RPF Projects - Who's interested?

[GunnyFreedom]

Actually, there are several different ways to make voting work fairly for something like this.

The simplest way would be a simple "one dollar equals one vote" paradigm. The guy who gives $100 has 100 votes, the guy who gives $5 has 5 votes.

Truth be told there is a legitimate reason for 'weighting' votes, because a bunch of $1 contributors can overwhelm the handful of $200 contributors and approve something awful. It would totally be worth $20 to a provocateur to line up 20 $1 contributions and ruin the dreams of the 5 $200 contributors.

On the other hand, is is also pretty shady to say only the people with the big money have any voice. That could equally end up manipulated in a different way.

So the simple answer is everybody who contributes votes, but the votes are weighted by amount. IE every $1 equals 1 vote.

There are still problems with what amounts to a direct democracy, of course. And a more complicated system could protect against that also. Model the selection system on the Constitutional Republic. Say, $1 = 1 vote to advance ideas into consideration, whereupon they are fleshed out and brought to the point of implementation, followed by a final 'each contributor gets 1 vote' to actually pull the trigger and launch the project. (or vice-versa, with the equal vote for consideration and the weighted vote for launching) A bit more complicated, but it also avoids the pitfalls of the either/or method.

Point being there are alternative routes available, and there is no reason for anybody to get bent out of shape trying to figure out a viable means of making projects arise from the community.

 

[Bryan]

Thanks, NC. People have bad days sometimes and with what we are up against it's no wonder. We're in this fight for the long haul. I'm certainly not always thrilled with how things go down on the site but sometimes it's better to have too much passion and energy that can set things off then being a bunch of brain dead zombies.

CJs a good man, and I'd stand by him any day. He has brought a lot to the movement and does great at advancing activism. Wish we had a lot more like him.

Btw, I'd be interested to hear about your speaking experiences.

 

[RonPaulIsGreat]

The dollar per x votes is the only real method.

It's pretty simple to implement. You create a bitcoin clone, called "donationcoin" or whatever. Set up a site, and send coins (voting rights) to the individuals wallet 10 coins / dollar rounded down after fees deducted. Then they can cash in those coins to vote. You don't get "permanent" voting rights with the coins either, you vote and the coin is gone. So, only vote if you really want a project, or really don't want one.

So, project one would be a list of user supplied possible initiatives.

1) Taxation is Theft Sign (vote send coin to address:akdkkekkk3k4k4k4k4k32423626.
to
20) Puppies are Fun Sign (vote send coin to address:ak3i9df9sd9f9asd9fa9sdfasdfaa.
And Vote. Next month have another vote.

 

[osan]

How about starting up a general defense fund that can be voted on how to dispense on the forums by the primary donators?
And/Or creating a network of protestors in every state to picket police departments when these things happen?

\

If a defense fund is to be established, make it formal. I am sure there are some who would like nothing better than to toss every last stinking one of the RPF employees into a cage. Taking in money and managing it would provide far too many low-hanging pretexts for that and/or shutting the site down, if handled casually. That means lawyer, which means money... unless you have pro bono resources, of course.

Don't make an easy target of yourselves to the IRS, because no doubt someone there will put eyes on this.

 

[Weston White]

How about a reoccurring “Donate to the Poll Pool”’s? Meaning a new pool is generated via forum thread within a designated subforum, the most relevant current concerns are posted and discussed therein, then a voting poll is established by a designated moderator (or two), wherein all may donate to a general fund and submit their vote to the area concerning them the most the most popular concern is awarded the funding.

Also as an alternate option the funds could be distributed in proportion to the votes, e.g., a final tally on an enumerated item of 45% receives 45% of the funding achieved.

Either way, this would function on a reasonable timeframe so as to ensure adequate participation (30-day intervals); it should also be hot-linked on the main Website page and permit for both verified guest and anonymous forum member participation, while using PayPal or similar services.

 

[osan]

The dollar per x votes is the only real method.

It's pretty simple to implement. You create a bitcoin clone, called "donationcoin" or whatever. Set up a site, and send coins (voting rights) to the individuals wallet 10 coins / dollar rounded down after fees deducted. Then they can cash in those coins to vote. You don't get "permanent" voting rights with the coins either, you vote and the coin is gone. So, only vote if you really want a project, or really don't want one.

So, project one would be a list of user supplied possible initiatives.

1) Taxation is Theft Sign (vote send coin to address:akdkkekkk3k4k4k4k4k32423626.
to
20) Puppies are Fun Sign (vote send coin to address:ak3i9df9sd9f9asd9fa9sdfasdfaa.
And Vote. Next month have another vote.

There could be a better method... here are my thoughts.

