[Lnc-business] draft minutes of 9/20/14 LNC meeting

[Daniel Wiener]

Will you all please shut up about the secret budget?  You know we're not
even supposed to mention its existence except in our secretly-held secret
sessions.


On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 4:15 PM, Alicia Mattson <agmattson at gmail.com> wrote:

> There's a secret budget for the pickle-flavored chapstick that's in my
> pile of potential gifts?  I spent that 50 cents from my own pocket!  :-)
>
> -Alicia
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 1:34 PM, <SAM8074 at aol.com> wrote:
>
>>  I think we need to debate the points openly and freely.  If points are
>> going to lead to party funded suites for LNC members with champagne buckets
>> and fois gras, then we must at least add a line item in the secret budget.
>>
>> Sam
>>
>>  In a message dated 10/3/2014 2:56:58 P.M. US Eastern Daylight Time,
>> wiener at alum.mit.edu writes:
>>
>>  Alicia,
>>
>> I trust you are maintaining a detailed spreadsheet of points awarded and
>> deducted?  Do we need to add a Policy Manual provision regarding points?
>>
>> Dan
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 3, 2014 at 2:30 AM, Alicia Mattson <agmattson at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>  Evan gets one half of a point for amusing the Secretary by noting
>>> Bill's name correction.
>>>
>>> I also awarded Dan Wiener a point for his having noticed during the
>>> Alexandria meeting that my motion to amend the policy manual without
>>> previous notice required something other than a simple majority vote.
>>>
>>> -Alicia
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Sep 29, 2014 at 3:24 PM, Evan McMahon <indyliberty at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I found a mistake. Bill Redpath is NOT refered to by his preferred
>>>> name... Cherry Bomb.
>>>>
>>>> In Liberty,
>>>>
>>>> Evan McMahon
>>>> At-Large Representative
>>>> Libertarian National Committee
>>>>
>>>> evan.mcmahon at lp.org
>>>>  On Sep 27, 2014 2:53 AM, "Alicia Mattson" <agmattson at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>    Attached are the first draft minutes from the Sept 20-21 LNC
>>>>> meeting in Alexandria.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please note that comments from the LNC on the minutes are due by
>>>>> October 11.
>>>>>
>>>>> Alicia Mattson
>>>>> LNC Secretary
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lnc-business mailing list
>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20141003/4b64cc33/attachment-0002.html>