I am pleased to note that the AFT website has attracted only a handful of followers/practitioners till date (the sincere ones, or the loony ones - depending on one's perspective - who are wanting to go all the way number in single digits after more than a decade of the website being in operation).
I am also pleased that of the first three so-called "actually free" people, two showed such poor consideration of others in their writings that their correspondence will continue to drive away most of who happen to come to the website. It is fortuitous indeed. If they were able to pretend being considerate in their writings, it would have been a greater effort for me or somebody else to successfully warn people of the danger of following them.
Given these two facts, at present I no longer consider it necessary to spend more of my time/writings on elucidating the pitfalls/dangers of Actualism.
I consider the contents of the website (which is mostly archived correspondence) to be a useful, if labyrinthine, addition to the annals of human endeavor. It can certainly teach you better skills in written argumentation. It can cure people of spirituality and metaphysics in some cases (e.g. the pages containing correspondence about Osho and J Krishnamurti are some of the most incisive analyses of these Gurus that are available anywhere). But it will, in the longer term, serve more as a stark lesson about the dangers of an obsessive pursuit to be superhuman.
To the mailing list members and practitioners: The sooner you come out of your desire to achieve a PCE/actual-freedom/virtual-freedom/in-control-virtual-freedom/out-of-control-virtual-freedom/different-way-of-being/etc. the better it is. There is obvious merit in being aware of one's reactions, in being attentive, and in questioning one's habit patterns, beliefs and passions, etc. and such questioning may lead to peak experiences, but beware of the actualist theology lurking in every corner of the website (infinitude, perfection, PCE, Actual Freedom, apperception, feelings-are-the-self). I can only warn.
To the so-called mutineers: If you are around, I would like to correspond with you, and share notes.
To the core members (R/P/V/Pa): I don't think I can reach you anymore where it would matter or make a difference. I would be happy to be proven wrong.
To the Directors of the Trust: Since you are so concerned about matters of propriety and legal prudence, I will point out to you (since it has probably not occurred to you yet) that nobody on the various mailing lists discussing Actualism etc. expressly transferred the copyright of their writings to you. To assume copyright over somebody else's writings (and especially somebody's writings on a public mailing list) is improper. The rather strict "Use Restrictions" at the bottom on your website are unenforceable for most of the webpages on your website since your copyright itself on most pages is a non-starter, having never been granted to you in the first place. You can legally claim copyright over what is written by other people only when that right has been granted to you. In the absence of any grant or claim by the writer(s) (whom you anonymize on your website but whose identity you have knowledge of), the writing is in the public domain. You may of course write to each one of the correspondents and obtain their permission to exercise your copyright over their writings, but till then, your restrictive notice has no legal standing.
I will not even begin to use words similar to the ones Richard used to rudely admonish a fellow human being who committed an inadvertent copyright impropriety, but I find it pertinent to mention that while he never received a single penny for his work, and never intended to, you have received monies for selling media containing, among other things, the text of the website over most of which you can not claim copyright.