This whole "voting" thing fails for me because in theory you can still have money shunted to something to which you are in strong disagreement. For example, what if there was a woman to whom, for whatever reason, funds were being collected to buy her an abortion? No doubt some of us here would be very upset to know that their donation went to this cause. This is why voting is, IMO, a poor instrument.

This is an age of computer technology. Why not make the most of it and venture far beyond the limitations of voting? I am thinking of direct donation through RPF which would serve as a "holding company" of sorts for all the various causes. A cause to which to donate is established, listed with RPF, and people donate directly to it or do not. There is no questioning the path of a given donation. If Mr. Jones specifies his money for Cause A, it is only to that cause that it goes. Nobody but Mr. Jones dictates this. RPF becomes nothing more than a clearing house, so to speak, directing the donations as specified not by some third party committee of members, but rather by each donor himself. Members should be able to nominate situations for "cause status" and perhaps that could be voted upon by members... though this might become unwieldy, especially if many causes are nominated. Perhaps more practically workable would be for RPF to ID candidates, announce them for discussion and let members give their input, RPF reserving ultimate decision-making authority. This streamlines the process while providing a mechanism for keeping RPF rooted in reality by allowing comment to help guide the decision process. And when RPF pooches it in the eyes of a given member, that member at least retains the satisfaction that none of his donations will be routed along that path.

Donations are made directly to the cause specified by the donor, RPF serving as the delivery instrument only.

And why limit this to cash donations only? Granted, non-cash, material gift donations could become a very large operation in itself, necessitating non-trivial operational capital, I see no reason not to at least hold the notion in reserve for another day. One never can say for sure where things will lead. Perhaps a partnership with an organization such as Salvation Army to help those in acute need with material items such as clothing and furniture? Imagine, for example, an entry team comprised of nitwit wannabe tough-guy cops (talk about redundancy) botch a raid on the wrong home and burn it to the ground. The family, which waiting to get their lives back in order secure a place to live, but they have naught for clothing but that which clads their backs. With the sort of arrangement I suggest, they would be able to go shopping for temporary raiments on a very short-notice basis at very low cost to donors, special pricing having perhaps been arranged with the outlet source. I suggest Salvation Army mainly because costs would be lower than with, say, the likes of even a KMart and SA has a reputation for honest operations, unlike others such as Good Will.

Anyhow, that is the rough cut of my notion. Feel free to drill holes in it or amend it or toss it into the rotary file.

 

[Anti Federalist]

I ain't your brother, I don't even like you fucking people but we either all hang together or we hang separately as someone once said, now quit niggling infantile points of order and lets do some shit instead of just philosofapping the day away shall we?

Huh, now I why Origanalist left...

 

[acptulsa]

Casey did have a point, though. If the wise heads can't pull those heads in out of the clouds long enough to issue some marching orders, then the men of action have the right by default to go do something even if it's wrong.

 

[green73]

Casey did have a point, though. If the wise heads can't pull those heads in out of the clouds long enough to issue some marching orders, then the men of action have the right by default to go do something even if it's wrong.

I can't speak for anybody else but I work every day trying to reach new people with the message of liberty, and have been doing so for the past seven years. I'd be willing to compare my hours worked with many of the loudmouthed statists here who get off their asses only when election time comes around.

 

[acptulsa]

I'm not checking resumes, or pointing fingers, or checking to see if the fingers already pointed were pointed the right direction.

Two good men wound up playing lightning rod for one another, to no one's benefit. I'm trying to find out how they wound up talking past each other, and what it is that would turn that misspent energy into a useful dynamic.

If someone knows there's an obstacle but can't figure out what it is, have enough respect for him to figure it out for him. Because if his goals are the same as yours, then his obstacles are your obstacles.

And having a bunch of brilliant strategists who are too busy arguing over how many angels can dance on the head of a pin to devise a proper battle plan is a serious obstacle.

If I could think of something to say so obnoxious that Originalist and CaseyJones came here and worked together to tear me a new one, I'd do it. And I'd wear my new, redundant exhaust chute with pride, too.

 

[Brian4Liberty]

 

[limequat]

^^^ No shit.

When I start this thread, I was thinking something like put Baby Bou's blown up face on a billboard in GA so thousands of people can see what a police state looks like. Chip-in to raise funds, contact the billboard company, make it happen. There doesn't need to be big egos here. Just a method to pool money for projects that people support.

Project X: Buy a billboard with Baby Bou's face on it, chip in <here>
Project Y: Organize a protest over cause A in city B, chip in <here>
...
Project N:

I'll circle back when I'm feeling more ambitious.

 

[osan]

Casey did have a point, though. If the wise heads can't pull those heads in out of the clouds long enough to issue some marching orders, then the men of action have the right by default to go do something even if it's wrong.

