General

Re: What it Means to be Anti-State

Clayton — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 20:06:22 GMT

I consumed a portion of your IP

Yes, I felt the loss as you were reading. LOL

Clayton -

Re: What it Means to be Anti-State

Andris Birkmanis — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 19:33:36 GMT

It was not exactly free, I consumed a portion of your IP by reading :D

Re: What it Means to be Anti-State

Clayton — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 19:25:53 GMT

I fixed the caterpillar mistake. Thanks for the free editing, Andris. ;-)

Clayton -

Re: What it Means to be Anti-State

Clayton — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 19:22:45 GMT

@Andris: I really have no strong desire to get material on LRC. I have other projects that I care about a lot more. I only submitted the article because I had written it and then thought "Hmm, this might be a good fit on LRC... let's see if they'll take it." I'm just griping about their email habits.

Clayton -

Re: What it Means to be Anti-State

Andris Birkmanis — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 18:18:22 GMT

My inner statistician tells me, that if we model your (one-way) exchange with LR as a binomial experiment, the result 0:2 still leaves you with a 95% confidence interval from 0 to 84.2% - in other words, their acceptance rate of the material of the kind you've sent them can well be above 50% - just keep trying :)

I suggest stopping after the 6th test.

Re: What it Means to be Anti-State

Clayton — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 18:06:10 GMT

The only point-of-contact they give is lew@lewrockwell.com. I understand they probably get a thousand emails a day, even after spam filtering. But everyone else in the world can manage at least a form letter "thank you for your inquiry" kind of thing. Anyway, that's how I feel about it. Nuff said.

Clayton -

Re: What it Means to be Anti-State

Groucho — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 10:47:48 GMT

How do you know it was even read? Who knows what kind of settings Lew (or whoever you emailed it to) have on ther spam filters?

I once emailed Lew a snapshot that I thought he'd like for a blog entry, but as far as I know he never posted it. I assume that, for whatever reason, he didn't see it or if he did see it he simply didn't use it.

But I have to factor in the likelihood that: I got blocked by the spam filter - after all, Lew Rockwell doesn't know me and I am only acquanited with him through his public works. And even if it did get through the filter, I can imagine him being leary of unknown people sending him emails with attachments. I also think it's a little unreasonable to expect that he would invest the time to read and respond to unsolicited essays sent to him by unknown authors.

Now as far as getting more exposure... have you considered the Mises Community Blog Project? If the project gets off the ground, it might be the start of something big (who knows?) - and you've obviously got writing talent. Something to consider?

Re: What it Means to be Anti-State

Clayton — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 09:39:35 GMT

@Andrew Cain: What's your point? I have no right to complain because I'm a "nobody"?? If I'll feel like bitching about something, I'll bitch about it.

And, believe me, making it onto LRC is not one of my goals in life. So I have right around zero intention of "becoming a somebody" in LRC's eyes in order to get it up there. I merely submitted it because I thought it would be a good fit and if they didn't like it or just generally didn't know who the hell I am, fine, I understand that but it wouldn't kill them to respond to an email.

Clayton -

Re: What it Means to be Anti-State

Clayton — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 09:36:20 GMT

are you sure caterpillars use silk to protect their progeny?

You're right, that's a mistake. Argh.

Clayton -

Re: What it Means to be Anti-State

Andrew Cain — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 09:08:05 GMT

Getting a response, whether yes or no, goes back to being a somebody in the world of publishing. The people at LR can get away with not addressing your email or articles. Again, not trying to be cruel, but who are you? What influence do you have? You are in a sea of others like you. Gotta be a somebody, then you will be acknowledged.

Re: What it Means to be Anti-State

Clayton — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 09:00:18 GMT

Look, Laurence Vance is a hack in my book and I have no idea why he's on LRC... well, he's on the blog so I figure it's because he's a personal friend of Lew.

I'm not arguing with Lew's criteria, whatever they are... just would like to get a response... "no thanks" would work just fine.

Clayton -

Re: What it Means to be Anti-State

Andrew Cain — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 08:57:26 GMT

Here are his works

Here are the sites he writes for

short answer: Laurence Vance is published.

Re: What it Means to be Anti-State

Andris Birkmanis — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 08:55:03 GMT

Powerful, emotionally moving.

Though, as I am feeling pedantic today - are you sure caterpillars use silk to protect their progeny? I would imagine, they use it to protect themselves (well, and by extension, their progeny, of course). Details like this may undermine credibility. I know this sounds silly, but they really may.

Re: What it Means to be Anti-State

Clayton — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 08:52:57 GMT

Laurence Vance is a published scholar?? Anyway, I'm not sore at being rejected... I would be happier if I had been rejected! That's my complaint! At least reject me!

Clayton -

Re: What it Means to be Anti-State

Andrew Cain — Sun, 28 Oct 2012 08:48:53 GMT

It's simple. Are you published in any scholarly sources or media sites? Then you are not going to get published on LR. It's harsh but they are not going to put up articles written by somebody no one knows about. It's like me trying to get published in the American Historical Review, which is basically the top journal for historians, while I am a graduate student. They are not going to accept it because I'm a nobody in the world of academia. Be a somebody then send your stuff to get published there. Not saying this to be mean or squash your work. Just giving out the truth.