[Lnc-business] Fwd: [Lnc-votes] protecting party assets

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

These seem to be clear cases of property siezure or fraud.  Unlike the
example given in the opening email.

This subject came up with great concern at the last LPCO meeting.  We have
"pre-affiliate" groups that are not chartered affiliates.  In each of our
60 unaffiliated counties - there is at least a shell group that is
Libertarian Party of [blank] county development group.  My concern in that
area had not to do with the name but with the state's laws concerning
political parties.

I can imagine siezure of assets is extraordinarily frustrating.

-Caryn Ann

On Thu, Aug 17, 2017 at 8:10 AM, Wes Benedict <wes.benedict at lp.org> wrote:

> I don't have time to deal with this before this weekend, but I'll just say
> that LPHQ and/or counsel has helped handle situations like this before and
> it's possible we could assist with this situation later.  I certainly
> understand how infuriating a situation like this can be. Many states have
> had problems over the years with a volunteer refusing to hand over control
> of websites or social media accounts that belonged to the party.
>
> 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.orgfacebook.com/libertarians @LPNational
> Join the Libertarian Party at: http://lp.org/membership
>
> On 8/17/2017 4:46 AM, Alicia Mattson wrote:
>
> Forwarding a request from a member of the CA affiliate leadership related
> to use of the party name.
>
>
> ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> From: Robert Imhoff <imhoffdousharm at gmail.com>
> Date: Tue, Aug 8, 2017 at 12:55 PM
> Subject: RE: [Lnc-votes] [Lnc-business] protecting party assets
> To: "Jeffrey.Hewitt at lp.org" <Jeffrey.Hewitt at lp.org>, "starrcpa at gmail.com"
> <starrcpa at gmail.com>
> Cc: "hmrobson at ca.lp.org" <hmrobson at ca.lp.org>, Jennifer Imhoff <
> jenniferrimhoff at gmail.com>, Ted Brown <tedbrown1776 at hotmail.com>,
> secretary at lp.org, Tyler Kuskie <tmkuskie at gmail.com>
>
>
> Jeff / Aaron,
>
> As the Region 4 representatives, I wanted to share with you some concerns
> the CA Libertarian Party is actually having with "Libertarian Party" use on
> public websites, and social media.
>
> The original thread that Alicia has started with the LNC seems to have
> diverged from what I think we should be talking about:  Actual misuse of
> the party name and brand, from rogue people.  I am hoping that we can
> actually use LNC bylaw article 5.1 for some sticky problems here locally in
> California.
>
> 1.) Twitter - We have had an official CA LP Twitter, that a person who was
> assigned to set up for the party, has gone rogue and will not release it to
> us, but uses "Libertarian Party" (https://twitter.com/californialp) Also
> another account with lots of followers: https://twitter.com/lpclive which
> we have no idea who controls.
>
> 2.) Reddit - We have another person who spun up a sub-reddit for the
> Libertarian Party of California (which is linked to by the official
> National LNC reddit), and he refuses to let CA party members become
> moderators. (https://www.reddit.com/r/CALibertarians/)
>
> 3.) Facebook - Again, the same person who controls our "Official" twitter
> above, also control many different Facebook pages and Groups which purport
> to be CA LP, though, one person who controls most of these stated his
> refusal to return these to the party for control, or shut them down.
> https://www.facebook.com/groups/LPCalifornia/
> https://www.facebook.com/Libertarian-Party-of-California-332441246138/
> https://www.facebook.com/groups/gj2012team/
> https://www.facebook.com/groups/LPCSoCal/
> https://www.facebook.com/groups/LPJeffCal/
> https://www.facebook.com/groups/234928289951578/
> https://www.facebook.com/groups/204640566235670/
>
> I would like to be advise on how our Social Media Committee, IT Committee,
> and Website Committee's (With representatives added in cc line) can be
> supported in doing their jobs, without these rogue social media accounts
> diverging potential members away from real social media assets.  I think
> that is the true spirit of what Bylaw Article 5.1 was set out to achieve.
>
> Can LNC support its affiliate in California and enforce Bylaw Article 5.1,
> with respect to all noted examples listed in this email?
>
> Warm Regards,
>
> Robert Imhoff
> California LIbertarian Party At-Large Executive
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing listLnc-business at hq.lp.orghttp://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>
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/20170817/1f004037/attachment-0002.html>