[Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2018-12: INDEPENDENT AUDIT OF AT-LARGE VOTE RESULTS

Richard Longstreth richard.longstreth at lp.org
Wed Jul 25 10:21:16 EDT 2018


Alicia, stop playing a victim. I admit I skimmed most of your message, but
I have to destroy your perceived bias based on one line.

You said

"When I noted your call for recount wasn’t in both elections..."

CAH didn't call for an audit. I did and I called for auditing both. Unless
you think Caryn Ann somehow controls my independent actions and calls from
my Regional Caucus you are not remembering the past correctly at all.

And yes, at Large was a bigger concern to me initially because of the one
vote margin so I only called for an audit there initially. After a few
days, I also introduced auditing the second election as well, something you
could have easily done previously if you thought a bias was in play.

Honestly, I don't know what the source of the conflict is for you two, but
Alicia, I'm consistently seeing a woe is me attitude from you and regular
attacks on Caryn Ann and it needs to stop. CAH isn't innocent either. We
all need to act like the professional leaders of the party we were elected
to be.

Nobody wants to read blocks of accusations or attacks any more. While we
all have the freedom to post and share as we please, I'd urge all of the
LNC to take pause before sending something like Alicia's message to the
public via this email list.

Richard

On Wed, Jul 25, 2018, 07:29 Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <
lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:

