[Lnc-business] EPCC - Paladin Strategies - Fwd: RE: Omaha Un-Convention Proposed Logo Copyright Question

Mon May 8 23:53:28 EDT 2017

I do think we need a more clear policy on reportable conflicts.

And thank you for that info David.

I think Paladin could be of use in social media strategies honestly.

-Caryn Ann

On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 8:45 PM Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
wrote:

> I agree with my colleague that we need to do a better job of
> differentiating "what is the content of the message?" from "how shall we
> deliver the message?"  I often think that our discussions blur these too
> much.  I agree with almost all of Mr. Demarest's comments.
>
> On the question of conflict, I have two thoughts.  First, to the question
> of how dealing with the same vendor on behalf of two organizations can be a
> conflict: if, in both organizations you are a decision-maker, and in at
> least one, you are negotiating, the door is open to make trade-offs between
> the contracts.  Note that I am not, of course, accusing my colleague of any
> such thing, but that is why, in my opinion, it would be a reportable
> conflict.  If you have not contracted on behalf of either organization,
> then I think it is less reportable.  Second, I think we ought to have some
> guidance as to what conflicts need, and need not, be reported.  There are
> many items on our conflict list (including some of mine) that I am not sure
> are conflicts, and that seem to be there largely out of an abundance of
> caution.  I have no objection to abundant caution, but it does concern me
> that, if our inclination is to just report it all without thinking through
> why a conflict may exist, we may easily miss something that should be
> reportable.  If we had some clear guidance as to what sort of thing is a
> potential conflict, we could fix both problems.  RONR provides little
> guidance on this matter, but perhaps we could refine our policy on it with
> some advice of counsel.
>
> Joshua A. Katz
>
>
> On Mon, May 8, 2017 at 9:34 PM, David Demarest <dpdemarest at centurylink.net
> > wrote:
>
>> Wes,
>>
>>
>>
>> Thank you for bringing up the conflict of interest question regarding
>> Paladin Strategies. Frankly, the thought had not occurred to me. During the
>> conflict of interest portion of the April LNC meeting, I did seek the
>> advice from an LNC friend regarding the question as to whether my promotion
>> of the "Omaha Roads to Liberty Un-Convention” could be considered a
>> conflict of interest. The answer was an emphatic "No" so I promptly forgot
>> it.
>>
>>
>>
>> Under separate cover addressed to Alicia, I will offer possible conflict
>> of interest scenarios in the following three areas:
>>
>>
>>
>>    1. I am promoter of the Omaha Roads to Liberty Un-Convention, a
>>    non-profit event under the legal and financial responsibility of my “2017
>>    Omaha Un-Convention, LLC” corporation
>>
>>
>>
>>    1. I have had verbal and email discussions with John Engle and Mike
>>    Fishbein of Paladin Strategies about their availability to speak at the
>>    Omaha Un-Convention and provide their advice on event publicity. We have
>>    not agreed on any specifics yet since the event is 8 month away. Paladin
>>    Strategies has done no work yet for the Un-Convention nor has any
>>    compensation been discussed although I will certainly be offering to cover
>>    their travel and lodging expense.
>>
>>
>>
>>    1. I have offered some LNC members and LNC staff the opportunity to
>>    speak at the Un-Convention and have suggested arrangements to cover their
>>    travel and lodging expense
>>
>>
>>
>> That being said, I am puzzled as to where the conflict of interest
>> concern arises from. Paladin is a partnership with previous clients. I have
>> not signed or been asked to sign a non-disclosure on behalf of Paladin. I
>> believe the question of previous clients was raised but the response as I
>> recall was general in nature for obvious reasons and no contract had been
>> signed.
>>
>>
>>
>> Once the objection to the partnership nature of Paladin Strategies was
