[Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2017-08: Budget Meeting
Caryn Ann Harlos
carynannharlos at gmail.com
Tue May 2 20:09:35 EDT 2017
PS: I said "pet issue" and said "we all have them." That was intended so
it was not dismissive. I have many pet issues. I share one with you.
Transparency.
On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 6:08 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com>
wrote:
> Actually Starchild you don't know my preferences vis a vis a nudist
> meeting.
>
> You may not understand why the safety thing is a thing (or you might find
> it unreasonable) but I just did an informal discussion amongst other female
> party members and they felt quite strongly the same way.
>
> I have a lot of work to do, we are not going to change each other's minds,
> so I am going to leave off here.
>
> -Caryn Ann
>
> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 6:04 PM, Starchild <sfdreamer at earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>
>> I wasn't suggesting that minority preferences should be given *equal*
>> weight, Caryn Ann. And of course in reality you *don't* prefer nudist
>> meetings, and nobody is suggesting the LNC should meet in the nude, lol! In
>> the case of such extreme and unlikely hypotheticals, perhaps you're right
>> that a majority whose feelings were strong enough *should* be able to
>> enforce their preferences all the time – but if they feel that strongly,
>> they should also be prepared to pay any associated expenses themselves in
>> cases where a proportional approach would otherwise have accommodated the
>> minority's preferences, instead of requiring the minority to further
>> subsidize preferences with which they disagree.
>>
>> I'm not really sure why you'd logically feel any safer from someone by
>> whom you felt threatened in a hotel meeting room than in an Arby's – in
>> either case somebody can readily walk in off the street, and when seconds
>> count I expect hotel security would be just minutes away! – but it may not
>> be worth getting into the particulars.
>>
>> Calling my concerns a "pet issue" sounds dismissive. Raising a concern is
>> not mutually exclusive with doing something. I've in fact suggested a
>> general plan of action in my response to Tim that I quoted below. Do I have
>> to print it out and put it in a binder and request time on the agenda for
>> it at a meeting in order to satisfy you? Why insist that I personally find
>> a location, instead of using local activists on the ground, unless it's
>> just about having an excuse not to support reform? If we are discussing
>> meeting in San Francisco where I live, I will certainly attempt to find a
>> free space here. Otherwise, I think it makes sense to rely on locals who
>> know their areas best. I haven't heard any arguments why it *shouldn't*
>> be our standard procedure to solicit proposals for cost-free meeting
>> locations from our members on the dates when we've decided we want to meet,
>> in the cities where we want to meet.
>>
>> Love & Liberty,
>> ((( starchild )))
>> At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>> (415) 625-FREE
>> @StarchildSF
>>
>>
>> On May 2, 2017, at 4:33 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>>
>> I actually do disagree. I might prefer nudist meetings. I do not think
>> my minority preference should be given equal weight. Conducive meetings
>> simply don't work that way.
>>
>> We have spoken hours on this and it is simply an area we disagree on.
>>
>> I would suggest that for the next meeting you might want to come with a
>> proposal in hand that answers questions and concerns. I don't believe much
>> in talking about my pet issues (we all have them), I believe in doing. I
>> care about Party history. So I did something. This is a big concern of
>> yours.... prove that it is better by doing the organizing for the next
>> one. It might help. Debating so far isn't changing any minds.
>>
>> If this were a big concern of mine, I would be setting out with proposals
>> and plans to prove them. The entire LNC gets a larger discount on room
>> blocks than they pay on the room. Seeing how we pay our own way, again, I
>> don't find it an unreasonable tradeoff and while there is no such thing as
>> perfect safety, not many women (50% of the population) who travel alone are
>> going to feel safe and secure with the type of scenario you are proposing.
>> Hotels provide a layer of safety that rightly or wrongly is a large factor.
>>
>> Last meeting a certain member had promised to come that caused me
>> concern. It turned out not to happen but if we were simply meeting at the
>> local Arby's or whatever, I would not have come nor would it have been
>> responsible to our members.
