Making these forums semi official

[alienpyro]

I was thinking, these seems to the ronpaul forums with the most traffic. I think we should make an effort to direct all other ron paul forum participants to here. That way we could be a little more centralized and could propagate and discuss ideas better. What do you guys think?

[DeadheadForPaul]

Agreed. I did not even realize there weree other forums

[Razmear]

just don't make it too easy for the trolls to find us. Things are running pretty smooth here right now.

[Bradley in DC]

I agree with the sentiment but calling it "official" would invite FEC scrutiny about campaign-related activities we don't want.

[BLS]

I suggested this about a month and a half ago and got BLASTED for it.

[DeadheadForPaul]

We need to keep this relatively downlow for 2 reasons. 1.) Keep trolls away 2.) Keep potential voters away. Some of our conversations would turn off the average person. I tihnk passionate supporters will find this pretty easily

[yongrel]

i think that a) these forums should be viewable only to members. And b) this form is slowly becoming the major one, thanks largely to an awesome Admin and Mod team.

No worries.

[angelatc]

I think Hot Topics should only be viewable to members. WHo knows - maybe it is.

[Slugg]

I think Hot Topics should only be viewable to members. WHo knows - maybe it is.

How about a request access system. Those who have 'proven' they are trustworthy get access, those who have not...don't. Let the admin, BradlyinDC and other long time Paulites decide, then it can be by 'recommendation' only or something...or...here's an idea...by donation?

I am just trying to figure out how to get a thread where we can communicate without 'leaks'

I think the 'centralized' idea is fine...but I think there should be a place to discuss things we do not want open to just anyone. Like Rumors, Plans, ideas, etc....

This way we (the users) have positive control over who can see our posts.

Perhaps this is a bit complex...but it's just a 2cent idea.

[mdh]

How about a request access system. Those who have 'proven' they are trustworthy get access, those who have not...don't. Let the admin, BradlyinDC and other long time Paulites decide, then it can be by 'recommendation' only or something...or...here's an idea...by donation?

I am just trying to figure out how to get a thread where we can communicate without 'leaks'

I think the 'centralized' idea is fine...but I think there should be a place to discuss things we do not want open to just anyone. Like Rumors, Plans, ideas, etc....

This way we (the users) have positive control over who can see our posts.

Perhaps this is a bit complex...but it's just a 2cent idea.

This is kind of whacky. We're never going to be able to communicate without leaks over the internet unless we limit it to a very short list of people. Furthermore, why is it that we should particularly want to? What we're doing is righteous, we don't need to hide in the shadows. Transparency lends credibility to our cause, believe me when I say that. If people can see what we're doing, they can make their own decisions about how they feel about it, and about how involved they want to be.

"You can throw your rock, and hide your hand, workin' in the dark against your fellow man, but as sure as God made black and white, what's done in the dark will be brought to the light." - Johnny Cash.

We have nothing to hide. We should be throwing our rocks and then holding our fists up proudly!

[DeadheadForPaul]

I think that, if its possible, we should only allow members with like 30 posts or more to access the hot topics. I say this because many of our conversations are very controversial and may turn off newcomers. Additionally, we can determine very quickly if someone is a troll or not. If a troll gets access to some of those discussion, it'd probably be bad

As our campaign grows, we will have more newcomers and more trolls, so i think we should address this issue

[specsaregood]

This is kind of whacky. We're never going to be able to communicate without leaks over the internet unless we limit it to a very short list of people. Furthermore, why is it that we should particularly want to? What we're doing is righteous, we don't need to hide in the shadows. Transparency lends credibility to our cause, believe me when I say that. If people can see what we're doing, they can make their own decisions about how they feel about it, and about how involved they want to be.

"You can throw your rock, and hide your hand, workin' in the dark against your fellow man, but as sure as God made black and white, what's done in the dark will be brought to the light." - Johnny Cash.

We have nothing to hide. We should be throwing our rocks and then holding our fists up proudly!

Exactly. As with most government intervention; this *sounds* like a good idea at face value; BUT freedom and transparency will serve us better in the long run.

As I posted in another thread.
"Ron Paul stands for a transparent government and ending government secrecy. His supporters mirror this belief by planning, discussing and fundraising on a publicly-available message board."

[Slugg]

This is kind of whacky. We're never going to be able to communicate without leaks over the internet unless we limit it to a very short list of people. Furthermore, why is it that we should particularly want to? What we're doing is righteous, we don't need to hide in the shadows. Transparency lends credibility to our cause, believe me when I say that. If people can see what we're doing, they can make their own decisions about how they feel about it, and about how involved they want to be.

