Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

NEWS FLASH! PORCUPINE FREEDOM FESTIVAL GOING VIRAL THIS YEAR!

Expand Messages
  • Tim Condon
    *WHOA! This is getting out of hand: It s going to be great!* Just so everyone knows, and can spread the word, I ve just talked to Rogers Campground in
    Message 1 of 34 , Jun 1, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      *WHOA! This is getting out of hand: It's going to be great!*

      Just so everyone knows, and can spread the word, I've just talked to Rogers
      Campground in Lancaster, NH. They expect "over a thousand people" at the
      PorcFest this year! "We're seeing double the numbers we saw last year," the
      Rogers Campground person told me. *YIKES!* The Porcupine Freedom Festival is
      going *viral!* That means Liberty in Our Lifetimes is definitely *Within
      Reach!* We all better make it, or we're going to miss one *historic Freedom
      Bash* this year! See you all later this month!

      Timothy Condon, Esq.
      12 Liberty Lane, Grafton, NH 03240
      Telephone 207-956-9041
      307 South Fielding Avenue, Ste. #2
      Tampa, Florida 33606
      813-251-2626 Fax 813-200-3395
      Email: tim@...


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Bill
      ... Offender in the context of the list in question. Someone whose posts are rejected for off-topic, spam, etc (in addition to racism, etc.). Are you saying
      Message 34 of 34 , Jun 29, 2010
      • 0 Attachment
        On 6/29/2010 2:48 PM, Tim Condon wrote:
        > Good idea, Bill. Define "offender." If an "offender" is someone a moderator
        > disagrees with politically or ideologically, we have a problem. If an
        > "offender" is someone who posts something a moderator doesn't think applies
        > to the Free State Project and/or its mission, but the writer does, we have a
        > problem. If an "offender" is someone a moderator doesn't like, and acts on
        > that dislike by virtue of his or her power as a moderator, we have a
        > problem. If an "offender" is someone who wants to pitch ideas or talk about
        > things that a moderator doesn't, and the moderator seizes upon the
        > opportunity to censor those ideas or things...then we've got a problem.
        >
        > Like I said, how about letting the free market of ideas, and the community,
        > take care of any problems in the absence of outright violations of Free
        > State Project ideals? (I.e. no racism, no bigotry, no advocating violence to
        > attain political ends, etc.) ---Tim Condon


        "Offender" in the context of the list in question. Someone whose posts
        are rejected for off-topic, spam, etc (in addition to racism, etc.). Are
        you saying the mods /currently/ block posts with which they merely
        disagree? Why would the definition change? Are you saying somebody who
        wants to post 50 male enhancement ads a day on this private property
        somehow has a right, and should just be left to his own devices, and
        other members simply must deal with it on their own or leave?

        I have absolutely no idea what percentage of posts are rejected around
        here currently. My own owned or moderated lists have none, but my
        largest is still under 200 members and is well hidden so it doesn't
        attract spammers. If there are essentially no rejections here, either
        (and as long as it mercifully stayed that way), then I'd absolutely
        second your suggestion. But if that's not the case, I offered what I
        consider a workable compromise. Or at least an experiment...
        --

        --= My life, my property, my decisions. =--
        --= BikerBill=- ©¿©¬ =--
        --= allemanse.com=- =--
        -US Constitution (c)1791 All Rights Reserved-
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.