This is your chance to excommunicate someone!

[Russell Kanning]

gotta agree with you guys .... especially the rascals from winchester, the maine coast, and graffy's lair in Grafton

It is funny watching how the FSP does stuff. They just got a new president and I guess us members don't get to vote on that.

[KBCraig]

It is funny watching how the FSP does stuff. They just got a new president and I guess us members don't get to vote on that.

We never have. And when it's been pointed out, we get reminded that the FSP doesn't have members.

[Jay]

https://freestateproject.org/blogs/free-state-project-statement-regarding-ian-freeman-and-free-talk-live

[Tom Sawyer]

https://freestateproject.org/blogs/free-state-project-statement-regarding-ian-freeman-and-free-talk-live

Furthermore, Ian Freeman is no longer invited to attend FSP-hosted events, including PorcFest and Liberty Forum.

I don't agree with this part. Unless there is behavior behind the scenes that I am unaware of.

[Jay]

I don't agree with this part. Unless there is behavior behind the scenes that I am unaware of.

If there was, it would have been used in the "campaign".

[MaineShark]

Furthermore, Ian Freeman is no longer invited to attend FSP-hosted events, including PorcFest and Liberty Forum.

I don't agree with this part. Unless there is behavior behind the scenes that I am unaware of.

I guess I'm finding that unclear.  Are they trying to say that he's banned, but passive-aggressively failing to actually use that word?  Or are they literally just saying that he will no longer be personally invited (since it sounds like they've previously issued actual invitations)?  "You can't come" and "you can come on your own, but we'll no longer single you out to request your presence" are two different things.

[Jay]

Furthermore, Ian Freeman is no longer invited to attend FSP-hosted events, including PorcFest and Liberty Forum.

I don't agree with this part. Unless there is behavior behind the scenes that I am unaware of.

I guess I'm finding that unclear.  Are they trying to say that he's banned, but passive-aggressively failing to actually use that word?  Or are they literally just saying that he will no longer be personally invited (since it sounds like they've previously issued actual invitations)?  "You can't come" and "you can come on your own, but we'll no longer single you out to request your presence" are two different things.

They "disinvited" Cantwell, Curtis, Zack Bass, and Mikkelson.  Of course it's a passive aggressive way to say banned...

[MaineShark]

They "disinvited" Cantwell, Curtis, Zack Bass, and Mikkelson.  Of course it's a passive aggressive way to say banned...

Oh, I thought they were explicitly banned.

Do they even have the authority to ban Ian?  Cantwell, for example, violated specific rules against promoting violence, so the Board had the authority to take action.  Is there some actual rule that Ian broke?

[Jay]

They "disinvited" Cantwell, Curtis, Zack Bass, and Mikkelson.  Of course it's a passive aggressive way to say banned...

Oh, I thought they were explicitly banned.

Do they even have the authority to ban Ian?  Cantwell, for example, violated specific rules against promoting violence, so the Board had the authority to take action.  Is there some actual rule that Ian broke?

Looks like they don't need a reason, just a vote:

"Policy and Procedure for Removing Participants (passed 7/11/04)

Participants may be removed for promoting violence, racial hatred, or bigotry. Participants who are deemed detrimental to the accomplishment of the Free State Project's goals may also be removed. A committee consisting of all of the board members plus the President and Vice President shall consider all cases of participant removal. Participants shall be removed only upon an affirmative vote of five members of this committee."

https://freestateproject.org/about/organization/policies

[blackie]

zack bass was removed before this policy was in place. It is the reason the came up with the policy.

Cantwell was also removed as participant, and is unwelcome at fsp events.

Ian has just been uninvited to FSP events. Or am I missing something?

[KBCraig]

They "disinvited" Cantwell, Curtis, Zack Bass, and Mikkelson.  Of course it's a passive aggressive way to say banned...

Oh, I thought they were explicitly banned.

Do they even have the authority to ban Ian?  Cantwell, for example, violated specific rules against promoting violence, so the Board had the authority to take action.  Is there some actual rule that Ian broke?

They were banned (at least Cantwell, Bass, and Mikkelson... not sure about Curtis, or even who that is).

Ian and his network have been "invited", because in the past they provided broadcasting at no charge. Now he's not invited. That is not the same as "banned", at all.

He can buy a ticket, but I don't believe he'll be extended any courtesies such as free space for broadcasting, hosting his show, and conducting interviews.

[MaineShark]

They were banned (at least Cantwell, Bass, and Mikkelson... not sure about Curtis, or even who that is).

Ian and his network have been "invited", because in the past they provided broadcasting at no charge. Now he's not invited. That is not the same as "banned", at all.

He can buy a ticket, but I don't believe he'll be extended any courtesies such as free space for broadcasting, hosting his show, and conducting interviews.

Okay, that's what I thought it sounded like, but others seemed to think it was a ban.

[Jay]

"Dear Chris, The FSP Board met last night to discuss your situation and what to do. Our decision is stated below, which includes our reasoning. Whereas Chris Cantwell has made the following public statements, been offered the opportunity to retract, and has refused to do so: "It's a terribly unpopular thing to say, but the answer, at some point, is to kill government agents," and "any level of force necessary for anyone to stop any government agent from furthering said coercion [tax collection in the context of funding the salaries of all government employees] is morally justifiable..."  Whereas the FSP Board believes this view exceeds the right of self-defense Whereas the Policy and Procedure for Removing Participants (passed 7/11/04) states: Participants may be removed for promoting violence, racial hatred, or bigotry. Participants who are deemed detrimental to the accomplishment of the Free State Project's goals may also be removed. Therefore, according to the Policy and Procedure for Removing Participants, the FSP Board removes Chris Cantwell as a participant and declares him unwelcome to attend FSP-organized events.   In peace and liberty, Jody for the FSP Board"

If unwelcome/not invited doesn't mean "banned", then why did they have a security guard checking cars that one year at PF to make sure that Cantwell didn't get in?

[MaineShark]

If unwelcome/not invited doesn't mean "banned", then why did they have a security guard checking cars that one year at PF to make sure that Cantwell didn't get in?

"Unwelcome" and "not longer invited" are two different things.

"Unwelcome" is definitely a ban.

"No longer invited" may mean literally that - no longer receiving a personalized invitation.  Or it could be a passive-aggressive way to say someone's banned without actually saying it.

"You are unwelcome" is definitely a ban, without question.

[Jay]

If unwelcome/not invited doesn't mean "banned", then why did they have a security guard checking cars that one year at PF to make sure that Cantwell didn't get in?

"Unwelcome" and "not longer invited" are two different things.

"Unwelcome" is definitely a ban.

"No longer invited" may mean literally that - no longer receiving a personalized invitation.  Or it could be a passive-aggressive way to say someone's banned without actually saying it.

"You are unwelcome" is definitely a ban, without question.

I'm just sayin' that I'd bet $20 that if Ian showed up with a ticket, he'd be asked to leave.