[Lnc-business] Vice-Chair

Fri May 19 03:41:27 EDT 2017

And an email to a member.  Hyper-literal stretching does not reflect on
me.  If someone brought a motion to resolve that lizard men control the
earth, I would not co-sponsor automatically.  If someone brought a motion
to disaffiliate Florida (as was suggested on Facebook during another
controversy) I would not co-sponsor automatically.  This is how reasonable
interpretation of language works, and I have been clear on that both here
and in my communications to my region.

On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 1:26 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com>
wrote:

> From emails to my State Chairs when there was a suggestion of a Motion to
> Censure Weld:
>
> Notice: some indicia of member support.
>
> Notice: "nearly" any motion
>
> Meaning there might be some so outlandish or so momentous that an
> automatic co-sponsorship is not a given but almost always is a given.
> There can be some minimum bars of support depending upon the gravity of the
> motion.
>
> Is this what we have turned into?  Biting and attacking the procedure of
> another region when I was attempting to explain my procedure?  Truly amazed.
>
> Deeply, deeply disappointed in this tack Aaron.  My first reaction was to
> co-sponsor as I do believe motions deserve hearings.  But then I am
> answerable to my State Chairs, and decided that was a reasonable minimum
> bar of support.
>
> I await the direction of my state chairs.
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 1:17 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
> carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Yes indeed.  I find it funny that you would seek to discredit me.
>>
>> *And yes, I do think Regional Representatives (I think differently of
>> Officers) DO have an obligation to bring forth motions asked by members
>> (there can be some minimum bars) even if they do not support it.  I will
>> ALWAYS follow that rule and it was a promise I made to my region, and they
>> elected me on it.*
>>
>> *Do you see "there can be some minimum bars"?  In this case, a majority
>> of my State Chairs.  If I got a letter from majority of 2016 delegates I
>> would do so as well.*
>>
>> *I believe that motions should be heard.  If I didn't think this was of
>> such momentous import, such as disaffiliating an affiliate, I would
>> sponsor.  I have done this numerous times.  I have already emailed my State
>> Chairs.*
>>
>> *This is pretty low Aaron.*
>>
>> *-Caryn Ann*
>>
>> On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 1:10 AM, Aaron Starr <starrcpa at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> From the historical email archives (emphasis added):
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> “If the LNC took the time to meet, debate, and vote on every idea that
>>> some member somewhere has, we'd be meeting every day.  I do not think LNC
>>> members are obligated to put forward a motion that they don't even support
>>> just because one person asked them to.  I think part of the job of being on
>>> the LNC is understanding what things are or are not productive uses of our
>>> time.  It's not just about the time of the person putting forth the motion,
>>> but it is the time of 16 other LNC members, plus 8 alternates, and
>>> potentially some staff.  Sometimes it is our job to thank the person for
>>> the suggestion but politely reject an idea brought to us.”
>>>
>>> --Alicia Mattson (September 16, 2016)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> “Alicia, I strongly, but respectfully, disagree.  The number of members
>>> who actually try to get something heard is infrequent.  If there were a
>>> deluge, you would have a point, and then I would encourage stricter minimum
>>> standards to be in place but there isn’t.   *And yes, I do think
>>> Regional Representatives (I think differently of Officers) DO have an
>>> obligation to bring forth motions asked by members (there can be some
>>> minimum bars) even if they do not support it.  I will ALWAYS follow that
>>> rule and it was a promise I made to my region, and they elected me on it.*
>>> If it got to be so much that this was even a concern on time, I would set
>>> stricter bars.  But each motion I have brought has had merit, and I
>>> supported each one […] Just like Arvin was perfectly justified in bringing
>>> that motion to disqualify Weld at the post-convention LNC meeting though he
>>> didn’t support it.”
>>>
>>> --Caryn Ann Harlos (September 16, 2016)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> “If a majority of Region 1 Chairs asked me to sponsor, I would do so.
>>> That doesn't mean I would vote for it. In order for me to consider voting
>>> for it (and it is just a consideration because I have deep reservations
>>> about over-reach and future unintended victims of LNC over-reach), I would
>>> do what I believe a representative should do.  I would ask the Chairs and
>>> the delegates of Region 1 who elected Mr. Vohra.  I don't take overturning
>>> the decision of the delegates to be my job or purview, at least not my sole
>>> job or purview.  And there simply is not enough time in an email vote to do
>>> such a canvas, thus leading to an express abstention if this proceeds to
>>> email vote.  I want to hear from the delegates, and I would need to hear
>>> from them in substantial support and that simply does not happen in 10
>>> days. *This is not ad hoc for this.  This has been my consistent
>>> position on all positions of import such as this, I have older emails on
>>> those past issues where I followed the same process.*  It requires 2/3
>>> vote of the entire LNC to pass.  I think it would be impossible to even
>>> reach all of the delegates from 2016 from Region 1 - people moving etc., so
>>> I would require a 2/3 approval of responding delegates.”
