Become a TFSF Member today!

[LafesterMacintosh]

Is this the thread you're going to meltdown in today you little bitch? It's hard to keep up with your little bitchiness. Keep us posted.

texas university aka lgbtq U

 

[weaponoffreedom]

Good luck with the tear, i have a tear in my biceps tendon and rotator cuff. They said not bad enough for surgery but med. weight and stretching. Injuries from heavy lifting for 30 yrs.

send a provable current picture of yourself

 

[Viking]

I must be a moron. I cant figure out how to sign up. Can someone send me the link or instructions written for a five year old? Thank you.

 

[TFSF]

I must be a moron. I cant figure out how to sign up. Can someone send me the link or instructions written for a five year old? Thank you.

Subscribe at the link below for the ability to post on the 'Members Only' forum and view TFSF in its entirety ad-free. The cost is $15 / month. Message us or reply to this thread once completed and we’ll get your benefits added on TFSF.

Get more from The Free Speech Forum on Patreon

creating Support TFSF

www.patreon.com

 

[Viking]

Subscribed. Now let me in before i kill cum stain! Skol!

 

[TFSF]

Subscribed. Now let me in before i kill cum stain! Skol!

Done. Thank you.

 

[Rebarcock.]

I must be a moron. I cant figure out how to sign up. Can someone send me the link or instructions written for a five year old? Thank you.

I had to laugh

 

[Taggart]

I'm in

 

[CuriousFiend]

Since John seems content to let people shit on founders without defending us, I'll give you a little history lesson.

This site did not start as "The Free Speech Forum", it was originally called "Crootn". The original incarnation of the "Dance Your Cares Away/Fraggle/Law Abiding Citizens" thread started on the Rivals.com main board forum back around 2016 (I wasn't there for the beginning, so @tgsio or someone else who was there can correct me if incorrect). Per @22*43*51 :

View attachment 207903

I was a member of the UGA Rivals forum and was getting shit from the mods for political postings in 2020, when my Dawg brother @Dawg88 told me about the thread on the main board. I joined the thread and was glad to find like-minded brothers and sisters that liked to post/discuss things that were contrary to the approved narrative. After the election was stolen in 2020, we started getting purged from TMB and other platforms, so John decided to start this site so that we would have a place for our thread to live.

As I previously mentioned, this site was originally called "Crootn" (slang for recruiting), and we initially thought that our thread would be protected and that we could have our own conservative-leaning site among the sea of liberal platforms:

View attachment 207905

View attachment 207904

Things were looking good, and it felt like we finally had our own place! We were originally asked to vote on what we wanted it to be named, and were to be given incentives/recognition for donating to help build the site:

View attachment 207906

View attachment 207907

View attachment 207908

I don't recall exactly what happened to disregard the name we decided on (Law Abiding Citizen), but since John and his team were the ones doing the work behind the scenes to build the site, I shrugged it off when he decided to name it "The Free Speech Forum" instead. We were happy to have our own place, so we happily donated:

View attachment 207909

Fast-forward several years to today, where the only thread I care about and gladly paid to protect and preserve has gradually been degraded to the point that I basically only post memes and funny stuff to lift others' spirits, and finally fractured off to where I'm told we have to pay $15 a month to get what the founders were led to believe we would always have.

View attachment 207910

To be perfectly clear: I have no problem with this site allowing any and all opposing viewpoints. All I ever wanted and expected was that our founding thread, the bedrock on which this site was built, would be protected. It was not, so I no longer pay.

This is ultimately John's site and he can do with it as he sees fit, but I'm disappointed that he refuses to defend those of us who helped build it and are unhappy with the current state of affairs.

Actually quite interesting.
Thanks for sharing this insight.

Definitely provides relevant context—which affords clearer overall perspective.

Tbh prior to this I hadn't been able to work out the motivation behind what had *seemed* like an arrogantly entitled possessiveness of the master thread - presented by *some* founding members.

Had assumed they were just being spoilt shits, but now it makes sense.

Wondering if there's an alternative solution, so I will attempt sharing my opinion as follows.

One thing that I think is causing issues is the belief that a free speech forum = entirely unrestricted speech.

But if that were true then we'd have cunts freely allowed to post CP & god knows what else.

Yet we don't allow that shit do we.

I've seen 1 older thread where a poster apparently did begin posting pro-CP type shit—and John immediately dealt with it.

(*I think)-Removing the suspect pro-CP posts,-(*not the poster)-and directly informing the poster in no uncertain terms that their irresponsible shit is out of line & will not fly here.
(*I think John handled it very well.)

