Tab Content
  • Bryan's Avatar
    Today, 01:13 AM
    Thanks for the note. There is no intent to provide anyone with a free pass to degrade other members but I understand there can be issues. As mentioned, the desire is to have a focus on intellectual exchange; the biggest issue that I can see right now is that the site has always allowed for name calling of other candidates and their supporters, something I've never been a fan of, which now presents a problem due to Trump. We do not allow for someone to directly apply a label to an individual member ("You're a ....") however. In general I suggest the following approach: - Stick to addressing facts and logic. - Avoid making commentary about other members (be careful of using the word "you") - Use the "Report Post" feature when someone attacks (snark puke, etc). It's the triangle "!" under each post in the Full View themes. There is no intent to disallow such discussion, but do see some best practices when bring critical of things / people we generally support, which includes: - Focus on bring value to the movement - Be specific about the issue, vs. making vague generalities
    276 replies | 5435 view(s)
  • CaptainAmerica's Avatar
    Yesterday, 02:00 PM
    http://www.khou.com/news/crime/shooting-reported-at-business-near-morton-ranch-hs/169903692
    2 replies | 97 view(s)
  • CaptainAmerica's Avatar
    Yesterday, 01:58 PM
    Im not sure yet, but I don't see myself tied to this sinking ship
    100 replies | 1957 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:28 AM
    acp is correct, you should post this in the feedback forum. What you are doing here looks to be passive aggressive. Otherwise, I'll report the issue, it's nothing I will personal fix. Thanks.
    276 replies | 5435 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    Yesterday, 08:26 AM
    Please focus on the issues vs passing judgement against other members- which is against the guidelines. Thanks.
    276 replies | 5435 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    Yesterday, 07:49 AM
    Yes, please do. Correct, which can be summed up as do not promote hate based positions (racism, sexism, etc), and do not promote candidates we do not support based on our open and community driven campaign evaluations. Free speech is huge but it if was left wide open the discussion would devolve into complete trash talk, it wouldn't be functional. So while opinions are nearly wide open, degrading other site members is not.
    276 replies | 5435 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    05-02-2016, 08:43 PM
    Please stay on topic, and away from personal attacks. Thanks.
    19 replies | 360 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    05-02-2016, 05:16 PM
    Interesting. I'm thinking McAfee is going to do the best going the distance, he will continue to rise as more people learn about his campaign.
    26 replies | 488 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    05-02-2016, 05:13 PM
    The only opinions that we'll censor are ones based on group hate-- (ex: racism, sexism, etc). We can debate these with non-supporting people who sign up here, but as a base, these it not acceptable within our camp, per the guidelines. We also do not allow people to promote candidates we do not support. Consider if a Bernie supporter came here and started a "Donate to Bernie" thread and similar, it would technically be off-topic to derail that thread but it would lower the value of the site to allow it, it goes against our Mission to help raise money for Bernie. We of course have no reason to back down on a fair debate of Bernie's policies. That said, there does have to be some balance within the thread volume of what is going on as others have suggested. Being a new member has no bearing on you providing value or not, so this isn't an issue. Logic and good ideas are what is taken well which can come from anyone. Thanks for contributing.
    276 replies | 5435 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    05-02-2016, 04:43 PM
    No, this would certainly not be the case. Regardless of whoever wins the president, we would want to: - Discuss all policy matters that are getting attention, work out what is the best course of action. - Push for the best course of action. - Hold the president accountable for their campaign promises that we liked. - Work to stop potential agenda items that we don't like. None of this has anything to do with supporting or not supporting a candidate, and we'd still have done with any pro-liberty candidate. If anything, we would want to hold our own to an even higher standard so they do not harm our message. I hope this helps clear things up.
    276 replies | 5435 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    05-02-2016, 04:30 PM
    This thread is a good example of what not to do. Don't make matters personal to other members, no one cares about the bickering. Stick to facts and logic in the future-- and you'll do to the site discourse a positive service to avoid the use of ad hominem against groups. Are a rule of thumb, using the word "you" in a debate is generally not constructive and often lowers the discourse. Thanks.
    23 replies | 414 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    05-02-2016, 11:12 AM
    Or perhaps even, the guiding point. These are absolutely some things that we want to achieve, and more. The key is to have the right level of site discourse, which we're improving, have the right site structures, which we're working on, and to have the right people. The entire interactive effort is something that I certainly can't do by myself, and we need people to step up in small ways, but in ways that they can provide value. To do this, there needs to have a good win-win framework in place, which is the goal of our Mission Advancement Framework.
    100 replies | 1957 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    05-02-2016, 11:01 AM
    ... and for those who aren't aware yet, this is what we hope to do with the Foundational Knowledgebase project. It's also something that we can completely control, we don't need anyone's permission, anyone's votes or the like. See this thread for the project kick-off: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?490530-The-Mission-Advancement-Framework-A-new-site-initiative!
