Shawn tries to quit the FSP

source = amanda42's blog
==========================================

Request for immediate removal!!!
(Anonymous)
2004-08-21 14:57

Hi Amanda, I have a question/request. How would one go about getting themselves removed from the FSP?? I have sent email to you, Tim, Jason, Alan, and two others; I have called 6 times and never got an answer, I have left message after message. I mean WTF???

Do I have to raise hell and get in the papers? Must I get thrown out instead? Do I need to call a lawyer or maybe ask one of my law professors at school? What do I need to do????

Others don't seem to have a problem, why wont you respond to my repeated requests? Please remove me immediately and send the conformation to my email at showard9@kc.rr.com

If this continues to be a problem, I _will_ have it taken care of, believe me; and it wont involve any free publicity. It will be accomplished through a very quiet court order that will be sealed from public display. I shouldn't think this would be too much to ask.

JUST DO IT!

Shawn Howard
Kansas City Missouri.
==========================================

Re: Request for immediate removal!!!
(Anonymous)
2004-08-22 08:11

The only removal option in the statement you signed is if the guidelines change or if the project does not get to 20,000 signers. The FSP is a rather passive organization for someone who has signed the Statement of Intent as no further action is required until 19,999 other people have signed. As it stands today, if you want out you merely have to say that you plan to violate your word at some future date, should the terms of the statement you signed come to pass. This has no substantive effect, as no action is required of you today so your future intention to violate your word is meaningless in today's context. Whether or not they remove you from their count is not of your concern, as they may not believe your word is truly meaningless and until you actually violate your word, you have not broken your agreement. If you wish to go to court to prove that your signed statement of intent is worthless, well, that would be amusing.
==========================================

Re: Request for immediate removal!!!
(Anonymous)
2004-08-22 09:38

I was errant in checking my mail until this morning when I discovered I was removed from the the list yesterday; whatever you think you know , you are obviously misinformed. In addition, I sent your reply to one of my professors, and he was the one amused. He wondered if you also practice medicine without a degree, and if so, you should be restrained as a public menace; if your grasp of medicine is no better than it is of our nations contract laws, you are a dangerous individual. Spouting sarcasm based on ignorance is never a good idea. For the record, and to show I'm a good sport, first thing monday (after class), I will withdraw my complaint from the State Attorney Generals Office, where they, assuredly will be amused.

But HEY! You're amused, my professor's amused, and after months of effort - I'm removed. It's been a grand week, has it not? Anything further you might feel necessary to respond with can be sent direct: showard9@kc.rr.com, as I no longer have a reason to visit this forum. Thank you. --shawn
==========================================

Re: Request for immediate removal!!!
(Anonymous)
2004-08-22 12:20

In the words of Jason, you can't resign, you can ask for your name to be removed from the list of participants.

Yes, I am extremely amused that one who would sign up for an organization whose goal is more individual responsibility and less government would seek the efforts of their state attorney general to remove themselves from a "contract" that has no legal binding whatsoever. I need no grasp of our nation's contract laws, as you were not entered into a contract. You merely made a promise, with no down side other than your breaking that promise should you fail to fulfill it. I would very much like to know what your professor thought of this situation. Did you show him the statement of intent and participation guidelines as well as my comment? No matter what you say or do now you will not have violated your statement of intent until 5 years have passed after 20,000 people have signed up and you have not moved. Perhaps I have an oversimplified view of this, but it's not a particularly complex statement. Good luck in wherever your travels take you instead.

Economic?

From: Mike Lorrey
Date: Fri Feb 27, 2004 7:14 pm

...

Why Grafton? It has been declared "The Free Town" by a group of Free State Project members investigating and planning its establishment and development.

Population: 1,000
Registered voters: 700
Actual ballot casters: 460
Libertarian leaning voters: 125

Grafton was rated the safest town in the northeastern US in the event of nuclear war by one academic study.

Area: 40 square miles

Location: 15 miles south southwest of the geographic center of New Hampshire, it is 40-45 minutes drive from the state capital, Concord.