Dunno, just thinking it could be more accurate to consider tfsf as a forum providing for reasonably responsible speech/US Constitutional Free Speech.

Regardless, I think it's funny af that some members here illogically assume free speech equates to unrestricted speech.

That they're simply entitled to post whatever tf they want—wherever they want—and fuck everyone else.

Yet generally these same posters are also the same fuckin ones commonly going around telling other posters to stop posting, "gtfoh", "no one reads your shit", "fuck off", etc.

ffs, it is overwhelmingly obvious hypocrisy masquerading as "free speech".

ie: "I can say what I want and no one can stop me, but I don't like what you say so you can shut up. If you don't, I'm going to harrass you until you comply."

Then there's obvious agenda narrative spamming shills, aka: "social media influencers" like this "Jake Broe Stan" twerplet who is essentially doing exactly what the hypocritical members are—ie: hijacking & masquerading behind the ambiguity of generalized "free speech".

Over @nz a while back, Notorious Outlaw twice tried arguing that "free speech" = he's entitled without any consequence to aggressively harrass-spam everyone, including making personal attacks using private information he'd gleaned.

Fuckin laughable all right.

His shitty behaviour wasn't *"free speech"* it was simply *irresponsible fuckwittery specifically intended to offend everyone.*

Imo freedom of expression is responsibility of expression.

As far as I'm concerned if cunts disregard acting responsibly—they equally so disregard their right to act at all.

Currently-(*& for the previous couple of years)-TFSF has hosted an exclusive access area, ie: the Patrons Pub & now the Peanut one.

Both practically the same basic thing-yet I don't recall hypocritical members going hysterical over Patrons Pub.(*¿maybe they did, idk?)

The point being that the PP didn't change anything fundamental to TFSF.

It was merely a distinct exclusive access area within the whole of TFSF board and it didn't impose any limitations upon anyone in other areas.

Just my cunty opinion, but I think the original DYCA/Fraggle/LAC ought to be the exclusive access thread instead of the Peanut one.

From the beginning it has been the creation of the founding members.

All founding members ought to be provided full access with or without paid membership.

I think the founding members deserve this privilege because they've earned it.

And if non-founders like me want access—I think it is justified that we ought to be required to pay for the privilege.

I'm not very good at articulating my thoughts clearly but hopefully this is sort of adequately getting my perspective across.

 

[TFSF]

I'm in

Benefits added. TY

 

[shiv]

Actually quite interesting.
Thanks for sharing this insight.

Definitely provides relevant context—which affords clearer overall perspective.

Tbh prior to this I hadn't been able to work out the motivation behind what had *seemed* like an arrogantly entitled possessiveness of the master thread - presented by *some* founding members.

Had assumed they were just being spoilt shits, but now it makes sense.

Wondering if there's an alternative solution, so I will attempt sharing my opinion as follows.

One thing that I think is causing issues is the belief that a free speech forum = entirely unrestricted speech.

But if that were true then we'd have cunts freely allowed to post CP & god knows what else.

Yet we don't allow that shit do we.

I've seen 1 older thread where a poster apparently did begin posting pro-CP type shit—and John immediately dealt with it.

(*I think)-Removing the suspect pro-CP posts,-(*not the poster)-and directly informing the poster in no uncertain terms that their irresponsible shit is out of line & will not fly here.
(*I think John handled it very well.)

Dunno, just thinking it could be more accurate to consider tfsf as a forum providing for reasonably responsible speech/US Constitutional Free Speech.

Regardless, I think it's funny af that some members here illogically assume free speech equates to unrestricted speech.

That they're simply entitled to post whatever tf they want—wherever they want—and fuck everyone else.

Yet generally these same posters are also the same fuckin ones commonly going around telling other posters to stop posting, "gtfoh", "no one reads your shit", "fuck off", etc.

ffs, it is overwhelmingly obvious hypocrisy masquerading as "free speech".

ie: "I can say what I want and no one can stop me, but I don't like what you say so you can shut up. If you don't, I'm going to harrass you until you comply."

Then there's obvious agenda narrative spamming shills, aka: "social media influencers" like this "Jake Broe Stan" twerplet who is essentially doing exactly what the hypocritical members are—ie: hijacking & masquerading behind the ambiguity of generalized "free speech".

Over @nz a while back, Notorious Outlaw twice tried arguing that "free speech" = he's entitled without any consequence to aggressively harrass-spam everyone, including making personal attacks using private information he'd gleaned.

