We’ve had about 2.85 million page views, over 78,500 comments and over 4,800 posts since IPR was founded on May 20, 2008, which was coincidentally also my 36th birthday.
-Paulie
And,
At Kn@ppster, IPR co-founder Tom Knapp writes about the events that led to the founding of IPR and some of the impact it has had:
(Or, How Teh Intarwebs Have Recombobulated The Internal Dynamics of Political Parties)
The Libertarian Party was (probably, and so I’ve heard) the first political party to get a web site up, and back in those heady days of the early-to-mid 1990s, we thought the Internet was going to change everything for us. And it did, but not at all in the way we expected it to.
Naturally, the Democrats and Republicans caught up in terms of tech. It was probably Howard Dean’s 2004 presidential campaign that really put the web over the top as an external campaign tool. What I find more interesting personally, and especially in the context of the LP, is the Internet’s effect on the internal, organizational dynamics.
That effect is by no means unique to the LP, of course. The Democrats and Republicans have felt (and groused about) strong pull to the left and right respectively from their own “netroots” (some say “nutroots” — so we know what they think about the whole thing).
In the LP, the Internet has proven its value over the last 18 months in terms of allowing party members to instantly and effectively respond to actions of the Libertarian National Committee.
At some point back in the days of yore, the following language made its way into the party’s bylaws:
Upon appeal by ten percent of the delegates credentialed at the most recent Regular Convention or one percent of the Party sustaining members the Judicial Committee shall consider the question of whether or not a decision of the National Committee contravenes specified sections of the Bylaws. If the decision is vetoed by the Judicial Committee, it shall be declared null and void.
In the nearly 40 years of the party’s existence, the Judicial Committee had been called upon to act precisely once, in the mid-1970s, and I’m pretty sure that was actually at a national convention pursuant to another process.
Before the Internet, and before a large proportion of the party’s membership got wired into the Internet, fulfilling the requirements of an appeal was an extremely burdensome process. A membership appeal in particular still is, for the simple reason that LPHQ doesn’t just hand out its list of sustaining members (convention delegate lists, on the other hand, are available on request from members).
An appeal way back when meant identifying 1% of the membership or 10% of the last convention’s delegates, then contacting them by snail mail or phone (in the days of per-minute long distance charges and no switchboard.com!) and hoping for a high enough positive response rate to get over the bar.
Today, an appeal is a matter of posting an online petition, publicizing it, and getting a bulk email out for members or delegates whose addresses can be found. It’s not easy, but it’s easier by far.
Last year, for the first time in the party’s history so far as I know, delegate and member petitions were filed with more than enough valid signatures to require that the Judicial Committee act. That committee overturned an act of the LNC, the removal of LNC member R. Lee Wrights. While the Committee chose to accept his personal appeal (as elsewhere provided for in the bylaws) as opposed to the delegate or member appeals, the whole thing was proof of concept:
The LNC no longer enjoys an environment of unquestioned authority. Its acts can be challenged, and if those acts are controversial they will be challenged.
It’s my opinion that the new, Internet-enabled accessibility of this appeal process played a big role in last week’s LNC meeting, at which the body rescinded a convention “floor fee” requirement. Several state parties had acted quickly (and in large measure were able to do so because they now conduct, or at least debate, business via email) to pass resolutions against the “floor fee.” Moreover, the LNC’s members had to suspect (correctly) that appeals to the Judicial Committee were already written and ready to be launched if the “floor fee” survived.
This shift toward accountability hasn’t gone unlamented. One frequent complaint is that “them blogs” — in particular, Independent Political Report — wield a disproportionate amount of influence over party affairs. That complaint is often accompanied by the twin complaint that “only about 30 people regularly comment there.”
I don’t agree that IPR’s influence is “disproportionate.” IPR was launched both to cover third party news and to provide an open forum for discussing that news, and that’s precisely what it’s accomplished. At this point, it is only slightly less popular (per Alexa) than the LP’s official site, and is the de facto news source of record for anyone who wants to know more about what’s going on in the party than they’ll get from “official” (read: promotional) releases.
LP officialdom has always had a problem with coverage that strays beyond the boundaries of the “puff piece” reservation.
At one national convention (I think it was Indianapolis 2002), LPHQ initially denied press credentials to a correspondent for Liberty magazine, a respected movement journal. The correspondent managed to get seated as a delegate, which allowed him to do his reporting as well, but the incident revealed a tendency on the part of LP staff toward trying to “manage” the party’s image by exclusion of “unfriendly” media.