Geography: mountainous/hilly with ponds, lakes and valleys

Geology: granite/schist/mica/quartz rock, late holocene glacial moraines, bogs, it is the eastern reaches of the ancient glacial Lake Mascoma.

Landmarks: Ruggle's Mine, a colonial mica mine, is a significant tourist draw. The town is otherwise highly undeveloped.

Development advantages: No zoning codes, no town building inspector, no building permits. A rather ineffectual town planning board is pretty much a rubber stamp.

Once we've transplanted 200-250 activist libertarians to the free town, we will be a functional majority of the town. When this happens, the following will occur:

- Divestment of the public school system, instituting private schools and homeschooling.

- Deestablishing the town police department, the town selectmen will wield their proper constabulary authority directly on a rotating basis, deputizing a volunteer constable corps, much like the volunteer fire department.

- Privatization of non-state roads.

- Encouragement of residential migration to off grid power.

Free Town Land Development: Building the "Habitat for Liberty", with raised capital and sweat equity of working members, on 300 acres of beautiful wooded terrain surrounding Ruggle's Mine.

...

Linda quits FSP

Source = FSP forum

I am disgustedby the lack of integrity shown by Jason & some of the other FSP "leaders"/"organizers" in this situation & others that have occurred over the last few months. I have sent the following letter to Amanda [whom I do feel still does have integrity]:


I have thought long & hard regarding my FSP membership. Several things have occurred over the last few months regarding policy/mission changes. I did not want to take rash action, so I gave myself a lot of time to think it through. But I cannot, in good conscience, continue as an FSP member because the current organization is no longer the one that I joined.

The FSP website specifically states:
"If these Guidelines are amended, anyone who has signed to an earlier version shall be given an opportunity to withdraw his consent"

The mission of the FSP has changed significantly & this, among other things, violates the spirit of the agreement. So much so that I feel that I must cancel my membership in the Free State Project. I did not want to do this without extending you the courtesy of giving you my reasons.

1) I joined what I thought was a political movement. The intent, or so I believed (the original statement to this effect has been removed from the website), was to "take over a state" (as per Jason Sorens). Because of the desire to obtain 501(c)3/4 status, the claim is now being made that it is not a political organization. It is also no longer "politically correct" within the FSP to use the term "take over" &, in fact, the website has been amended to specifically state that this is not the intent. These are changes that I cannot agree with.

2) I am concerned by the attempt to knowingly mislead by keeping the membership # at approx. 6,000. There has been evidence presented on the forums that there are ~2,000 names still included of people who cannot be confirmed despite repeated attempts to contact them in several different ways. There has been additional evidence that the true membership # is actually closer to 1,700. To give the FSP leadership the benefit of the doubt I have referred to it as misleading. But it is pretty close to being fraud.

Additionally, the guidelines stated that if 20,000 members were not achieved by 9/1/06, then the commitment was null & void. Now, FSP leadership is acting as though membership is an open-ended commitment that will continue indefinitely. Again, this changes what I committed to. And the phony membership # still on the website would cause me to seriously doubt the validity of any claim of having achieved 20,000 members.

3) It was ultimately revealed that only around 2,300 people voted regarding the state selection. Some people did not receive their ballots in time. In hindsight, the membership should probably have been confirmed prior to taking the vote. I'm not sure that this vote should be considered valid.

Add to that the information that we have learned about NH since then:

a) NM was not included in the vote because the population was approx. 1.5 million. Even though NH was approx. 1.2 million at the time of the vote, the projections for NH, given the continuing influx of people from MA, is that it will be far more populous than NM within a few years. 20,000 people wouldn't even make a dent, especially if the plan is specifically to NOT concentrate (ie. take over) any specific areas/towns.

b) NH is too expensive for most people to be able to move to, which would eliminate many people who might otherwise be a part of that 20,000. I asked very specific questions of a prominent LPNH member prior to the vote & was literally lied to re: real estate prices. I now know that I could never afford to live in NH. I can't possibly follow through on a commitment if I am literally unable to do so.

c) Statist attitudes are far more entrenched in NH than we have been led to believe. Most of the NH people whom I have come in contact with on the various FSP egroups (George Reich being a notable exception) are not people that I would ever want to live near or work with. They seem to merely want to change from the current mode of statism & control to their own version. They find it perfectly acceptable to support those laws that they are in favor of [& find it all too easy to threaten those who disagree with them]. And these are the "locals" who supposedly support the FSP goals! I am not looking to go to the expense & extreme effort of moving merely to exchange one version of statism for another. I have come to believe that NH is the wrong state & wish that the FSP leadership could acknowledge that before it is too late.