>> raised at the April LNC meeting, on top of our understandable stress and
>> exhaustion following social media and committee elections as Caryn Ann has
>> pointed out, I was certain our motion would fail and saw no point in
>> pursuing further discussion.
>>
>>
>>
>> That being said, I believe in transparency perhaps to a fault in the eyes
>> of some. I have not been reticent in advertising the subject matter
>> referred to in the above three conflict of interest declarations to any and
>> all that would listen. However, the quoted email was sent just to LNC
>> members I thought would be interested.
>>
>>
>>
>> I would ask the question: What does the content of the motion that was
>> defeated 4-10 have to do with the content of the original motion to solicit
>> bids from political consultants. Was anyone on the LNC operating under the
>> illusion that we were soliciting bids from political consultants for any
>> purpose other than seeking their professional advice on applying messaging
>> technique strategy to facilitate presenting our excellent Libertarian
>> message in a manner that connects more effectively with the broader
>> audience?
>>
>>
>>
>> From my personal perspective, our heated discussions and concerns both
>> pro and con about “dumbing down” our message entirely miss the point of
>> what Paladin Strategies has to offer. Our fixation on changing or not
>> changing the content of our message continues our focus on hitting the
>> broader audience over the head with where we are coming from. It is not
>> surprising to me that our messaging success rate has been limited to less
>> than 50% of the LP and maybe 15% of the broader audience. I am concerned
>> that we will never connect effectively with the necessary higher percentage
>> of the broader audience until we change our messaging strategy to focus on
>> where they, the broader audience, are coming from in their struggle to
>> adapt to the quicksand of the current status quo.
>>
>>
>>
>> Focusing on where they are coming from requires using leading questions
>> instead of the message bomb to connect with them emotionally first by
>> putting ourselves in their shoes, not forcing them to step into our shoes.
>> Through careful targeting and testing of our leading questions, we can find
>> out what their concerns are about the status quo and get them to think
>> about how they would like to change the status quo to better address their
>> immediate concerns. This may plant a seed of doubt in their current statist
>> beliefs and prompt them to ask how Libertarians would address their status
>> quo concerns. That is when the real discussion of Libertarian principles,
>> goals and courses of action starts to which we can each lend our personal
>> version of our Libertarian principles.
>>
>>
>>
>> Thoughts?
>>
>>
>>
>> ~David
>>
>>
>>
>> Dec 28-Jan 1 Omaha Roads to Liberty Un-Convention
>>
>>
>>
>> ~David Pratt Demarest
>>
>> LNC Region 6 Representative (IA, IL, MN, MO, ND, NE, WI)
>>
>> Secretary, LPNE State Central Committee
>>
>> Cell:      402-981-6469 <(402)%20981-6469>
>>
>> Home: 402-493-0873 <(402)%20493-0873>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Lnc-business [mailto:lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org] On Behalf Of
>> Wes Benedict
>> Sent: Monday, May 08, 2017 11:20 AM
>> To: Libertarian National Committee list <lnc-business at hq.lp.org>
>> Subject: [Lnc-business] EPCC - Paladin Strategies - Fwd: RE: Omaha
>> Un-Convention Proposed Logo Copyright Question
>>
>>
>>
>> Dear LNC:
>>
>>
>>
>> I recently sought advice from Jim Lark in his role as chair of the
>> Employment Policy and Compensation Committee, and he indicated that I
>> should bring this matter to the attention of the LNC.
>>
>>
>>
>> At the April 15-16, 2017 LNC meeting in Pittsburgh, a company, Paladin
>> Strategies was considered for hire. From the draft LNC minutes, there was a
>> motion  "to allow the Chair to initiate a contract with Paladin Strategies
>> to create a general messaging strategy for up to 6 months."
>>
>> That motion failed 4-10.
>>
>>
>>
>> In any case, before the vote, when various LNC members asked the body who
