Willravel

I don't think there's one answer to that question. I think in some things compromise is unfortunately the best option but on other things I'll fight tooth and nail until the bitter end because I'm as sure as I can be that the other side is wrong and their position will fail. Take health care reform as an example. I feel I've seen enough raw data to conclude that the general libertarian position, that the health care industry should remain private, simply won't work. I plan on fighting for a different system either until I win, I die, or some new and convincing data becomes available. I don't see that as something to compromise on because I don't feel a compromise would yield the best outcome. On the other hand, I might be willing to compromise when libertarians talk about decriminalization. I'd be fine decriminalizing certain illegal drugs such as marijuana and such, but I'd not want all illegal drugs legalized entirely because I'm not convinced that total legalization would be as successful as partial legalization or decriminalization.

I think the strongest position is the most practical for the given situation. You can't be all radical all the time because you'd end up alienating the other side completely and nothing will ever get solved. You can't compromise on everything because then you'll not be fully supporting any of the options you feel are correct. It has to be blended depending on the given situation.
Those aren't the only 3 options. I'm registered green right now, I was independent before that. I might register Peace and Freedom if the Green Party continues to lose its way and I feel I can't contribute to fixing it.