[Lnc-business] website motion

Fri Feb 19 11:16:23 EST 2016

I'm really not sure I follow that at all, Wes.

For one, it's not MY website I'm interested in building.  It's our website
that needs to be built.  As for getting people to pay for it, I did meet
with a very wealthy donor last week.  You know him well.  As I wrote, he is
not willing to donate another dimer to us until we make some visible
forward progress.  I don't know what's so objectionable about that.

And I've not said I can't get anyone to join or support the LP.  What I've
told you is that I'm consistently hearing the same stories from people.  If
you want to talk down and ridicule because that doesn't automatically sit
positively with your feelers, then by all means.  But I'd much rather share
the information candidly in hopes that we actually do something about it.
My point being that if you just want a bunch of yes-men telling you what an
absolutely amazing job we do as a party, then seek counsel in your family
or something of the sort.  I spend WAY too much time (and no doubt others
spend way more time than I do) working with this organization.  There's no
benefit in sugar coating this.

And for that matter, my god the thin-skin we have around here.  I sent you
guys an incredibly nice, warm, thoughtful, thankful email just yesterday
describing the new email layouts and what an amazing job you guys did.  So
the notion that I don't praise and just want to shit all over you is
false.  The website sucks ass.  100% of people I ask about it say the same
thing.  I'm asking the board to help me fix it.  Period.  No additional
motive.

-Kevin

On Fri, Feb 19, 2016 at 6:35 AM, Wes Benedict <wes.benedict at lp.org> wrote:

> Kevin, I think I fronted $30,000 to LP Texas in 2004 for ballot access. If
> you can pay your employees $150,000, you take a risk, build your website,
> and when it's done, ask the LNC for $20k. Or go ask that donor you met with
> to pay for it.
>
> I'm concerned that you keep talking about how you can't get anyone to join
> or support the LP. Only you personally. How can you oversee a project
> geared towards donating to the LP.?
>
>
>
> On Feb 19, 2016, at 1:22 AM, Kevin Ludlow <ludlow at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>

-- 
========================================================
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/20160219/214e592a/attachment-0002.html>