4) I am deeply disturbed by the way the FSP leadership has handled the so-called "Grafton incident", the Free Town Project, & Zack.

The Free Town Project is merely an informal group of individuals who believe in taking the "concentrate in one state" premise to it's logical conclusion of concentrating in a town [or county]. The people involved all agreed that they essentially wanted a truly libertarian town. Despite the fact that the FSP advertises any number of groups/organizations on the website & in announcements, it has consistently refused to mention this group [even prior to the "incident"].

The membership director of the FSP (Tim Condon) prematurely announced the selection of Grafton without consulting any of the other people involved. HE posted his "report" on public egroups & the FSP website. Had he not done this, the interest in Grafton might not have become noticeable to the residents of that town. I told him at the time that I disagreed with his decision to do this.

The incident also occurred because Zack publicized some illegal actions by the Grafton selectmen and their clerk - who was instrumental in organizing the meeting in Grafton & their campaign against Zack strictly for revenge. He never made ANY negative comments directed at "Graftonites" & his comments were no worse than those made by other people encountering similar problems (ie. Mike Lorrey's difficulty with a local police official regarding a permit.) Yet Zack is publicly crucified for his comments, while others are not.

I have to also wonder how the FSP leadership would have reacted had it been their personal info posted on the forum in a misleading way. Anything can be twisted to make someone look bad. And most activists are activists for a reason & have had run-ins with gov't bureaucrats. Let he who is without any history cast the 1st stone.

The incident was further complicated by the FSP leadership decision to essentially take over the Grafton meeting. Several members of the FTP had intended to attend that meeting until it became obvious that the FSP had decided to take over the "defense" & that it would be nothing more than a witch hunt if they did attend. Since they no longer intended to attend the porc fest at that point & lived far enough away that it would be a considerable expense for them to come merely to be publicly offered up as scapegoats by the FSP, it became no longer worthwhile for them to attend the meeting.

The FSP site specifically says it will expel members for promoting violence. Zack has never promoted aggression or the initiation of violence, yet he was expelled. On the other hand, Dave Mincin - the NH FSP liaison & co-organizer of the Porc Fest - is considered a valued member of the FSP leadership & has not been expelled - despite threats of violence he has made directed at other FSP members (& which has been pointed out to the FSP leadership). The standards for being welcomed - or expelled - are obviously inconsistently applied at the whim of the leadership.

This situation was made even worse, in my view, when Jason decided to go onto non-FSP related lists, under an assumed alias! - to attempt to discredit Zack with information presented in a knowingly false & misleading manner. Prior to that I had a high degree of respect for Jason. Unfortunately, I can no longer say that now. I would also have to wonder what other subterfuge is occurring & who else will be attacked - publicly or via assumed aliases - for disagreeing.

Then, Tim Condon - speaking for the FSP - goes on a radio show to publicly proclaim that the abolition of victimless crime laws (like prostitution) is not what the FSP is about. References to wanting to repeal laws relating to specific victimless crimes are no longer "politically correct" & have pretty much been removed from the FSP website - as has any reference to "taking over" & any reference to the FTP [including Tim's report].

This is NOT the same organization or project that I signed up to support. I am therefore rescinding my FSP membership.

I still support the original goals of the FSP, but I cannot support the project in its current revised form. I am willing to uproot my life & go to the effort & expense involved in moving for real freedom - but it's not worth it for just another version of lib-lite. Unfortunately, I do not believe that NH can ever be anything more than lib-lite. Nevertheless, I hope that I am wrong & you succeed.

