[Lnc-business] Upcoming LNC Meeting - previous notice requirements, agenda item requests, and reports

[Joshua Katz]

In response to a point made by a constituent, I informally withdraw my
informal suggestion to informally refer.  My intent was to spare those who
might be bored, but it was pointed out to me that the effect would be
possibly discussing limitations on transparency in a non-transparent forum.
 Here are the comments I sent to Dan, with some edits for things I thought
of since then:

Using an implied numbering:
1.  The first question is whether or not the LNC wants to set the rules for
how other large committees conduct business.  The new bylaw says we may,
but doesn't require us to.  I'd suggest the following - for the LNC, the
same number as is required to initiate an email ballot, plus one, or the
chair.  For another large commitee - the same percentage of membership as
for the LNC, or the committee chair, or the LNC chair can call a committee
to meet.  I agree that no commitment should be made on items not noticed.
 Unless I'm mistaken, it's in order in general to give notice at a meeting
of intent to make a motion at a future meeting, on a topic not in the
agenda, and I think that should be allowed - a rule stating that no
commitments may be made would still allow for that.
2.  I strongly support the use of Doodle, and also think we should use it
for LNC meetings, at least to craft a motion, but that's a side point.  As
for notice, it depends on what we want the electronic meetings to do.  One
idea would be to use them for urgent items, which would require a low
threshold.  However, we've gone for years without them, and we have an EC
to handle most urgent items.  Another way to use them would be to reduce
reliance on email ballots.  RONR seems to suggest that video or telephone
conferences are preferable for the conduct of business to asynchronous
balloting, so this seems like a good use for them.  As such, I think a
moderate threshold makes sense.  Maybe 3 days notice to the website and
email?  Anyone can read lnc-business, so I don't think there's a need to
email all members.
3.  For physical meetings, it says "Party members."  Does this mean
sustaining or pledge-signing?  In either case, I'd suggest aligning it with
the rule for physical meetings.  The right of the committee to invite
others is not removed by the adoption of a rule allowing a class of people
to attend since these are rules, not bylaws, so I don't think it's
necessary to add that to the rule.
4.  The 11th edition contains a section handling electronic meetings, we
should make sure this rule requires all that is required there.  I don't
have it with me, but if I remember correctly, it also suggests having
standing rules or rules of order to deal with recognition, how the floor is
sought, and so on.  In addition to what you have, I'd add the ability to
identify participants (and listeners, given that we're limiting those) by
some positive means.  The rule should be crafted in a way that allows for
some splitting of responsibilities.  I'd say that the presiding officer of
the meeting is responsible for tracking who is participating, being able to
identify participants and observers, and may either track a quorum or
delegate that task to the recording officer, and must ensure that the
technical aspects you list are taken care of - either by doing them or
through delegation and checking prior to the meeting.  I also think the
rule should limit the use of mute.  In a physical meeting, there are rules
whereby the chair silence a person, of course, but there are also ways to
deal with a chair who is behaving badly.  Technical means of silencing
someone, on the other hand, don't allow for that.  In addition to not
acting on an appeal, for instance, a chair could make it so that a person
who is expected to appeal will not be heard, or even mute someone in
anticipation of their raising a point of order.  Not that I'd suggest that
this is likely, but it just makes sense to have some rules on its use.  I
would say mute should be limited to a case where a non-member attempts to
disrupt a meeting, a technological failing causes a problem (such as
feedback or severe echoing), or non-decorous and out of order behavior
after 3 requests - in the latter case, only with unanimous consent from the
rest - i.e. the chair informs the body that he has muted that person
temporarily and asks for objections.
5.  I don't think it makes sense to require a recording officer since its
already in our parliamentary authority.  Copy the rule for minutes and
their approval from physical meetings for the LNC.  I'd strongly suggest
letting other committees set their own rules for approving minutes and
posting them.  I agree with requiring a recording to made and archived.  I
also think they should be made available publicly.


Joshua A. Katz
Westbrook CT Planning Commission (L in R seat)


