Welcome to the Free Talk Live bulletin board system!
This board is closed to new users and new posts.  Thank you to all our great mods and users over the years.  Details here.
185859 Posts in 9829 Topics by 1371 Members
Latest Member: cjt26
Home Help
+  The Free Talk Live BBS
|-+  Free Talk Live
| |-+  General
| | |-+  L. Neil Smith turns out to be a statist asshole
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 12   Go Down

Author Topic: L. Neil Smith turns out to be a statist asshole  (Read 44016 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

John Shaw

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17244
    • View Profile
    • Think Twice Productions
Re: L. Neil Smith turns out to be a statist asshole
« Reply #15 on: July 13, 2010, 05:28:09 PM »

Scott is a pimp, therefore all other arguments are invalid.

WAT

I enjoy and pay for his work, therefore anything anyone else says on this subject must make greater efforts to convince me because of my personal bias.
Logged
"btw its not a claim. Its documented fact."

Cognitive Dissident

  • Amateur Agorist
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3916
    • View Profile
Re: L. Neil Smith turns out to be a statist asshole
« Reply #16 on: July 13, 2010, 05:48:20 PM »

OK...we be chillin' I guess.

I, for one, hope Neil calls and I hope they're both pleasant with each other.  I'm tuned in to LRN on FreeToAir Satellite now, for the first time.  Maybe I'll occasionally listen live, now that it's on FTA, and I've taken the time to program a favorite (more of a pain in the ass than it should be, in my cheap receiver.)
Logged

davann

  • Guest
Re: L. Neil Smith turns out to be a statist asshole
« Reply #17 on: July 13, 2010, 06:02:45 PM »

Ha, the Freestaters screwed the pooch again. I could only read the first two pages before I had to stop from outrage. All the freestaters were concerned about was possibility of some free publicity. Talk about shallow and self serving. I seen this document on this board and thought it was good and original. Never had a clue it was written by some one else. It is these sort of episodes that lead me to want to drop my amping*. Especially Ian's response. The work was stolen. I can read both copies and see the truth. Theft is theft. The freestaters are in the wrong.

*I wont because I still think the radio show is doing it's job even if I disagree on one or two issues with the freak host**.

** Not Mark.

Logged

John Shaw

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17244
    • View Profile
    • Think Twice Productions
Re: L. Neil Smith turns out to be a statist asshole
« Reply #18 on: July 13, 2010, 06:13:20 PM »

I just really hope Ian doesn't try to benefit from this by using it on the show.
Logged
"btw its not a claim. Its documented fact."

voodoo

  • FTL AMPlifier Platinum
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3748
    • View Profile
Re: L. Neil Smith turns out to be a statist asshole
« Reply #19 on: July 13, 2010, 06:13:40 PM »

The IP argument is so stupid.  Like Balko thesis "libertarianism happens to people", IP points-of-view are not rationally argued but rather "happen to people".

Having said that, like J.Neil Schulman, L. Neil's argument boils down to:
  a) I have debt/expenses/want to get paid, and
  b) I feel very strongly about an inconsistent position.

Having said that, Smith and Wesson Shaw are on the wrong side of any recognized application of IP - and there's prior precedent involving L. Neil to refer to.

Even if you subscribe to the theory that L. Neil's words and ideas are his even if you buy them from him, he still would not own the application of such, which is what the Shire Society did.

That would be like John Shaw writing a book on making flat screens or film editing and then claiming to own all the flat screens or films that readers may create in the future.

As for prior precedent, there is an organization (hopefully being resurrected as an active organization) called the Western Libertarian Alliance.

Quote
Message From Ernest Hancock - ca. 2004

In the early days when we thought of banding together as libertarians without a center, the Western Libertarian Alliance concept of L. Neil [Smith] came to mind and we morphed it.

Several of us spent time defining what it was that we wanted to make clear... and the Philosophy page was born. It was placed on the web and people were given a chance to accept it or not without any thing required other than they said they did. No one could claim that they were or weren't WLA without the validation of others. The philosophy is its own standard and enforcer.

I don't think the WLA (in this form) is exactly what L. Neil would have created. The great thing about the WLA is, everyone gets to be their own leader... and sometimes people go with them. This is why we created just enough structure to make it clear that there wasn't any structure. No leaders, no committees, no board of directors, no mission statement, no platform, no targeted issues other than the desire for freedom, no "official" logo (there [are] at least 3 that we have used in past publications).