Amanda - I personally like & respect you & your commitment to the FSP. I wish you well in your endeavors, both personally & professionally.

Sincerely,
Linda

Benson in Grafton, August 11, 2004 6-8pm

From: "Mike Lorrey"
Date: Tue Aug 10, 2004 9:22 am
Subject: FTLD Update

Hey all you FTLD'ers,
Partly to keep the list active, partly to update:
We have definitely won the Battle of Grafton. John Babiarz says that
he gets apologies all the time from other residents now, and that
while a few, like Neal "Nobody is Gonna Shove Freedom Down My Throat"
Kenny, are trying to get a growth control/zoning ordinance on the
ballot, it is widely expected to be a loser. If we lay low until this
happens, we'll have a local mandate to move in.

We were also able, via our NHPR appearances on The Exchange, to help
win positive exposure across the state for the FTP and the FSP in
general. Liberal friends of mine said we came across as very
reasonable people, and the fact that the 'save grafton' folks have
only lived in town for a month blew a major hole in their
credibility.

John Babiarz is having a fundraiser barbecue tomorrow (wed) evening,
6-8pm, for Governor Benson, who will be present, at John's home in
Grafton. Cover charge is $25 a head, and if you want to attend, call
John & Rosalie at 523-8315. Security has already been arranged with
the town Chief of Police, so we won't have to worry about protesters.

Governor Benson has been excellent with our Killington project,
meeting with the town manager and selectmen at the state house a few
weeks ago and having a press conference on Killington secession in
the governors office. Lets show the governor we appreciate his
support, eh?

NHPR The Exchange, June 23, 2004

NHPR The Exchange
hosted by Laura Knoy
topic: Free Town Project
June 23, 2004 9:00 - 10:00 AM.
Listen to the Real Media or Windows Media audio stream.

some of the transcribed dialog is below. Notice how Tim Condon, Mike Lorrey, and Amanda Philips all describe the FTP very differently.

Tim Condon:

"A group of us, some of us in the free state project, said, gee, wouldn't it be great if we could do on the microcosmic scale what the free state project is doing on a large scale with New Hampshire. That is say, find a town with a good cultural feeling to it, friendly people, a lack of overly restrictive controls, preferably few busy bodies, and a very much live and let live attitude, and let's trumpet that as a good place in New Hampshire a good place to go and live. The result was Grafton."

Laura Knoy:
"Tell us more specifically, Tim, what it was about Grafton that attracted you."


Tim Condon:
"Well, there are several things. One is its south of the notches, so we can at least expect it is somewhat warmer then if we were north of the notches. It doesn't have any Zoning. And libertarians tend to believe that zoning is more a tool for local political power structures to exercise their power over property rights than to actually protect the land or the environment. Plus the chairman of the Libertarian party of New Hampshire, John Babiarz, and his wife, lives there, and we talked to him about the town and he said it's a very live and let live place. What more could you ask for then a small town, where people respect each others privacy, have a live and let live attitude, and don't want to control necessarily what you do with your life, or your property."



Laura Knoy:
"I want to ask you more about the role of Mr. Babiarz, the head of the New Hampshire Libertarian Party, and who has run for Governor twice. How much of a role did he play in attracting you to Grafton, since that is indeed his home town?"


Tim Condon:
"Not very much. I mean, he wanted us to come there, and understandably so, because libertarians tend to like each other, just like liberals tend to like each other, and conservatives tend to like each other. We went through several towns, including Dalton, and Lempster, we also looked at Bristol and Ellsworth. As we went to these different towns, we took care to talk to the people we met along the way, and talk to the town clerk if we could. And of course, Babiarz, being the chairman of the New Hampshire Libertarian party was already a friendly face, so we specifically met with him in Grafton to ask him 'what is your town like?', 'Does it have a live and let live atmosphere?', 'Do they believe in protecting peoples privacy, and letting people do what they want to do with there own lives as long as they don't hurt anybody else?'. And he responded, that very much that kind of a town."