Fuckin laughable all right.

His shitty behaviour wasn't *"free speech"* it was simply *irresponsible fuckwittery specifically intended to offend everyone.*

Imo freedom of expression is responsibility of expression.

As far as I'm concerned if cunts disregard acting responsibly—they equally so disregard their right to act at all.

Currently-(*& for the previous couple of years)-TFSF has hosted an exclusive access area, ie: the Patrons Pub & now the Peanut one.

Both practically the same basic thing-yet I don't recall hypocritical members going hysterical over Patrons Pub.(*¿maybe they did, idk?)

The point being that the PP didn't change anything fundamental to TFSF.

It was merely a distinct exclusive access area within the whole of TFSF board and it didn't impose any limitations upon anyone in other areas.

Just my cunty opinion, but I think the original DYCA/Fraggle/LAC ought to be the exclusive access thread instead of the Peanut one.

From the beginning it has been the creation of the founding members.

All founding members ought to be provided full access with or without paid membership.

I think the founding members deserve this privilege because they've earned it.

And if non-founders like me want access—I think it is justified that we ought to be required to pay for the privilege.

I'm not very good at articulating my thoughts clearly but hopefully this is sort of adequately getting my perspective across.

Honestly a VERY valid point about including founders. Let me work through some thoughts

There are multiple dimensions to the changes I’ve made / am making. I want a sustainable model in place. I know some of you could find this place on their own, but I prefer to have it community sourced.

 

[shiv]

Also I understand the thoughts between responsible speech etc, but I want one place on the internet with Unrestricted speech (great description). The Unrestricted Speech Forum just doesn’t have a nice ring to it

Where else can you go on the internet that is just a hell hole of all kinds of thoughts, motives, ideas, opinions etc.

It’s novel, it’s unique

 

[shiv]

Actually quite interesting.
Thanks for sharing this insight.

Definitely provides relevant context—which affords clearer overall perspective.

Tbh prior to this I hadn't been able to work out the motivation behind what had *seemed* like an arrogantly entitled possessiveness of the master thread - presented by *some* founding members.

Had assumed they were just being spoilt shits, but now it makes sense.

Wondering if there's an alternative solution, so I will attempt sharing my opinion as follows.

One thing that I think is causing issues is the belief that a free speech forum = entirely unrestricted speech.

But if that were true then we'd have cunts freely allowed to post CP & god knows what else.

Yet we don't allow that shit do we.

I've seen 1 older thread where a poster apparently did begin posting pro-CP type shit—and John immediately dealt with it.

(*I think)-Removing the suspect pro-CP posts,-(*not the poster)-and directly informing the poster in no uncertain terms that their irresponsible shit is out of line & will not fly here.
(*I think John handled it very well.)

Dunno, just thinking it could be more accurate to consider tfsf as a forum providing for reasonably responsible speech/US Constitutional Free Speech.

Regardless, I think it's funny af that some members here illogically assume free speech equates to unrestricted speech.

That they're simply entitled to post whatever tf they want—wherever they want—and fuck everyone else.

Yet generally these same posters are also the same fuckin ones commonly going around telling other posters to stop posting, "gtfoh", "no one reads your shit", "fuck off", etc.

ffs, it is overwhelmingly obvious hypocrisy masquerading as "free speech".

ie: "I can say what I want and no one can stop me, but I don't like what you say so you can shut up. If you don't, I'm going to harrass you until you comply."

Then there's obvious agenda narrative spamming shills, aka: "social media influencers" like this "Jake Broe Stan" twerplet who is essentially doing exactly what the hypocritical members are—ie: hijacking & masquerading behind the ambiguity of generalized "free speech".

Over @nz a while back, Notorious Outlaw twice tried arguing that "free speech" = he's entitled without any consequence to aggressively harrass-spam everyone, including making personal attacks using private information he'd gleaned.

Fuckin laughable all right.

His shitty behaviour wasn't *"free speech"* it was simply *irresponsible fuckwittery specifically intended to offend everyone.*

Imo freedom of expression is responsibility of expression.

As far as I'm concerned if cunts disregard acting responsibly—they equally so disregard their right to act at all.

Currently-(*& for the previous couple of years)-TFSF has hosted an exclusive access area, ie: the Patrons Pub & now the Peanut one.

Both practically the same basic thing-yet I don't recall hypocritical members going hysterical over Patrons Pub.(*¿maybe they did, idk?)

The point being that the PP didn't change anything fundamental to TFSF.

It was merely a distinct exclusive access area within the whole of TFSF board and it didn't impose any limitations upon anyone in other areas.

