[Lnc-business] cosponsors requested to have staff manage social media

Sun May 28 09:05:47 EDT 2017

Of course not, but internal criticism should be internal and not posted
on public comment sites.  Or if it,  is the poster should not identify
him/herself as an official of the LP.

Sam

Sam Goldstein
Libertarian National Committee
Member at Large
8925 N Meridian St, Ste 101
Indianapolis IN 46260
317-850-0726 Phone
317-582-1773 Fax

On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 11:11 PM, Arvin Vohra <votevohra at gmail.com> wrote:

> What on earth? Are we suggesting that only staff should be able to
> comment?? Or that now internal criticism is no longer allowed?
>
> I
>
> On May 27, 2017 9:02 PM, "Sam Goldstein" <goldsteinatlarge at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> This is outrageous and would join Mr. Starr in requesting that Mr. Barton
>> immediately be
>> dismissed from any role in our social media platform.  Mr. Starr has a
>> long history of
>> service to the party, and while some members many not agree with his
>> stances or methods,
>> I don't think anyone on the current or past LNCs would refer to him as a
>> Republican.
>>
>>
>>
>> Sam Goldstein
>> Libertarian National Committee
>> Member at Large
>> 8925 N Meridian St, Ste 101
>> Indianapolis IN 46260
>> 317-850-0726 <(317)%20850-0726> Phone
>> 317-582-1773 <(317)%20582-1773> Fax
>>
>> On Sat, May 27, 2017 at 7:40 PM, Aaron Starr <starrcpa at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Colleagues,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> While we are on the subject, earlier this week our staff posted this
>>> television news video clip on Facebook as an example of earned media by a
>>> candidate opposing a sewer tax increase and spearheading a recall effort
>>> against those elected officials who voted for that increase (
>>> https://www.lp.org/california-libertarian-interviewed-local
>>> -television-water-rate-increases/).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Please examine these screen shots (cropped to show only relevant
>>> portions). Note this comment:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> “Starr is a Republican pretending to be a Libertarian. Why he hangs out
>>> in the LP instead of just being a Republican (or joining the Constitution
>>> Party) is beyond me. This is a dude who regularly tries to use soft bribes
>>> to get his way in the party. Please, LP members of his region, vote this
>>> guy out. We don’t need him and folks like him. Not at all.”
>>>
>>> -Josh Barton, Social Media Volunteer at Libertarian Party
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I don’t believe I have ever met Josh Barton. When I hover over his name
>>> with my mouse I see that his Facebook profile states he is one of our
>>> party’s social media volunteers.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> It’s one thing to disagree with someone over public policy (perhaps Mr.
>>> Barton favors the Oxnard City Council’s sewer tax increase); it’s quite
>>> another to lash out with this personal attack.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I understand we get some negative feedback from the public, but should
>>> we tolerate that from those who are part of the organizational structure?
>>> Who here believes that it is appropriate for someone touting himself as a
>>> social media volunteer for the party to be posting something like this on
>>> our Facebook page as a representative of the Party?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Our staff would never post a comment such as this. They are accountable
>>> to the LNC and have a stake in our organization’s overall success, which
>>> makes them largely above the factionalism and personality conflicts we
>>> witness with some volunteers.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> When you agree to wear the party hat, you’ve agreed to a certain
>>> fiduciary duty to the organization.
>>>
>>> If I were the National Chair, I would without hesitation order the
>>> deletion of such an offensive comment and (absent a sincere public apology)
>>> would likely fire any volunteer (or member of staff) who wrote anything on
>>> our Facebook page like this about any of our candidates or board members.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> 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 *Sam Goldstein
>>> *Sent:* Friday, May 26, 2017 7:03 PM
>>> *To:* lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>> *Subject:* Re: [Lnc-business] cosponsors requested to have staff manage
>>> social media
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Alicia,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yes, my concern is that the LNC needs a supervisory presence on social
>>> media beyond the limited ability of
>>>
>>> the APRC.  Ultimately, it is the LNC, not staff, that is responsible to
>>> the members and delegates in convention
>>>
>>> for the public image of the party.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sam
>>>
>>>
>>> Sam Goldstein
>>>
>>> Libertarian National Committee
>>>
>>> Member at Large
>>>
>>> 8925 N Meridian St, Ste 101
>>>
>>> Indianapolis IN 46260
>>>
>>> 317-850-0726 <(317)%20850-0726> Phone
>>>
>>> 317-582-1773 <(317)%20582-1773> Fax
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 26, 2017 at 9:48 PM, Alicia Mattson <agmattson at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Sam,
>>>
>>> So is your desire to just have LNC members/alternates in a supervisory
>>> role, or in the role of posting public comment?  If it's just a supervisory
>>> role, I don't think it should be our job to do that, but I'm okay with
>>> allowing such access to the page.  But I'm not sure I want LNC
>>> members/alternates making the postings instead of staff.  If a 4th
>>> co-sponsor was interested with some tweaks, we could hash out some
>>> alternate language.
>>>
>>> -Alicia
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -Alicia
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 6:00 AM, Sam Goldstein <
