[Lnc-business] Motion:Historic Preservation Committee

Tue Jan 10 21:30:10 EST 2017

Thanks.  Between your two explanations, I have a better idea of why we're
doing this and what will be accomplished, which makes me more positive
about it.  I have some suggestions in light of what you said, and I already
owe you some work on the rules of order part.  I'm going to need a few
days, though - this week is our intensive one week class, which as you
might guess is pretty all-consuming, and I have 20 job applications to get
out tonight, and my IJ application is due on the13th.

Joshua A. Katz

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 5:01 PM, Ken Moellman <ken.moellman at lpky.org> wrote:

>
> This motion is to put someone "in charge".  Basically, it's managing
> volunteers. The committee will be in charge of LPedia, generally, and in
> charge of actually making available to the public all of the information we
> have in the basement.  Someday, we might even be able to use that space for
> something else, other than filing cabinets full of documents.
>
> In a decade from now, assuming that the committee has caught up on the
> 45-year document backlog that exists today, the committee will still
> maintain LPedia, and will continue to update LPedia with the to-be-history
> of the party.   It probably won't need a committee, but it will need a
> manager of some sort - and at that time, after the backlog is all entered,
> the future version of the committee can look at modifying or disbanding the
> HPC.
>
> I'd be fine doing this without a committee, if the LNC wants that.  It is
> a job that needs to be done, and staff shouldn't be burdened with it when
> there are volunteers ready to do the task.
>
>
> ken
>
> ---
>
> Ken C. Moellman, Jr.
> LNC Region 3 Alternate Representative
> LPKY Judicial Committee
>
>
>
> On 2017-01-10 09:35, Joshua Katz wrote:
>
> I haven't decided how I will vote on this, and the debate here hasn't
> helped me.  Let me revisit some of the comments I made on the document
> itself, but in a more inquisitive manner, and see if I can get some light
> on the matter.
>
> It seems to me that there are 3 (really 4, but see below) categories of
> tasks that matter here.  They are:
>
> 1.  Things we do now.
> 1a.Things that can be done now without a motion, but aren't.
> 2.  What the makers of this motion intend to do that isn't done now.
> 3.  What will be done as a result of this motion passing, in 10 years,
> when few of us are on the LNC.
>
> Obviously, we want 2 and 3 to be as close to identical as possible.  I'm
> getting the sense from some of the discussion that they aren't, and I will
> try to make some suggestions on the document to bring them closer together.
>
>
> My question is on the relation between 1 and 1a together, and 2.  What,
> exactly, is in 2 that is not in 1 or 1a?  To give some examples:  is there
> anything not being stored that the makers want to see stored?
>
> So far as I know, there is nothing stopping volunteers from going into the
> basement and scanning things.  At least, that's the impression I have from
> the fact that my colleague from Colorado, a stickler about rules, did so,
> with another volunteer member, and there was no suggestion of impropriety.
> What stops us from, without doing anything, having volunteers do that?
>
> Which brings me to another question - what, exactly, will this committee
> decide?  It seems to me that the answer might be nothing, but I'm not sure
> on that.  That is, it looks like it will not be an empowered committee, and
> will only make recommendations to the LNC, albeit with special rules of
> order that will make it easier for things to pass (but, I suggest, might
> impact the vote threshold for this motion, as well as make the Policy
> Manual a bit more confusing - it might be good to have this motion amend
> the Special Rules of Order section of the Policy Manual as well, and leave
> the rules of order parts out of the committee description and scope).
> Since it was posted, the scope of those recommendations has been narrowed
> somewhat (my understanding of the deleted line about expenditures seems to
> have been different from that of several others - I didn't see it giving
> the committee unlimited power to commit us to expenditures, but I did see
> it as oddly outside the budget process, as others have pointed out - I
> might prefer if a budget line were created for this purpose, and the
> committee just incurred the costs without going to the LNC within that
> line).
>
> So, in sum, here is what I would like to know:
> What, exactly, will this motion allow to happen, that cannot happen now?
> Why is a committee needed for this purpose?
>
> These questions are actually closely related, because they both get at why
> this is a committee, rather than a group of volunteers doing work.
>
> I don't want to get into most of the other points raised at the moment,
> but I'll add that volunteer time is, of course, not totally fungible, but I
> suspect it is more fungible than we often think.
>
> Joshua A. Katz
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 6:37 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
> carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I am at a full screen computer now, and can get better address:
>>
>> *With the assistance of staff and the Secretary, maintain all physical
>> historic information in a safe and climate controlled environment.*
>>
>> This is already done. Decisions are already made - either explicitly or
>> implicitly - about what is kept. This does not change that.
>>
>> *With the assistance of staff and the Secretary, collect all public
>> electronic records.*
>>
>> This is already done. When things are made public, they are either
>> electronic or physical. They are already been saved.
>>
>> *Make a good faith effort to preserve and publish all available
>> historical party documents, and transform physical documents into
>> electronic format toward that end.*
>>
>> Historical documents are not kept for mere utility reference, but for
>> their historical value. We don't put out that much "publicly" and what is
>> put out has a historical value in saving. Though this section could be
>> tweaked to give greater discretion to the committee on items.
>>
>>
>> *Make a good faith effort to preserve and, and within its discretion, to
>> publish, all available historical party documents, and transform physical
>> documents into electronic format toward that end.*
>>
>> I would make the point of volunteer times. Their times is their to spend.
>> There are volunteers waiting to be involved.  Their time is not fungible,
