[Lnc-business] Satanic Post - LNC Input Requested

Sun Apr 16 12:30:56 EDT 2017

Whitney,

As I've noted previously, it's my belief that the APRC let this slip
through during our preparation and travel for the meeting. I know that I
did not have an opportunity to review the scheduled Facebook posts for
Wednesday or Thursday during my preparation or travel, in addition to my
daily routine.

I think the interest we now have in the process for this asset is a step in
the right direction. When I joined the APRC, I had concerns, specifically
about the nature of our Facebook procedures, that have now come to light.
As Chair of the APRC, I do not think that adding members to the committee
with the current procedure in place is the correct tack. I believe that
Steven Neikahla's proposal (that did not pass) was a step in the right
direction, however my concern lies with the "punishment" of the appointment
bestowed upon me for the proposal to operate.

I believe the proper step would be to form a committee, consisting of
existing (non-LNC) Facebook admins & editors, members of the APRC, and
other members of the LNC to offer an updated procedure recommendation. That
committee should offer those suggestions at our upcoming LNC session in
Kansas City. In the interim, I intend to pay MUCH closer attention to the
Facebook posts myself and encourage the other members of the APRC to do the
same. During our upcoming discussion regarding the vacancy appointment, I
intend to suggest something to assist the committee in that regard.

This committee's focus should be Facebook-specific in the immediate term. I
would suggest replacing the existing (non-LNC) Facebook admins and editors
with those who focus on other aspects of our social media outreach upon
completion of the Facebook recommendation.

Thoughts?  <-- I thought it important to utilize Mr. Demarest's standard
closing with this particular topic.

Brett C. Bittner

Region 3 Representative
Libertarian National Committee <http://lp.org/>

brett.bittner at lp.org
317.537.8344

On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Whitney Bilyeu <whitneycb76 at gmail.com>
wrote:

> If volunteers are overstepping their bounds, that needs to be reigned in,
> and I would like to see the Chairman deal with that.
>
> The material that is being put out gets mixed reviews...that is not my
> issue. I would like assurances from the APRC that they can handle the FB
> volume in a timely manner, which based on my conversations with some of
> those members, is possible, but difficult. Would adding APRC members, whose
> sole responsibility would be to review FB content, be appropriate?
>
> I don't want to create a situation that will stifle the productivity or
> creativity of the page's volunteers at all. However, some established
> frontend guidelines/non-negotiables are in order to avoid future missteps.
>
>
> Whitney
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 11:07 AM, Ken Moellman <lpky at mu-net.org> wrote:
>
>> I believe that if we're going to run religious-themed memes, that they
>> should always include multiple faiths. That way we can never have content
>> that is singled out and used out of context.  Part of the issue in modern
>> politics is the out-of-context clip.  Messaging must be crafted in a way
>> that prevents being clipped out of context.
>>
>> Does anyone care that the Satanic Temple is basically a parody
>> organization?  No.  They see "Satanic".
>>
>> So crafting messages is actually a skill.  That's the point.  And
>> messaging is extremely important to at least corral, if not control, from
>> an organizational standpoint.  I'm pretty sure other people know that.  I'm
>> pretty sure that's why we have the APRC.  I am not saying I'm any good at
>> messaging myself, but I know it is critically important.
>>
>>
>> Meanwhile, I'm now receiving messages from current and former FB
>> volunteers who are saying there are fundamental problems with the way
>> things are structured. That there is one particular person who is
>> inflicting his vision upon the FB crew.  They have asked to not be publicly
>> identified because they know this person and their allies will also start
>> attacking in response.  This exposes a fundamental problem with the way
>> things are set up currently.  And as it stands, the status quo will
>> continue with no corrective action.
>>
>>
>> It's extremely frustrating to someone like me, who tries to focus on the
>> technicals.  I don't want to get involved in platform fights, for instance.
>> But I can help build websites and email servers, and I can put us on the
>> ballot. But if others are doing things which push people away and hurt the
>> party, then all of my work is for naught.
>>
>> ken
>>
>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 9:50 AM, Patrick McKnight <
>> patrick.joseph.mcknight at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Arvin,
>>>
>>> I respectfully dissent from the premise of your message. The issue is
>>> not this one post. The issue is the structural process and lack of
>>> transparency.
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> Patrick McKnight
>>>
>>> On Sun, Apr 16, 2017 at 9:44 AM, Arvin Vohra <votevohra at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi All -
>>>>
>>>> I'd like to request LNC oversight on the Satanic Temple posting as part
>>>> of the #FreeToBelieve series. I don't want to see our volunteers raked over
>>>> the coals for issues related to the LNC or APRC.
>>>>
>>>> Is a Satanic Temple Posting:
>>>>
>>>> 1. Fine on any day of the year
>>>> 2. Never ok
>>>> 3. Generally ok, but not during a religious holiday of a conflicting
>>>> religion.
>>>>
>>>> If future posts go up, I'd like it to be very clear on what the LNC
>>>> views are, so that volunteers are not blamed for our decisions.
>>>>
>>>> My view: I don't think that this is a battle worth picking. You can
>>>> already be as Satanic as you want in America, so we're not gaining
>>>> anything. I'd much rather focus on repealing laws and taxes that exist.
>>>>
>>>> Personally, I have no opposition to the Satanic Temple. As part of an
>>>> overall study of religion, I have read sections of various "Satanic" books,
>>>> and written in non-political areas on mythology parallels between
>>>> Prometheus in Greek Mythology and Lucifer in the Judaeo-Christian
>>>> tradition. Realistically, I'll probably look into the religious legal
>>>> protections they have, based on the comments by the chair, to see how
>>>> others can do the same. I'd love to see an America in which every single
>>>> house and apartment building is legally seen as a religious location that
>>>> pays no property taxes.
>>>>
>>>> -Arvin
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> Arvin Vohra
>>>>
>>>> www.VoteVohra.com
>>>> VoteVohra at gmail.com
>>>> (301) 320-3634
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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/20170416/dca73dd1/attachment-0002.html>