Just my cunty opinion, but I think the original DYCA/Fraggle/LAC ought to be the exclusive access thread instead of the Peanut one.

From the beginning it has been the creation of the founding members.

All founding members ought to be provided full access with or without paid membership.

I think the founding members deserve this privilege because they've earned it.

And if non-founders like me want access—I think it is justified that we ought to be required to pay for the privilege.

I'm not very good at articulating my thoughts clearly but hopefully this is sort of adequately getting my perspective across.

But additionally, a big issue with a lot of that previous post is Croot Lord (who is not the same person as I) made some statements without talking through with me

 

[madman71]

But additionally, a big issue with a lot of that previous post is Croot Lord (who is not the same person as I) made some statements without talking through with me

His statements factored into my donations (and most likely others' as well). If you didn't have him retract them or walk them back at that time, then this is just revisionist history.

 

[shiv]

His statements factored into my donations (and most likely others' as well). If you didn't have him retract them or walk them back at that time, then this is just revisionist history.

Fair enough

This reads pretty spot on though:

 

[shiv]

Fair enough

This reads pretty spot on though:

View attachment 208016

It’s essentially the same I just implemented, it just took me 3 years

 

[madman71]

Fair enough

This reads pretty spot on though:

View attachment 208016

Had he not posted this the next day, you would have a valid point:

 

[shiv]

Had he not posted this the next day, you would have a valid point:

View attachment 208017

And he is not me. He didn’t put in the work I did. He bailed once it became clear we weren’t destined to be millionaires. But if that factored in your decision thats fine.

 

[shiv]

Also it says “if that’s the route we decide to take” pretty clearly in there. We never took that route. I just implemented a system very similar to the original one I outlined.

I’ve always been clear about what the Main Forum is

 

[LafesterMacintosh]

Since John seems content to let people shit on founders without defending us, I'll give you a little history lesson.

This site did not start as "The Free Speech Forum", it was originally called "Crootn". The original incarnation of the "Dance Your Cares Away/Fraggle/Law Abiding Citizens" thread started on the Rivals.com main board forum back around 2016 (I wasn't there for the beginning, so @tgsio or someone else who was there can correct me if incorrect). Per @22*43*51 :

View attachment 207903

I was a member of the UGA Rivals forum and was getting shit from the mods for political postings in 2020, when my Dawg brother @Dawg88 told me about the thread on the main board. I joined the thread and was glad to find like-minded brothers and sisters that liked to post/discuss things that were contrary to the approved narrative. After the election was stolen in 2020, we started getting purged from TMB and other platforms, so John decided to start this site so that we would have a place for our thread to live.

As I previously mentioned, this site was originally called "Crootn" (slang for recruiting), and we initially thought that our thread would be protected and that we could have our own conservative-leaning site among the sea of liberal platforms:

View attachment 207905

View attachment 207904

Things were looking good, and it felt like we finally had our own place! We were originally asked to vote on what we wanted it to be named, and were to be given incentives/recognition for donating to help build the site:

View attachment 207906

View attachment 207907

View attachment 207908

I don't recall exactly what happened to disregard the name we decided on (Law Abiding Citizen), but since John and his team were the ones doing the work behind the scenes to build the site, I shrugged it off when he decided to name it "The Free Speech Forum" instead. We were happy to have our own place, so we happily donated:

View attachment 207909

Fast-forward several years to today, where the only thread I care about and gladly paid to protect and preserve has gradually been degraded to the point that I basically only post memes and funny stuff to lift others' spirits, and finally fractured off to where I'm told we have to pay $15 a month to get what the founders were led to believe we would always have.

View attachment 207910

To be perfectly clear: I have no problem with this site allowing any and all opposing viewpoints. All I ever wanted and expected was that our founding thread, the bedrock on which this site was built, would be protected. It was not, so I no longer pay.

This is ultimately John's site and he can do with it as he sees fit, but I'm disappointed that he refuses to defend those of us who helped build it and are unhappy with the current state of affairs.

LOL

 

[Homewood]

I love this place regardless, I gots nowheres else to go. Please don’t make me go back to the Auburn board, covid broke those liberal pussies.

 

[tgsio]

Done. Thank you.

Most mundane response ever cracked me up.

 

[tgsio]

Actually quite interesting.
Thanks for sharing this insight.

Definitely provides relevant context—which affords clearer overall perspective.

Tbh prior to this I hadn't been able to work out the motivation behind what had *seemed* like an arrogantly entitled possessiveness of the master thread - presented by *some* founding members.

