[Lnc-business] Post LNC meeting discussion website issues
Wes Benedict
wes.benedict at lp.org
Thu Dec 15 12:38:34 EST 2016
Your requests for timing estimates are reasonable, however, I'd prefer
to hold off on the estimates in the short run.
Our recent history with LP.org is one of over promising,
under-delivering, and breaking new things in the process.
I'd prefer to give you an estimate on January 4, after our new team
(Wes, Ken, Sean, Andy, contractors) has a couple weeks to make progress
and I can better gauge our speed at accomplishing things.
Wes Benedict, Executive Director
Libertarian National Committee, Inc.
1444 Duke St., Alexandria, VA 22314
(202) 333-0008 ext. 232, wes.benedict at lp.org
facebook.com/libertarians @LPNational
Join the Libertarian Party at: http://lp.org/membership
On 12/15/2016 9:09 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
> I would like some tentative time frames here:
>
> LPedia: When can we do something on this and what would that
> "something" involve (which will include an LNC vote). With my new
> information on OUR archives which is OUR responsibility to preserve
> (though I would rather them be preserved anywhere rather than
> nowhere), I believe the LNC needs to keep this. The technical issues
> are not something new, in fact that was the whole reason it was put
> off until now as I was assured we would have time now.
>
> The 2006 and the 2016 site: When will these be put into the archive
> solution. That solution might work beautifully. I do not believe it
> can due to the concerns in the beginning email, but we have a
> responsibility to at least get them up, and if they are the subject of
> further motions, then let's get that going.
>
> The archiving project I working with volunteers on our own as party
> members to see what we can take on and other than insisting that these
> items needs to be put somewhere will not be troubling the LNC about it
> at this time.
>
> But those two other items above need timefames and plans.
>
> -
> *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 <mailto: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/>
>
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 1:16 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos
> <carynannharlos at gmail.com <mailto:carynannharlos at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> With this treasure trove of historical information and background
> discussions with enthusiastic volunteers eager to retain our
> history, I suggest that the Party retain LPedia but do something
> with it. Barring that, putting it to LSLA is an option and LSLA
> at one time indicated willingness. One way or another we need to
> decide. I fear we risk losing history if LSLA decided to neglect
> it and then we could wash our hands of it and lose accountability
> for this stewardship.
>
> My analysis of the other issues above remains. The archive option
> is not good and there are better ways to handle. I believe a
> historical committee (and yes I will be proposing one when this
> things gets talked out - or not if really good disqualifiers come
> up) would be the best to advise on this and work with volunteers
> and staff to get the content moved to the current site without
> "clutter" - until such content is moved, the archive sites would
> allow members some way to access.
>
> My solution would keep our promises and use LPedia for the rest.
>
> --
> *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
> <mailto: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/>
>
>
> On Wed, Dec 14, 2016 at 12:57 PM, Ken Moellman
> <ken.moellman at lpky.org <mailto:ken.moellman at lpky.org>> wrote:
>
> I'm happy to report that we're off and running, post-meeting.
> Wes is running with Zocalo. Meanwhile, I'm trying to merge
> one of our hosting sites with a bunch of "leftovers" on it
> into cheaper hosting. I've been working on that for the last
> 24 hours.
> There are still some technical decisions to be made, but the
> priorities at the moment are (a) fix the website; (b) clean up
> and save some money.
> Also, a decision needs to be made about LPedia. I have
> recently learned through investigation that LPedia has some
> technical challenges. Wherever it lands, it's going to need
> some help. So, is LSLA taking LPedia? Is the LNC retaining
> it? What's the timeframe? The reason I ask, is that we're
> going to have to move LPedia one way or the other. I
> personally think it would be a good task for LSLA, which would
> let us standardize on one platform for every other website the
> party will be maintaining (thus making maintenance easier).
> ---
>
> Ken C. Moellman, Jr.
> LNC Region 3 Alternate Representative
> LPKY Judicial Committee
>
> On 2016-12-14 13:26, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>
>> Committee members, I am back talking about the website and
>> some decisions that were made this weekend. Some of those
>> decisions were good, some were at best very incomplete (and
>> at worst misguided). I believe Motion(s) to amend will be
>> the result of these discussions I hope to get going-perhaps
>> even a sub-committee to work with the IT Committee (one that
>> might be in the realm of the proposed historical/archival
>> committee). In our very time-limited discussions,
>> complicated decisions and discussions cannot be adequately
>> done. I will attempt to organize this email into digestable
>> issues.
>>
>> *_BASIC ISSUES WITH CURRENT WEBSITE_*
>>
>> This would include bad colour scheme of grey on grey,
>> difficult navigation, slow load times, odd information
>> screens that are not customizable etc. We gave Wes the
>> authority to work with Zocolo on that which seems to be the
>> right move to get these issues resolved. I trust Wes will
>> give us regular reports. We also gave Wes the authority and
>> discretion to restore the old masthead which stated "Party of
>> Principle" (as that was a separate issue as to whether that
>> would be a policy manual official logo – it is in fact a
>> trademark – no matter how I feel about trademarks – of the
>> Libertarian Party). I highly encourage Wes to make that
>> happen and the LNC can later vote to change if they wish.
>>
>> *THE PROPOSED NEW SEPARATE LP ARCHIVE SITE*
>>
>> I do not believe this was the right decision or a
>> well-thought-out decision with all due respect to my fellow
>> committee members. It is in fact an inadvertent betrayal of
>> the earlier promise to membership that no ideological content
>> would be lost. This solution does not make good on that
>> promise. Words are made in a context, and the context of the
>> assurances to members was that content would not be lost
>> *from the LP.org website* AND IT IS– shunting it off into
>> another website which may not even be cross-searchable (that
>> decision was not made) is in fact losing the content, and
>> this should be unacceptable. I think part of the problem in
>> the discussions was a fundamental mis-casting of how websites
>> actually work.
