well okay, but then he shouldn't have made that promise so soon if he wasn't sure that he would get the permission. or at least he should have told Tom and Stef that there is a potential problem of defamation and that it hinges on that. You can't agree to such a thing and then later say 'turns out that honoring the contract would be against the law so I won't honor the contract on my side but thank you for honoring it on your side! and I'll go ahead and publish the article now'

I btw just listened (bit on the background so I may not have heard it accurately enough) to that November podcast with T. and C. and have to say that I think Stef did that quite well. I think what he said to C. in that was appropriate and helpful, so now I'm a bit confused cuz the April podcast with Tom alone seemed wildly inappropriate to me.

Well the new front page of FDR is up....and I find this (.

stef-in his post about the interview wrote:

...being quoted out of context had been such a problem

.)..carazay!

This "20 deFOOs" statistic is invented out of whole cloth. Total bullshit. It gets repeated over and over by Stef when he talks to the media, but it isn't true. If you go to FDR, EVERYONE talks about "their deFOO" and where they are in its progression. It is assumed that all true FDR members should do it.

Since the Guardian article, I've always had doubts about the "20 deFOOs" as it seemed too few. I've recently started checking a few names I recognised and I've found nearly 20 already who mention having deFOOed. I've got a lot more names to check.

I saw at least half the regular posters talk about it or mention their progress, or say something like "yet" or "when I..." in reference to deFOOing. Whether they follow through or not, I don't know, but it seems to be assumed that it is a good idea, no one questions it, it is implicitly assumed to be a good decision. I believe that there are even a handful of blogs about various deFOO experiences, couples who've both done it and more.

If you loosen up the term to include people you have to ditch because they don't listen to FDR podcasts or live the right life or agree to psychoanalysis (beyond the family of origin), I know personally of four DeFOOs:

1. My husband tried to ditch me (unsuccessful).
2. His friend ditched him (for not ditching me).
3. That guy Realist linked to here ditched his wife (I know him, remember, and I know his wife).
4. That guy Realist is debating when--not if--to deFOO his parents.
5. Husband's friend ditched his other friend last spring.

OK. Five deFOOs from three people. Sorry about that math.

I realize that anecdotal evidence is practically worthless. But I don't for a second buy the 20 person count.

That's a good point. Plenty of people leave friends or partners over FDR. I was almost left over FDR before I joined.

After looking for some time at the FDR section of liberating minds I would like to share some of my thoughts, please correct me if I’m wrong.

I’m rather astonished at the disparity in the way that some users treat Tom and Mrs. Barbara Weed. The amount of sympathy and kindness shown to Mrs. Weed is completely incomparable to the sympathy shown to Tom, simply because I haven’t found any example of it. It is quite astonishing to me, since Tom has made a decision and now shows astounding levels of independence, yet he is presented as somebody who cannot think for himself. And even if he is a victim of a cult, than still he is the one who needs more compassion than his parents.

Another quite surprising aspect of this situation are Mrs. Weed’s actions. Calling the press, three different newspapers, Sky News, BBC etc basically to offend Tom, slander him and reveal his identity. Correct me if I’m wrong but I cannot see that as an expression of love. And if she doesn’t love her son, why the posture? Why bothering whether there were 20 or more DeFOO’s? How many techniques are being used by Stef? Which newspaper posted what? I mean who cares about such inconsequential things when her son told her that he doesn’t love her? I’m not going to speculate about Mrs. Weed’s motivation in those actions, I’m basically shocked by this. And quite frankly we don’t know what’s going on with Tom, whether he is under Stef’s influence or not, we have to little evidence of it, yet Mrs. Weed is the only one who libels Tom with such allegations.

Btw I wonder why in “voluntary donations” Mrs. Weed has to use quotation marks? Does FDR force anyone to pay like, for example, the government? To my knowledge, no.

To make sure that my position is clear:

1 I do not consider FDR to be a cult. It’s cliquish, that’s true, perhaps even more cliquish than other discussion forums that I’ve engaged in. I can see that some users refer to Stef as a father figure and he doesn’t do much about it.

2 I have never posted anything in the FDR message board nor do I contact any of it’s members, apart from some libertarians who visited it. Once I have entered the FDR chat to discuss libertarian ideals in teaching, no family matters whatsoever.

3 I have criticized Stef on his youtube videos, for example under the “Zeigeist: Addendum Review”. There are also other issues that I don’t like about his behaviour or the things he says.

4 After seeing Conrad’s posts I can fully subscribe to the view that Stefs accusations where ridiculous and insulting. Among the user posts that I have read, his are probably(again I could be wrong) the most balanced calm and very intelligent.

5 I’m a libertarian agorist, and I don’t hold any grudge against the liberating minds site, it has some good links, I’ve also seen some interesting discussions her(about philosophy, ethics, psychology, science etc.). So I don’t have anything against this site or it’s users in any ideological manner.

There is no “search” feature on the forum so I could be missing some information, known to the regular users, that would contradict what I have written. If you could show me such information, I shall immediately withdraw from my statements above.

Welcome to Liberating Minds, Flanky.

Flanky wrote:

Btw I wonder why in “voluntary donations” Mrs. Weed has to use quotation marks? Does FDR force anyone to pay like, for example, the government? To my knowledge, no.

Of course some of the donations to Freedomain Radio are proper donations. But if you charge people for a service, that charge cannot really be considered a donation, no matter how you ultimately collect on it. That is especially true when, in the case of Molyneux's "premium" content, the deliverable is not given away ahead of time. If you don't pay him, you don't get access, and that doesn't sound at all like a donation to me. Molyneux consistently avoids talking about aspect, however, and instead refers to his income as being entirely donation-driven. He has been disingenuous about the sort of business he is running, and I assume that's why Barbara Weed used that statement.

Flanky wrote:

Another quite surprising aspect of this situation are Mrs. Weed’s actions. Calling the press, three different newspapers, Sky News, BBC etc basically to offend Tom, slander him and reveal his identity. Correct me if I’m wrong but I cannot see that as an expression of love.

Barbara's actions are, to me, distasteful. I and others here (Alex, blackacidlizzard, etc.) have said as much to her. But that's her prerogative, and I find it hard to feel too bad for Tom. He has not been slandered, nor is his identity as Barbara's son something which Barbara is somehow obligated to keep secret. Tom walked out on his family and refused to speak with them further. I find that as distasteful as what his mother has done, but--similarly--that's Tom's prerogative.

Flanky wrote:

The amount of sympathy and kindness shown to Mrs. Weed is completely incomparable to the sympathy shown to Tom, simply because I haven’t found any example of it.

Well, Barbara is here talking to us about her feelings. Tom is not. I don't think anyone here is inclined to victimize Tom without having ever really talked to him. And whatever sympathy I have for Barbara is entirely unrelated to whether she "deserved" to lose her son. She is upset, and for that reason alone I feel sorry for her. If Tom is upset (as he very well may be) I feel sorry for him too.

I don't think it's anyone's business, actually, except insofar as Barbara (or Tom) have personally asked people for advice. Most of us, however, have some personal experience with Molyneux, and so I think you'll find that most of the comments here on LiMi reflect how he relates to this whole situation.