[Lnc-business] website motion

Fri Feb 19 01:22:44 EST 2016

Mr. Wiener,

Thank you for the response.

First, let me say that I appreciate your position that unlike our friends
running the country, we cannot spend money that we do not have.  That part
is quite well taken and respected.  So let's get the money.

Look guys, I get that everyone on this board is risk-averse to a collective
degree that is kind of unimaginable.  I really do get that.  I think many
people cite risk aversion as being a Libertarian ideal.  I disagree with
this, but we can definitely agree that risk aversion is a common trait of
Libertarians.  I have many theories as to why; I'll save them.

There's this kind of cheesy quote that you tell kids.  Sometimes the quote
makes it onto posters for bedroom walls and such.  It's this little girl
leaning into her mom.  She's upset, scared, and tugging at the mom shirt
with clear fright in her eyes.  The caption reads, "But mom, what if I
fail?".  To which the mom lovingly leans in, smiles in earnest at the
little girl and replies confidently, "What if you fly?"

You guys want to challenge the status quo with every breath you take.  You
want to run in the face of every single cultural norm we have and shout
"there's a better way to do this - just hear me out!".  Hell, you guys want
to challenge the contender(s) for arguably the most powerful position in
the entire world - the president of the US.

We want to do all of these things.  So I'm asking you, just stop what
you're doing for 30 seconds, reflect what could happen if we actually tried
to accomplish this one little task.  What is the WORST that could happen?
We fail?  We're in a very slightly worse financial position than we already
are?  But now consider what is the BEST that could happen?  Maybe this
tailspin of a cash hole we're in stops.  MAYBE people would see that the
LNC is doing something external.  MAYBE people would have their morale
boosted just a little bit and be more inclined to donate.  MAYBE we could
use it as a way to leverage requesting donations from people.

I give you guys a hard time a lot for thinking so analytically.  I
apologize for sounding rough, but most all of you have to know that this
line of thinking can hurt us as much as it can help us - it just depends on
the circumstances.  People are not as motivated by cerebral action as this
group thinks.  Even the people inside of this party aren't, despite many
thinking that they are.  People are easily motivated by change they can
see.  It's a well documented scientific reality and is the basis for lots
of marketing and advertising science.  People don't always care if you
rebuild the engine and shave 8% off of your car's annual petrol bill.  They
can't see it.  It's meaningless outside of your own brain.  But get a new
$500 coat of paint and all of a sudden your old clunker is being talked
about by everyone on the block.  That talk prompts people to be excited.
Excitement lends to spending money.

I'm just asking you to think of the upside for a change instead of the
downside.  As Libertarians, our entire lives are spent on the downside.
Literally every single thing in this modern world is stacked against us.
It's nice to give people a win every once in awhile.

I've heard Nick say to this board on many occasions that if we're trying to
get new office supplies, donors won't give us a dime.  BUT, according to
this same chair, he can go to people on the idea of ballot access and
convince them it's important enough to donate to the cause.  And he has
done it - several times.  Kudos, good sir!

Ss let's do it again!!!  We have a good brand.  We're going to have a
phenomenal presidential year.  Hell, we're going to have a televised
Libertarian debate for goodness sake!  You're a salesman, Nick.  I have the
utmost of confidence that you can sell the importance of our brand image to
some of our donors.  I'm asking for almost nothing here.

I'm asking you all to put your risk aversion to the side, take a chance,
and let me personally take on a project that I am highly confident we can
accomplish.  If you wait 4 more months on this then you're ultimately going
to be waiting 4 more years for another real shot at market glory.  We have
an amazing list of opportunities coming up for us.  Please do not let this
slip through the cracks just because you're afraid to imagine what it might
be like to fly.  It's a hell of a lot nicer in the clouds than on the
ground.

Thank you for your time.
Kevin Ludlow
512-773-3968

On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 5:24 PM, Daniel Wiener <wiener at alum.mit.edu> wrote:

> Kevin, my concern is similar to Alicia's.  Namely that the LNC is in a
> cash crunch.  I'm not arguing about whether we should or can somehow create
> a high-quality website at a cheaper price than the $20,000 you are
> quoting.  I'm worried that we simply don't have sufficient money readily
> available, no matter how desirable a goal it is.  The  LNC has decided to
> spend money on other projects, such as $100,000+ to get ballot status in
> Oklahoma.  (I voted against that, not because it was a bad idea, but
> because of our extremely limited resources.)  And we are planning expensive
> petition drives in many other states.
>
> There are a lot of really important things that the Libertarian Party
> needs to spend money on, including redesigning the website.  I'd love to do
> all of them.  But unlike the government, we can't spend money we don't
> have.  It doesn't help if *everything* is considered to be a top
> priority, and we refuse to make trade-offs.
>
> All of which is not to say that I'm opposed to your website proposal.  But
> as a minimum condition, I'll only vote for it if I'm convinced that we have
> the necessary cash on hand and anticipated future revenue to remain
> financially solvent, and/or we decide to cut other planned expenditures to
> compensate.
>
> Dan Wiener
>
> On Thu, Feb 18, 2016 at 10:11 AM, Kevin Ludlow <ludlow at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> All:
>>
>> I've only heard back from 2 people with respect to me putting the website
>> redesign into high gear.  It would be a combination of getting a proper
>> design from a high-end design firm and then having it implemented into NB
>> by the NB team.
>>
>> Could everyone give me an idea of where they sit with this idea in
>> general.  Are there concerns?  Are there impasses I'm unaware of?  Do we
>> just not think the website needs an overhaul?  Does it require more
>> discussion?
>>
>> -Kevin Ludlow
>>
>> --
>> ========================================================
>> Kevin Ludlow
>> 512-773-3968
>> http://www.kevinludlow.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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 (https://tinyurl.com/lozjjps)
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
>

-- 
========================================================
Kevin Ludlow
512-773-3968
http://www.kevinludlow.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20160219/96572278/attachment-0002.html>