IPR itself was established — on about 24 hours’ lead time — in response to a similar situation. Third Party Watch, a venerable institution, was bought out by allies of Bob Barr, a contender for the LP’s 2008 presidential nomination, just before the national convention. The new managing editor (who had just left his job as the LP’s executive director and gone to work for the Barr campaign) instantly fired (and requested revocation of the LP convention press credentials of) its writers who didn’t support Barr.
It’s difficult to blame LP officialdom for becoming discommoded by blog coverage which toes no line and answers to no authority. The LP’s officials and staff rightly consider it their job to put the best face on, and get the most positive coverage possible for, the party.
But it looks like they’re going to have to get used to it. And personally I think that’s a good thing. A bright sun overhead may burn, but as Louis Brandeis said, sunlight is also the best disinfectant.
Slight correction to the above from Paulie:
Shane Cory/Third Party Watch did take back my press credentials (before giving them back to me in the midst of the convention). They also demoted me at TPW, put posts in moderation during the convention, and removed links to my personal and group blogs from TPW. However, I remained signed up to post articles at TPW until the site died. I’m not sure whether the other writers who had their press credentials removed were ever actually removed completely at TPW.
Although I remained permitted by TPW to post there, my agreement in signing up to write at IPR included no longer posting articles at TPW, so I never ended up posting there again.
-p
they don’t care.
415.690.6352
BTW this computer is going away today so if I am not here much that is why.
paulie, ok, print your #. I’ll call & give you my # now that my computer & phone are usable again. Then you call with address when you are ready. OK?
I have no idea when or where.
I don’t remember it.
Maybe it was something you sent TPW.
We are not TPW.
to the point!
paulie // Mar 3, 2010:
“If you can find better, help would be appreciated.”
Months and years ago I made the effort! —- Lake
to the heart.
So the denigration of the nation of my birth is dependent upon personality politics instead of logic and professional standards ?????
Plz point out where I was wrong and untruthful. I am woefully imperfect but I am not knowingly a liar and or a 21st spin doctor. If you can not see where paulie twists and turns against the truth maybe I was deficient in my exhibits!
So you think my example were with out merit ????? So you think IPR could not be a whole lot better, more fair, more balanced ?????????
Not sure about address at the moment, I may be in transit soon, not sure where yet. Things are sort of up in the air.
Lake, I thought you and Paulie would be friends now after you united against Grundman over social issues. But you went back to complaining. There is nothing to complain about. And why are you attacking Milnes too? You’ve also have attacked Catholic Trotskyist, though he is also pretty insane, as I must admit, as someone who knows him personally. But IPR is one of the only sites that wouldn’t have banned you, Milnes, Catholic Trotskyist and myself by now. It does a great job, and I hope it will continue for years to come, with great Libertarian Party, Green Party, Constitution Party and other independent and third party stories.
paulie, post your # again, will you? I can’t seem to find it.
paulie, what kind of computer are you using now? I’m going to try to call you for address. OK?
Fryer Tuck!
<>
Can’t set it with that LP party back from now????
paulie // Mar 3, 2010 at 6:53 pm
If you can find better, help would be appreciated.
that was from driving off Root support we saw blank!!!!! can’t sign in chinese, I lost my glasses. Get me a female for a VP? ask me again, there are more behind the shelf!!!
Just ignore the annoying little pissant “straight” and he will go away and spread his manure elsewhere
If you can find better, help would be appreciated.
to the point: is it good enough ??????
I try my best.
to the point.
post all the Lib articles you feel necessary!
Plz just be fair and balanced!
is found out! Oh Darn, Don Lake
“Straight” is the new gay.
Why, I’m so glad you asked.
Since I don’t have, never had, and never received from you or anyone else, any contact info for Phil Sawyer, I contacted him through BAN comments, since that was the only way I had to contact him.
But keep spouting off about nothing.
off of his rocker!
What does Phil Sawyer have to do with Ballot Access News ??????????? Sawyer is merely irritating honest, [near saint] Richard Winger is the founder of BAN!
Both are Californians and reasonably sane!
Not my fault if Sawyer says he “was not contacted.” I did ask him at BAN, and I don’t have his contact info, so no thanks to you.
No hat drops. Take your time. I’ve made an effort to contact numerous people of all sorts of alt-parties. Some of them already write here. Some said no. I didn’t ignore any contact info we actually received.
I am in fact a non-smoker.
I’ve signed up several non-LPers here.
I’ve posted numerous non-LP articles myself.
Again, take all the time you want. If you have contact info, post it.
I never received it before and still haven’t.
No idea where you sent it or to whom.
I was never on any internal TPW list, if that was it.
And yes, I do depend on you being an ungrateful chump.
