and non-libertarians. Our ideological enemies are not nearly as "tolerant" as we are. They are taking advantage of our "tolerance" every day, on this forum and elsewhere.

But don't get too discouraged man.

Keep in mind that, whatever our organizational problems, however bad the political environment, we are in fact right. :)

Swordsmyth

10-19-2017, 02:07 PM

Natural Citizen

10-19-2017, 02:46 PM

Make whatever decision is best for you, but if you leave you will be missed.

Well, no, I'll never leave the cause itself. I'll never stop working in that regard. I appreciate your kinds words, though.

The realization sometimes presents itself, however, that one wastes valuable energy becoming preoccupied by those who signed a contract to work with you in synergy, yet choose...and make no mistake, it is a choice..to work against the defined function of our site and often times at the site's expense in terms of validity. Admittedly, however, I lack the self-control to not be bothered by it.

Guideline 6 comes to mind here...

6) Do not disrupt Mission-supporting activism efforts.

Attempts to undermine the value of electoral politics or the legitimacy of the US constitution.

Now, I spend a great deal of my time debating these people who make it their mission to work against that.

It's a waste of my time and it's a waste of yours. It's noise. And it has become dominant noise, unfortunately. And there is no way that we're going to be able to educate in any functional manner if we have to fight our own in defense of our site mission in the process. What's worse, we can't be taken seriously by any passer-by because when we do try to work toward the site mission, we get some dolt posting a meme of a unicorn dragging his ass with rainbow colored feces for the simple fact that he disagrees with the constitution. When people see stuff like that, we don't get taken seriously as a whole. And we become misrepresented literally by troll tactics.

Until we can get a hold on stuff like that, really, the best thing to do is to take off and work elsewhere and consider coming back once the wrecking balls have been cleared. A site mission and any guidlines can never prove to be of any value unless there exists loyalty to them in synergy. By the simple fact that we agree to these terms when signing on yet many observably choose to act in a contrary, opposing, way, should indicate that we aren't doing a very good job at securing our own mission.

So, that's what I mean by that. Though, it does become addicting to the point that one ends up containing himself in no beneficial way.

Daniel had mentioned something recently that is very important and definitive of where we actually are at this point. It's about education. It's about frequency. That's key right now. Unfortunately, it's becoming a redundant chore, at least on RPF, because many of our supposed peers make it impossible. The namesake is more often misrepresented than represented. And we let them, unfortunately, by th very fact that libertarianism permits for them to be present and to publicly try to make asses out of people who, in accordance with the site mission, value electoral politics and the legitimacy of the US constitution through application as well as education.

The Rebel Poet

10-19-2017, 04:04 PM

Well, no, I'll never leave the cause itself. I'll never stop working in that regard. I appreciate your kinds words, though.

The realization sometimes presents itself, however, that one wastes valuable energy becoming preoccupied by those who signed a contract to work with you in synergy, yet choose...and make no mistake, it is a choice..to work against the defined function of our site and often times at the site's expense in terms of validity. Admittedly, however, I lack the self-control to not be bothered by it.

Guideline 6 comes to mind here...

6) Do not disrupt Mission-supporting activism efforts.

Attempts to undermine the value of electoral politics or the legitimacy of the US constitution.

Now, I spend a great deal of my time debating these people who make it their mission to work against that.

It's a waste of my time and it's a waste of yours. It's noise. And it has become dominant noise, unfortunately. And there is no way that we're going to be able to educate in any functional manner if we have to fight our own in defense of our site mission in the process. What's worse, we can't be taken seriously by any passer-by because when we do try to work toward the site mission, we get some dolt posting a meme of a unicorn dragging his ass with rainbow colored feces for the simple fact that he disagrees with the constitution. When people see stuff like that, we don't get taken seriously as a whole. And we become misrepresented literally by troll tactics.

Until we can get a hold on stuff like that, really, the best thing to do is to take off and work elsewhere and consider coming back once the wrecking balls have been cleared. A site mission and any guidlines can never prove to be of any value unless there exists loyalty to them in synergy. By the simple fact that we agree to these terms when signing on yet many observably choose to act in a contrary, opposing, way, should indicate that we aren't doing a very good job at securing our own mission.

So, that's what I mean by that. Though, it does become addicting to the point that one ends up containing himself in no beneficial way.

Daniel had mentioned something recently that is very important and definitive of where we actually are at this point. It's about education. It's about frequency. That's key right now. Unfortunately, it's becoming a redundant chore, at least on RPF, because many of our supposed peers make it impossible. The namesake is more often misrepresented than represented. And we let them, unfortunately, by th very fact that libertarianism permits for them to be present and to publicly try to make asses out of people who, in accordance with the site mission, value electoral politics and the legitimacy of the US constitution through application as well as education.

"You must spread some Reputation around before giving it to Natural Citizen again."

Between that segment of anarchists who don't want us to vote, and the few remaining alt-right trolls who derail threads, we need to work harder than ever. Don't give up.

wizardwatson

10-22-2017, 09:03 PM

I should have my write up on Bryan's thing, together with a defined process, by the end of the weekend. Essentially, Bryan's idea for a "Wiki" is really just developing a process for consensus on a mission/platform/definition document. I'm essentially writing up a very simplified forum-based "wiki" workflow that doesn't require anything fancy, and is easy for everyone to understand.

It will be like the Fisher Price version of Roberts Rules of Order, only implemented on a forum, with "meeting minutes" and reports via a Google Sheet that I've created, that does some basic reporting. That's the abstract.

Won't go into details, since it will be a time waste since I'm only a few days out from showing the whole thing. Better to spend time finishing than responding to questions about "where I'm at." I've been working on it since Oct. 10th.

Wow, wiz. I just saw your post over in the Foundational Knowledgebase Subforum:

How to "Liberty Movement" - by wizardwatson (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?516161-How-to-quot-Liberty-Movement-quot-by-wizardwatson)

...and you actually got it done before the weekend was over. I would say I'm impressed, but after reading the material you wrote, I gotta say, that phrase just doesn't do it justice! You are a legend, my friend. I'm excited to see where this goes!

wizardwatson

10-22-2017, 09:05 PM

Wow, wiz. I just saw your post over in the Foundational Knowledgebase Subforum:

How to "Liberty Movement" - by wizardwatson (http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?516161-How-to-quot-Liberty-Movement-quot-by-wizardwatson)

...and you actually got it done before the weekend was over. I would say I'm impressed, but after reading the material you wrote, I gotta say, that phrase just doesn't do it justice! You are a legend, my friend. I'm excited to see where this goes!

Well, all credit to the Lord. I am nought but a humble servant. Thanks for the mention!