Blackie

Introduce Yourself
#1

Tell us about yourself.

I <3 guns and weed.

Why are you here?

Ian mentioned forum.freetalklive.com on FTL, so I thought I would see what that is all about.

I noticed that Shiresociety.com does not have port 443 open, only port 80, so it can only do http. I highly recommend you enable and force https connections, since usernames and passwords are in play.

The Freetalklive.com SSL cert. seems fine and won’t expire until November 30, 2018. I didn’t look at took much, but whatever I looked at was a good https connection.

Freekeene.com has port 443 open, is trying to use a cert for bbs.freetalklive.com from Let’s Encrypt, which is a no go for https. The domain name and the name in the SSL certificate need to match.

It’s probably just configuration issues. Changing a few lines in a config file, and having the right certs in the proper location.

How did you find these forums?

internet

2 Likes
#2

Welcome to the Shire forum.

#3

I’ll talk to error about it - thanks, Blackie. Welcome aboard.

#4

TLS is on for the forum.

#5

I can connect over https now. Thanks!

#6

Yay, teamwork! Thanks, error.

#7

Blackie - you were on this forum in 2008 before the Shire Society’s formation. Are you a Shire Declaration signer?

#8

FTL_Ian - I am not a Shire Society Declaration signer. I have a few issues with it.

witnesses to the lesson of history

I have only witnessed my own life. History is a story, and I can’t claim to know which parts are true and which parts are false. History is subjective.

FIRST, each individual is the exclusive proprietor of his or her own existence and all products thereof, holding no obligations except those created by consent;

FOURTH, explicit voluntary association is the only means by which binding obligations may be created, and claims based on association or relationships to which any party did not consent are empty and invalid;

I believe an individual can create an obligation without consent. If you damage another individual and it is your fault, you have created an obligation to make that individual whole again. No consent required.

1 Like
#9

Ahh, good point. I wish that had been brought up when we were crafting it.

#10

I think you’re overthinking it, looking for a loophole that is not relevant.

A) The lesson is quite easy to witness. States always dominate and subjugate people and those places where people can’t or couldn’t defend themselves are not separate from having their lessons witnessed.
Obviously some trust in the senses is necessary in life.

  1. It is generally accepted in common law that if a person takes actions that are consistent with contract formation they are considered to have consented to the contract formation. Nevertheless if a person consciously takes actions with their existence and produces destruction of value and/or consensually infringes another they are responsible to the injured party and obligated to repair such in a reasonable manner.
    IV) Similarly if someone is at fault for damage of another it skips ahead to reparations to restore. aluation/repair etc. is necessary as “at fault” is a legal term of responsibility for the problem and thus the obligation is based not on association or relationships but the direct actions of the person i.e. explicit voluntary actions created the obligation/s.

It was a good critique but I think your analysis would not hold water to peer review as people individually choose how to interact with contract breakers and those who fail to repair their damages. The nature of freedom is that in such disputes the reasonableness of the parties to the dispute could justify their actions and vice versa allowing society to be the judge rather than having a strict eye for an eye or other judicial rules that apply both to members and non-members.
Anyone can claim membership and anyone can dispute the merits of members just like liberals nowadays are anything but liberal in many definitions.