Laura Knoy:
"Last week there was a town meeting in Grafton to talk about the Project. Where you there Tim?"


Tim Condon:
"Boy, was I ever."


Laura Knoy:
"How did it go?"


Tim Condon:
"It was quite a scene. I don't think that I exaggerate too much when I say there was somewhat of a mob atmosphere there. Quite a large crowd, a couple hundred people. We were informed after we got there that someone had sent out an anonymous letter that hit every address in Grafton. All we knew was the people of Grafton had some questions about the Free Town Project, about these people that wanted to move into Grafton, and what are they about, and who are they. The letter that was anonymously sent out was really quite nasty. And, so, there was some bad feeling there already before we went up. There where a bunch of people there from out of town. The people that where yelling and jeering at us, that was what is was like when we tried to talk, were predominately democrats, we were told. And a substantial portion of the crowd did not join in the mob like atmosphere. They didn't jeer and cat call. What we expected when we went there was to stand up and have a question and answer session where we could explain ourselves, and explain and questions or problems people might have, particularly any fears, because there were some people associated with the free town group that where taking these ridiculous positions, and that was being trumpeted around town. Again, thankfully, I don't think the crowd that was there was really representative of what Grafton is all about."


Laura Knoy:
"You mentioned one member of the free town project who has been making outrageous statements, as you said. What types of outrageous statements, and second part of that question, how do you disassociate yourself from that person and those statements?"


Tim Condon:
"Things like we are going to legalize all victimless crimes. We are going to legalize prostitution and gambling and pornography, and just that's not what we are about, and in fact that person has been expelled not only from the free state project, but also he is not part of the free town group any more either."


Laura Knoy:
"Well, Mr. Condon, where do you go from here?"


Tim Condon:
"Well I think that recognition that there are good nice people in Grafton, and that crowd that we met on Saturday was not really representative of Grafton is a good first start. I intend to buy some land up there prepatory to moving up there. It'll probably be as much as 5, 6, 7 years from now before I can actually move up full time. But I'd like to buy some land now, and perhaps have a summer place that I can go to in the summer to get out of this hot Florida sun."


--------------------------

Laura Knoy:
"What is your definition of what the free town project is all about?"


Mike Lorrey:
"Um, there've been a lot of distortion about what it is all about. Really the core of it is for members of the free state project and people that sympathize with the free state project, who want to move to New Hampshire, and want to find a small town that may be similar to where they came from, in the rest of the country, or what there town may have been like originally. It's primarily economic in interest is in southern states and western state property values are much lower than they are here in New England. And people, you know, we have a lot of productive, entrepreneurial people that are members of the free state project, they would like to come here with the same quality of life as they have. You know, someone living in Dallas Fort Worth, there home there may be worth $150,000, if the same home were here in New Hampshire the same home may be 300 $400,000 in value. So they would like to come here, find some place to buy or build a home were they are going to be able to preserve there quote quality of life and their equity."


Laura Knoy:
"So it's an economic thing mostly?"


Mike Lorrey:
"That is what it started out as, and there are some that saw it as having political aspects as well. That's not really what the aim is of the project."


Laura Knoy:
"And I have to say, it's been hard for me as a reporter to get a handle on what the goals of the free state, excuse me, free town project are because some people say it is to create libertarian social change, other people say it is to sort of influence town government on a small scale, your saying it is about property"


Mike Lorrey:
"Well People who move here are obviously going to be getting involved in the town. Grantham, Grafton, sorry, is an extremely volunteer oriented town. There isn't a lot of paid staff in the town government. The reason that Grafton wound up on the top of the list is just like any of these list you see in the magazines of the most livable town in America, you know, we set our list of criteria, and went thru all the towns in New Hampshire, and Grafton naturally wound up at the top of the list. And, you know, if some town is voted, lauded, awarded most livable town status some place, they typically want to promote that and say, hey this is a great thing, Grafton is the freest town in the freest state in the country, and that is something people should be proud of."


--------------------------


Laura Knoy:
"And if you could just could just clarify for us, Amanda, how the free town project is affiliated or not with the free state project."