>> people get involved in what they are passionate about.
>>
>> - Caryn Ann
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 5:15 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
>> carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Alicia,
>>>
>>> First I would ask if there is language you could suggest.
>>>
>>> As in the "all" - it is what we are doing now.  Nothing is being added.
>>> All records that are public records.
>>>
>>> The committee is tasked with a good faith effort to publish them yes.
>>> Nearly everything being referred to will have been published previously -
>>> this is making the permanent archive.
>>>
>>> Top level history is subjective.  The Wiki now is far from only top
>>> level- histories of some county parties are preserved if someone was
>>> interested in them.
>>>
>>> What is useful is very much subjective.  To those very interested in
>>> having a good complete record of our history, they are all.
>>>
>>> Volunteer time is like earmarked money. If a volunteer wants to give it-
>>> that is their choice, not ours on what we deem fruitful.  I already know
>>> volunteers willing to be dedicated. There is a core of people interested in
>>> historical matters.
>>>
>>> A treasure trove of records exist.
>>>
>>> -Caryn Ann
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 1:53 AM Alicia Mattson <agmattson at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I think the scope of this committee, as proposed, is so broad that it's
>>>> a problem.
>>>>
>>>> Am I really being asked to be partially responsible for preserving ALL
>>>> physical historic information (in #1), and ALL public electronic records
>>>> (in #2)?  And the committee is additionally tasked with publishing ALL
>>>> historical documents (in #4)?
>>>>
>>>> "All" is an awfully large amount of information, and it means there
>>>> would never be anything deemed inappropriate for inclusion because it says
>>>> "all".
>>>>
>>>> I thought this was just going to be some top-level history like
>>>> whatever is on the wiki right now, but this proposal is a massive expansion
>>>> in scope.
>>>>
>>>> Some historical documents are useful to keep around for reference.
>>>> Others just aren't, so why spend time preserving ALL of them?
>>>>
>>>> Are we going to spend our limited volunteer time and effort documenting
>>>> the past, or are we going to instead focus on how to make our future
>>>> efforts have more real-world results?
>>>>
>>>> -Alicia
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Jan 8, 2017 at 5:56 PM, Ken Moellman <ken.moellman at lpky.org>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The following is a motion seeking a sponsor and co-sponsors, to create
>>>> the Historic Preservation Committee, tasked with preserving and publishing
>>>> all historical documents of the Party.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Add a line item to chart in subsection 1 of section 1.03 of the Policy
>>>> Manual, which reads (column name in italics):**(Committee name)* Historic
>>>> Preservation Committee
>>>> *(Size)* Two (2) LNC Members or Alternates, plus up to five (5)
>>>> non-LNC members.
>>>> *(Member Selection)* LNC Members or Alternates selected by LNC.
>>>> Non-LNC members selected by the committee, which shall be accepted unless
>>>> objected to by a majority of the LNC within 14 days of notification.
>>>> *(Chair Selection)* * Committee Selected
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Create a new subsection under section 2.02 of the Policy Manual, which
>>>> reads:*x) Historic Preservation Committee
>>>>
>>>> The goal of the Historic Preservation Committee is to preserve
>>>> historical documents of the party.  To that end, the committee shall:
>>>> 1. With the assistance of staff and the Secretary, maintain all
>>>> physical historic information in a safe and climate controlled environment.
>>>> Any costs for document storage shall be presented to the LNC and shall be
>>>> accepted unless objected to by the majority of the entire LNC within 14
>>>> days.
>>>> 2. With the assistance of staff and the Secretary, collect all public
>>>> electronic records.
>>>> 3. With the assistance of the IT Committee and staff, provide and
>>>> maintain a permanent public document archive in the form of a
>>>> publicly-viewable website which is separate from the Party's primary
>>>> website.
>>>> 4. Make a good faith effort to preserve and publish all historical
>>>> documents, and transform physical documents into electronic format toward
>>>> that end.
>>>> 5. Vote to recommend the destruction of any original document, or
>>>> document for which no other copy is available. No such document shall be
>>>> destroyed without the consent of the LNC, as outlined in Section 2.07(x).
>>>> 6. At each LNC meeting, present a summary of physical document
>>>> preservation mechanisms currently being utilized, and the number of
>>>> documents preserved in electronic format.
>>>> 7. Ensure that any document that would qualify for discussion under the
>>>> rules of executive session for the LNC, as outlined under Section 1.02(5),
>>>> remains private until such time that the Executive Committee, or the entire
>>>> LNC, meeting in executive session, votes in the affirmative to make that
>>>> information public.
>>>> 8. Within one business day, inform the LNC of any committee
>>>> appointments.
>>>> 9. Publicly announce and permit a public audience for all meetings,
>>>> other than those meetings held for the explicit purpose of discussing
>>>> historic items that would qualify for Executive Session.
>>>>
>>>> Nothing listed in the responsibilities, powers, or scope of this
>>>> Committee shall be construed to prevent or circumvent the normal operation
>>>> of the Party's main website or to interfere in the duties of the Secretary
>>>> as mandated by the Party Bylaws or this Policy Manual.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> *Create a new subsection under section 2.07 of the Policy Manual, which
>>>> reads:*(x) All agendas, public meeting minutes, and public records of
>>>> the Party shall be made available to the Historic Preservation Committee.
>>>> No data shall be deleted or destroyed without a vote in the affirmative by
>>>> no less than two-thirds of the entire LNC.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Ken C. Moellman, Jr.
>>>> LNC Region 3 Alternate Representative
>>>> LPKY Judicial Committee
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> 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, 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
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170110/710b353d/attachment-0002.html>