Is Free Republic a Fraud? Is it time for Free Republic to go away?

Free Republic | 11/28/01 | Jim Robinson

[Inspector Harry Callahan]

You make a convincing argument. Very articulate and well-reasoned, as usual.

Dammit!

>;^)

[Anitius Severinus Boethius]

Any time! :)

[Z2]

Jim,

How do you view your chances in the Ninth Circuit appeal of the LAT/WP copyright infringement case? What would be FR's fate if you were to lose that appeal? What contingency plans have you made in preparation for that outcome, should it occur? Is the attorney who replaced Clarity also working pro bono?

Thanks.

[Richard Axtell]

The FreeRepublic is more than a phenomenon, it is new media communications paradigm. It is what the leftist establishment media has always tried to prevent; a conduit for REAL news, debate, and information exchange. I see this paradigm as in its developmental infancy, full of possibilities of expansion and with a strong and influential future. It is the standard, limited, and heavily biased format of mainstream network news coverage that is the dinosaur, the dying paradigm of the past. Why more "copies" of FR are not seen on the web is a mystery to me. Perhaps political foes are reluctant to acknowledge the fundamental success and efficacy of the FR as a disseminator of truth and conservative opinion at the same time they envy its wide public acceptance and influential reputation. I am not including in consideration the silly, short lived, low hit count "vanity" sites, such as "DU", or the pathetic "Smirking Chimp" because their authors motivation is less to offer a forum for discussion and debate of timely important issues, and more about satisfying their egos via a vehicle for personal and futile "spleen venting."

I recommend that Jim seriously begin to consider what form that his successful endeavor should take in the future to provide for future expansion, innovation, and influence; perhaps a not-for-profit corporation, perhaps a regular commercial venture, perhaps a little of both. The possibilities for the future of FR are exciting, important, and profound in their implications to the future of our Republic, and our lives in general.

In response to the "bitter enemies" of FR I say this; To call FR a "fraud' without making any logical arguments to back up that statement, is more an example of childish pique than rational thought or reasoned opinion. My guess is that those who have been "banned" can, if they are honest with themselves, trace the cause to HOW the conducted themselves while on the forum, as opposed to the content or political direction of their opinions. "Disruptors" are not labeled as such for nothing. While you will deny that you belong to such a group, there are various and sundry covens of politically bent individuals who are envious of the success and influence of FR, and will try any kind of underhanded, unethical, or even illegal method to bring it down or discredit it and JimRob himself. Jim has been passionate in his dedication and desire not to see the FreeRepublic deteriorate and descend into a vicious cesspool of foul language and vituperative rhetoric that many of us have witnessed with other un moderated "discussion news group" sites. This dedication, consistency, and resolve in the face of spurious law suits, illegal hacking, vicious disruption, and public slander has lead to the success of FR and as such is tribute to the integrity and citizenship of our mutual friend, Jim Robinson.

[BADJOE]

I don't think so. They would not even recognize it for what it is. And how in hell would they descibe it to ban it. : )

[Inspector Harry Callahan]

You'll note that THE VERY FIRST POST I MADE when I logged in was on the very thread Jim made those comments on. I politely asked him to explain those comments. I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt, and a chance to stand behind his comments. Will he? I don't know..

As soon as that gets cleared up or I get banned again, (whichever comes first) I'll probably be on my way.

Don't worry. I'm not gunning for a Radio Show or anything... ROFL!!

[lds23]

Alright, alright, I've made a donation.

Is it the barometer that makes people cranky? - the ladyfriend was on may case today too. ;)

[rainingred]

Thanks Hugh,

I know you've been around here for quite awhile. I don't hang out in those Anti FR chat rooms. I guess I live a sheltered life. I never witnessed any of his anti FR brouhaha. I hope IHC comes to his senses soon. Maybe he can apologize and repent. I always enjoyed his enthusiasm, whether I agreed with him or not.

[samtheman]

I give monthly. I will increase my monthly giving as of today. I hope that all regular FReepers who enjoy this site will treat it as a subscription service, and give monthly to support it. --- OrthodoxPresbyterian

I just started here a couple months ago and have already become a contributor but I would not like to see this site become a mandatory subscription site. The whole reason it is here is to spread the word. Those of us who are willing to give, should give more if necessary, and appeals like this thread are welcome to let us know what the needs are. But limiting access to subscribers-only would be taking away The Power.

At the very least, I would expect this place to always maintain a "free for read-only, pay for posting-priv" policy.

[ReaganGirl]

This anti-terrorist weapon of yours...is that the one I saw under the apron during the cruise? LOL

Big hug and a kiss to you Joe! I miss your charm and wit at the dinner table.

[Hugh Akston]

No problem.

[texasbluebell]

A quick crunch of the numbers shows that 10K people contributing just $3.00/month would yield $360,000 annually. $3.00 per month is less than one copy of the Sunday NY Times (ok--cheesy example).

Heck, I was spending $30 a month for the Chicago Trib, daily and Sunday. Decided to drop it and send the money here. With my next donation, it will just about equal the amount of money I was spending on the fishwrap. (I couldn't even use the Trib for the cat litter box, only the Wall Street Journal works for that one...)

[MarkWar]

>Those who want to keep it going speak up. Those who want it to go away, tell us why. But if those who want it to be gone lose out in the debate, then I'd say they should just go away themselves...

Jim,

Sorry I'm getting into this so late. But better late than never.

I'd certainly like to add my voice to those pleading for FR to stick around! I can't imagine ANY argument to close up shop. (Well, I mean, any EXTERNAL argument -- if _you_ get tired of it and the hassle it adds to your life, that's entirely your call.)

But there are SO MANY of us who love this place -- and, I suppose it's kind of safe to say -- love each other and you that there's no reason to let a bunch of hate from people who probably hate everything to influence FR one way or the other.

And, for what it's worth, don't you always have the option of selling advertising space (one way or another), making millions, and hiring a bunch of sherpas to do the dirty work? Heck, I'd put up with a commercial here or there to keep the interchange going...

Mark W.

[BADJOE]

Go here >>>

https://iseek.com/freerepublic/frsupport.htm

[1 FELLOW FREEPER]

Freepers Creed
We believe that the Clintons are multiple felons and should be in jail.
We believe that when Quayle mentioned family values, it was worth more than a mean-spirited snicker from Peter Jennings, or become cannon fodder for Saturday Night Live.
We believe in a limited federal government, and that Americans are vastly overtaxed .
We believe in controlled immigration,and those here illegally should be deported.
We believe Free Republic should be around in the year 2525

[tubebender]

No business can survive when it allows 1% of it's base to dictate how you treat the other 99%. Please don't dwell on the bad but rejoice in all the good that happens here.

[citizen]

time for another check - bttt

[Gasshog]

I appreciate this site because it has help me to become more politically aware, but I also share the concern of Social Meltdown at the alarming number of posts, threads, and Users being banned, deleted, etc...Why cant WE, the posters ourselves be able to decide/vote on these issues?

I am no programmer but I am sure it could be done. A hit of the Abuse button would flag that post to a separate page where those concerned would vote in real time whether or not the item flagged should be censored (there is only a one vote per poster and votes are only tallied as against the item in question). A predetermined number of "thumbs-down votes" elminates the item and places a demerit on the poster, so many demerits, say five, for example BAN the poster PERMANENTLY.

I would like to hear some feedback on this.