[Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2017-08: Budget Meeting
Caryn Ann Harlos
carynannharlos at gmail.com
Tue May 2 20:11:59 EDT 2017
PSS: And yes I have a tremendous binder fetish.
On Tue, May 2, 2017 at 6:09 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com>
wrote:
> 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*
>
>
>
>
>
--
*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/e0f1549f/attachment-0002.html>
More information about the Lnc-business
mailing list