The original WLA as I remember was an idea of L. Neil that included Northern Mexico, Western Canada and the Rocky Mountain states in the US. It was part of a story or an idea that the more free parts of all three countries would band together in a union of ???. I don't remember exactly, you'll have to get Neil to explain it. I don't even think it was fully formed in his head anyway.

The WLA is really a product of the aphorisms of L. Neil that you see a bunch of in the quote boxes of the newspaper. The WLA is a product of the minds of at least a dozen people that I can think of off the top of my head with L. Neil as a very big inspiration for. But I think we took his idea and striped it of any remaining structure (except for the structure that makes it clear that there isn't any structure :)

Once Haggard put up the first page, other WLA pages began to follow. There were at least 3 states that had their own. Another was Texas. But the others lay dormant waiting for.....?

Looking at L. Neil's WLA model you can see way too much structure. We went another path and honored him every chance we got.

There is no central plan for freedom. So you'll start to see all sorts of variations on the WLA and there will be nothing anyone can or should do about it. That is why we created the "Philosophy page" no more, no less... at least for this group. Other variants are expected and even encouraged.

Ernest Hancock

Edit to add: Oh, and Scott Bieser was one of the original signers of the "Covenant of Alliance" with the WLA.
« Last Edit: July 13, 2010, 06:20:56 PM by Brock »
Logged
"It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself."  ~ Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virginia Q.XVII, 1782. ME 2:222

The Muslim Agorist

  • FTL Creative Team
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1270
  • Join the Counter Economy
    • View Profile
    • The San Francisco Muslim Examiner
Re: L. Neil Smith turns out to be a statist asshole
« Reply #20 on: July 13, 2010, 06:27:28 PM »

The Fix is in

I wrote

Quote
Mr Smith,

I find it very strange that your chosen method of contact was to comment on my article about the Shire Society. I see I was able to connect you with the relevant parties, although now I feel somewhat in the middle.

I just want to say that this was a real let down for me. I sincerely felt that something good was coming from you. I was excited to see a possible collaboration between this community and you that could be profitable for all parties.

You wrote "My demeanor is far from threatening; it is the natural reaction of a professional writer to plagiarism." I strongly disagree. I am a professional writer and artist, and this would not be my reaction. My wife is an attorney, and I understand greater than most that "lawyering up" is the proverbial cocking of the gun the room. Though that may not have been your intention, that is how it is received.

I just had to get that off my chest.

That being said, I fully empathize with your position. Had I been more aware of all the details I would have made an effort to contact you from the outset, as I'm sure most of us would. But here we are.

You wrote "I suggest that you get together with your friends and try to figure out how you're going to make restitution to me." This is not my understanding of restorative justice. Maybe my understanding is wrong, but I think the damaged party is responsible for defining the amount of damage in a complaint. What would make you feel whole? Some measure of silver? A prominent credit?

Best Regards
Davi

PS.
As a writer myself, I view the greatest honor that can be bestowed upon an author is to have inspired actual human action. Imagine if Robert Heinlein had sought tribute from the Church of All Worlds.

He wrote:

Quote
  Thanks. It all has to do with their collectivist notion that I don't own my own ideas. That makes them badguys, as far as I'm concerned, Ayn Rand style badguys. Things mifht havebeen different if they had informed me that they wanted to use the Covenant. I would not have let them butcher it, but I might have let them use it.

  What do I want? Acknowledgement that they've acted like socialist scum. They can't afford to pay in money or any kind. Watch _The Libertarian Enterprise_ this weekend.


N.
Logged
"The Greatest Jihad is to speak a word of truth in the face of a tyrant."
~Prophet Muhammad

I'm tired of Repeating Myself

Andy

  • Verbose.
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 2722
  • Ask me later.
    • View Profile
    • My Blawg
Re: L. Neil Smith turns out to be a statist asshole
« Reply #21 on: July 13, 2010, 06:38:03 PM »

I might listen to them try and defend this.

Edit:

I have a feeling anyone but Ian could have defused this without drama.
« Last Edit: July 13, 2010, 06:48:25 PM by Andy »
Logged

John Shaw

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17244
    • View Profile
    • Think Twice Productions
Re: L. Neil Smith turns out to be a statist asshole
« Reply #22 on: July 13, 2010, 06:39:33 PM »

The IP argument is so stupid.  Like Balko thesis "libertarianism happens to people", IP points-of-view are not rationally argued but rather "happen to people".

