Mark & Gard _ Live Tonight!

[FTL_Ian]

Haven't gotten to that show yet, but having heard Mark promote this whilst onair with me, I can say that though I don't agree with him fully, I think I understand where he's coming from.

He just wants to trigger the move asap by reaching the all important 20,000 number.  We all know that number is too high, and that 2,000 movers would be pretty great.  So, Mark figures anything to reach 20k is worth it, so people that said they'd move will start moving.

If there were only 750 real signers to the first 1000 pledge, would you be upset about the fact that someone faked hundreds of names, or glad that 750 people were moving to NH?  That's kind of a difficult moral choice, isn't it?

[Kat Kanning]

Whether or not we'd be glad about the 750 people moving does not impact what the moral choice is:  it is not moral to defraud people.

[FTL_Ian]

Whether or not we'd be glad about the 750 people moving does not impact what the moral choice is:  it is not moral to defraud people.

Agreed, however there is no guarantee that any of the 1000 will follow through on their promise.  Is that fraud?

[K. Darien Freeheart]

Agreed, however there is no guarantee that any of the 1000 will follow through on their promise.  Is that fraud?

I'm not an arbitrator and I can't make decisions for other people, so this is neither a judgement or whatever, but I personally would feel as if I was committing fraud if I did what Mark was doing. If 20K people were gunghoe about moving, there would be a torrental spring of liberty in that area. The promise of the results of 20K people willing to obtain and defend liberty is a bit more motivating than the idea of 3K people spending the next 20 years fighting for liberty. Yes, I'd like to be part of EITHER of them.

Realistically, look at the early movers. You yourself recognize that the majority of those activists are political activists. As a sampling of the super hard core that have already moved, most want to use the system to "protect liberty". This is MUCH easier when you've got a large, liberty focused population that doesn't have to potentially risk as much to keep liberty at the forefront.

I don't think this post is clearly expressing my point, so I'll sum it up.

I'm SURE there are people who have and will sign up for the FSP believing that 20K people will make change inevitable. Some of those signers probably see the idea of 7,500 movers as a futile effort and not signifigant enough to make a difference because they NEVER wanted to be part of the non-cooperative activists but part of the people that ONCE certain barriers were removed legislatively would live their lives out and get active as that liberty was threatened on a case-by-case basis. I think if the real aim has changed, that should be made clear. I think it's unethical to ask people to pledge to move under certain conditions KNOWING that those conditions are going to be obtained artificially. It's the exact same thing as Bob Barr's Libertarian Campaign. Yes, you might elect a LP Candidate, but that's ENTIRELY pointless if he's ideologically a Republican. Having people sign up who seriously don't intend to move to spur on people who have agreed to conditionally move is bad.

That said, I understand Mark's motivations. I think he said that he himself was on the fence when he signed. I wonder if between the time he signed and the time he MOVED, if he'd been told "Oh, well, we're kinda stuck at just under 7,000 so we'll start asking people to sign who don't care" Mark would still have wanted to make that move.

[TackleTheWorld]

Yes it's fraud.  They are living a lie and hurting their chances of fulfilling promises in the future, and cutting into their own confidence if they break their promise. 
We are bigger than the FSP now.  FTL and NHFP and Ridley report are reaching those we can reach.  We don't need to prop up manikins in the shop window, we've got real people.

[K. Darien Freeheart]

We are bigger than the FSP now.  FTL and NHFP and Ridley report are reaching those we can reach.

I agree, and in some ways hope I'm wrong too. I'm planning on going to a meetup this weekend with Rich Goldman and the local FSP group here, and one of the things that's slated to be discussed is FSP promotion. I've never been to one of those meetings so I don't know what to expect.

One of the things I mentioned over on the Free Keene Forums (http://forum.freekeene.com/index.php?topic=108.msg590#msg590) was that I was having a bar discussion with some people, and while the bartender there was a Ron Paul supporter, most people in the conversation have NEVER HEARD OF HIM. That's telling. I'm not looking at "blame" for WHY this is, but it convinced me 100% that vocal liberty supporters have just begun to scratch the surface. Ron Paul's campaign is arguably the most visible and moving pro-liberty campaigns in US history and a large number of people have never heard of it. How many more people might be willing to stand for liberty and haul ass to New Hampshire if they're just presented with the idea?

[FTL_Ian]

People not following through on their intentions (which differ from promises) is unfortunate and sad, but it's not really fraud, because it's not dishonest.  It's weak, sad, and pathetic, but not dishonest.  Intentions can change.  Simple as that.  Besides, everyone signing up for the FSP knows there's a chance that nowhere near 20,000 will move - for whatever reason, so certainly they should be prepared for that possibility.  

If you move to NH and a bunch back out of their "intent" to move, you can't sue them (I'm not suggesting you would, plus you don't even know who they are.)- as you have not suffered a loss through their inaction.  By moving, you took a risk and gambled that the other 19,999 would follow through.  Believing they all would seems pollyannaish.  So, knowing that in advance, there is no fraud - caveat emptor.