Amanda Philips:
"The free town project has nothing to do with the free state project. They're separate organizations, with separate goals, separate leadership, separate everything. The only connection between the two groups is that some people who are members of both, who consider themselves members of the free state project and the free town project. So that’s the only connection between the two groups. The free state project, and you can find all the information about us on the website its freestateproject.org. The free state project is focused on state level, it's not even really even focused on state level politics. What the free state project is, is a migratory movement to get 20,000 liberty oriented people, 20,000 pro-liberty people, to move to New Hampshire, and see what happens. And, so, you know, we do not tell or ask our membership to any specific place within the state of New Hampshire. And I have to tell you that even if I tried to tell our people where to move, they wouldn't listen to me anyway."


Laura Knoy:
"Well, I'm curious Amanda, why the free state project isn't linked at all to the free town project, because it seem to me you share the same goals of getting more, as you put it, liberty-oriented people in New Hampshire."


Amanda Philips:
"Well for one, the free state project does not support or endorse any organizations. And the free town project, as they stated their goal, the free town project actually has, they have specific legislative things that they wanted to do, and the free state project is not about that. We don't support specific legislation, or endorse any candidates or parties. And so that was the big difference between the free town project and the free state project. The other one is that, and I realize that this is one individual, one individual’s website had state that they were about quote unquote taking over a town, and that is not at all what the free state project is about. We don't want to take over anything. We are just about getting some pro-liberty people to move to the state of New Hampshire, and that is all we are about. And we have this very clear, we have this laid out very clear on our website, if anyone wants to check it out what we are all about."


Laura Knoy:
"Won't those pro-liberty people, as you call them, once they move to New Hampshire, correct me if I'm wrong; isn’t the goal then to create some type of social and political change, otherwise why bother?"


Amanda Philip:
"Well, for one, pro-liberty people, we're moving for more freedom, in the first place. I think all of us all the 49, I like to call them the 49 slave states and the one free state, we're all moving, as soon as I cross the boarder into New Hampshire I have a measure of freedom than anything I know in any of the other states, so that's part of it. But the other thing is that we're all individual people with individual goals, and so some people might choose to get involved, you know, in anti-tax movements, some people might choose to get involved, you know, in property rights movements, some people might choose to get involved with, you know, advocating for more local control instead of state control, other people might chose to get involved with gun movements, with the gun rights movement. And so what are people do when they get to New Hampshire is completely up to them, and we expect that they will work for pro-liberty causes in the state of New Hampshire. But I don't know what those causes are going to be until the people actually get there."


Laura Knoy:
"I see, and you could say that about anybody actually. I mean, any person moving to New Hampshire is going to decide whether he or she wants to participate in public life, and what issues he or she is going to tackle."

20,000?

******************************************
Re:20,000???????

« Reply #42 on: July 27, 2004, 09:08:51 PM »
----------------------------
Quote from: thewaka on July 27, 2004, 12:27:46 PM
There is no Sept. 2006 deadline.
Diana
---------------------------
Quote from: O-Ren Ishii on July 27, 2004, 05:10:40 PM
From the FSP FAQ, circa Feb. 2002:

http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?board=48;action=display;threadid=6489;start=30
Q. What is the time frame for the Free State Project?

A. The Participation Guidelines state that a signature on the Statement of Intent becomes void, and must be renewed by the signer, if three years pass before we reach 5,000 members and select the state. The Participation Guidelines also state that once we reach 20,000 members, everyone has five years to move to the selected state. The Participation Guidelines do not specify a requisite time period between reaching 5,000 members and reaching 20,000 members. However, the assumption has always been that if 20,000 is not close at hand within five years of the launch of the Free State Project (officially September 1st, 2001), the Project will fold. To get 20,000 signers by September 2006, we will need approximately 15 new signatures per day on average...
---------------------------
Blefuscu

Yes, it should be clear from the portion of the FAQ that you posted that there is no 2006 deadline. The assumption that has always been may not be now.
******************************************

Wow, this is too funny. Some FSPers don't even know what they committed to, and are trying to deceive others about the commitment!

