I definitely do not want the Gulch being an HOA. A sex offender who had served his time in another state came recently to my neighborhood. I have become acquainted with him. I wouldn't call him a friend, but definitely not an enemy. Several concerned parents found a law that said that sex offenders are not allowed to live within 1/2 mile of a kids' community playground, so they pooled money together (separate private donations, rather than HOA money) to buy a playground. The playground now exists, and the sex offender is back to his home state. His partner, a very long term resident in my neighborhood, will leave to join him in a few months. Ah, those pesky HOA's.

both are mystical. Buddhism is about transcending reality. so, A is not A. Mormons believe in God, they follow a cultish prophet, they have secret hierarchical groups. A is not A. it doesn't mean there isn't overlap.

but we dont always have sufficient knowledge, and some of us might have more or less knowledge- leading to disagreements.

Is the earth cooling or warming for example. Is it a normal cycle, or caused by human intervention.

I do basically agree that there would be no difference of opinion on issues on which there was no difference in knowledge.

I would say that in a practical gulch, people could have different levels of knowledge, or they just disagree that the facts presented by some were in fact true.

More likely, each of the two objectivists is going to consider his/her views to be logically consistent with the agreed-on common premise, so the disagreement will continue, possibly over decades.

how do you handle real-life situations now? You choose according to your values. Is that a compromise? I hope not.

I've never seen an HOA the residents who weren't in charge of enforcement were happy with. My point is, as always, I do not need RMP as my "neighbor" when I have great conversations with her whenever I want. If I can find a Midas bank, I'll put my money there. I'd hardly ever get to see Ragnar anyway. I'd miss the diner.

Actually - it was Midas who was the ultimate decision make - he owned the valley.

Out of curiosity, if we are not stupid enough to think the cosmos happened all by itself, are we stupid enough to think that SOMETHING ELSE happened all by itself, then created the cosmos? ;-)

I think you inadvertently nailed the issue - different religions have different beliefs. Some of those beliefs would 100% fit in the gulch, other's wouldn't. For example, most Mormons or Buddhists would fit in the gulch just fine.

Assuming there are, and will likely always be differences in how people view the ideal gulch, why not have more than one gulch? Each with their own version of the ideal? The successful ones will thrive. What would be wrong about having such competition? Why can there only be one gulch? Just like several people starting a business.

Why would we only need one judge? Why not 2 or 20?

Seriously when two objectivists disagree their task is to find the point of common agreement and then see which one of the conflicting views is logically consistent with the agreed on common premise. Then comes the personal issue which is what does the one who is wrong do about it? Then what does the one who is right do about it. This requires weighing many complex values and deciding which is determinate of just action. The process is why laws are necessary in civilization as settling property issues.

A rational person does not draw conclusions without sufficient knowledge, and what we don't know (that would perhaps make it "perfect" by your definition) cannot be a concern in the process.
So there should be no differences of opinions on objective issues.
Any "rational compromise" would be on subjective issues.

What do you mean by compromise? I am not clear.

I negotiate deals/agreements with people all day long, to mutual advantage. Is that what you mean?

This scorned by libtards old-fashioned Christian for a Constitution, New Testament and gun clinging all-American aging dinosaur (quaint for still being around) is not to worried about there ever being a "fictional Gulch" that may not let me in.
I'm pretty sure there will never be a real one.
If there is, I doubt I will live so long.
I find this place stimulating and I've learned a lot of stuff so far.
I've been a ""born again" Christian sice the 70s and only learned who Ayn Rand was when I had Netflix send me the AS1 DVD.
I now have all three DVDs and I've read some Ayn Rand.
You just gotta know that his cyberspace gulch is gonna attract its share of characters.
Like me~Allosaurus is Latin for "different lizard." Allosaur is the short form. .

Perhaps, but the 1st generation that would move there would agree with the philosophy, from then on....just look to the state of this country.

I think that the more the gulch is populated by people of diverse philosophies and beliefs, the more its going to change from a gulch to a regular town.

This is what is happening to America, and I think is responsible in part for the change in culture towards socialism (the hispanics that have come here come from socialist countries and they bring their socialism with them). It used to be that immigrants adopted american ways and language, but now WE adopt their cultures and even language).

Belief in the "unknowable" . . . hmmm. How about the mathematical term "infinity?" Do we really know what that means, or do we simply accept the concept as a convenient means not to run into a mental brick wall? There may be things that exist, but we are incapable of affirming as humans, because of sensory limitations. It is a matter of faith in human ingenuity that given enough time, we can discover and explain anything, but can we really? Is acceptance of the unknowable the act of a rational mind that determines it's a waste of time and resources (agnostic)? There's a difference between faith in the existence of a deity (which believers would say is very knowable), or a determination that something is simply beyond our current ability to understand.

Sorry - I couldn't resist.

I guess I am thinking on more of a personal level. While many here understand and accept the philosophy disagreements still occur. I enjoy the debate but I have seen it get out of hand at times. Curious as to how we would handle a real life situation.

Objectivists do not come out of the womb 100% dyed in the wool. People are a mix of rational behavior and what I will call irrational behavior. One hopes in a gulch, there would be mostly rational behavior.

But, not every conclusion that a person makes is totally conscious and the result of perfect knowledge. Therefore there will be differences in opinions, and I do think that it is best to try and get the most rational compromise that is available.
I would agree that certain basic human rights should not be compromised. But beyond those, compromise is a way to get things moving forward when there are disagreements.

If you cant find labor in the Gulch by wages or reason then probably your farm produce isn't very good either.

Old dino can see that going negative even faster,

The reason we have the expression "Carved in stone" was ancient Greek villages needed all the citizens to know the rules by which they lived so they carved them in stone and placed the stones in the market place. Just like Galt's Oath on the power plant. Limited government is just those laws, agreements between the citizens, needed to protect life and property it is not a necessary evil but necessary for life. Read Locke to understand the history.

Objectivism is a philosophy derived from the premise that reality exists and it is consistent with the facts of reality as revealed by science. Now which are you going to contradict by compromising?
Everyone is trying to get out of the failed world by bringing into a new successful world the reasons the reasons the old one failed.

Ayn Rand was flexible as are those who have studied under her, when it is appropriate.

As for compromise you should never compromise because when you do neither you or the other person is happy.

As an Objectivist I never compromise nor did I before I was an Objectivist!