[Lnc-business] Motions (status of secretary)

[Arvin Vohra]

True, but in terms of time, there is nothing that we could get done before
Friday. Even if we decided to go with a hair-trigger immediate vote for
suspension, which I would personally consider rash, it would still take 10
days, putting the end date later than Friday. Among the unfavorable options
that we have, the best one seems to be waiting until Friday, when we have
more information.

Also, I know this is closer to discussion, but due to the seriousness of
the topic, I consider it appropriate for this to appear on the business
list.

-Arvin



On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 10:45 PM, R. Lee Wrights <rleewrights at gmail.com>wrote:

> On Sun, Jan 6, 2013 at 8:26 PM, Starchild <sfdreamer at earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>         Does this mean we delay any motions until January 13? I'm not
>> suggesting an immediate move to suspend or remove Ruth as secretary, but it
>> does not seem appropriate to wait another entire week to get some clarity
>> on the situation, at least not without a better explanation than we've been
>> given (i.e. none).
>>
>> Love & Liberty,
>>                                    ((( starchild )))
>> At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>
>
>
> With all due respect, I must agree with Starchild here. We have waited and
> waited with no word, and then when we get word. the word is wait a little
> longer?
>
> I'm sorry, but I find this unacceptable.
>
>
> Lee Wrights
> Vice Chair
> Libertarian Party
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20130107/a414c1d6/attachment-0002.html>