[Lnc-business] Contract issues

Tue Sep 20 13:57:57 EDT 2016

Someone put Reese's Pieces into the bowl. That way it only affects the
people with peanut allergies... 

---
Ken C. Moellman, Jr.
LNC Region 3 Alternate Representative
LPKY Judicial Committee 

On 2016-09-20 13:55, Nicholas Sarwark wrote: 

> FYI: All the cool kids are using poisoned Skittles as the correct
> analogy these days.
> 
> -Nick
> 
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 10:48 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos
> <carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote: And to add saying "withe exception of that one clause" is precisely the
> issue. A meal may be delicious with the exception of the few grains of
> arsenic. I will not focus on the savour of the steak but rather the sting
> of the poison.
> 
> --
> 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
> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus
> 
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 11:46 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos
> <carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote: 
> Protecting the interests of the party and its members and us do not
> include eternal secrecy. While some might have trouble seeing it, no, in a
> contract negotiation, something as huge as that, should not be missed.
> Whether or not it is "understandable" is not the question. It is
> extraordinarily prejudical and and negligent.
> 
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 11:31 AM, Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
> wrote: 
> In response to the implied question: Having read the contract, I find it
> to be a good agreement, and one that delivers excellent value to the Party,
> with the exception of the clause under discussion. I personally have
> trouble seeing the implications of that clause, even after having it
> explained to me, and so it makes perfect sense to me that those implications
> can be missed during an extended negotiation where the primary focus was on
> protecting the interests of the party and obtaining value for the party.
> 
> Joshua A. Katz
> Westbrook CT Planning Commission (L in R seat)
> 
> On Tue, Sep 20, 2016 at 9:37 AM, Nicholas Sarwark <chair at lp.org> wrote: 
> Dear All,
> 
> I want to clear something up.
> 
> The LNC authorized me to negotiate a contract and joint fundraising
> agreement between the party and the Gary Johnson campaign. I have,
> for the past three and a half months, been working with our counsel,
> Oliver Hall, to negotiate a contract that would be in the best
> interest of the Libertarian Party.
> 
> During those months, terms have changed during the course of the
> negotiations in both agreements. At some point I asked Mr. Hall about
> the advisability of making the provisions of the contract public both
> before and after the election. His advice was that it would not be
> advisable at any point, but definitely would not be prior to the
> election. Based on that discussion, my preference would be to keep it
> confidential until inauguration day. That was what I communicated to
> the list, but that communication was in error.
> 
> The actual contract requires confidentiality of the terms. Mr.
> Goldstein pointed out that phrase to me and I sent a correction to the
> email list as soon as I realized that I had misspoke. I understand
> that this misspeaking has created a lack of confidence and a motion to
> rescind the entire authority to execute the contract.
> 
> I would like it to be clear that making the contract public was not,
> to my knowledge, one of the stated objectives at the LNC meeting
> following the convention for our contract with the campaign. A very
> small and vocal minority making it into an absolute requirement at
> this late stage of the negotiations is shifting the goalposts in the
> final seconds of the game (after, I'm not sure if signatures are
> already on the campaign's copies).
> 
> I think the contract negotiated is a good one. Others who have seen
> it are probably within their bounds to say whether they consider it a
> good or bad agreement, without discussing specific terms with LNC
> members who will not agree to keep it confidential.
> 
> The effect of this motion would be to cancel everything negotiated
> because I misspoke and/or people value transparency over any other
> goal. If that's what you want to do, you should co-sponsor it and
> vote for it.
> 
> Yours in liberty,
> Nick
> 
> P.S. Recognizing that eventual transparency is important to the
> aforementioned small and vocal minority, Oliver and I are actually in
> negotiations with the campaign for some kind of addendum that would
> modify the confidentiality terms to address those concerns.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org [1] 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org [1]

--
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
Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus

--
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
Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado
Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus

_______________________________________________
Lnc-business mailing list
Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org [1]

_______________________________________________
Lnc-business mailing list
Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org [1] 

Links:
------
[1] 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/20160920/0772ef34/attachment-0002.html>