Just last night, after the conclusion of my fourth really bad day in a row - my dog Hercules disappeared Sunday, but reappeared early this morning, thank God - I was about to post a thermonuke message of a similar timbre.

I appreciate the exchanges we have here, but at some point we need to put ribber on the road. This shit is NOT going to fix itself. I would also note that talking and lobbying and protesting is not likely to buy us anything worth the mention. Theye don't give a rat's patootie what you or I want. I know the admins are twitchy about calls for unequivocal material action of a certain nature, and I do not blame them. But it has become very clear to me after 30 years of very careful examination that our only remaining choices appear to be capitulation to the globalist juggernaut, or fighting - and I mean real fighting where people are injured and killed. I do not issue that opinion lightly or with any relish. But the fact is that we have become very lazy, complacent, and willfully ignorant. We have allowed Themme to march into our territories with barely a complaint. We have allowed Themme to alter the landscape of our perception such that thing which would have precipitated a civil war in 1950, pass as perfectly tolerable in 2014. That is not always a bad thing - after all, I doubt too many people opine the lapse of witch burnings. However, it is also not always a good thing either. We are being played like cheap fiddles and are barely responding anymore. This is a terminally bad sign, IMO.

So I can agree with the OP that it behooves us to get some movement afoot. Attract attention, positive AND negative. I believe forcing Theire hands is essential to getting the issues of this land settled without the namby-pamby packaging that never solves anything, but only serves to kick that can down the road one more time. Make no mistake about it: if and when Theye decide to drop the other shoe on us, there will be NOTHING half-baked about it. It will the fist of Stalin in one glove and that of Mao in the other. By then, it will be too late to mount any effective resistance. Remember how appalled everyone gets when they hearken back to the ways in which Hitler was supposed to have responded to failures in immediate, full-faith compliance, or that of the Khmer Rouge? Those will pale in comparison with what stands to be coming down the pike when these bastards decide it is time to spring the trap.

Can't say you have not been warned.

Just so nobody can accuse me of complaining without offering solutions, I offer a first step project: authoring of a document describing and defining the principles of proper human relations. If we have no clear map of what the world should look like, our positive actions can attain no good result, save by wild coincidence. There are many laudable documents out there, but none of them really pull it all together as a clear, complete, and correct gestalt. We have examples from groups like the Shire Society, ISIL, and so forth. There are my rantings at freedomisobvious. But there is no "white paper" or "bible" of proper human relations and I assert that without this there is no hope of attaining and maintaining freedom over the longer term because there will be no universal human standard of such relations. That being absent, people will continue to argue about how people should behave toward each other.

I submit that the authoring of such a tract stands to be the single most important document ever penned by humanity. To FINALLY identify the truly universal tenets of proper human relations in clear, correct, and complete form, devoid of all arbitrary and random nonsense such as we tend to find in religious texts, would represent a truly quantum advance in the "evolution" of the human race. Here I speak of those things that can be established through unbreakable logical instrumentality. It is possible and it is badly needed because if you look around, it is clear that the fundamental human animal is still hopelessly lost among the tortured mazes of concepts that lead them nowhere but to more trouble. Until recently, this was not that great a tragedy when viewed from 50,000 feet. It was a lot of work to kill one's enemies in large numbers. Today, mechanized warfare has made it very easy, and that is a huge problem for the species.

So why not begin at the beginning and get the foundation laid for the future of the human race? Does this not make sense to anyone?

 

[green73]

Huh, now I why Origanalist left...

He's a gem that one.

 

[Mani]

I submit that the authoring of such a tract stands to be the single most important document ever penned by humanity. To FINALLY identify the truly universal tenets of proper human relations in clear, correct, and complete form, devoid of all arbitrary and random nonsense such as we tend to find in religious texts, would represent a truly quantum advance in the "evolution" of the human race. Here I speak of those things that can be established through unbreakable logical instrumentality. It is possible and it is badly needed because if you look around, it is clear that the fundamental human animal is still hopelessly lost among the tortured mazes of concepts that lead them nowhere but to more trouble. Until recently, this was not that great a tragedy when viewed from 50,000 feet. It was a lot of work to kill one's enemies in large numbers. Today, mechanized warfare has made it very easy, and that is a huge problem for the species.

So why not begin at the beginning and get the foundation laid for the future of the human race? Does this not make sense to anyone?

I know the gov't has pissed all over the constitution, but is there any reason not to try and make it relevant again?