Had assumed they were just being spoilt shits, but now it makes sense.

Wondering if there's an alternative solution, so I will attempt sharing my opinion as follows.

One thing that I think is causing issues is the belief that a free speech forum = entirely unrestricted speech.

But if that were true then we'd have cunts freely allowed to post CP & god knows what else.

Yet we don't allow that shit do we.

I've seen 1 older thread where a poster apparently did begin posting pro-CP type shit—and John immediately dealt with it.

(*I think)-Removing the suspect pro-CP posts,-(*not the poster)-and directly informing the poster in no uncertain terms that their irresponsible shit is out of line & will not fly here.
(*I think John handled it very well.)

Dunno, just thinking it could be more accurate to consider tfsf as a forum providing for reasonably responsible speech/US Constitutional Free Speech.

Regardless, I think it's funny af that some members here illogically assume free speech equates to unrestricted speech.

That they're simply entitled to post whatever tf they want—wherever they want—and fuck everyone else.

Yet generally these same posters are also the same fuckin ones commonly going around telling other posters to stop posting, "gtfoh", "no one reads your shit", "fuck off", etc.

ffs, it is overwhelmingly obvious hypocrisy masquerading as "free speech".

ie: "I can say what I want and no one can stop me, but I don't like what you say so you can shut up. If you don't, I'm going to harrass you until you comply."

Then there's obvious agenda narrative spamming shills, aka: "social media influencers" like this "Jake Broe Stan" twerplet who is essentially doing exactly what the hypocritical members are—ie: hijacking & masquerading behind the ambiguity of generalized "free speech".

Over @nz a while back, Notorious Outlaw twice tried arguing that "free speech" = he's entitled without any consequence to aggressively harrass-spam everyone, including making personal attacks using private information he'd gleaned.

Fuckin laughable all right.

His shitty behaviour wasn't *"free speech"* it was simply *irresponsible fuckwittery specifically intended to offend everyone.*

Imo freedom of expression is responsibility of expression.

As far as I'm concerned if cunts disregard acting responsibly—they equally so disregard their right to act at all.

Currently-(*& for the previous couple of years)-TFSF has hosted an exclusive access area, ie: the Patrons Pub & now the Peanut one.

Both practically the same basic thing-yet I don't recall hypocritical members going hysterical over Patrons Pub.(*¿maybe they did, idk?)

The point being that the PP didn't change anything fundamental to TFSF.

It was merely a distinct exclusive access area within the whole of TFSF board and it didn't impose any limitations upon anyone in other areas.

Just my cunty opinion, but I think the original DYCA/Fraggle/LAC ought to be the exclusive access thread instead of the Peanut one.

From the beginning it has been the creation of the founding members.

All founding members ought to be provided full access with or without paid membership.

I think the founding members deserve this privilege because they've earned it.

And if non-founders like me want access—I think it is justified that we ought to be required to pay for the privilege.

I'm not very good at articulating my thoughts clearly but hopefully this is sort of adequately getting my perspective across.

You articulated your thoughts just fine.

As for me? I'm one of the originals. I'm willing to keep this board going. I still post over at tmb. Most think I'm the one who started fraqqle. I did not. I'm not that clever. Even changing the title? I was getting messages asking me to and suggestions for the new name.

The reason the thread was under my handle is Ones finally put it under me because I'm one of the few known women that posts there (and have for years) and it was almost impossible to delete/cancel 'my' thread. It was his way of saving the thread.


There were some very smart, driven posters in that (5 renditions?) thread. It was a true free speech /free for all thread for years until the sane mods were ran out and replaced by the pussy, bitch ass gen mods who were actively involved in killing the thread.

Until then? Anybody got cunty? It was dealt with in thread. Speech drowning out speech. As it should be.

There was a whole hell of a lot of work by people much smarter than me to get this site up and running. I believed and believe in what they were and are doing. The only thing I can do is support them. If that means I throw in a little more every month? Coolio. I'm in. I'll always be in.

After all, there are a bunch of posters who aren't just members. They're family. They read my incessant drunken ramblings, have followed my kids' lives and have been the best humans I've been blessed to 'know'. Y'all know who you are. I sure as hell do. And Riley is doing great. She just got cleared to exercise again. Don't ever think I don't love each and every one of you. And I mean that sincerely.

 

[Cyberty]

I have decided to become a member again. @shiv

 

[shiv]

I have decided to become a member again. @shiv

Appreciate it man. Glad to see you on the board again