>    Skimmed and skipped.
>    Not going to that dance Alicia.  Continue solo if you wish.
>    -Caryn Ann
>
>    On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 5:20 AM, Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business
>    <[1]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>
>         Caryn Ann,
>         I see we have again reached the play-the-victim portion of the
>      script.
>         How rude of me to defend my actual words when they are being
>         misrepresented.  Defense is now accused of being aggression and
>         hostility.
>         When I initially pointed out that it was unfair representation to
>      say I
>         would be supervising the audit, your first reaction was the
>         not-me-and-I-didn't-want-to-do-it bit.  Later you expressed that
>      you do
>         actually agree with the mischaracterization, even after I pointed
>      out
>         it’s not what I said.  You projected your complaints about the
>      first
>         tally onto a future audit by others.  You continued to
>      re-characterize
>         my proposal that I, "sit in a corner and work on something else
>      while
>         they do their task" as "being involved", which sounds like
>      something
>         different.
>         I see Wayne Harlos' signature on the Colorado tally sheet in the
>         Secretary's race.  I see Dr. Buchman's signature on the Utah
>      tally
>         sheet in this At-Large race in which he was a candidate.   After
>         telling everyone else that EVH noticed that they had also
>      committed
>         lapses of judgment, you're now suggesting that I'm so toxic that
>      I
>         cannot even sit in the corner of the room, lest my presence
>      hypnotize
>         Nick's chosen independent auditors into failing to do their job,
>      but
>         you would be happy to be present instead, as if you were some
>      kind of
>         non-partisan here.
>         Don't forget that you were a nominator for Dr. Buchman. I presume
>      him
>         to be the candidate about whom you have publicly described as
>      having
>         been "screwed by this whole process", in the next breath calling
>      it a
>         "suspect election".  You didn’t say all candidates were screwed
>      by the
>         process, just one particular candidate, as though he was entitled
>      to
>         win but he didn’t.  That told me you were unhappy with the
>      result.
>         When I noted your call for recount wasn’t in both elections that
>      I
>         tabulated in which I was a candidate, only the one where you had
>         already expressed displeasure with the result, out came the
>      victim
>         card.  You said I was attacking you, and ridiculously accused me
>      of
>         using a "shaming and silencing tactic", though 1 out of every 3
>      emails
>         to this list is from you.
>         While I was spending many hours assembling more-than-requested
>         information, and giving you updates on my progress, I was accused
>      of
>         "ignoring" the situation.  When you singled out Aaron with no
>      mention
>         of the others, we got the drama of, “I think the optic of this
>      make
>         Arvin's comments look like the height of civility.”  Really?
>      Worse
>         than a guy saying school board shootings are a good idea?  Worse
>      than
>         Arvin’s philosophies about 14-year-old girls?
>         You're not exactly a neutral party in this matter, and yet you
>      think
>         it's fine for you to be present for the next audit, but somehow
>      it’s a
>         “huge mis-step in judgment” for me to even sit in a corner and do
>         something else while others do the audit.
>         The comments you posted here about Aaron’s role also do not
>      accurately
>         portray the situation.  I realize you haven’t had to actually do
>      the
>         job yet, so you haven’t experienced that time pressure to get the
>      data
>         assembled and announced.  It feels like installing a roof during
>      a
>         hurricane.
>         I have manually tallied three conventions, including our two
>      largest,
>         with an unusually large number of candidates this year.  The 2018
>         At-Large race had 604 delegates voting for a whopping 36
>      options.  (In
>         2016, only 418 delegates voted for 20 At-Large options.)
>         This year, while the tellers were still trying to double-check
>      the
>         At-Large tally sheets, we had to pause and distribute and collect
>      the
>         ballots on which 501 delegates voted for 22 Judicial Committee
>         candidates.  I was running out of At-Large data to enter because
>      the
>         tellers were spread too thin by the overlapping elections.
>         To keep the process from completely stalling, and have a higher
>      chance
>         of getting results before adjournment, I pulled Aaron in to
>      assist,
>         plus a couple of more tellers.  Aaron is a former auditor, and
>      his
>         brain is wired to find anomalies in a system.  I knew he would do
>      the
>         job well, cleanly, and help train the other newcomers so we could
>      keep
>         the At-Large process moving.  And he did.
>         Aaron worked with a partner.  When they checked California’s
>         submission, right off the bat they realized that the number of
>      votes
>         written on the ballots was one more than the total on the tally
>      sheet.
>         When they realized the discrepancy impacted my vote total, Aaron
>         stepped back and asked two other tellers to verify it and have
>      them –
>         not him – make the change to the tally sheet and sign it.  Aaron
>      also
>         insisted that several others present witness a recount of the
>         California ballots that had my name on it.
>         At that point NOBODY knew how close the race was going to
>      ultimately
>         be.  I was only partially through data entry.  Perhaps people
>      imagine
>         that I’m up there looking at the totals every few seconds so that
>      I
>         constantly know where it stands, but the push to get the job done
>      ASAP
>         means that all I can afford to think about is keeping the data
>      entry
>         moving and watching for any anomalies.  Another teller was beside
>      me
>         for the duration of the data entry.
>         Regarding the “rumor” as you called it, I suspect someone just
>      wasn't
>         precise in their choice of words.  It would require a time
>      machine for
>         the situation to have been, “…the vote for the last seat was a
>      tie
>         until Mr. Starr found an additional vote for Ms. Mattson in CA.”
>      That
>         phrasing could give the reader the impression that all the data
>      entry
>         was done, we knew it was a tie, and we went searching for a way
>      to
>         break the tie.  That didn’t happen.  Many people were standing
>      around
>         waiting for the data entry to be complete, and snapshots of my
>      screen
>         were taken within a few seconds of data entry being completed and
>         sorted into a ranking order to see just how close it was.
>         Had Aaron and his fellow teller not noticed that the California
>      ballots
>         contained one more vote than was on the tally sheet, when the
>      data
>         entry was LATER completed, the initially-reported results would
>      have
>         mistakenly been reported as a tie, and it would have been REALLY
>         awkward had this fact gone unnoticed until post-convention.
>      Instead,
>         it was noticed in the presence of, and was verified and corrected
>      by,
>         other tellers before the initially-reported results.
>         For most of a decade, I have been saying that we should move to
>         electronic voting.  The delegates have previously rejected it,
>      leaving
>         me with no choice but to do my best to try to catch and fix the
>      errors
>         before the initial results.  I have been pointing out how
>         error-susceptible our human-tallying elections are.  I have been
>         educating about how difficult it is to get exact results with the
>      time
>         pressures, multi-tasking, noise levels, disruption levels, etc.
>      that
>         are experienced during the convention.  I have argued against the
>         convention conducting other business during the votes because it
>      makes
>         it harder to get the really important tallying job done.
>         I wrote the proposal which became Convention Rule 10, adopted by