>>
>> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 5:22 PM, Starchild <sfdreamer at earthlink.net>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Caryn Ann,
>>>
>>> There's truth to the saying you get what you pay for, but there's at
>>> least equal truth to the observation that it pays to shop around. I'll
>>> quote here part of what I said in my response to Tim:
>>>
>>> *...a logical approach would be to let local Libertarians in New Orleans
>>> know of our interest to hold a meeting there in a space with the
>>> characteristics you mention, and give them a little while to see what they
>>> come up with. I think this should be standard operating procedure whenever
>>> we identify dates for an upcoming meeting and a city in which we wish to
>>> meet.*
>>>
>>>
>>> I agree that the cost to individual members to get to a meeting location
>>> (via Uber, etc.) is a relevant consideration when deciding where to meet,
>>> but I don't think it ought to take precedence over saving the party itself
>>> (and by extension all the members who donated that money) hundreds of
>>> dollars.
>>>
>>> *Are* expensive hotel meeting rooms conducive to the most number of
>>> people? I don't know that to be the case. A survey of the membership on
>>> whether they want the LNC spending money on such things or not could be
>>> instructive. It's also possible what you say may be true of our current
>>> membership, but untrue of a broader cross-section of the public to which we
>>> haven't appealed as much because practices such as holding all our
>>> conventions in upscale hotels have failed to attract them to us as
>>> different practices might have done. Safety and liability? The truth is
>>> we'll *never* have absolute certainty when it comes to the
>>> surroundings, including in hotels; seeking watertight *guarantees* of
>>> safety or whatever sounds like the mistake that statists make when they
>>> insist that there *must* be a government welfare safety net, *must* be
>>> the kind of public safety guarantees that only an aggressive State can
>>> provide (even if they are largely illusory), etc. – that any marginally
>>> lower level of assurance just won't do.
>>>
>>> But even if we were to assume (without having conducted any surveys)
>>> that most LP members are fine with the LNC spending $1000 of the party's
>>> money on catered food/beverage in order to meet in a hotel, and
>>> that expensive hotel meeting rooms are always the first choice of the
>>> largest number of potential attendees, this would not suggest to me that we
>>> should accommodate the majority's preferences 100% of the time. If as you
>>> suggest it boils down to a utilitarian decision (rather than a matter of
>>> principle in not wasting our resources, as I see it), it still seems to me
>>> that fairness, common sense, and the principle of proportional
>>> representation that Libertarians have often embraced in terms of elections
>>> dictate that we should also accommodate the minority view (if it *is*
>>> the minority view!) for some percentage of our meetings. Do you disagree?
>>>
>>> Love & Liberty,
>>> ((( starchild )))
>>> At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>>> (415) 625-FREE
>>> @StarchildSF
>>>
>>>
>>> On May 2, 2017, at 3:43 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>>>
>>> Starchild,
>>>
>>> ==Who said anything about a *dank* basement?==
>>>
>>> It was an example. There is a truth to the saying you get what you pay
>>> for.
>>>
>>> == I suspect that a comfortable place with sufficient space could be
>>> found for much less than $1000 in obligations, if not free.==
>>>
>>> To suitably address our needs? I doubt it. Possible? Perhaps. But I
>>> do know that I have limited time and I am not going to volunteer to find
>>> it nor supervise or followup on people to do it. We would likely spend
>>> more than that in pursuing it. If an option easily pops up, I want to go
>>> for it, but I know from just trying to find accomodations for our state
>>> board in its meetings, it is easier said than done. And there are other
>>> considerations such as ease to hotel. We already pay our own way, I do not
>>> feel it is unreasonable for the Party to consider not making us have to
>>> Uber or pay even more to another site. I find this a small price to pay
>>> for what we are guaranteed to get (and have legal recourse if we don't). I
>>> would like to see the affiliates more involved but that is another story.
>>>
>>> When it comes to groups, particularly mixed groups, it is actually a
>>> utilitarian decision. A professional clean spacious hotel meeting space is
>>> most conducive to the most number of people. Yes, it is always cold for me
>>> everywhere so I plan accordingly. I also have diet issues and sometimes
>>> not to my liking but it is generally conducive to the most number of people.