 

[Bryan]

This thread makes me sad. Not only did Origanalist leave, but Casey did too. Perhaps its a case study of how things can go wrong when situations escalate. As I said before, Casey is a fine person and has been a great asset for the cause of liberty, the level of activism in the broader community however hasn't sat well with him as he wants to see more focus on it. I completely understand CJ's perspective, but if it's expressed in a way that is viewed poorly, it can lead to escalation as done here.

I can understand why people go-off, it's not something I like to see here, mod or not, but it's also a part of being a human at times. Sometimes members go off here, and when it's done by long standing members it needs to be taken in stride at some level. That's why our guidelines are just that, guidelines, and not hard fast rules. People aren't perfect, they have bad days, we get that. At some points however, it can be good to back away from something before it gets too hot. As well, no one should think that its OK for someone to be banned when there is escalation such as with this thread.

I certainly would like to see both Origanalist and Casey back, but obviously have no real control over that. I did talk to CJ on the phone for a while last week, he is doing good and we're on good terms. Still, this site is bigger than any one person, including myself or even Ron Paul. This site represents the ideas of liberty and as long as it is under good stewardship it will remain a beacon for those who seek a better path for our world. Providing good stewardship is one of my life goals, so I hope to see it thrive.

 

[green73]

This thread makes me sad. Not only did Origanalist leave, but Casey did too. Perhaps its a case study of how things can go wrong when situations escalate. As I said before, Casey is a fine person and has been a great asset for the cause of liberty, the level of activism in the broader community however hasn't sat well with him as he wants to see more focus on it. I completely understand CJ's perspective, but if it's expressed in a way that is viewed poorly, it can lead to escalation as done here.

I can understand why people go-off, it's not something I like to see here, mod or not, but it's also a part of being a human at times. Sometimes members go off here, and when it's done by long standing members it needs to be taken in stride at some level. That's why our guidelines are just that, guidelines, and not hard fast rules. People aren't perfect, they have bad days, we get that. At some points however, it can be good to back away from something before it gets too hot. As well, no one should think that its OK for someone to be banned when there is escalation such as with this thread.

I certainly would like to see both Origanalist and Casey back, but obviously have no real control over that. I did talk to CJ on the phone for a while last week, he is doing good and we're on good terms. Still, this site is bigger than any one person, including myself or even Ron Paul. This site represents the ideas of liberty and as long as it is under good stewardship it will remain a beacon for those who seek a better path for our world. Providing good stewardship is one of my life goals, so I hope to see it thrive.

I am as always thankful that this site is in such wise and thoughtful hands.

 

[TheTexan]

I offer a first step project: authoring of a document describing and defining the principles of proper human relations. If we have no clear map of what the world should look like, our positive actions can attain no good result, save by wild coincidence. ... To FINALLY identify the truly universal tenets of proper human relations

I don't think there is a universal set of principles of human relations that apply in all cases. Except for one: secession.

 

[Barrex]

Well this escalated quickly...

This thread makes me sad. Not only did Origanalist leave, but Casey did too...bla bla bla...Providing good stewardship is one of my life goals, so I hope to see it thrive.

PRIVATE PROPERTY!!!

Activist/s that start/s activity should be given full control over his/their activity/thread. If original owners give up then that activity/thread can be given to those who are willing to take it over. Clear ownership, clear responsibility. Why is state such bad owner and entrepreneur? No on is in charge, no one owns it, no one is responsible (or everyone is everything).It is funny that anarchist and libertarians who preach private property = good management are adopting socialist model "owned by everyone=everyone is responsible" when it comes to organizing moneybomby and any other activity. There is no distribution of responsibility. I think this would prevent good activist fighting amongst each others over nothing. Casey and Originalist didnt even wanted to work together. People who organized Ron Paul Festival and are members of this forum didnt do it on this forum... and they should have. Why didnt they? This place was intended for that purpose........... but I have been ranting about this for a while with no effect so there is a chance that I am wrong.

P.s.

Yes I did call you all socialists.

 

[mosquitobite]

I agree. In the war for good ideas or good projects, the one with the most support wins. The person who can "sell" their idea is often the one who wins. So there is a place for dissent, but the key is for people to keep it respectful and for the idea's owner to not take it personal. Yes, you may think it is a good idea - so let it be hashed out in a brainstorm and let everyone confirm it is a good idea.

The problem here seems to be there are too many negative Nancy's that won't just give their 2c on why it's a bad idea and move on - they cling to that negativity as if they own the opposing view.

Let the ideas fall where they may and let people support what they want! If I want to donate to a blimp, stop posting every 10 minutes to tell me why I shouldn't. Say your peace and move on. Don't donate and you're out nothing. If I donate, it didn't cost you anything personally. Bring a better idea, but not every idea needs to be pitted against another competing idea. It just gets us where we are - NOTHING happens.