[Lnc-business] EFC Update and Extension

Wed Jan 11 12:02:39 EST 2017

The difference is that we are entitled to ten days to respond.

That cannot be unilaterally shortened to "no objections" unless everyone
has already reminded.

-- 
*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/>

On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 8:01 AM Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
wrote:

> The question is only being discussed because email ballots are weird. I'm
> not convinced there's much of a difference when seeking unanimous consent
> by email vs.voting. if one yes vote is cast, and no objection is expected,
> everyone else can be silent with no change. The main difference seems to be
> that when seeking unanimous consent, we'd be assuming a motion and wouldn't
> need co sponsors. If no one objects, it's clear there was sufficient
> support to consider the question
>
>
>
>
> On Jan 11, 2017 8:37 AM, "David Demarest" <dpdemarest at centurylink.net>
> wrote:
>
> Caryn Ann, I agree.
>
>
>
> There is a place for judicious use of the “Any objections?” approach
> particularly when none are expected.
>
>
>
> When objections are expected, however, asking if there are any objections
> can easily be perverted into a careless or deliberate expedient strong-arm
> statist top-down authoritarian tactic to stifle discussion, transparency
> and diversity of opinion.
>
>
>
> Show-of-hands, or better yet, roll-call recorded voting maximizes free
> speech and personal accountability and minimizes abdication of personal
> responsibility to higher authority.
>
>
>
> It’s not rocket science. Nick and Arvin set an excellent example on the
> thoughtful use of the “Any objections” approach.
>
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>
> ~David Pratt Demarest
>
> LNC Region 6 Representative
>
>
>
> *From:* Lnc-business [mailto:lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org] *On Behalf
> Of *Caryn Ann Harlos
> *Sent:* Wednesday, January 11, 2017 7:04 AM
> *To:* lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> *Subject:* Re: [Lnc-business] EFC Update and Extension
>
>
>
> Alicia my concern about precedent is there may be a motion that there is
> one lone objector to in the future.
>
>
>
> To simply say if I don't hear an objection in a shorter period of time
> prejudices rights since the time frame for any decision is ten days and
> that shortened it.
>
>
>
> It is not a concern here.  It could be one in the future.
>
>
>
> And I don't find going through the process and casting a vote to be
> "busywork."
>
>
>
> As my colleague from Connecticut writes, I'm a stickler for the rules.
>
>
>
> If I am simply wrong here about our rules, I would love to know.
>
>
>
> -Caryn Ann
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 11, 2017 at 1:12 AM Alicia Mattson <agmattson at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> There are 5 co-sponsors of this motion, which is more than enough to
> sponsor an email ballot, however there are two technical problems with the
> wording, one of which is fairly important to note.  I want to make sure the
> co-sponsors are aware of this before I send it out for a vote.
>
> 1)  This motion references "EFC", but if someone is not reading these
> threads as we are, and they're just reading our minutes later, they'll have
> no clue what this motion is talking about.  At the time we created the
> committee, we didn't specify any name for the committee at all, but it was
> under an agenda heading about reviewing the 2016 campaign.  Following the
> meeting when I needed to have staff add this committee to our website, I
> merely had them designate it as the Committee to Solicit Bids for Reviewing
> 2016 Campaign.  That way it would be easy to find in our minutes what that
> committee was.
>
> The committee members themselves nicknamed it the Empowered Future
> Committee (? I think ?), but that name appears nowhere in our minutes, nor
> does the acronym EFC.
>
> The name confusion will will leave readers in the dark about what it was
> this motion did.
>
> 2)  The bigger technical issue with this motion is that it actually