"You can throw your rock, and hide your hand, workin' in the dark against your fellow man, but as sure as God made black and white, what's done in the dark will be brought to the light." - Johnny Cash.

We have nothing to hide. We should be throwing our rocks and then holding our fists up proudly!

Wacky? Nah, if this forum is going to be used for 'planning,' or 'assisting' the message, then it only seems logical to try and keep out the trolls and 'nay-sayers'

I suggested that because apparently there have been blogs/articles written about conversations on this forum that ended with spin. I also don't see a problem with a 'short' list either. The real goal, however, it to prevent trolls. A forum where people can toss around real ideas that don't get lost in trillions of other threads.

Why, not just a few days ago a thread was deleted because it implied things (positive none-the-less) about the campaign. To prevent any spin the thread was deleted (rightfully so I think). But, the majority of the conversation in the thread was 'wishful daydreaming and excitement'...and that's good....we should be able to 'daydream' about these little rumors and whatnot. However, if a troll comes along and blows this all out of proportion it becomes another "hit piece" and we lose a little ground.

Your right, what we are doing is righteous, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be protected.

Again, it was just a 2cent idea....tossin' it out there.

[Slugg]

Exactly. As with most government intervention; this *sounds* like a good idea at face value; BUT freedom and transparency will serve us better in the long run.

As I posted in another thread.
"Ron Paul stands for a transparent government and ending government secrecy. His supporters mirror this belief by planning, discussing and fundraising on a publicly-available message board."

Okay

[empirenine]

I think the best idea would be to simply build strong ties with the other boards and make sure we have an open line of communication.

We just need good communication between the boards if a great idea needs some people to back it.

[BenIsForRon]

^agreed, if we tried to actually merge the boards things would get too chaotic.

[ronpaulhawaii]

...

"You can throw your rock, and hide your hand, workin' in the dark against your fellow man, but as sure as God made black and white, what's done in the dark will be brought to the light." - Johnny Cash.

We have nothing to hide. We should be throwing our rocks and then holding our fists up proudly!


Okay


^agreed, if we tried to actually merge the boards things would get too chaotic.

Transparency is good, chaos is not. I think this will grow naturally. Multiple boards allow for "personality conflicts"

my2cts

[kern802]

I think the best idea would be to simply build strong ties with the other boards and make sure we have an open line of communication.

We just need good communication between the boards if a great idea needs some people to back it.

The people here have already attempted that at multiple levels with the other Ron Paul forum site. The other one is being run as a for-profit venture only and has no interest beyond that.

[freelance]

I think you might be asking for trouble. I found this site through dailypaul.com. It's the only other forum listed. They will find dailypaul.com and if they're interested, they'll find the forum from there.

Publicizing the site COULD invite an invasion a la fredthompsonforum.com.

The other thing is that we would feel compelled to "watch what we say," and that could have a chilling effect.

Just my $.02.

[empirenine]

The people here have already attempted that at multiple levels with the other Ron Paul forum site. The other one is being run as a for-profit venture only and has no interest beyond that.

That doesn't equate to members of each board being uninterested in communicating. This idea has nothing to do with the owner's or business structures of the websites.

I'm thinking more of a liaison that would post on both forums if an important event is happening.

[Suzu]

I made a grassroots volunteers forum a while back where one must join in order to even read. It has two sections, one that is more public and another for discussions of campaign strategies and plans that we don't want the whole world to know about. People who want access to the whole forum have to identify themselves and let us know how they have been supporting Ron Paul, and if the rest of the verified members do not know them or if there is any discrepancy, they will be checked out before being verified.

So far, relatively few have joined, but I set this up at the urging of some of the early meetup members who wanted a more secure and flexible place to have discussions. Lately it has been languishing as it seems most people prefer not to disclose their identity and/or gravitate to other forums where there is more activity.

Maybe I wasted a lot of effort making separate boards for each state, with the option to further subdivide as needed with subsections for different cities or parts of each state. Unless activity there picks up soon, I may close it down, but some folks have said that once people realize that a secure forum is needed, they will join.

I'm glad for this forum and others because they are a lot of fun to be a part of, but I have never felt it was a good idea to use a completely open forum for serious campaign strategizing and activity planning.

You all have a standing invitation to register at http://ronpaulnetwork.info/forum if you think a more secure platform is a good idea.

[SeanEdwards]

These forums are fine and don't need any changes. The admins are doing a great job.