But I do have a solution: every time Lake bitches about this, I’ll post more LP articles 😛
(Actually not every time, I may be losing my access to the computer I have been borrowing today or tomorrow).
clue less central annex!
Austin Battenberg // Mar 3, 2010 at 4:56 pm
Just because the majority of people who post here happen to be libertarians, doesn’t mean this site is dedicated to libertarians. I like the fact that the news on this site covers all third party related news, and hopefully someday, the site will be more populated with more non-libertarians.
AND AGAIN, WHY DID LIBERTARIANS FEEL FREE TO TREAT TPW AND IPR AS A LIB SITE, PER MY MANY COMPLAINTS ?????
NONE EVER APOLOGIZED FOR THINGS LIKE LIB REFORMS BEING REFERRED TO AS MERELY REFORMS. PUT ON YOUR GLASSES. READ BETWEEN THE LINES.
UNTIL THEN YOU WILL NOT KNOW WHAT YOU ARE TYPING ABOUT.
paulie // Mar 3, 2010 at 5:22 pm
I didn’t drop any ball. I’ve already asked Sawyer. He did not respond.
AND HE HAS SAID ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS THAT HE WAS NOT CONTACTED!
And no thanks to you, you still haven’t supplied any names and contact info. AT THE DROP OF A HAT, MONTHS AND YEARS LATER ????????? AND I THOT YOU WERE A NON SMOKER!
I’ve asked you before and did not get names and contact info. YOU ASKED A FEW MOMENTS AGO, MONTHS AND YEARS AFTER THEY WERE ORIGINALLY PROVIDED. YOUR MARCH 2010 REQUEST IS LITERALLY INSANE!
If you have it, post it. MONTHS AND YEARS LATER ???????????
Otherwise, stay mad.
DEPEND UPON IT, LIAR AND PUNK!
I guess that would be option B: Stay mad.
to Mister paulie:
Trent Hill // Mar 3, 2003
Shane,…….. Playing nice goes a long way in third-party politics. And more importantly, you guys then let a valuable and traffic-feeding site….just die. It is now an expired site with no value whatsoever.
———- and such ‘short hand’ is not playing nice. Ya don’t moderate comments [one of your saving graces]; like dude some one besides me could have snidely, loudly, openly, honestly commented of the misleading comment.
———- Again, it conveys that TPW and IPR are sub rosa and defacto Lib sites, which even you, Mister Partisan Gate Keeper, alluded to. Duh!
———- Mean what you say and say what you mean. We need to be better than the Dems and GOP (not just as bad)!
I didn’t drop any ball. I’ve already asked Sawyer. He did not respond. And no thanks to you, you still haven’t supplied any names and contact info.
I’ve asked you before and did not get names and contact info.
If you have it, post it.
Otherwise, stay mad.
to insanity central!
paulie wanted detailed information MONTHS AND YEARS after he originally dropped the ball ????? Don’t want much do ya ?????? Wanna know where I ate lunch at on Friday June 6th, 2003 ????????????
Right off the top of my head AND MONTHS AND YEARS later, Phil Sawyer of Sacramento California. So where did paulie have lunch at on Friday June 6th,2003 ????????
You do so have a problem, it is grossly illogical and even insane to ask for ancient information after you had it [and dropped the ball] MONTHS AND YEARS AGO! You are deffinently the one with the problem!
Like California’s Bruce Cohen, you say some thing and all kinds of folks need to correct you!
Such ‘short hand’ was grossly prevalent and [like Captain Cody] some one with integrity should have slapped them down! Any thing less [again to rabid jerks like Quirk] is tacit approval. Hey it is your site; run it honestly and correctly.
Lordie, you are no better than the Dems and GOP!
“Lake, contact information for the people you want contacted?”
Still waiting.
Names and contact info?
——- Yes, not one reported being contacted.
Possibly because I don’t have their contact info?
Yes. I have complaining, honestly and openly FOR YEARS! And your problem is ?????
I’m not the one with the problem.
[d] and the insidious ubiquitous, oblique, informal reference as if site was [pick one] Lib, Biblical, and or Conservative.
For one BLATANT example, Lib after Lib felt comfortable enough on the ‘Lib ness’ of the site to refer ‘reform’ items as it they were LIBERTARIAN REFORM items.
Yes, people use shorthand on articles which are about LP matters or to other commenters they know when they bring it up.
And we don’t moderate comments (except very egregious cases).
Shane,
If that was the strategy, it seems like a poor–and expensive–one. It cost delegates too–we had several people contact us and say Barr’s heavy-handed approach had cost him their support. Playing nice goes a long way in third-party politics.