>>> goldsteinatlarge at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Alicia,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Would you consider adding "members and alternates"  to your motion
>>> following "LNC"?  If so I will
>>>
>>> co-sponsor.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Sam Goldstein
>>>
>>> Libertarian National Committee
>>>
>>> Member at Large
>>>
>>> 8925 N Meridian St, Ste 101
>>>
>>> Indianapolis IN 46260
>>>
>>> 317-850-0726 <(317)%20850-0726> Phone
>>>
>>> 317-582-1773 <(317)%20582-1773> Fax
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, May 25, 2017 at 8:38 AM, Alicia Mattson <agmattson at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I'm asking for co-sponsors for a motion to insert a new Policy Manual
>>> Section 2.06.5 Social Media to read as follows:
>>>
>>> Only LNC employees and contractors shall serve as administrators of,
>>> serve as moderators of, or post content to, the Party’s social media
>>> accounts. Volunteer content creators may submit content for approval.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> At the LNC meeting there was majority support for the motion to both do
>>> the above and also to create a committee to review our social media
>>> processes.  I could have supported it, but if we know what we need to do to
>>> fix the problem, why spend the time to have a committee study it first?
>>> Just fix it.  I thought there was majority support for the other motion to
>>> simply turn control of our social media back over to staff.  Turns out that
>>> I was mistaken, and one person was not willing to turn control back over to
>>> staff without the creation of the committee, so then the other motion
>>> failed.  Because I misread the room, an option that actually had majority
>>> support didn't pass.
>>>
>>> Now that we have separately created the committee, I want to go back and
>>> re-visit turning control back over to our staff.
>>>
>>> Please note that the motion welcomes volunteers to submit material.  It
>>> does not eliminate their opportunity to contribute.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I want to add some details to the discussion we had in Pittsburgh, with
>>> two Facebook PR blow-ups on our minds at the time.
>>>
>>> Since Pittsburgh, we have had yet another PR disaster.  Granted it was
>>> not on our official FB page, but on the personal page it was posted to, the
>>> person's party position was touted right there in the sidebar, and we took
>>> a lot of damage from it.  The Convention Oversight Committee lost two very
>>> valuable volunteers over this latest disaster -- volunteers who did a lot
>>> of work for us in Orlando and were again helping for New Orleans.  Gone.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> There are no group votes before volunteers post on the party's FB.  One
>>> person puts it into the schedule, and unless someone else sees it and
>>> objects, it goes public.  We publish so much material that the APRC doesn't
>>> always have time to review everything in advance.  Though the group has an
>>> informal rule against people posting their own material, people sometimes
>>> do it anyway.  The comments about the military could easily have been
>>> posted on our page.
>>>
>>> There was a very recent incident in which a new volunteer was driven to
>>> quit on the same day she joined for the crime of suggesting that we post
>>> more positive material and less negative material.  I don't want to hear
>>> that the LNC giving final control to staff is somehow disrespecting the
>>> work of the volunteers, when that new volunteer's desire to contribute was
>>> so summarily disrespected.
>>>
>>> We have some important policies that I don't believe the volunteers have
>>> even been informed about, and volunteers are not really accountable for
>>> following policies in the same way that our staff is.
>>>
>>> Policy Manual Section 2.09.6:
>>>
>>> Party resources shall not be used to provide information or services for
>>> any candidate for party office unless:
>>>
>>>    - such information or services are available and announced on an
>>>       equal basis to all Libertarians who have declared they are seeking that
>>>       office, or
>>>       - such information or services are generally available and
>>>       announced to all party member
>>>
>>> Not all party members have access to post on our Facebook page.  Not all
>>> candidates for internal party office are offered the chance to post on our
>>> Facebook page.
>>>
>>> I think some of our Facebook posts cross the line into personal
>>> promotion of people who intend to run for internal party office at the next
>>> convention.
>>>
>>> There was a time in the past when staff established criteria to try to
>>> manage application of this policy, with criteria for what constituted
>>> "news" or "earned media" that involved a candidate, etc.  I don't believe
>>> there is any such attention to his policy right now for our social media.
>>> Some candidates have already declared.  The closer we get to a national
>>> convention, the more these posts will be perceived as self-promotion that
>>> unfairly isn't available to their opponents.
>>>
>>> So I'm asking for co-sponsors for this motion, to return final decision
>>> power to our staff, who are expected to know and follow our policies, and
>>> who are accountable to the LNC.  The volunteer groups can continue to
>>> generate material just like they do now, but staff would schedule the
>>> actual posts.
>>>
>>> If the Social Media Process Review Committee comes back to us with
>>> suggestions for reasonable ways to manage this later, we can amend this
>>> policy.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -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
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> 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
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20170528/375d89e6/attachment-0002.html>