>>>
>>> I just don't find it unreasonable a price for a large room, with the
>>> technology we may need, with the conference table we need, with the space
>>> we need, and that people will feel comfortable going to in general,
>>> particularly alone. Perhaps I am sensitive to the issue that some female
>>> members (and perhaps male members too, I can only speak from what I know)
>>> are leary about other environments. A hotel is safe, professional, and
>>> functional. (there are also legal liability considerations that I really
>>> don't care to get into but if we are inviting people to a meeting, and we
>>> are not absolutely certain of the surroundings etc we could incur
>>> liability). A hotel conference room is a good safe bet. Overall, after
>>> taking into consideration time factors as well (time is money), I don't
>>> find it unreasonable.
>>>
>>> -Caryn Ann
>>>
>>> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 4:31 PM, Starchild <sfdreamer at earthlink.net>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>> Caryn Ann,
>>>>
>>>> Who said anything about a *dank* basement? I suspect that a
>>>> comfortable place with sufficient space could be found for much less than
>>>> $1000 in obligations, if not free. If food were unavailable for purchase on
>>>> the premises, delivery is generally an option. Hotel meeting rooms do
>>>> *not* make it certain that people can attend comfortably or that they
>>>> are able to eat comfortably. There are other types of discomfort you may
>>>> not be considering, for instance the discomfort of being in a sterile
>>>> atmosphere lacking fresh air or one where you feel party funds are being
>>>> wasted on inappropriate overpriced extras. Nor are more basic types of
>>>> physical discomfort necessarily eliminated. During our last meeting I had
>>>> to call the hotel staff multiple times to ask that the air condition be
>>>> turned down because it was too cold (I saw you putting your blanket or wrap
>>>> over yourself, so I know it wasn't just me). They took away beverages that
>>>> the party presumably paid for – I still don't know how much, because as far
>>>> as I know Robert has yet to supply the breakdown of the costs for the
>>>> meeting, as requested and as he told me at the meeting he would – when I
>>>> and others still wanted to use them (e.g. hot water for tea). Pre-set
>>>> catered food menus often put people with dietary considerations on the
>>>> short end of the stick. I've experienced more than once not being able to
>>>> eat a full, balanced meal, or having to make special requests of hotel
>>>> staff, because the menu was planned around an omnivorous diet that assumed
>>>> people would want meat/dairy.
>>>>
>>>> Love & Liberty,
>>>> ((( starchild )))
>>>>
>>>> P.S. – On a side note, the signers of the Declaration of Independence
>>>> were not yet on the literal field of battle either.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On May 2, 2017, at 6:02 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Starchild, I care not for the food etc but disagree on the image. We
>>>> are not yet fortunately on the literal field of battle and meeting in a
>>>> comfortable place with plenty of room is necessary for the most efficient
>>>> use of our time and energies. We are not robots where that does not
>>>> matter. I know that my mind and body are not of such that say a dank
>>>> basement would work as well.
>>>>
>>>> Further these spaces makes it certain that members can attend
>>>> comfortably and they also are able to eat.
>>>>
>>>> I don't find it unreasonable for what we get IOW.
>>>>
>>>> -Caryn Ann
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 4:02 AM Starchild <sfdreamer at earthlink.net>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Apr 30, 2017, at 7:56 PM, Daniel Hayes wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Starchild,
>>>>>
>>>>> There is a $1,000 F&B(catering) requirement associated with the use of
>>>>> the room. Nick had said a working lunch was probable for the budget
>>>>> meeting and I passed the specs as per consultation with Robert on to our
>>>>> HelmsBriscoe rep who coordinated it with the Hyatt.
>>>>>
>>>>> Daniel Hayes
>>>>> LNC At Large Member
>>>>> Convention Oversight Committee Vice-Chair
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Assuming Daniel Hayes is correct, and I have no reason to doubt him, *meeting
>>>>> at this location would cost the party $1000 in food and beverage purchase
>>>>> obligations to the hotel.*
>>>>>
>>>>> Certainly I accept any person's choice in spending his or her
>>>>> *individual* funds in any way that s/he chooses, and I am, for better
>>>>> or more likely for worse, probably as guilty as many libertarians of
>>>>> putting resources toward my own sensual gratification which I could put
>>>>> toward advancing the freedom movement. But regardless of our individual
>>>>> preferences or habits in this regard, as representatives of the members of
>>>>> the Libertarian Party I think we owe it to our members to spend the
>>>>> *collective* resources they have entrusted to us on advancing the
>>>>> cause of freedom.