And more importantly, you guys then let a valuable and traffic-feeding site….just die. It is now an expired site with no value whatsoever.
Also, for anyone that doesn’t know, a similar site to IPR has been launched by d.eris (the more the merrier!): http://thirdpartydaily.blogspot.com
paulie – I meant people to report on the inner workings of other parties.
Just because the majority of people who post here happen to be libertarians, doesn’t mean this site is dedicated to libertarians. I like the fact that the news on this site covers all third party related news, and hopefully someday, the site will be more populated with more non-libertarians.
A) So has everyone else. I know, since I have done a lot of it.
B) Examples of such articles from this site? We don’t answer for TPW.
C) Yes they were. . The only one I remember is Phil Sawyer. I asked him at BAN and he did not reply.
If you want to supply names *and contact information* we’ll do what we can.
to our clue less former Siberian Soviet!
paulie // Mar 3, 2010:
“Lake, contact information for the people you want contacted?” ——- Yes, not one reported being contacted. Yes. I have complaining, honestly and openly FOR YEARS! And your problem is ?????
[d] and the insidious ubiquitous, oblique, informal reference as if site was [pick one] Lib, Biblical, and or Conservative.
For one BLATANT example, Lib after Lib felt comfortable enough on the ‘Lib ness’ of the site to refer ‘reform’ items as it they were LIBERTARIAN REFORM items.
paulie // Mar 3, 2010 at 4:38 pm
CATEGORIES [Huh ???????????]
[a] Libs were openly and directly courted by both sites.
[b] Inappropriate Libs, Bible Beaters, and [so called] Conservatives were kept on long after numerous complaints were lodged. Space Cadet Captain Cody Quirk for one BLATANT example! (Out right lies. Out right neglect. Unreferenced postings, as if the blogging was directly from Quirk and or the site management!)
[c] and again, none of the Lake referrals were contacted, as I have mentioned time and time and time again!
Tom,
Articles were placed in moderation, but my understanding is that you were still signed up, not completely removed.
At least I know that was the case with me.
Whether IPR, TPW, or HoT, there will always be a place for LIBERTARIANS [Lake’s emphasis] to gather and bitch — which is a great thing.
And everyone else too, Lake. You’re far from the only one, you know.
Shane,
You write:
“Paulie, that’s how I remember it. Tom’s embellishing a bit by stating that I ‘instantly fired’ anyone.”
Here’s my version of “instant firing.”
One night, I’m a writer for the site.
The next morning, when I hit “publish” on an article, it’s instantly reverted to draft.
I hear nothing from the new owners of the site. I’m 86ed with no explanation or even so much as a “thanks, but we no longer require your services.”
After several hours of trying, I get in touch with the former owner of the site and find out what ‘s going on.
I’m not complaining about it, Shane. It was a smart move.
and yet, Shane says ………..
Shane // Mar 3, 2010:
….. my perspective, the purchase of TPW was simply a distraction to throw some of you folks into a tizzy just days before the [Lake’s emphasis: LIBERTARIAN] convention by taking over your virtual club house.
Whether IPR, TPW, or HoT, there will always be a place for LIBERTARIANS [Lake’s emphasis] to gather and bitch — which is a great thing.
Lake, contact information for the people you want contacted?
CATEGORIES
Constitution Party (546)
Green Party (1200)
Independents (1014)
Libertarian Party (2081)
Non-left/right parties (357)
Right-wing minor parties (223)
Socialist/left parties (432)
Third parties, general (412)
Uncategorized (134)
from my state ment, which I still stand by. I have repeated complained and was repeatedly told that non Bible Beaters and non [so called] Conservatives and the non Libertarians were sorely needed.
I got no returns from the USPS and no bounces from email.
paulie // Mar 3, 2010:
“False. Not only have we contacted numerous people, some of them actually have signed up.” [but none were from Don Lake, and none reported that they were contacted!]
Lake,
“Libertarian Political Report” would be highly inaccurate.
A majority of the articles have not been about the LP. Only about 40%.
Several IPR writers (including the editor) are non-LP. Many of the regular commenters, including you, are non-LP.
By the way, we do carry the same role for other parties.
Of IPR writers, Kimberly Wilder is an ex-Green, Dave Schwab is a current Green. Trent Hill is ex-CP, Cody Quirk is AIP/CP.
The California AIP/CP feud is hashed out here frequently. So too is the Green Party/ex-Green feud, the GP vs. Va IGP feud, Florida Modern Whig Party vs. Modern Whig Party, Tea Party factions against each other, and much more.
from jerk off city!