Blefuscu, did you happen to see the big announcement press conference the FSP gave Oct. 1 2003 to declare New Hampshire was chosen as the free state? They have the video archived Of course they edited those videos, but I have an unedited version. Here are some good quotes from the press conference:


Donna Delacruz, associated press
"What happens if within 5 year you do not get the 20,000 people to move to New Hampshire?"

Jason P Sorens
"If we don't get 20,000 by September 2006, then people don't necessarily, they aren't held to their obligations for signing up. So, many have said they are going to move whether or not we reach 20,000 and our current projections show that we will reach 20,000 by 2006.So, if we don't meet the 20,000, the movement may fold into some other form, though it looks as if we will."

John Lieberman, Sinclair broadcasting
"What sort of timeframe are you looking at to have some sort of measurable effect politically in New Hampshire?"

Jason P Sorens
"Some Plans have already been laid, and are in the making. I think we will start have an effect rather soon actually in New Hampshire. Because of its open political system, we can have an effect rather quickly. I expect that we will have a measurable effect in the state house perhaps as soon as the 2004 elections. We already have some supporters in the state legislature and many people are moving to New Hampshire quite soon, or will be running campaigns there. The time table is long run of course. This is a long run project. I hope to live and hopefully die in New Hampshire, and I think many of our members think the same way. We want to make New Hampshire our home, and so we are willing to stick it out for the long run."

Anon Reporter?
"I noticed in the paperwork here that you had 5000 possible ballots, and 2388 people voted, and of them is it 53% of them that say they are going to move within 2 years?"

Jason P Sorens
"That's right, within three years."

Anon Reporter?
"So, I'm wondering what you are basing your projections on, that you’re confident that you will reach the 2006 deadline."

Jason P Sorens
"Our membership growth has proceeded geometrically as rather than too linearly. Our first year we had less than 1000 members and in the year since them we gotten over 4000 members. The best trend we've been able to predict, based on weekly averages in term of signups are that we will reach 20,000 between late 2005 and late 2006. The turn out was intentionally low, because we wanted to make it difficult to vote, he, because we wanted our members to put a lot of thought into it, and we wanted people who cared most about the outcome to have an effect. So, there where various factors influencing the outcome of the vote including many ballots were delivered late to members, many members where out of town, or out of the country, we required ballots to be notarized, and many members were not able to get to a notary. And the balloting period was quite short. Because we wanted to choose the state and have it decided. All those factors influenced the low turnout. We will be contacting people how didn't vote to make sure they are committed to the free state project, because we want people who are committed to moving, not just people who sign up on a whim, so we are going to make sure our members are committed."

--------------------------------------


Where to start......

Looks like FSP won't meet the deadline and members will not be held to the moving obligation.

Jason, what is geometric growth? I think you meant exponential. But FSP membership growth reached a plateau shortly after the vote, and New Hampshire was chosen. You don't even have linear growth now. FSP barely has growth.

Amanda Philips claimed the FSP had 6000 members at the June 19th meeting in Grafton. It is almost two months later and FSP still has not reached 6000. But let us assume they do have 6000 members. The current number of new members per week is about 17. At that rate FSP will not reach 20,000 members until almost 2020. If FSP wants to meet the Sept. 2006 deadline they will need about 230 new members a week.

WOW, who wanted to make it difficult to vote Jason? Who is this “we”, do you have a mouse in your pocket or something? Surely it was not all FSP members that wanted it to be difficult to vote. Do you mean the board wanted it to be difficult to vote? Don't trust your own members to vote? How many members did you piss off and lose because of that? Less than half voted? Or do members not care that you did not want them to vote? Or are there not 5000 FSP members? And then there are the opt-outs.

I want to know what the real number of FSP members is. My Guess is less than 3000. And not many people visit the online forum. It is a very low traffic Internet board. Very rarely are more than 50 people on line at a time, and that number would include visitors as well. And it is usually the same few people that post.

Oh No! Tony Stelik is going to kill himself!