>>>>>
>>>>> If there were some reason why expensive hotel rooms were truly
>>>>> necessary in order for us to meet, I would by all means support using party
>>>>> money to pay for those rooms, but they are *not* necessary. *There
>>>>> are plenty of places where we can reasonably meet and incur $0 in financial
>>>>> obligations instead of $1000. *
>>>>>
>>>>> Some have made an "image" argument – that we need to spend money to
>>>>> meet in upscale locations in order to look "serious" or "professional" or
>>>>> what-not. I do not think this makes us look serious about fighting for
>>>>> freedom. When the signers of the U.S. Declaration of Independence pledged
>>>>> their "lives, fortunes, and sacred honor", that wasn't just trying to look
>>>>> serious, it was *being* serious. I won't say they were being
>>>>> "professional"; it seems almost insulting to the memory of those who led
>>>>> that previous struggle for American independence to use the term in
>>>>> relation to their efforts. Is the struggle we are now engaged in any less
>>>>> important and critical for the future?
>>>>>
>>>>> I believe the path to freedom lies through manifesting as agents of
>>>>> change, not by emulating the well-heeled organizations that characterize
>>>>> the political establishment – *doing things that make us look more
>>>>> like an establishment organization or the party of the wealthy are
>>>>> contra-indicated.* They drive away our natural supporters who, for
>>>>> good reasons, mistrust and oppose that establishment. If it walks like a
>>>>> duck...
>>>>>
>>>>> But even more than how it looks, is what it is. Former vice-president
>>>>> Joe Biden has said many dumb things, but I've heard him credited with
>>>>> saying at least one wise thing. He reportedly said, don't tell me what your
>>>>> values are – show me your budget, and I'll tell you what your values are.
>>>>> Are you comfortable with what spending party money on hotel-catered
>>>>> food for meetings of party leaders when it isn't necessary tells people
>>>>> about our values? I am not.
>>>>>
>>>>> * I vote no*, and encourage my fellow National Committee members to
>>>>> vote this down and *instead* *get behind a motion to meet at a
>>>>> different location in New Orleans that would not incur such an
>>>>> unjustifiable expense*.
>>>>>
>>>>> Love & Liberty,
>>>>> ((( starchild )))
>>>>> At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>>>>> (415) 625-FREE
>>>>> @StarchildSF
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On May 1, 2017, at 9:37 PM, Alicia Mattson wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I vote yes.
>>>>>
>>>>> -Alicia
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 10:48 PM, Alicia Mattson <agmattson at gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> We have an electronic mail ballot.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by May 1, 2017 at 11:59:59pm
>>>>>> Pacific time.*
>>>>>> *Co-Sponsors:* Hayes, Harlos, Goldstein, Bilyeu, Redpath
>>>>>>
>>>>>> *Motion:* The 2017 LNC budget meeting shall be held at the New
>>>>>> Orleans Hyatt Regency on December 9th and 10th, 2017.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> -Alicia
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> 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/>
>>>> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee
>>>>
>>>> A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>>>> *We defend your rights*
>>>> *And oppose the use of force*
>>>> *Taxation is theft*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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/>
>>> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee
>>>
>>> A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>>> *We defend your rights*
>>> *And oppose the use of force*
>>> *Taxation is theft*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/>
>> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee
>>
>> A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>> *We defend your rights*
>> *And oppose the use of force*
>> *Taxation is theft*
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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>
> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee
>
> A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
> *We defend your rights*
> *And oppose the use of force*
> *Taxation is theft*
>
>
>
>
>
--
*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>
Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee
A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
*We defend your rights*
*And oppose the use of force*
*Taxation is theft*
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20170502/adea6b2e/attachment-0002.html>
More information about the Lnc-business
mailing list