>>
>> *Objection: "We don't want to clutter the new website"*
>>
>> First I will add, clutter or not, this was an assurance made
>> to members and we can either keep that assurance or not. I
>> was given that assurance as a member, and I expect the LNC to
>> keep it. But this is a non-concern that seems to be operating
>> under some kind of physical assumption along the lines of
>> some analogous idea that the website weighs two pounds now
>> and would then weigh twenty pounds or that we would be adding
>> 100 more library stacks. That is not how websites work. And
>> I think we can get into this more in the sub-divisions of my
>> email of the types of content on the two older sites which I
>> will call the 2016 site and the 2006 site for clarity. But in
>> general, this would be invisible to the user until they
>> needed the data. The issue of "clutter" is a red herring.
>> At most there might be a new submenu called "archives" which
>> is hardly some monumental clutter. Users could go there or
>> not. The ones that go there *want* this information. The
>> rest of the information clearly falls under current headings,
>> is relevant, and as presently organized is not cluttered. It
>> is arguably way too compressed.
>>
>> *Issue: What would this new Archive site look like?*
>>
>> This was not even discussed. It seemed to me like the LNC
>> thought we could just stick it at a new address, flip a
>> switch, and be done. But that isn't an archive, it is a time
>> machine that would freeze a site as it looked on the day it
>> was taken down. For instance on the 2016 site, this LNC
>> would remain enshrined forever on a page. That is not
>> useful. Ditto to the 2006 site. This brings us to the
>> actual issue: the content that needs to be preserved – and
>> that can be broken down into some broad categories (with some
>> overlap but not much): ideological content, news content,
>> parliamentary institutional content (some of it
>> bylaws-required), and historical institutional content.
>> Each of these categories need to be handled deliberately and
>> separately, and it is frankly impossible (I was going to say
>> insane) to think a simple solution like flipping a switch to
>> an archive site can responsibility do this. And this also
>> exposes another huge flaw: Will there be TWO archive sites?
>> A 2016 and 2006 archive site? How does this LNC possibly
>> think those two can be merged? Do you seem how quickly
>> unworkable this becomes? What we passed is simply not
>> do-able and if we continue down that path, it will become
>> obvious and the temptation will be to throw up our hands and
>> say "oh well we tried" and just let the content go away. I
>> will not go down that path because it isn't inevitable.
>>
>> So now on to discuss the types of content...
>>
>> *THE CONTENT*
>>
>> *Ideological Content*
>>
>> This would include staff blog articles, press releases,
>> newsletters, and the like. These items are part of what
>> makes up our current positions – there is an unbroken line –
>> and these should be searchable and part of our current site.
>> How that would be done has many open paths, including simply
>> putting them where they belong in chronological order. This
>> can be done by trained volunteers. I believe Chuck Moulton
>> volunteered to do some. This would be fulfilling the promise
>> to our members. As an example (and this touches on my
>> earlier archive emails), ALL of the old issues of LP News
>> should be on the website. This does not "clutter" any more
>> than having older minutes does, particularly the way we do
>> with "see more" pull downs that only list the title year.
>>
>> **
>>
>> *News Content*
>>
>> This is part of our political history and again, these items
>> should just be put into the blog section where they
>> originally appeared and can be done by trained volunteers.
>>
>> *Parliamentary Institutional Content*
>>
>> This would include LNC minutes, EC minutes, Convention
>> Minutes, old and current Bylaws, and Policy Manual etc. These
>> need to go where they exist presently on the site. Most of
>> this is required by our Bylaws and is already being planned
>> on by staff, but when I say minutes, I mean *ALL minutes*,
>> including those from the 2006 site and those that I am
>> gathering from members. We can either put a disclaimer that
>> they are not certified or come up with a certification
>> method. They were historically verified.
>>
>> *Historical Institutional Content*
>>
>> This would include lists of past staff, past candidates, and
>> past committees. This is perfect for LPedia – but of course
>> that requires us getting on the ball with LPedia. Some other
>> content above arguably would be better for LPedia. I would
>> like the IT Committee Chair to give us some thoughts here on
>> LPedia.
>>
>> *Conclusory Comment*
>>
>> I think this analysis has shown that this idea of an archive
>> site is unworkable, not keeping our assurances to our
>> members, and unnecessary – a combination of our current site
>> and LPedia is the answer.
>>
>> *MY PROPOSED SOLUTIONS*
>>
>> This ties right in to the Historical/Archive Committee I have
>> been hinting out. I believe these decisions and plans can be
>> done by such a committee working with staff and the IT
>> Committee and that the Chair of the IT Committee would
>> automatically be on this almost proposed new Committee which
>> would give a recommendation on how to better handle this
>> issue rather than the clumsy way done at the LNC meeting.
>> And then there would be a plan going forward for digitizing
>> the rich content found at HQ and in our storage unit. And
>> yes, such a committee should have full transparency. Nothing
>> here is secret and is the collective heritage of members.
>>
>> I solicit thoughts. I believe we made a rushed grave
>> mistake, and we can fix it in an orderly manner that would
>> not take more LNC time but the time and loving care of LNC
>> members and voluntary Party members who truly care about this
>> issue. We can't all be passionate about all things. Let's
>> let those who are plan it.
>>
>> --
>> *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
>> <mailto: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 <mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org>
>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>> <http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org <mailto:Lnc-business at hq.lp.org>
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
> <http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org>
>
>
>
>
> --
> *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
> <mailto: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>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> *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 <mailto: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/20161215/f0305e41/attachment-0002.html>
More information about the Lnc-business
mailing list