    100 replies | 1957 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    05-02-2016, 10:56 AM
    There is some balance here. For one, I don't know of anyone that is saying to hold your breath, no one is saying "hope" beyond a campaign slogan, and no one is saying to waste your time on fruitless efforts. I do agree that we should be smart in how we spend our time and use our assets, I agreed all of this recently in the this thread here on the new site vision: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?494373-A-new-site-vision-a-new-era I see Rand's campaign as a bit of a turning point showing we need a better plan, and it's not a good idea to wait to 2020 or 2024 to try some slightly different version of what has already been done. Ultimately however, your path is a personal choice and the best path will depend upon may factors that are unique to you. Sure, maybe the machine won't let us change the machine from working form within the machine but we can still leverage the machine to build our numbers. That's what I've said is one of the main benefits of the campaigns, and our campaign evaluation system factors this in. Consider we would not be here if it was not for Ron Paul leveraging the machine to get his message out. It works. Consider that people like Massie and Amash got into Congress and are working to push our message from within. They have an opportunity, took it, and it's working for them. So I say to find your balance and come to peace with it, explain why you have that view but there is no reason to beat up others for doing something different. Again, read my post (at leas the "State of the Movement; Where do we go from here?" section) in which I address these points. In short, I say that for now, we should focus on things that we can control.
    100 replies | 1957 view(s)
  • CaptainAmerica's Avatar
    04-29-2016, 07:57 PM
    I want to expatriate, who has good info about it and how to do that?
    100 replies | 1957 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-29-2016, 03:03 PM
    There are a lot of people hot on this issue.. the 2016 race... on both sides. I don't see him as bashing all liberty supporters, just fighting on his point of view. While the site does not support Trump, and for well established reasons, I also see it as a failure to have the site be an echo chamber of bashing on the lowest common denomination. It doesn't help anyone intellectually. We need our positions to be solid against criticism. Without this, if you develop your talking points from an echo chamber you'll get destroyed once you leave the walls of the echo chamber. So discussion on the issues is valid, even if that means defending wrong information for someone we don't support. Also consider, different people have different MOs for why they support a candidate, for most here there is some strategy. Some will agree with that and some not.
    107 replies | 1160 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-29-2016, 02:47 PM
    Well, I certainly disagree with that, which part of this is irrelevant? http://www.ronpaulforums.com/content.php?1957 (Link to Mission Statement) Thanks.
    107 replies | 1160 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-29-2016, 02:38 PM
    Bossobass has been a strong liberty fighter for a long time. We obviously disagree on the Trump issue but we can still be amicable on matters. So long as people stick with the guidelines they are welcome here. The guidelines include not promoting non-supportive candidates but we can still rationally breakdown issues and the news cycle for everyone to get a better focus on current events. (Not just addressing erowe1). Thanks.
    107 replies | 1160 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-29-2016, 02:31 PM
    Let's please keep this civil. I think Bossobass first post here was sarcasm to spin some common talking points. Things work best by sticking to a logical discussions of the issues but at least, stick with the guidelines, see my sig. Thanks.
    107 replies | 1160 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-29-2016, 01:09 AM
    Pointing out reality isn't a downer. 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. 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.
    100 replies | 3109 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-28-2016, 09:53 PM
    There are a few options, one is the courts. File a legal challenge. This would be pretty expensive so you'd want some institutional backing. I found this page, could be of interest to look at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firearm_case_law_in_the_United_States Another option is legislative, basically get legislation drafted up, gain support, and push it through to become law. You'd want a good common sense bill so legislators will look bad to not support it. If they don't you work to expose them. Worst case, you get people to run against them. There are some established techniques to make this happen by applying pain to legislators. Obviously none of this is easy or cheap. I'm not a lawyer but -- state legislators can pass whatever law they want; more or less; the laws however can be challenged in a court which can strike them down.
    13 replies | 366 view(s)
  • Bryan's Avatar
    04-28-2016, 07:25 PM
    That's not the issue at all, you said "as opposed to giving aid and comfort to Hillary Clinton" as if this is a binary option, it is not and calling you out for framing this as a binary option does not equate to being threatened. It is understood that there may be "dozen data points where they are the same or similar to Ron/Rand on issues" and it could be argued that the GOP nominee may end up being better than the Democrat nominee but that doesn't mean that they have earned support, much less should enjoy having ones good name put behind the candidate. Some may think it's the best things, other will degree. I can very much respect people who have high standards of who they will put their name behind.
    103 replies | 1688 view(s)
More Activity

