also, Murray Rothbard or Lew Rockwell or Jeff Tucker have had their careers or their institutions (Mises Institute) expand rapidly, but they still seem(ed) like friendly, non-insane people enjoying what they're doing without the huge ego-problems

Nice post from anarchyintheuk:

Stef,


I'm going to take a crazy wild guess at what I think is going on here. I'm probably way way off so please correct me. I think that you were angry at the people who were clamouring for tshirts and so on and were saying "if only we had this if only we had that we'd do more for FDR". But instead of fully expressing that anger to those people (a good number of whom are reasonably big donators I imagine), you created a scenario where not buying tshirts is, not immoral, (because you have too much integrity to try and use morality that way) but a kind of null zoneish not immoral but universally not good. I think that in partially rejecting your anger (which was not inappropriate in my opinion) and not fully RTRing with those who requested all this new stuff you're providing (and presumably considerable costs) you created a false standard of integrity.



I think that the doctor stuff is a mythology. I want a doctor to step up and save me if I'm dying on a plane even on his day off but assigning universal morality to that is not accurate in my opinion. Similar to how I want people to give to charity but they are not immoral if they don't. I think that the people who asked for tshirts and then came up with stories as to why they weren't buying them lacked integrity in that instance but I don't think it is correct to universalize that to those of us who never stated an interest in the tshirts etc. Basically saying "give me ways to spread FDR" and then rejecting those ways when they are given lacks integrity but simply having no opinion or being content with spreading the ideas of truth in your own way or even not spreading them at all doesn't imply a lack of integrity or a lack of morality.




Again I'm probably totally and completly wrong I'm not the expert here by quite a large margin but you do always say that the hardest stuff to see is the stuff right in front of you so I thought I'd say what I think is going on and allow you to point out where I'm going wrong.

It's pretty pathetic how self-effacing you have to be to say anything to Stef...

"I'm so wrong!"
"Tell me where I'm wrong..."
"I'm no expert."
"Crazy and wild guess..."

Bullshit, that's exactly what he sees. Why all that mess? Intimidation from the most moral of philosophers? NO!

excellent post by AnarchyInTheUK, but little does he know that the category that he would see himself belonging to does not exist on FDR. There are only two categories:

1. critics like statists, religious people, or the often obnoxious and unargumentative Ron Paul supporters that responded to Stef's Ron Paul videos (you can bet that Stef absolutely loved the hostile and nonsensical responses he got re his Ron Paul videos: it gives him an excuse not to have to deal with serious criticism)

2. followers who praise Stef

there aint no third category: people who respect a lot of Stef's work but who have some serious questions and criticisms and would like to be able to discuss these openly. This category has to be swept under the rug (poor metaphor)
[/i]

AinUK is entering the ignore phase now, apparently. He is using the "RTR" on Stef and has phrased his inquiry in the most kind and self-effacing way possible, so can't be instantly written off as a troll. So Stefan (and everyone else) is letting his question slide into the memory hole. Should he find within himself the audacity to express any expectation of an answer, we should see him over here within a week.

Putty Tat, get ready to push a pin in the isles

[quote="Conrad"]

Moe wrote:

Nice post from anarchyintheuk: I think that you were angry at the people who were clamouring for tshirts and so on and were saying "if only we had this if only we had that we'd do more for FDR...

The T-shirts and caps look terrible. Someone else should have designed them. Its a valid consideration regarding people asking for but not wearing the T-shirts. Who wants to wear something that looks crappy and slap-dash?

But spreading the word by using ball-caps and T-shirts seems not very effective to me, since most people don't even notice t-shirt says, and it is the rare person who will actually ask.

Scott

Stefan seems incapable of admiting being wrong, and in the case of the 920, USING MORALITY AS A WEAPON. The FDRers so want to be good in Stef's eyes, and he knows it, so if he can twist UPB to make them HAVE to but t-shirts, the guilt will do the rest. Anybody ever hear about something like that? Has anybody ever suggested that that might be immoral? Just wondering...

The silence in that thread is deafening...

no reply yet?

[quote="fourvoicechord"]

Conrad wrote:

Moe wrote: Nice post from anarchyintheuk: I think that you were angry at the people who were clamouring for tshirts and so on and were saying "if only we had this if only we had that we'd do more for FDR... The T-shirts and caps look terrible. Someone else should have designed them. Its a valid consideration regarding people asking for but not wearing the T-shirts. Who wants to wear something that looks crappy and slap-dash? But spreading the word by using ball-caps and T-shirts seems not very effective to me, since most people don't even notice t-shirt says, and it is the rare person who will actually ask. Scott

forgive me an inappropriate and awful joke.

Suppose somebody who knows nothing about FDR sees Greg or James walking by wearing the FDR T-shirts. Both Greg and James are in the 300 pounds category (nothing necessarily wrong with that) and their T-shirt says: 'I took the red pill'. A natural response would be: 'I think you took more than just one...'