> imposes new requirements on the committee and doesn't accurately represent
> what the date in the original motion was for.  This wording says nothing
> about changing the due date for the bids, which is what the January 10th
> date was.  However, the wording now says the committee is to present us a
> report by the date of January 30, though the original motion required no
> report from the committee to the LNC in January.  If we mean to make the
> bid deadline January 30, the committee would presumably need some time
> after the bid submission deadline to come up with any recommendations and
> make any sort of report back to us about the bids.
>
> Is that what the co-sponsors intended to do?  Impose a new reporting
> requirement on an unreasonable time frame?
>
> My suggestion to fix both issues is that you take Joshua's idea to merely
> amend the motion we adopted in December to change the date, and leave the
> rest of the wording alone.  (Okay, technically Joshua said just to change
> the "1" to a "3", but this representation is just a little more readable.)
> Amend the motion we adopted in December as follows:
>
>
>
> "that the Libertarian National Committee
>
> establish a committee to take bids from political consultants for the task
> of
>
> extensively reviewing and making recommendations for the Libertarian
> Party’s messaging
>
> (and modes of messaging), inclusion in the debates, fundraising and
> campaign
>
> finance, campaign mechanics, and state and local affiliates. Said agency
> will
>
> agree to present their findings to the public before December of 2017. The
> committee
>
> will take bids until the 10th*30th* of January."
>
>
>
> I need to hear from the co-sponsors what you want to do.
>
> -Alicia
>
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 9:38 AM, Demarest, David P. <
> David.Demarest at firstdata.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I am seeking co-sponsors for the following motion:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Extend deadline from 1/10/2017 to 1/30/2017 for EFC presentation to LNC of
> report on political consultant bids, analysis and recommendations.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *2017 Omaha Libertarian Strategy UnConvention Oct 20-22*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ~David Pratt Demarest
>
>
>
> LNC Region 6 Representative
>
>
>
> Cell:      402-981-6469 <(402)%20981-6469>
>
>
>
> Home: 402-493-0873 <(402)%20493-0873>
>
>
>
> Office: 402-222-7207 <(402)%20222-7207>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* David Demarest [mailto:dpdemarest at centurylink.net]
>
>
>
>
> *Sent:* Monday, January 09, 2017 11:02 PM
>
>
> *To:* lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>
>
> *Cc:* Demarest, David P.; 'David Demarest'
>
>
> *Subject:* RE: [Lnc-business] EFC Update and Extension
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Larry or Trent,
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> If you can provide the desired wording, I will offer the motion unless
> someone has already done so.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Thoughts?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ~David Pratt Demarest
>
>
>
> LNC Region 6 Representative
>
>
>
> Cell:      402-981-6469 <(402)%20981-6469>
>
>
>
> Home: 402-493-0873 <(402)%20493-0873>
>
>
>
> Office: 402-222-7207 <(402)%20222-7207>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Lnc-business [mailto:lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org
> <lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org>]
>
> *On Behalf Of *Joshua Katz
>
>
> *Sent:* Monday, January 09, 2017 7:35 PM
>
>
> *To:* lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>
>
> *Subject:* Re: [Lnc-business] EFC Update and Extension
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> My recollection is that we chose January 10 so that the bids would be
> presented on my birthday.  I'm disappointed we won't be able to receive
> them on that auspicious occasion.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> I will cosponsor a motion with Sam, however, to amend our previously
> adopted motion by substituting a 3 for the 1 in "10."