On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 7:59 PM, Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Small suggestion - I'm interested in these details, and assume others are
> as well.  I also assume many are not.  Maybe it would be useful to assemble
> those who want to discuss the details on a group email off-list?  Kind of
> the informal and online version of creating a committee and referring.  In
> that spirit, I'll send you my thoughts on what you wrote.
>
>
>
> Joshua A. Katz
> Westbrook CT Planning Commission (L in R seat)
>
>
> On Sat, Aug 30, 2014 at 7:14 PM, Daniel Wiener <wiener at alum.mit.edu>
> wrote:
>
>> In case my earlier email was missed, I again request an agenda item
>> (probably for 30 minutes) to discuss electronic conferencing procedures.
>> The purpose of this agenda item is to comply with the objectives of the new
>> Article 13 in the Bylaws:
>>
>> *Boards and committees may conduct business by teleconference or
>> videoconference. The National Committee shall have power to adopt special
>> rules of order and standing rules to facilitate the conduct of business by
>> teleconference or videoconference.*
>>
>> Rules which need to be defined include:
>>
>>
>>    - Who can call an electronic meeting: Presumably the Chair, but also
>>    some percentage of the members of the committee.  The meetings should have
>>    agenda items specified ahead of time and be limited to those items.
>>    - How and when to schedule an electronic meeting:  Notification will
>>    presumably be by email to all committee members.  How much advance notice
>>    is needed?  Public notification should also be given, perhaps by a
>>    combination of an email to LNC-Business and a listing somewhere on the
>>    LP.ORG web site.  We may want to use something like Doodle.com (which
>>    Scott Lieberman has previously suggested) to facilitate the scheduling of a
>>    meeting.
>>    - Who may attend meetings?  I'm inclined to say that only sustaining
>>    LP members be allowed to listen in, unless the committee specifically
>>    invites other individuals because of their relevance to an agenda item.
>>     - Specify the essential tasks of the meeting organizer or
>>    facilitator: Handle the technical aspects of setting up the teleconference
>>    or videoconference; track who has joined the meeting; be able to mute or
>>    cut out a participant if it becomes necessary; etc. (Help me fill in the
>>    "etc.")
>>    - Require that there be a secretary to take the minutes of the
>>    meeting, and that the meeting itself be recorded (audio at the least, and
>>    video if possible) and archived.  In the case of non-LNC meetings, specify
>>    the procedure for approving the minutes and making them (and the
>>    recordings?) available on the LP.ORG web site.
>>
>>
>> *PLEASE ADD ANY IDEAS YOU MAY HAVE FOR THE ABOVE AND SEND THEM TO THIS
>> LIST. * I'd like to at least rough out a Policy Manual motion prior to
>> the LNC meeting.
>>
>> Once we've defined these procedures, I would also like us to proceed with
>> some test cases.  We've already done teleconferencing for Executive
>> Committee meetings, so the next step would be video conferencing trials for
>> some committees.  A few of the services worth looking into include
>> http://gotomeeting.com <http://www.gotomeeting.com>,
>> http://fuzemeeting.com, http://lifesize.com, http://bluejeans.com,
>> http://polycom.com, http://readytalk.com, powwownow.com, http://webex.com.
>> They all offer free trials.
>>
>> For those people who don't have web cameras built into their computers,
>> they are available very inexpensively these days.  For example, Amazon
>> offers a Gigaware high-definition (HD)  webcam with microphone for $14
>> including shipping (http://tinyurl.com/lfgsly4); or a TeckNet HD webcam
>> with microphone for $14 including shipping (http://tinyurl.com/mdks2qr);
>> or, if you want to go super cheap, a Fosmon webcam (no microphone) for $7 (
>> http://tinyurl.com/mpxvopb).
>>
>> Dan Wiener
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 28, 2014 at 11:12 AM, Nicholas Sarwark <chair at lp.org> wrote:
>>
>>> All,
>>>
>>> A reminder that if you intend to introduce a motion at the upcoming
>>> LNC meeting with previous notice, you'll need to send complete
>>> language of any such motion to the LNC business list no later than
>>> September 6, 2014.
>>>
>>> If you would like an item added to the agenda for the meeting, please
>>> send me an email with the agenda item, a brief description, and the
>>> time you are requesting.  The agenda is of course amendable at the
>>> meeting, but everything will go more smoothly and quickly if most
>>> items are included in the proposed agenda.
>>>
>>> I will distribute a proposed agenda to the LNC no later than September
>>> 13, 2014.  I would ask that any written reports from regional
>>> representatives and officers be sent by that date as well to ensure
>>> all members have sufficient time to review them prior to the in-person
>>> meeting.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Nick
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> *"In general, we look for a new law by the following process. First, we
>> guess it (audience laughter), no, don’t laugh, that’s the truth. Then we
>> compute the consequences of the guess, to see what, if this is right, if
>> this law we guess is right, to see what it would imply and then we compare
>> the computation results to nature or we say compare to experiment or
>> experience, compare it directly with observations to see if it works. If it
>> disagrees with experiment, it’s WRONG. In that simple statement is the key
>> to science. It doesn’t make any difference how beautiful your guess is, it
>> doesn’t matter how smart you are, who made the guess, or what his name is.
>> If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong. That’s all there is to it.”*
>> -- Richard Feynman
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20140830/95902b2f/attachment-0002.html>