WRS and LF

Understanding how WRS was forced to leave LF

 
NOTE (Nov 2004):  Three individuals named on this page have denied what is said of them, and the author of the page did not recall the source of his information.  Some addenda are thus shown in a box at the bottom of the page.  Further notes, by individuals named below, may be sent to Muslim America for incorporation into this page.  Caveat:  Much discussion among the temporarily departing Liberty Forum members occurred on The Secession, a forum set up for the purpose indicated by its name.  Some of the page author's information was originally obtained there.

 

In short: Mr_Nuke_Buzzcut accused Kudzu of promoting pedophilia. Kudzu told him he had the facts wrong. WindRiverShoshoni came to her defense and said that it was libel and that it could actionable. Then a cabal at the private forum Galt's Gulch (led by Thoughtcriminal and OWK), demanded John Deere remove WRS, stating that WRS had already caused enough trouble. The trouble makers added that WRS' "spying" is also intolerable.

TC, along with his followers Weikel, Jack_Barbara, Earth_AD, SamSpade, SteamshipTime, Gustav_Vasa, and Edana, protested "either WRS goes or we go." All of them kept their word — so far. Supplanter also threatened to leave but chickened out.! Natibrau, who said she was leaving and even took a six-day vacation on March 10, decided to stick around. Polichinello, who took a three-day vacation on March 12, is also back.

JD probably ignored their threats, but did suspend WRS. The only way WRS could return now is if he accepts JD's "terms":

 
 
Received: 03/09/04 03:11 PM
Subject:  "Without Regrets"

   Dear WRS:

Quote:  I think it's something we can work with, although I am sure you realize that there will be some dissatisfied with the end result, whatever it may prove to be.

   Such a discussion might have been interesting but I'm afraid it is too late for that now.  One of my administrators has opted to leave rather than deal with perceived threats and the possibility of having his life outside LibertyForum affected by what he says here.  With this latest development your continued presence on LibertyForum is now untenable without the following:

   1)  A public statement that states unequivocally that you will not initiate legal action against any member of LibertyForum or against LibertyForum as a result of information posted to or about you on this forum.  Whether real or not, said threats intimidate some people and have no place on LibertyForum.  If you can't play without calling Mr. Judge, don't play at all.

   2)  Your personal assurance to me that you will cease collecting and using IP and other personal information to try to influence events and individuals within LibertyForum.  People who post here should not be concerned that some busybody will call their boss and tell him that one of his employees is spending too much time on a discussion site.

   You are sufficiently intelligent to understand what our privacy policy is intended to accomplish, which is to protect the identities behind the handles people use to post.  Yes, I know others have the capability of doing this and it will be my job to educate them.

   3)  Your agreement to stop hosting images on your servers for use on LibertyForum.

   Without these three stipulations being met, there really is no reason for you to return.  I will await your reply by 10:00pm EST.  Should you not respond or choose not to agree to my stipulations, I will close your account on March 10, at 12:00am EST and request that you not return to LibertyForum.

* * *

LibertysLegacy:

Nuke and a few others left of their own accord, without force, fraud or misrepresentation. One might almost be proud of them. WRS on the other hand, chose to stick with principle and was subsequently crucified for it. [Post 1369114]

Mugwort [to LL]:

I agree; that's what bothered me on this "libertarian" forum. When JD said he had not decided to ban WRS and others announced they were leaving, I thought, "Well, that's self-determination — good for them. And good for JD not getting hornswoggled into adopting coercive tactics when it's not at all apparent that they're called for." [Post 1369144]

Givemeliberty (a Gulch member):

I certainly agree that it was inappropriate that it was posted at Galt's Gulch. It should have been posted on the main forum from the beginning rather than convene a lynch mob in secret. Of course, TC and those that posted on it had an expection of privacy. That was the intent and purpose of putting it at the Gulch. That way they could carry on their little lynching without interference from those that might not agree nor would it allow those accused to defend themselves.

TC and several others wanted WRS banned and he/they used the Gulch to accomplish their purpose. No one that might have disagreed with them were invited, the accused were not allowed a defense, and no real evidence was presented for a number of the accusations. That stinks to high heaven and beyond.

I suspect the only reason I was flagged is because I had not expressed an opinion in regards to WRS, et al. and was maybe assumed to be an ally of TC and the gang. [Quoted by Mugwort in post 1368985]

JohnGalt (a Gulch member):

Gulch was a place to discuss "getting off the grid" issues, the apolitical side of libertarianism. The ideas being discussed had potential intellectual property value and logically should be shielded from general consumption of anon viewers.

Second, Galt's Gulch was a way for the citizens (defined in the classical sense) to speak freely about the direction of the forum. [Post 1369631]

MadameAxe (a Gulch member):

The Gulch is a private topic. Therefore, reposting posts that were made there on the public forum, without the permission of those who made the posts, is effectively equivalent to posting private messages without permission. [Post 1369641]

JRadcliffe (a Gulch member):

[The Gulch] is a forum for hard core Libertarians. [Post 1369711]

OWK (a Gulch member):

Galt's Gulch was intended originally as a place for Liberty-Minded folk who were considering alternatives to living in the US, to discuss options privately... The only time it was ever utilized for anything other than these purposes, was when TC introduced the Zaphod controversy there. [Post 1370583]

 
Addenda (Nov 2004):

In reply to Jack Barbara's comment here,

Who posted this lie on MuslimAmerica?  I would challenge anyone to produce a quote in which I suggested "either WRS goes or I go".
The author of this page has stated here:
A correction needs to be issued then.

In a post here, Natibrau states:

I never threatened to leave.
I did lose interest in this forum, and have seldom checked in ever since.
Plus, I'm a dude.
By eMail Nov 15, 2004, Supplanter states:
Please include a link where I stated I would leave Libertyforum.  Until then, I consider myself "chickening out" a slander.  :)

Your friend,
Supplanter