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Joshua A. Katz
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 9, 2017 at 6:15 PM, Larry Sharpe <lsharpe at neo-sage.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Hi LNC Team,
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Happy New Year.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> We have found four possible vendors for proposals. Each has our request
> and is scheduled to provide us with a plan/proposal by the end of this week.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> We will whittle these down and perhaps have a Q & A and/or a 2nd round
> before selecting 2 or 3 of them to present (heir plans with details) to the
> LNC.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> As I mentioned in a previous note, we will need to extend our deadline.
> It was challenging to get the right vendors who are the right size, with
> the right backgrounds,
>
> that are willing to help us with flexible pricing options. And when you
> add on the Holiday Season, this was even tougher.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Therefore, with respect, the EFC requests an extension to January 30th to
> confidently be able to present options to the LNC.
>
>
>
>
>
> --
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Larry
>
>
>
> *Larry Sharpe*
>
>
>
> *The Neo-Sage Group, Inc.*
>
>
>
> http://TheNeoSage.com/
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__theneosage.com_&d=CwMFaQ&c=ewHkv9vLloTwhsKn5d4bTdoqsmBfyfooQX5O7EQLv5TtBZ1CwcvjU063xndfqI8U&r=POfq57_C0OM3236VPm9_N_9MhP1EEP_0raNPnh6qDnw&m=l3E8uIb1Zmn2ZGI-EM9kMaCwcRKZHIJh0YgWNjldtao&s=ud5O-zqvuRMugamUZJHlmR1gtQNhjdqDulycdA9Xr0o&e=>
>
>
>
> https://www.youtube.com/user/TheNeoSage
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.youtube.com_user_TheNeoSage&d=CwMFaQ&c=ewHkv9vLloTwhsKn5d4bTdoqsmBfyfooQX5O7EQLv5TtBZ1CwcvjU063xndfqI8U&r=POfq57_C0OM3236VPm9_N_9MhP1EEP_0raNPnh6qDnw&m=l3E8uIb1Zmn2ZGI-EM9kMaCwcRKZHIJh0YgWNjldtao&s=ODKDVD-MSKr8Nj6rVzzE_7tekKApiQStn_qzBkLbMA0&e=>
>
>
>
> http://www.linkedin.com/in/neosage
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__www.linkedin.com_in_neosage&d=CwMFaQ&c=ewHkv9vLloTwhsKn5d4bTdoqsmBfyfooQX5O7EQLv5TtBZ1CwcvjU063xndfqI8U&r=POfq57_C0OM3236VPm9_N_9MhP1EEP_0raNPnh6qDnw&m=l3E8uIb1Zmn2ZGI-EM9kMaCwcRKZHIJh0YgWNjldtao&s=SqMcdfn_x_ljVwcKVIo7hGo-g0wBB-KbGhXj3amsmm0&e=>
>
>
>
> *https://www.facebook.com/neosage
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__www.facebook.com_neosage&d=CwMFaQ&c=ewHkv9vLloTwhsKn5d4bTdoqsmBfyfooQX5O7EQLv5TtBZ1CwcvjU063xndfqI8U&r=POfq57_C0OM3236VPm9_N_9MhP1EEP_0raNPnh6qDnw&m=l3E8uIb1Zmn2ZGI-EM9kMaCwcRKZHIJh0YgWNjldtao&s=vaUViEyWA1_eySn7MQS5_9v2uQIL-bDKqEfZKIrtFW0&e=>*
>
>
>
> *212-307-3545 <212-307-3545>*
>
>
>
>
>
> *Instructing – Advancing – Inspiring*
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
> Lnc-business mailing list
>
>
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>
>
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
> <https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__hq.lp.org_mailman_listinfo_lnc-2Dbusiness-5Fhq.lp.org&d=CwMFaQ&c=ewHkv9vLloTwhsKn5d4bTdoqsmBfyfooQX5O7EQLv5TtBZ1CwcvjU063xndfqI8U&r=POfq57_C0OM3236VPm9_N_9MhP1EEP_0raNPnh6qDnw&m=l3E8uIb1Zmn2ZGI-EM9kMaCwcRKZHIJh0YgWNjldtao&s=j4Eqo1RwV6Fg_cwLp1W0OXnbmBlATLZMJh7tZlVjNF0&e=>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> The information in this message may be proprietary and/or confidential,
> and protected from disclosure. If the reader of this message is not the
> intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering this
> message to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any
> dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication is strictly
> prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify
> First Data immediately by replying to this message and deleting it from
> your computer.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
>
> 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/20170111/47b6ba62/attachment-0002.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 3629 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20170111/47b6ba62/attachment-0002.png>