>>>
>>> --Caryn Ann Harlos (May 18, 2017)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Aaron Starr
>>>
>>> (805) 583-3308 Home
>>>
>>> (805) 404-8693 Mobile
>>>
>>> starrcpa at gmail.com
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *From:* Lnc-business [mailto:lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org] *On Behalf
>>> Of *Caryn Ann Harlos
>>> *Sent:* Thursday, May 18, 2017 10:52 PM
>>> *To:* Libertarian National Committee list
>>> *Subject:* Re: [Lnc-business] Vice-Chair
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you for your input Steve.  On difficult decisions of great import,
>>> my position remains the same as it did back when people were urging me to
>>> disqualify our Presidential ticket or to censure Bill Weld.  As a
>>> representative, there are some decisions that are referred to the persons
>>> who directly elected me and directly elected Mr. Vohra.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> If a majority of Region 1 Chairs asked me to sponsor, I would do so.
>>> That doesn't mean I would vote for it. In order for me to consider voting
>>> for it (and it is just a consideration because I have deep reservations
>>> about over-reach and future unintended victims of LNC over-reach), I would
>>> do what I believe a *representative* should do.  I would ask the Chairs
>>> and the delegates of Region 1 who elected Mr. Vohra.  I don't take
>>> overturning the decision of the delegates to be my job or purview, at least
>>> not my sole job or purview.  And there simply is not enough time in an
>>> email vote to do such a canvas, thus leading to an express abstention if
>>> this proceeds to email vote.  I want to hear from the delegates, and I
>>> would need to hear from them in substantial support and that simply does
>>> not happen in 10 days.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This is not ad hoc for this.  This has been my consistent position on
>>> all positions of import such as this, I have older emails on those past
>>> issues where I followed the same process.  It requires 2/3 vote of the
>>> entire LNC to pass.  I think it would be impossible to even reach all of
>>> the delegates from 2016 from Region 1 - people moving etc., so I would
>>> require a 2/3 approval of responding delegates.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This is what I believe is the right way to handle and is in line with
>>> how I have handled my representation in the past.  However, 10 days is not
>>> enough time for me to do my duty, and I think an email vote is way too
>>> trivial to the gravity of this motion.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -Caryn Ann
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 18, 2017 at 11:15 PM, Steven Nielson <stevennielson at lpwa.org>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Distinguished Leaders of the LNC -
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I had originally voiced my opposition to a motion for removal, however
>>> strongly encouraged action by our Chairman to address the comments made by
>>> our Vice Chairman. Since that time there have been, as Mr. Sharpe noted,
>>> several further communications that have caused concern with my original
>>> position. The circumstances have since changed and as such my position of
>>> general neutrality has also changed.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Mr. Vohra holds a position of great influence when it comes to perceived
>>> positions of the national party. What he does while in this position, both
>>> "on the clock" or off, directly impact perception. It is a reality that
>>> every single one of us who hold a position of influence must face.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This body has an opportunity before it, nay an obligation before it to
>>> take an official position on such actions of those who hold the highest
>>> positions of influence within our ranks.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I am merely an alternate to Ms. Harlos, and as such I am not eligible to
>>> second the motion made by Representative McKnight. However, I strongly
>>> encourage a second and a vote by this body, and by doing so either support
>>> or oppose both the statements made and the subsequent actions taken by our
>>> Vice-Chairman.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> In Liberty,
>>>
>>> Steven M. Nielson
>>>
>>> Alternate Regional Rep. Region 1
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On May 18, 2017 9:37 PM, "Patrick McKnight" <
>>> patrick.joseph.mcknight at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I totally agree with Larry. For me the lack of remorse is astounding. I
>>> personally sent Arvin an email about this and received no response. We
>>> can't grow by making offensive generalizations and calling people names.
>>> This is unacceptable behavior.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Therefore I must, with a heavy heart, make a motion to remove Arvin
>>> Vohra from his position as Vice Chair under Article 6, Section 7 of our
>>> Bylaws. Who will second this motion?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Patrick McKnight
>>>
>>> Region 8 Rep
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On May 18, 2017 10:12 PM, "Larry Sharpe" <lsharpe at neo-sage.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Dear LNC,
>>>
>>> The idea that we as the LNC should do nothing as a committee regarding
>>> Arvin Vohra's comments is alarming to me.