Having said that, like J.Neil Schulman, L. Neil's argument boils down to:
  a) I have debt/expenses/want to get paid, and
  b) I feel very strongly about an inconsistent position.

Having said that, Smith and Wesson Shaw are on the wrong side of any recognized application of IP - and there's prior precedent involving L. Neil to refer to.

Even if you subscribe to the theory that L. Neil's words and ideas are his even if you buy them from him, he still would not own the application of such, which is what the Shire Society did.

That would be like John Shaw writing a book on making flat screens or film editing and then claiming to own all the flat screens or films that readers may create in the future.

As for prior precedent, there is an organization (hopefully being resurrected as an active organization) called the Western Libertarian Alliance.

Quote
Message From Ernest Hancock - ca. 2004

In the early days when we thought of banding together as libertarians without a center, the Western Libertarian Alliance concept of L. Neil [Smith] came to mind and we morphed it.

Several of us spent time defining what it was that we wanted to make clear... and the Philosophy page was born. It was placed on the web and people were given a chance to accept it or not without any thing required other than they said they did. No one could claim that they were or weren't WLA without the validation of others. The philosophy is its own standard and enforcer.

I don't think the WLA (in this form) is exactly what L. Neil would have created. The great thing about the WLA is, everyone gets to be their own leader... and sometimes people go with them. This is why we created just enough structure to make it clear that there wasn't any structure. No leaders, no committees, no board of directors, no mission statement, no platform, no targeted issues other than the desire for freedom, no "official" logo (there [are] at least 3 that we have used in past publications).

The original WLA as I remember was an idea of L. Neil that included Northern Mexico, Western Canada and the Rocky Mountain states in the US. It was part of a story or an idea that the more free parts of all three countries would band together in a union of ???. I don't remember exactly, you'll have to get Neil to explain it. I don't even think it was fully formed in his head anyway.

The WLA is really a product of the aphorisms of L. Neil that you see a bunch of in the quote boxes of the newspaper. The WLA is a product of the minds of at least a dozen people that I can think of off the top of my head with L. Neil as a very big inspiration for. But I think we took his idea and striped it of any remaining structure (except for the structure that makes it clear that there isn't any structure :)

Once Haggard put up the first page, other WLA pages began to follow. There were at least 3 states that had their own. Another was Texas. But the others lay dormant waiting for.....?

Looking at L. Neil's WLA model you can see way too much structure. We went another path and honored him every chance we got.

There is no central plan for freedom. So you'll start to see all sorts of variations on the WLA and there will be nothing anyone can or should do about it. That is why we created the "Philosophy page" no more, no less... at least for this group. Other variants are expected and even encouraged.

Ernest Hancock

Edit to add: Oh, and Scott Bieser was one of the original signers of the "Covenant of Alliance" with the WLA.


WTF are you talking about by throwing my name in there? I didn't say a goddamned thing about "OWNING" my ideas. I said cribbing other people's writings without asking to is dickish behavior. Not actionable.

Read before you post please. You crib offa me without asking, I get to call you an asshole publicly. That's it.

Logged
"btw its not a claim. Its documented fact."

The Muslim Agorist

  • FTL Creative Team
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1270
  • Join the Counter Economy
    • View Profile
    • The San Francisco Muslim Examiner
Re: L. Neil Smith turns out to be a statist asshole
« Reply #23 on: July 13, 2010, 06:53:29 PM »

But how funny would it be to call on the government to protect intellectual property rights over the sentence, "WE, THE UNDERSIGNED Witnesses to the Lesson of History -- that no Form of political Governance may be relied upon to secure the individual Rights of Life, Liberty, or Property"
Logged
"The Greatest Jihad is to speak a word of truth in the face of a tyrant."
~Prophet Muhammad

I'm tired of Repeating Myself

Cognitive Dissident

  • Amateur Agorist
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3916
    • View Profile
Re: L. Neil Smith turns out to be a statist asshole
« Reply #24 on: July 13, 2010, 07:01:52 PM »

But how funny would it be to call on the government to protect intellectual property rights over the sentence, "WE, THE UNDERSIGNED Witnesses to the Lesson of History -- that no Form of political Governance may be relied upon to secure the individual Rights of Life, Liberty, or Property"

As things have gone, it would certainly be interesting to call that bluff.  I still say try to be nice and smooth it over, try to make him whole, and be someone who made a mistake.  At least then, if there's an asshole, there's just one asshole--not "a bunch of assholes."
Logged

voodoo

  • FTL AMPlifier Platinum
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3748
    • View Profile
Re: L. Neil Smith turns out to be a statist asshole
« Reply #25 on: July 13, 2010, 07:07:42 PM »


Read before you post please.


