[Lnc-business] Judicial Committee

Thu Jun 2 09:41:04 EDT 2016

I see, didn't think of that. I agree, but wouldn't have purchased them
prior to this convention, since we didn't know if we'd adopt the bylaw
change to require balloted voting within delegations.  For the future, I
think that would be good.

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

On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 9:37 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Joshua, having pads of paper that are title with voting  etc and
> pre-printed are an expense but are WAY more professional.   Yes things
> would still need to be handwritten in but having a tablet with some
> pre-printing on it lends gravitas and feels personal to the delegate.
>
> In Liberty,
> Caryn Ann Harlos
> Region 1 Representative
> (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming,
> Washington)
>
> On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 7:32 AM, Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I favor approval voting for at-large and JC.  It is open to strategic
>> voting - as are all methods of voting.  Delegation were provided with index
>> cards; if a state decided to use torn up scraps of paper, that is their
>> decision.  You might say an index card isn't professional either - well,
>> it's more professional, and it just isn't practical to print up in the
>> neighborhood of 1,000 ballots immediately after nominations.
>>
>> I agree that it would be far superior to use electronic voting.
>>
>> Joshua A. Katz
>> Westbrook CT Planning Commission (L in R seat)
>>
>> On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 9:24 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
>> carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> It wouldn't be the first time I was unusual, and this could be in part
>>> because I am exposed to a lot of Frank Atwood and his advocacy of approval
>>> voting.
>>>
>>> The "don't understand it" is our fault.  I think the "too easy to game
>>> it" falls under the don't understand it part and the fact that most of the
>>> delegates were voting on torn up scraps of paper that don't inspire
>>> confidence in the system.  Whether it would make a difference or not is
>>> another matter, but perception of professionalism goes a long way.  I
>>> really do not understand how we don't have something better than that....
>>> but that is another conversation.
>>>
>>> The ridiculous time to tabulate is true. And needs to be improved
>>> through modernizing.  I know this has been soundly rejected by delegates
>>> before, but geez louise we are dinosaurs in this.
>>>
>>> Yes, an issue for Bylaws to consider, and I don't envy them selling any
>>> of it to the delegates.
>>>
>>> But yes, I do defend approval voting and ranked choice.  Both of them
>>> are monstrously difficult to do manually, and trivially easy if we were
>>> modernized.
>>>
>>> In Liberty,
>>> Caryn Ann Harlos
>>> Region 1 Representative
>>> (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming,
>>> Washington)
>>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 7:11 AM, Ken Moellman <ken.moellman at lpky.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Everyone I've talked to about Approval Voting since the convention has
>>>> been quite negative on it.  You're literally the first person to defend it,
>>>> Caryn. :)
>>>>
>>>> Somewhere between the "don't understand it" and "too easy to game it",
>>>> and compounded with "ridiculous time to tabulate", Approval Voting is not a
>>>> good methodology.
>>>>
>>>> I'd personally recommend using IRV for all non-presidential/vp votes.
>>>> One round, and we can get on with it.  And the committee gets filled in
>>>> appropriately. LPKY does this and it works like a champ.
>>>>
>>>> It's an issue for the Bylaws Committee to consider, anyway.
>>>> ---
>>>>
>>>> Ken C. Moellman, Jr.
>>>> LNC Region 3 Alternate Representative
>>>> LPKY Judicial Committee
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 2016-06-02 08:28, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Ken, I believe the voting technology and means we use are the problem,
>>>> not approval voting itself.  I think most members would be positively
>>>> riotous against the removal of approval voting, but the means by which we
>>>> do it can certainly be improved.
>>>>
>>>> In Liberty,
>>>> Caryn Ann Harlos
>>>> Region 1 Representative
>>>> (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming,
>>>> Washington)
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 5:12 AM, Ken Moellman <ken.moellman at lpky.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Alicia,
>>>>>
>>>>> I understand that you have a ridiculous amount of work to do.  As long
>>>>> as it's on the agenda to get published, I think people will be fine.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd like to explore a secure mechanism to increase voting efficiency -
>>>>> both the voting and the tallying.
>>>>>
>>>>> I'd also like to see the death of Approval Voting.  Blech.
>>>>> ---
>>>>>
>>>>> Ken C. Moellman, Jr.
>>>>> Libertarian National Committee
>>>>> Region 3 Alternate Representative
>>>>> Ballot Access Committee
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On 2016-06-02 01:45, Alicia Mattson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Ken,
>>>>>
>>>>> Our standard operating procedure is that alternates freely comment on
>>>>> our email list.
>>>>>
>>>>> I know your requests are well intended, but please keep in mind that
>>>>> my post-convention to-do list is extremely long.  It includes, but is not
>>>>> limited to:
>>>>>
>>>>>    - producing minutes for 2 LNC meetings
>>>>>    - producing minutes for an EC meeting
>>>>>    - generating nomination certificates for SOS offices to place our
>>>>>    presidential ticket on the ballot in states where we already have ballot
>>>>>    access
>>>>>    - updating the bylaws
>>>>>    - updating the platform
>>>>>    - generating various data sets and articles for LPNews, media
>>>>>    inquiries, etc.
>>>>>    - producing minutes for the convention which conducted quite a bit
>>>>>    of business while I was tabulating election results, so I have my records,
>>>>>    an assistant's records, and a pile of slips of paper that were submitted
>>>>>    that contain some of those motions, and a bunch of other ideas for motions
>>>>>    that were never made
>>>>>    - my email inbox is full of lots of requests that I won't get to
>>>>>    immediately
>>>>>
>>>>> When the convention minutes are produced, it will contain
>>>>> state-by-state breakdowns of each of the elections.  That info will be
>>>>> shared, but it just cannot be at the top of my priority list at the moment.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Alicia
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Jun 1, 2016 at 7:47 PM, Ken Moellman <ken.moellman at lpky.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I have had 2 of the 4 chairs in Region 3 ask about seeing state
>>>>>> totals and possibly even having the state ballots scanned in for Treasurer,
>>>>>> At-Large, and Judicial Committee, since these were skipped over due to time
>>>>>> constraints and thus there was no ability to contest any results.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't know if it's proper for me to speak on this list as an
>>>>>> Alternate. I reached out to Brett but he was busy today.  And since the
>>>>>> issue came up, I thought I'd mention it, since it's topical.
>>>>>> ---
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ken Moellman
>>>>>> Libertarian Party of Kentucky
>>>>>> ken.moellman at lpky.org
>>>>>> http://www.lpky.org/
>>>>>> (859) OK-BE-LPK
>>>>>> (859) 652-3575
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On 2016-06-01 21:24, Sam Goldstein wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Many members are asking about the JC results.  Can someone please
>>>>>> post them here for distribution?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Thanks,
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sam Goldstein
>>>>>> Libertarian National Committee
>>>>>> Member at Large
>>>>>> 8925 N Meridian St, Ste 101
>>>>>> Indianapolis IN 46260
>>>>>> 317-850-0726 Phone
>>>>>> 317-582-1773 Fax
>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>> 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 Liberty,
>>>> Caryn Ann
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> In Liberty,
>>> Caryn Ann Harlos
>>> Region 1 Representative
>>> (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming,
>>> Washington)
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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 Liberty,
> Caryn Ann Harlos
> Region 1 Representative
> (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming,
> Washington)
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160602/97523b52/attachment-0002.html>