>>>
>>> If a Board Member or member of the Executive Team at Pepsi ever said
>>> anything negative about Pepsi customers publicly he/she would be relieved
>>> immediately, regardless of whether they were on the clock, off the clock,
>>> on Facebook, in a crowd or announced that is was only their PERSONAL
>>> opinion that "X" group of people are bad. This would happen even after an
>>> apology. If you choose to take on a public role, there WILL be constraints
>>> on your private life. If you don't like that, you shouldn't take on this
>>> role. The LNC is NEVER off. Our words will always be used to hurt the cause
>>> whenever possible. I have been an officer of a public company and I was
>>> never "off". I could never publicly say disparaging things about our
>>> customers. That's the price I agreed to pay to take that position. Ours is
>>> no different.
>>>
>>> What if the comments were about divorced women? Or were race related?
>>> Would we just say, "Oh well, that's his personal opinion? Yeah, I know he's
>>> a racist, but you know, what are you gonna do, right?" I hope not, because
>>> no other organization, private, public, profit or nonprofit would stand for
>>> it, and neither should we.
>>>
>>> Arvin blatantly insulted veterans. That is about 20 million voters and
>>> their supporters (maybe another 25 -50 million?).
>>>
>>> After multiple lengthy notes explaining why he was right, he finally
>>> provided a weak "I'm sorry that you are so sensitive" apology hidden in
>>> another self-righteous diatribe. There is still no real apology for the
>>> actual insult. Then he went on to insult teachers, another 3 million
>>> voters!  Then he went on to call our candidates tricksters and lairs.
>>> Obviously, he doesn't feel like he's done anything wrong and he has no
>>> intention of stopping.
>>>
>>> He has poor judgement, no remorse and a severe lack of empathy. He is
>>> making it harder for us to grow, that's one of our primary goals, and he's
>>> not stopping.
>>>
>>> Because of his actions, it is harder for us to get volunteers,
>>> donations, members and candidates! And the volunteers and candidates that
>>> we have must spend more time doing damage control instead of being
>>> productive with the precious time they give us.
>>>
>>> Everyday the damage continues and the pain festers. And some of you want
>>> to wait until 2018!? No waiting until 2018. We must lead and we must handle
>>> our own. We need to act now.
>>>
>>> As soon as we start consistently winning at the State level and become a
>>> threat, our enemies will comb through our data and use this against us.
>>> What story will we tell?
>>>
>>> "Yes, he called our veterans murderers and we did nothing about."
>>>
>>> They will hear that we agree with him:
>>>
>>>    - Our veterans are murders
>>>    - Our teachers are enemies
>>>    - Our candidates are liars and trickster
>>>
>>> It is what voters will think and that is what matters for a political
>>> party. That will come back to haunt and crush us once we have several
>>> candidates that are about to win.
>>>
>>> Or we can say:
>>>
>>> "Yes, he called our veterans murderers and we acted quickly and
>>> decisively. We do NOT agree with that, and that's why we acted."
>>>
>>> He has every right to his voice and opinion, just not publicly while he
>>> represents the LP.
>>>
>>> This is not about disagreeing on an issue or platform point. It is about
>>> insulting millions of voters and purposely, actively, continually hurting
>>> our efforts to grow and win which is in direct violation of article 2 of
>>> our bylaws.
>>>
>>> I am a huge proponent of second chances, but he has had many and refuses
>>> to adjust his behavior.
>>>
>>> Any officer in any organization, public or private, profit or non-profit
>>> who created and continues to create this much damage would be removed. So
>>> should he.
>>>
>>> Those of you who know me know that I rarely stand my ground on an LNC
>>> issue. I usually say my opinion, respect the answer, do damage control as
>>> needed and then continue my work. Not this time. For my brothers and
>>> sisters who were called immoral murders here, I will not fall back.
>>>
>>> I initially was going to ask for a motion to officially ask Arvin to
>>> apologize, or maybe for a censure. But that time has passed. Because I am
>>> an Alternate, I cannot propose a motion, so I request for any At-Large LNC
>>> member or my Regional Rep, Patrick McKnight, to propose a motion to remove
>>> Arvin Vohra from his position as Vice-Chair under Article 6, section 7 of
>>> our Bylaws.
>>>
>>> Let him fight for liberty outside of LP leadership.
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>> Larry
>>>
>>> *Larry Sharpe*
>>>
>>> *The Neo-Sage Group, Inc.*
>>>
>>> http://TheNeoSage.com/ <http://theneosage.com/>
>>>
>>> https://www.youtube.com/user/TheNeoSage
>>>
>>> http://www.linkedin.com/in/neosage
>>>
>>> *https://www.facebook.com/neosage <https://www.facebook.com/neosage>*
>>>
>>> *212-307-3545 <212-307-3545>*
>>>
>>>   *Instructing – Advancing – Inspiring*
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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*
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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/20170519/4ce4d90f/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/20170519/4ce4d90f/attachment-0004.png>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Screen Shot 2017-05-19 at 1.33.40 AM copy.png
Type: image/png
Size: 126675 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20170519/4ce4d90f/attachment-0005.png>