Freedom Friends Tuath

[Russell Kanning]

Sounds good .... I would like to join the FF tuath.



I would like to leave again .......

Ok ..... I would like to join ..... what do I have to do?

[Kat Kanning]

Do we cut our thumbs and become blood brothers?

[AlanM]

Sounds good .... I would like to join the FF tuath.



I would like to leave again .......

Ok ..... I would like to join ..... what do I have to do?

Print out the membership sign-up form Mike made up. Have a member co-sign it with you, and send it to me, since I am the administrator.

[Russell Kanning]

Who are the members?

[AlanM]

Who are the members?

Cathleen, Don, Ken, Mike, and myself.

[Kat Kanning]

I made a wiki page so we wouldn't have to dig this info out of the thread each time someone wants to join.  It needs cleaning up

http://www.soulawakenings.com/underground/tikiwiki/tiki-index.php?page=Freedom+Friends+Tuath

[AlanM]

Cool!  Thanks, Kat.

[Caleb]

Good.  I hereby declare your tuath to be my friend in times of peace, my enemy in times of war. 

Caleb

[Michael Fisher]

Good.? I hereby declare your tuath to be my friend in times of peace, my enemy in times of war.?

Caleb

I'm declaring a tuath war on calibaba77.  WHO'S WITH ME!?!?

*silence fills the room*

Stupid tuatha and their complete lack of offensive power!   

[Michael Fisher]

Thanks for putting this up on the front page!   

I forgot to update the original post with the rules we talked about.  Then the board has to adopt the bylaws and application.

One good thing about a tuath is if they ever change the membership application, everyone must rejoin the tuath.  Otherwise, it will cease to exist.

[Eli]

Rejoin?  Piffle.  I thought this was a voluntary authoritarianism  .  We all agree to abide absolutely by the bylaws...unless we don't.  Doesn't seem like we need rejoining.  People are free to opt out.

[MattLeft]

Organizing a Tuath sounds interesting.  Some thoughts:

I know the idea here is in its infancy, just working out the kinks and such.  It seems, though, as long as the Tuath consists of a small number of people, all from the FSP/NH Underground community, it will be largely symbolic at best.  By confining your dealings with only good friends, it would seem unlikely that any earth-shattering disputes would arise...after all, you're among friends.  I think  consideration should be given to accepting, even actively recruiting, as many people as is possible.  Not necessarily just from the circle of people you know & trust, but anyone who's game to get involved.  The more the merrier, strangers are welcome.

Obviously many who join will prove to be unworthy by being untrustworthy, or jumping ship at the first sign of conflict.  I say "No big deal" to that.  This weeding-out process would, over time, allow the Tuath to be left only with tried and true members.

In any given conflict where the Tuath's dispute resolution would come into play, two initial things can happen.  All parties involved will either participate and abide by the agreement (in which case, no matter the outcome, the members will have earned serious Tuath kudos and reputations), or one or more of the parties will jump ship and seek relief through other means (in which case the Tuath will have weeded out one or more undesireables).

If you joined a Tuath along with a thousand total strangers, there is no ill consequence.  You would proceed, in good faith, on the assumption that any disputes would be handled in-house.  If one of your business partners, John Doe, screws you, and then ducks out, you're left with the traditional non-Tuath measures such as the courts (no different than how it would be if you'd never joined the Tuath in the first place).  But, the Tuath would have solidified its strength by learning the quite valuable lesson that John Doe is no longer trustworthy.


Another thought:  I like the idea of, over time, some people earning reputations as wise and learned arbitrators.  For instance, I get into a dispute and need some Tuath arbitration.  I say to my Tuath-brother who I have a grievance with, "I'd prefer the following arbiters:  Joe, Tim, and Don," all of whom I know have excellent reputations and have handed down numerous sound judgments in the past.  The other Tuath member, says "I know Don, I'll agree to that."  Thus, good arbiters that earn meritorious reputations will be in demand.  If they are compensated for their arbiting efforts, I can envision some wise folks making some decent money on their reputations for justice and sound rulings.  If no agreement can be reached between the two disputing members, then random members can be selected.

DUDE

[Michael Fisher]

Another thought:? I like the idea of, over time, some people earning reputations as wise and learned arbitrators.? For instance, I get into a dispute and need some Tuath arbitration.? I say to my Tuath-brother who I have a grievance with, "I'd prefer the following arbiters:? Joe, Tim, and Don," all of whom I know have excellent reputations and have handed down numerous sound judgments in the past.? The other Tuath member, says "I know Don, I'll agree to that."? Thus, good arbiters that earn meritorious reputations will be in demand.? If they are compensated for their arbiting efforts, I can envision some wise folks making some decent money on their reputations for justice and sound rulings.? If no agreement can be reached between the two disputing members, then random members can be selected.

From my understanding, that's how it worked in Iceland and Ireland.  Each side chose half of the arbitrators, preferably reputable and knowledgeable arbitrators who are experienced at understanding contracts, tuath laws, and making good judgements.

If we change to this type of arbitration process, it would greatly simplify the bylaws.

[tracysaboe]

Sounds like a church or a fraternal society.

Churches used to act very simularly to this. All disputes were arbitrated w/in the Church through church law. (and each individual congregation had it's own interpretation and understandings of those laws. In many demoninations the individual congregation has sole authority so it was very decentralized.)

The basic premis is this. If you have a dispute with your brother, solve it before you get to the judge. Much better to work out your own disputes then a secular Judge dictating to you.

Many fraturnal societies in the 1800s operated simularly as well. -- completely outside the government legal system.

Good luck w/ this.

Tracy

[tracysaboe]

From my understanding, that's how it worked in Iceland and Ireland.  Each side chose half of the arbitrators, preferably reputable and knowledgeable arbitrators who are experienced at understanding contracts, tuath laws, and making good judgements.

If we change to this type of arbitration process, it would greatly simplify the bylaws.

The Ad Hoc arbitration systems that developed in the West, involved 1 person choosing an arbitrator, the other choosing an arbitrator, and then those two arbitrators agreeing to a third one.

Then this ad hoc "triumverant" heard the case. Whoever got two of the three judges to agree with him won. And since he agreed to basically 2 out of the 3 arbitrators, if he didn't do what the "court" demanded he pretty much became a social peria. Nobody would do business with him after that, and many private property owners would completely banish him from their premises.

If this person had a history of not complying with these free market arbitration settlements, many times they were completely banished.

Tracy