[Lnc-business] Participation on LNC email list

[Joshua Katz]

I'm going to partly agree and partly disagree.  I'm not a fan of email
ballots, for several reasons.  First, they make it too easy for a "starting
majority" to remain in place.  By eliminating 60% of the communication the
minority can do - the non-verbal part - they make it easier for the
majority to stay in place.  Those who are firmly committed to their views
can even glance over, or ignore, debate threads.  This can be done in a
real meeting too, but it's harder.  In this way, they threaten the notion
that the majority may act, but only after fully hearing from the minority.
Second, they evolved when technology made them feasible (before that people
in some organizations relied on mail ballots), but they failed to go away
when technology made them less necessary by enabling teleconferences and,
far better, videoconferences.  It is one thing to note that we've only had
one email ballot in this term, but note also that we've had one
videoconference since they were authorized.  Third, they encourage a form
of decision-making I think is less than ideal for a board, as I'll discuss
below.

I also think email is a bad way to assess where things stand, for much the
same reasons, and to craft ideas.  I dislike the process of floating email
ballots, although I understand the necessity because email ballots can't be
amended.  The whole thing is clunky, regardless of how you try to
accomplish it.

We are, as noted, the board of the third largest political party in the US,
and yes, party business takes place all the time.  However, not all party
business needs, or wants, our involvement.  The RNC meets three times per
year, although its executive committee meets more often - still less often
than our EC, though.  Microsoft's board, on the other hand, meets 8 times
per year.  The point is, though, that boards are not continually meeting
entities, because the work of a board is slow.  Boards set strategic plans
and budgets (and, ideally, empower the appropriate people to act within
those plans and budgets) and then let things happen.  Both of those are
items that play out over time; making changes to them too soon makes them
less effective.  One of our problems is that we, too often, take on
management roles, engage in micromanagement, etc.  The biggest problem with
that is that it leaves a hole where we're supposed to be - if we're busy
telling the staff how to clean the cabins, who is steering the ship?  Who
is providing oversight functions?  Who is stewarding resources?  We are
supposed to, but we can only take on so many roles, and often, the act of
trying to imitate management is inconsistent with trying to provide
governance.

I realize this doesn't directly answer your point, but rather goes off on a
tangent - if we never went off on tangents, though, we'd just go around in
circles.

Anyway, I do agree that we should be in constant communication through this
list - but I don't agree it should be for the purpose, primarily, of
passing motions and making decisions.  Rather, boards need cohesion, and
they need to foster civil disagreement.  People who only see each other 4
times per year can, more easily, impute poor motives to each other, can, in
the time they are apart, imagine people to be far worse than they are,
etc.  Staying in communication, and seeing give and take on various issues,
even if no decision is reached, can prevent that.  If mass communication,
such as this list, is not used, we tend to see atomization; people staying
in touch primarily with those with whom they disagree.  Ironically, one of
the side effects of this, in my view, is that meetings feature less
disagreement - we become less likely to speak up when we disagree if we
don't have the perception of a base level of collegiality.  People become
afraid of each other, or just prefer to avoid the hassle of intense
disagreement - and political fallout that accompanies it.  The more we
talk, even if not about topics within our jurisdiction, the better we can
get along, which leads to better decisions.  If we only take to the list
when we disagree, well...

And, despite what I said, I will also be possibly floating a few email
ballots.


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

On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 9:21 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com>
wrote:

> All,
>
> I brought this up multiple times in the meeting  and wish to revisit here
> and hope my comments are not out of turn - either as a new member or
> inappropriate for my position.  I reiterate my concern and chagrin that we
> do not, as a body, participate in these discussions often and consistently.
>
>
> We are the national governing body of the third largest political party in
> the US.  Party business does not occur only 4 times a year.  I realize we
> have staff and committees but this simply is not enough.  There was at
> least one motion this time of mine was put on the table because I was
> desperate that there simply wasn't enough interaction here.  We could
> dispose of a lot and do a lot more effectively if we committed to the fact
> that we need to be nearly constantly interacting as a governing body.  I
> find the idea that we have had only one email vote this year quite
> astounding.
>
> I will be (or I hope other more experienced members will be so that we newer
> members can learn will be) bringing some motions that were spun off from
> our meeting.
>
> Let's please commit to actively communicating and leading as a body
> between meetings through this resource.
>
> If I need to be smacked down for being out of turn here, please be gentle.
>
>
>
> --
> *In Liberty,*
> *Caryn Ann Harlos*
> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona,
> Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann.
> Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org>
> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
> <http://www.lpcolorado.org>
> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
> <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160718/17963938/attachment-0002.html>