What I find surprising is the inability of many to understand the difference between what is required by law and what is required to achieve funding. You correctly state that there is no obligation for FR to disclose financials - unless of course enough of its donor base demands it prior to opening their wallets so that the choice is to either become more transparent or cease operations.
In a similar vein, FR is not required to allow posters to speak their mind if doing so is counter to management's views. Unless of course management's views become so narrow that there are not enough customers that both share these views and also have the capability of achieving the site's funding goals.
I commonly see these two issues confused on this thread and others. It's quite surprising and perhaps this lack of comprehension explains why a small group of posters act in a way that is seemingly contrary to the site's continued viability.
Yes, legalities and expediencies are not mutually exclusive, but some people seem to think that they are.
Jim has always been pretty clear about the makeup and tenor of Free Republic. It is disingenuous to come here and then complain that posting leftist lies is not allowed and that “It’s not fair.”
I would not call a straight Conservative policy a “narrow view.” Nor is upholding and politically reinstating the Constitution and the rule of law, which I believe are the philosophy and the agenda of this site.
Your observations are interesting and most probably true. Thank you for a thoughtful and intelligent post.