"Indeed FSP is the last chance or there will be nothing left, worth of living for." - Tony Stelik

Pretty scary stuff Tony. Don't you have kids? Check out this site Tony : http://www.finalexit.org/ Just trying to help ;)

Tony Stelik
Southington CT 06489

I wonder what the Tony Stelik - John Babiarz connection is. John Babiarz was born in Southington, CT and only moved to Grafton, NH about 11 years ago. John B's parents still live in Southington, CT. I think Tony S. and John B. are both Polish too.


http://forum.freestateproject.org/index.php?board=48;action=display;threadid=7280;start=msg101822#msg101822

"Feeling like adding my 2 cents to this discussion….

As fare as I am familiar with the Free Town Project, it was not a monolith in any sense shape and form organization.

There were at least three competing groups of people hoping for acquiring inexpensive land and house. Although general idea of complementing existing political shape in considered towns, and Grafton was on the top of the list, was semi- driving motivation, in reality the prevailing consideration for most of interested in the project was economical reasons and political outcomes being a byproduct.

Further, free town project never evolved more than to loose discussion group on the yahoo forum. There is no one who could represent free town project. All what could be represented are various, also loosely formed, business oriented groups and Zack was not a member of any – as fare as I would know.

I am trying to think what Tim and Amanda were doing at the town meeting since FSP never endorsed free town project discussion group, nor it endorsed any particular business group. Bob Hull does not belong to any group and his land investment is strictly individual affair. He did not even take major part in discussions, not alone in discussions with Zack. Mike Lorrey was involved in one of business groups and his attendance could be justified at the meeting, but he was exactly opposing Zack all the way and should be rather amongst audience at the meeting. The only person or persons who should be answering the questions are Zack and one or two others who shared Zack’s opinions.

Zack is a libertine. He has any right to be whatever he wants to be, and if he made a noise he should have enough courage to face the people he addresses and take a stand like a man to defend his position. The all interested in this case are "Zackoniaks" and the people of Grafton. Unfortunately I see Zack did not have enough integrity to be where needed and take responsibility to answer the questions. Others had to cover his behind with better or worse effects.

As to Zack’s history I have to take his side however. He was charged for having child pornography stored on his computer. In effect he was accused, he lost his case in the court and he won appeal (democrats dug this out). I know Zack and I would be more than surprised if he would happened to be a pedophile. On the other hand he is rabbit individualist and his downloading of the pictures might be just a form of protest. What right has the government to tell anybody what sides you can or can not visit on the web? If the source owner does not object to download files, what business has the government to tall you what is legal or illegal to download? Is not the internet beyond any jurisdiction of any agency? I myself, unbuckle when I see road block and police officers checking if the drivers are buckled up. And for the same reason. What the government business in deciding how I am protecting myself? What I am blaming Zack for, is stupidity. In his age and experience I would expect such a person should know, since long, be libertine can only hurt him, and if somebody can be associated with him will be hurt to. Opposition to liberty can, and always uses any tricks to scare the people and play them against potential friends. Libertine is creating enemy to his own believes with the total contradiction to reason.

The conclusion of all the mess Zack created is that he single-handedly, perhaps shut down free town project in any form in Grafton and wherever else. Zacks page and the logical consequences of it, I have to consider as initiation of force against all porcupines." -tony stelik


Tony, it was not just Zack. You all have pretty much the same goal for Grafton as Zack. Please stop trying to blame Zack for everything, because it is simply not true. You are part of the problem too, along with your buddy John B. Did you forget about the Blue Floridian tour in Feb.? You and Tim and Zack and Bob chose Grafton as the freetown. Who talked you into that?

Didn't Tim tell Bob he was going to buy some of the land before it was purchased? Who is Bob going to sell the land to, democrats? If Bob's buying land is an individual affair, why is he buying it under a bunch of differnt name? And at the town meeting people quoted the freestateproject site, not just the freetownproject site.

You can try all the revisionist history you want, but it does not change the past. And why do you keep blaming democrats? Who told you the meeting was full of Dems? Is that just marketing to the other porcupines?