Now, filling out fake signers is fraudulent, in that you're clearly pretending to be someone you are not.  However, in the case of the First 1000, imagine if the count was at 950 in December and come January, if 1000 wasn't reached, the pledge would fail.  Looking at the signup rate, you observe that it's not going to make it.  If the pledge only had a few more weeks, it would be a success on its own.  Unfortunately, the pledge creator selected a set timeframe, and the deadline cannot be extended.  If it fails, you'd have to start all over again.  If you manufacture 50 fake signers, making the pledge successful, and knowing 50 more people would have signed eventually, is that fraud or just breaking an arbitrary rule (the deadline on a pledge)?  Who is the victim?

[K. Darien Freeheart]

By moving, you took a risk and gambled that the other 19,999 would follow through.  Believing they all would seems pollyannaish.  So, knowing that in advance, there is no fraud - caveat emptor.

I agree totally and yet at the same time, I think that "watering it down" just to trigger those intending to lessens the likelyhood that REAL activists would take it seriously. If you had just been introduced to the Libertarian Party today, not being burnt out on politics, would you take them seriously when their actions are totally contrary to their platform? Perhaps it's not "fraud" (though I think there is grounds for that claim, since the agreement is to move when 20,000K activists agree to, and the FSP is directly funding FTL which is calling for people who MIGHT NOT be activists to move) but it's certainly kind of a crappy thing to do, in my eyes from an integrity standpoint.

But meh, whatever. Cancer kids seem to be doing a lot better than watered down joiners so in reality, there's probably not too much happening either way for this to really matter, so I'll stop bumping this thread.

[Friday]

If there were only 750 real signers to the first 1000 pledge, would you be upset about the fact that someone faked hundreds of names, or glad that 750 people were moving to NH?  That's kind of a difficult moral choice, isn't it?

Are you kidding?  It's an incredibly clearcut moral choice.  How could you even sleep at night if you knew you had tricked people into quitting their jobs, pulling their kids out of school, spending thousands of dollars on moving expenses, etc. under false pretenses?

[FTL_Ian]

If there were only 750 real signers to the first 1000 pledge, would you be upset about the fact that someone faked hundreds of names, or glad that 750 people were moving to NH?  That's kind of a difficult moral choice, isn't it?

Are you kidding?  It's an incredibly clearcut moral choice.  How could you even sleep at night if you knew you had tricked people into quitting their jobs, pulling their kids out of school, spending thousands of dollars on moving expenses, etc. under false pretenses?

Fine, what about the people that changed their intent and didn't show up?  Are they responsible for you quitting your job in the hope they would keep their intent?

[FTL_Ian]

If there were only 750 real signers to the first 1000 pledge, would you be upset about the fact that someone faked hundreds of names, or glad that 750 people were moving to NH?  That's kind of a difficult moral choice, isn't it?

Are you kidding?  It's an incredibly clearcut moral choice.  How could you even sleep at night if you knew you had tricked people into quitting their jobs, pulling their kids out of school, spending thousands of dollars on moving expenses, etc. under false pretenses?

Fine, what about the people that changed their intent and didn't show up?  Are they responsible for you quitting your job in the hope they would keep their intent?

Also, what about my 950 person scenario?

[FTL_Ian]

We are discussing this on tonight's show.

[Mark_FTL]

There are some really good points here. I like Lauren's manikin one and John's passionate defense of the purity of the pledge. Clearly my view is not as strict as some's. My view of the eligibility to sign is this: If you answer the following questions with "yes" proceed to next step.

1. Do you love liberty?
2. Really, or are you just talking?
3. Would you move to a state if it was "free"?
4. Would you move to a state if it was progressing in a notable fashion towards "freedom"?

Then you are qualified for FSP membership. Please, sign now! You are active enough for liberty to move, you must be willing to do something. NH is progressing toward liberty in some notable ways now, all evidence I can see says it will continue at an exponential rate. Thus, be quite notable in 5 years.

The SOI is a PR thing at this point. It defines success or failure in the minds of people that will never sign or move. It should be reached for that reason. I shouldn't have said that I would sign-up my baby on air, but I have gotten 6 signers in real life to sign up. Ian like a dozen. Look for the planks in ones own eye before judging me too harshly. I make this crap happen. If everyone that signed got one other person to sign, we wouldn't be having this conversation.

And lastly. I have a nationally syndicated show that thrives on controversy. Couldn't we have had this argument there and made a 3 hour episode all about the FSP?

[Kat Kanning]

Whether or not we'd be glad about the 750 people moving does not impact what the moral choice is:  it is not moral to defraud people.

Agreed, however there is no guarantee that any of the 1000 will follow through on their promise.  Is that fraud?

Yes, and a completely unrelated issue.  Because one person does not fulfill their promise doesn't give you the right to defraud anyone.

[lastlady]

I've been reading this thread thinking to myself.

Who is Mark? And why is what he says so important he is just one person?

But now I see he is a radio host for Free Talk Live. But still does it matter that much what he thinks?