Robert Milnes // Mar 3, 2010:
“Pretty obvious paulie isn’t making much money here if he is waiting on me to send him a lousy TinyBook ……”
Lake: and that is salient in what manner. Duh! The Democans and the Republicrats must rejoice every day that your rants and high jacks appear!
False. Not only have we contacted numerous people, some of them actually have signed up.
from Green and reform and Socialist central!
Ross Levin // Mar 3, 2010:
” ……….. I’m proud to be part of IPR, even if I don’t pay attention to LP insider stuff. Can we get someone from the Green Party and other parties to start doing stuff like that here?”
Lake: been there done that; of the dozens of volunteers I forwarded not one was contacted!
from ossification central: “to confuse and defuse”
“Insane” // Mar 3, 2010 at 2:55 pm
“Regardless, from my perspective, the purchase of TPW was simply a distraction to throw some of you folks into a tizzy just days before the convention by taking over your virtual club house.”
——- Don Lake: ” TPW and IPR as built on sand. You have just proved my point of months and months of griping; the characters and characteristics of TPW and IPR are ‘moral midgets’!
“Whether IPR, or TPW, there will always be a place for [non Dems and non GOP ??????] to gather and bitch — which is a great thing.”
——- Don Lake: is that why such an ethically challenged moron like you [r self] would not honestly name the sites ‘Libertarian Political Report’ and ‘Libertarian Party Watch’ ????? Lordie, you sound like such a prick!
IPR was actually my first paid job ever. I made about $200 when it was sold. And if what Tom says is true (which I don’t doubt), then I’m proud to be part of IPR, even if I don’t pay attention to LP insider stuff. Can we get someone from the Green Party and other parties to start doing stuff like that here?
IPR is a volunteer job for me.
I only made money off it once, which was about $500 the one time it was sold.
I do have a job/business….made about $5,000 in the last month or so, slinging clipboards, for example.
It goes quick on the road, though – motels, restaurants, etc.
Going to Austin for LSLA/LNC was about $500 for greyhound and motels, and that’s without paying a conference fee.
It’s not that I couldn’t get my own tinybook, I just have never made it a priority.
Shane, back to work=have to report to handler?
Pretty obvious paulie isn’t making much money here if he is waiting on me to send him a lousy TinyBook.
I see it’s Special Needs Day on IPR.
It’s always Special Needs Day on IPR.
That’s just part of what makes it what it is, for better or for worse.
Around 1991.
Okay, then. I see it’s Special Needs Day on IPR.
Paul, sincere congratulations to you and others on the traffic and I hope you can make some money with it in addition to the other benefits.
Back to work for me.
Better men than him have tried & failed. Besides I figure an order came down to not kill me. Just keep me down & surveil.
Thank you, paulie. With each backhanded compliment you elevate my status.
He could tell you, but then he’d have to kill you.
Shane, are you just a good government lackey? Or paid? Frontman for CPAC? An actual agent? Which agency might that be? FBI, HSA, NSA(military)?
Yes, Milnes. I couldn’t deny the strength of your candidacy. Truly awe inspiring.
Rather than focusing on your favorite campaigns, folks wasted a good deal of time getting a doggone blog up while screaming about the injustice of the purchase.
I don’t remember it being a major distraction from helping campaigns.
I have to say that I find it funny that a guy who does reputation management owns IPR.
Sort of like a personal injury attorney who owns an ambulance company? LOL
It’s all about The Milnes.
Shane @2, “…throw some of you folks into a tizzy…”. Just who are “some of you folks”? Because that would include me.
Thanks, Paul. I have to say that I find it funny that a guy who does reputation management owns IPR.
Chris Martin (reputationhawk.com) is the current owner, and as far as I know does not comment here.
Trent Hill is his employee and actively manages the site.
Paulie, that’s how I remember it. Tom’s embellishing a bit by stating that I “instantly fired” anyone. It was more like anti-Barr writers instantly quit. I didn’t even actively manage the site and handed it off to an employee.
Regardless, from my perspective, the purchase of TPW was simply a distraction to throw some of you folks into a tizzy just days before the convention by taking over your virtual club house.
Rather than focusing on your favorite campaigns, folks wasted a good deal of time getting a doggone blog up while screaming about the injustice of the purchase. It was a good week’s worth of distraction.
Whether IPR, TPW, or HoT, there will always be a place for libertarians to gather and bitch — which is a great thing.
Just make sure that in 2012, you don’t let a web site become a point of vulnerability to your activists.
By the way, who owns IPR these days anyway?
1,000,000 visits is a huge milestone. Congratulations everyone and thanks readers.