Please.  Read, then post.
Logged
"It is error alone which needs the support of government. Truth can stand by itself."  ~ Thomas Jefferson: Notes on Virginia Q.XVII, 1782. ME 2:222

John Shaw

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 17244
    • View Profile
    • Think Twice Productions
Re: L. Neil Smith turns out to be a statist asshole
« Reply #26 on: July 13, 2010, 07:10:15 PM »


Read before you post please.


Please.  Read, then post.

Oh noes ur stealin mah wordzes.

Stop being an ass, man. I am not in favor of IP law. I am in favor of calling out finks for stupid fink behavior.
Logged
"btw its not a claim. Its documented fact."

BobRobertson

  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 929
    • View Profile
Re: L. Neil Smith turns out to be a statist asshole
« Reply #27 on: July 13, 2010, 07:24:03 PM »

Since Scott posted here as well as on FreeKeene, I'll reply here too.

I have to confess I was the one who brought the Shire Declaration to Neil's attention, a week ago.

Sorry, Scott, I have to claim prior action on this one. I wrote to him from PorcFest with a pointer to the Shire Society forum and a copy of the text, and mailed him one of the blue flyers that was posted around the campground.

I, too, am very sad with how this is evolving. Twice in discussions I pointed out (without having been on FreeKeene.com at the time and not seeing the discussion thread) that there was no reason to re-invent the wheel (pointing to the _Covenant_), and then how the Shire text was obviously derivative.

Like you, ...
Quote
I thought he'd be flattered, and now I'm surprised and wish I hadn't said anything, although I'm sure eventually it would have come to his attention.

Exactly.

As one of the people who has tried to put copyright into the light of enquiry, especially with my article _The Issue Of Copyright_, http://www.ncc-1776.org/tle2009/tle549-20091220-05.html I'm sad to see it coming to a head in this way.

Quote
I am told that Ian has invited Neil to call in to Free Talk Live this evening to hash this out. I hold Ian in high regard, and consider Neil a good friend, and I implore both gentlemen to take a calm, measured approach to the conversation, and keep your weapons holstered. A public fight will do no good for either party and cause a great deal of harm to the movement.

Agreed. A real disagreement is a bad time for colorful invective. Let that be for petty arguments, turning the "heat" up for fun. This isn't fun.

Curt-
Logged
"I regret that I am now to die in the belief that the useless sacrifice of themselves by the generation of 1776 to acquire self-government and happiness to their country is to be thrown away by the unwise and unworthy passions of their sons, and that my only consolation is to be that I live not to weep over it."
-- Thomas Jefferson, April 26th 1820

BobRobertson

  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 929
    • View Profile
Re: L. Neil Smith turns out to be a statist asshole
« Reply #28 on: July 13, 2010, 07:26:43 PM »

Golly, I hope Scott doesn't notice I'm using one of his drawings for my icon...
Logged
"I regret that I am now to die in the belief that the useless sacrifice of themselves by the generation of 1776 to acquire self-government and happiness to their country is to be thrown away by the unwise and unworthy passions of their sons, and that my only consolation is to be that I live not to weep over it."
-- Thomas Jefferson, April 26th 1820

The Muslim Agorist

  • FTL Creative Team
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1270
  • Join the Counter Economy
    • View Profile
    • The San Francisco Muslim Examiner
Re: L. Neil Smith turns out to be a statist asshole
« Reply #29 on: July 13, 2010, 07:32:39 PM »

I wrote to him from PorcFest with a pointer to the Shire Society forum and a copy of the text, and mailed him one of the blue flyers that was posted around the campground.

You're the first one to bring to my attention with your comment on the Examiner article.
Logged
"The Greatest Jihad is to speak a word of truth in the face of a tyrant."
~Prophet Muhammad

I'm tired of Repeating Myself
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 12   Go Up
+  The Free Talk Live BBS
|-+  Free Talk Live
| |-+  General
| | |-+  L. Neil Smith turns out to be a statist asshole

// ]]>

Page created in 0.021 seconds with 33 queries.