24 Visitor Messages

  1. View Conversation
  2. View Conversation


    As promised... Great Tits.
  3. View Conversation
    Where are you? This is the last morning meeting!
  4. View Conversation
    Please check your PM.
  5. View Conversation
  6. View Conversation
    Get in chat NOW

    Cancel the other hotel and book Omni online: http://www.omnihotels.com/FindAHotel...formation.aspx

    It's cheaper, better, and closer. HURRY

  7. View Conversation
    Thanks a million! ^_^
  8. View Conversation
    Hi Gage,
    I saved some of the pictures you took at the last Ron Paul event because they were some of the best face shots I'd seen. Would you mind if I used them in order to create custom tote bag iron-ons in Photoshop? I would post a thread up here and link back to your picture thread, giving you 100% credit for the source images. I'll understand if no, but I'd be so grateful if yes :P Thanks!
  9. View Conversation
    CAn you help us on promoting the black this out moneybomb ?
Showing Visitor Messages 1 to 10 of 24
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
About Gage

Basic Information

Date of Birth
May 16, 1993 (22)
Profile Sidebar Configuration

Profile Sidebar Configuration

Activist Reputation (Self-Rated):
1
Select if you "Stand with Rand":
I Stand with Rand (This will add a "Stand with Rand" icon by your name.)
Political Campaign Skills
Campaign Workers:
Fund Raiser
Graphics:
Graphic Artist, Graphic Designer, Photographer, Web Designer / Developer
Video and Audio:
Video Producer
Computer and Technical:
WebMaster, Social Network Developer
Entertainers and Events:
Event Promoter, Event Planner

Signature


"We have nothing to fear except our own unwillingness to defend what is naturally ours, our God-given rights. We have nothing to fear that should cause us to forget or relinquish our rights as free men and women. To thrive, we must believe in ourselves again, and we must never, never trade our liberty for any fleeting promise of security." - Rand Paul

Statistics


Total Posts
Total Posts
3,393
Posts Per Day
1.12
Visitor Messages
Total Messages
24
Most Recent Message
12-31-2012 02:00 PM
General Information
Last Activity
Yesterday 10:32 AM
Join Date
01-27-2008
Referrals
1
Home Page
http://www.flickr.com/gageskidmore

24 Friends

  1. 2ndfor1st 2ndfor1st is offline

    Member

    2ndfor1st
  2. Brandywine Brandywine is offline

    Member

    Brandywine
  3. Bryan Bryan is offline

    Admin

    Bryan
  4. CaptainAmerica CaptainAmerica is offline

    Member

    CaptainAmerica
  5. ChristinaJade ChristinaJade is offline

    Member

    ChristinaJade
  6. compromise compromise is offline

    Banned

    compromise
  7. Don't Tread on Mike
  8. DrewAZ DrewAZ is offline

    Member

    DrewAZ
  9. HarrySeaward HarrySeaward is offline

    Member

    HarrySeaward
  10. Jeremy Jeremy is offline

    Moderator

    Jeremy
Showing Friends 1 to 10 of 24
Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
No results to display...
No results to display...

03-24-2016