[Lnc-business] I vote "yes" on dropping planned membership changes (was Re: [Lnc-discuss] Having a wide range of donor recognition levels is good)

[Starchild]

	Just to keep things orderly, I am formally posting on this list that I vote "Yes" on Mark Hinkle's motion to scrap the proposed changes to our membership structure that are currently slated to go into effect Jan. 1, 2013 (thanks Paulie, for catching that I voted on the LNC-discuss list by accident). 

	I am voting yes on the understanding that this motion if it passes would keep life membership in the Libertarian Party at $1000, as I believe I heard Mark say is the case. However I would like the chair's ruling on this point ASAP, since Scott Lieberman has claimed that the motion if passed would not stop the increase in the cost of a life membership from increasing to $1500.

Love & Liberty,
                                ((( starchild )))
At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee


On Dec 13, 2012, at 7:04 AM, travellingcircus at gmail.com wrote:

> I like the time idea. Maybe it should be a separate motion. I guess the concern there will be how much time and money it will take to keep track of people's time. But maybe it can be overcome. 
> 
> The higher contribution levels, with their names, are just a way to try to hopefully get some larger contributions by giving them recognition. They don't change anyone's actual membership. 
> 
> The only part of the motion that changes membership status is 1k vs 1.5k for life membership. That's a legitimate argument. Both sides have made their points and at this time it's 8-7 for scrapping the change by my count (although you still should vote on the business list, the only vote I saw from you was on the discuss list). Four full members of the LNC have not voted that I have seen (Neale, Redpath, Lark, Wiener....although Liberman voted). 
> 
> Basic membership cost is not up to us, that's a bylaws issue at this point. 
> 
> Paulie
> 
> On Thu, Dec 13, 2012 at 12:59 AM, Starchild <sfdreamer at earthlink.net> wrote:
> 	Have a wide range of donor recognition levels? Sure, I've got no problem with that. 
> 
> 	In fact I'd like to see us recognize donations of *time* as well as money. Recognition levels could start at an hour spent helping with a mailing, editing a newsletter, writing letters, posting pro-freedom commentary online, doing outreach tabling, giving a speech, etc., and go all the way up to 80 hours/week or whatever. Obviously time spent aiding the libertarian movement is not always going to be as verifiable as a check mailed in, but as long as we're not giving away anything too valuable in recognition, I don't see a problem with letting people self-report their non-monetary donations. If folks are concerned this would be abused, perhaps we could require that one other LP member affirm a person's claimed contribution of time in order for it to be officially recognized.
> 
> 	However I do not support tying donations, whether of money or of time, to membership in the Libertarian Party. Most if not all of the arguments I've seen here for having higher contribution levels, or more contribution levels, do not depend on those additional or higher levels being tied to membership. By making sure contributions are not tied to membership, we can send a clear and unambiguous message that voting in the Libertarian Party is not for sale.
> 
> Love & Liberty,
>                                   ((( starchild )))
> At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-discuss mailing list
> Lnc-discuss at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-discuss_hq.lp.org

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20121213/ddf6ca1f/attachment-0001.html>