[Lnc-business] EFC Update and Extension

[Joshua Katz]

It was my understanding that the unanimous consent procedure would involve
waiting 10 days for objection.
On Jan 11, 2017 11:03 AM, "Caryn Ann Harlos" <carynannharlos at gmail.com>
wrote:

> 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
>>
>>
>>
>> <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=>
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20170111/0067d41b/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/20170111/0067d41b/attachment-0002.png>