>> the firm was or who were some of their other clients or projects, the
>> responses were along the lines of "we don't know or we can't disclose due
>> to non-disclosure agreements".
>>
>>
>>
>> I was surprised that no one spoke up and mentioned that Paladin
>> Strategies was a firm working on the "Omaha Un-Convention". The excerpt
>> from an email received below discloses that fact.
>>
>>
>>
>> Perhaps others mentioned in the email below are bound by non-disclosure
>> agreements or did not notice the connection, but I am not bound by any
>> on-disclosure agreement with Paladin Strategies or the "Omaha
>> Un-Convention" event. Therefore, I feel obligated to disclose the situation.
>>
>>
>>
>> I am not familiar with Paladin Strategies beyond what has been in emails
>> about the Nebraska event and what occurred at the LNC meeting as far as I
>> recall. They very well may be a fine organization. As a former management
>> consultant myself, I'm acutely aware it's not uncommon for staff members to
>> be uncomfortable about bringing in outside consultants for services. Here I
>> am on the other side of that equation. Before the LNC meeting, I did inform
>> the chair that I was not particularly in favor of the LNC hiring
>> consultants for messaging for various reasons and the chair suggested it
>> was not a good idea for me to bring that up in the LNC meeting. I agreed
>> with the chair that it was not a good idea for me to bring up my opposition
>> to hiring the consultants at the LNC meeting.
>>
>>
>>
>> I'll also mention that recently one of my staff members told me they were
>> recently offered to provide training at the Nebraska event as well as to
>> have expenses paid for that staff and staff members' family to travel to
>> attend the Omaha Un-Convention.
>>
>>
>>
>> In bringing this matter to the LNC, I wish to emphasize that I am not
>> alleging any untoward behavior.  As a matter of proper procedure I believe
>> it would have been appropriate for those LNC members with knowledge of
>> Paladin Strategies and its association with the proposed Nebraska event to
>> provide this information to the LNC during the discussion.
>>
>>
>>
>> > > Subject:
>>
>> > >
>>
>> > >     RE: Omaha Un-Convention Proposed Logo Copyright Question
>>
>> > > Date:     Thu, 6 Apr 2017 11:23:07 -0500
>>
>> > > From:     David Demarest <dpdemarest at centurylink.net>
>>
>> > > To:     'Wes Benedict' <wes.benedict at lp.org>
>>
>> > > CC:     'Nicholas Sarwark' <chair at lp.org>, 'Robert Kraus'
>>
>> > <robert.kraus at lp.org>, 'Brett Bittner' <brett.bittner at lp.org>, 'Vohra
>>
>> > Vohra' <vicechair at lp.org>
>>
>> >
>>
>> > <snip>
>>
>> >
>>
>> > Joe Hedlund, our Publicity Committee Chair, is about to launch an
>>
>> > aggressive and carefully targeted publicity and branding campaign that
>>
>> > leverages the services of Paladin Strategies, the political messaging
>>
>> > strategy firm built on skills of John Engle and Mike Fishbein. Paladin
>>
>> > is the same pollical consulting firm that Larry, Trent and I have
>>
>> > selected and will present for LNC approval in Pittsburgh to proceed
>>
>> > with the targeted messaging technique strategy goal of the EFC
>>
>> > committee. John and Mike will have a significant role in our event at
>>
>> > multiple levels, including workshops, seminars and publicity messaging
>>
>> > strategies. While Paladin is a for-profit firm, Mike and John and
>>
>> > their liberty-conscious pricing approach continue to impress me as
>>
>> > dedicated Libertarians that share my primary Libertarian motivation -
>>
>> > freedom, nothing more, nothing less.
>>
>> >
>>
>> > <snip>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Wes Benedict, Executive Director
>>
>> Libertarian National Committee, Inc.
>>
>> 1444 Duke St., Alexandria, VA 22314
>>
>> (202) 333-0008 ext. 232 <(202)%20333-0008>, wes.benedict at lp.org
>> facebook.com/libertarians @LPNational Join the Libertarian Party at:
>> http://lp.org/membership
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>>
>> 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
>
-- 
*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/20170509/8f6b78df/attachment-0002.html>