[Lnc-business] Vice-Chair

Fri May 19 04:10:08 EDT 2017

How much time are you doing researching *me?  *This is really really odd.

-Caryn Ann

On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 2:07 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Because he has, in his discretion, the right to determine his minimum
> bar.  I had the same group of delegates ask me- I told them that they
> should go their regional representative.  They didn't have one.  I referred
> them to Arvin.  There was, in the context of convention, and the proximity
> of the event, a perfectly justifiable reason to bring it at a meeting that
> was happening right then.  It was his discretion.  I think a regional
> representative would be perfectly justified in not setting any bar.  You
> really are stretching to attack me, and it is very odd.
>
> *Things happen not in isolation but in the totality of the circumstances.
> In those circumstances, he was perfectly justified.  There is also the
> added issue of those states being region-less.  They had little other
> direct representatives recourse.*
>
> I really wonder at your extreme interest in my reasoning and aggressive
> pursuit.
>
> -Caryn Ann
>
> On Fri, May 19, 2017 at 2:01 AM, Aaron Starr <starrcpa at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> From May 30, 2016 post-convention LNC minutes:
>>
>> “After citing a Facebook post made by Alicia Dearn about the reasons for
>> her actions concerning the Vice-Presidential nomination, Mr. Vohra moved to
>> rescind the nomination of William Weld as the Vice-Presidential nominee.”
>>
>>
>>
>> From September 16, 2016 email:
>>
>> “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.”
>>
>> […]
>>
>> “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
>>
>>
>>
>> Based on someone else’s Facebook post, you thought a “minimum bar” on a
>> subject “of such momentous import” was met for Arvin Vohra to put forward
>> his motion to remove our Vice Presidential nominee from the ticket. Why
>> should there be a higher standard for you to make a motion to remove Arvin
>> Vohra from the position of Vice Chair?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> 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:* Friday, May 19, 2017 12:18 AM
>>
>> *To:* Libertarian National Committee list
>> *Subject:* Re: [Lnc-business] Vice-Chair
>>
>>
>>
>> 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*
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20170519/9068ccec/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/20170519/9068ccec/attachment-0002.png>