>         delegates to require tellers to double-check the state tallies,
>      and to
>         require the on-screen review of the tally spreadsheet (previously
>      that
>         step was often skipped just to save time).  Though it still
>      doesn’t fix
>         everything, those things do increase the number of errors we
>      catch
>         onsite before the results are displayed.
>         For me to now be portrayed with such inflammatory rhetoric as
>      someone
>         who ran a “suspect election”, as someone making the party look
>      worse
>         than Arvin Vohra did, and now to have you taint the perception of
>      the
>         future audit with misrepresentations of my words…well, that’s
>      just a
>         special experience.  I do not deserve that.
>         -Alicia
>         On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 4:05 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos
>         <[1][2]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:
>         Alicia, I am not going to engage the aggression here.  Your
>      comment is
>         completely out of bounds on multiple levels and I ask that you
>      stop the
>         personal hostility.  But you are free to make it, and I shall
>      decline
>         to engage further.  All those allegedly are a smooth way to try
>      to call
>         me a liar.
>         I do respect you for all the reason I said in the past
>      (intelligence,
>         skill-set, competence).  I do think being involved in this count
>      at all
>         both past and present is a huge mis-step in judgment. And I also
>      think
>         - and communicated to the persons that EVH pointed out - that
>         delegation chairs similarly situated demonstrated a mis-step in
>         judgment as well.  And I do think you should step out of this
>      entire
>         process entirely.
>         PS: I don't think the member was entirely incorrect so I would
>      not say
>         that to them.  The reason I was reluctant to share it is
>      precisely
>         because of this.  It seems you want to keep making things
>      personal
>         between you and me.  They are not.  A political race is not
>      personal.
>         I never got personal with you or about you in my campaign, and I
>      don't
>         intend to start now.
>         -Caryn Ann
>         On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 4:35 PM, Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business
>         <[2][3]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>              Caryn Ann,
>              When you received this feedback from the anonymous member,
>      you
>           had the
>              opportunity to tell them, "That's not what she said.  Go
>      back and
>           read
>              her post again."  Instead you repeated the
>      misrepresentation,
>           with all
>              its implications, here on a public list to give it a broad
>           audience.
>              For someone who allegedly is not attacking me, and allegedly
>      has
>              respect for me, and allegedly "did not even want to pass
>      along",
>           ya
>              just flopped it right out there...  Don't pretend that you
>      had an
>              obligation to do it.  You're not fooling anyone with this
>      game.
>              -Alicia
>              On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 3:59 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos
>              <[1][3][4]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:
>              Alicia I am passing along directly what the member said.
>      That
>           member
>              reads the list and can decide if they think they were being
>           unfair.  I
>              did not solicit this feedback and did not even want to pass
>      along
>           but
>              it is member feedback.
>              -Caryn Ann
>              On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 12:35 AM, Alicia Mattson via
>      Lnc-business
>              <[2][4][5]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>                   CAH> A concerned member (no permission to share name)
>      wrote
>           me
>                and
>                   inquired if any audit should be supervised by a
>      candidate.
>                   Seriously?  Do you think that's a fair way to portray
>      what I
>                proposed?
>                   What I actually said was, "I can sit in a corner and
>      work on
>                something
>                   else while they do their task, but if at some point
>      their
>           number
>                   doesn't match mine, we can all take a look at it right
>      then
>                without
>                   going back and forth via email."
>                   I also said to Nick, "Phoenix is within that zone, and
>      you
>           could
>                   personally supervise if you wish."
>                   I suggested that I sit in a corner, and I invited Nick
>      to
>                supervise.
>                   -Alicia
>                   On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 2:26 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos
>                   <[1][3][5][6]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:
>                   A concerned member (no permission to share name) wrote
>      me
>           and
>                inquired
>                   if any audit should be supervised by a candidate.
>                   Since I agree with Alicia that the actual ballots are a
>           better
>                   solution, if the Chair wishes it, I can make myself
>           available as
>                the
>                   current Secretary to be personally present at any
>      audit.
>                   I can then confer with Alicia about any issues found.
>                   -Caryn Ann
>                   On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 2:59 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos
>                   <[2][4][6][7]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:
>                   I will make those two changes thank you Alicia.
>                   On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 5:51 PM Alicia Mattson via
>           Lnc-business
>
>             <[3][5][7][8]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>                  Sorry for needing to send one more email on this subject,
>               however, it
>                  has occurred to me that if the start/end dates in the
>          Secretary's
>                  report are listed as 07/12/18 to 07/19/18, then the
>    footnote
>          that
>               I
>                  wrote will make me sound like a person who can't subtract
>    12
>          from
>               19.
>                  I should have written the footnote to be more specific as
>               follows:
>                  * Since the published vote period of 11:53 p.m. Pacific
>    on
>               07/11/18 to
>                  11:59:59 p.m. Pacific on 07/19/18 resulted in a voting
>       period
>               which
>                  exceeded 8 days, Ms. Mattson had expressed a belief that
>    the
>          end
>               date
>                  should be changed from 7/19/18 to 7/18/18.  During this
>       final
>          day
>               of
>                  voting which is disputed, Mr. Redpath changed his vote
>    from
>          "no"
>               to
>                  "yes".  These reported results reflect the changed vote
>       during
>               the
>                  disputed time period, but the outcome of the vote is not
>          impacted
>               by
>                  the question of how to report this one vote.
>                  -Alicia
>                  On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 1:55 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos
>
>                        <[1][4][6][8][9]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:
>                        I added that note to the tally sheet and will
>      include
>           that
>                in my
>                        Secretary's Report.
>                        -Caryn Ann
>                        On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 2:44 PM, Alicia Mattson
>      via
>                Lnc-business
>
>                  <[2][5][7][9][10]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>                       Since these results include a vote change during the
>       final
>               day, I
>                    do
>                       think these results need to be footnoted as follows:
>                       * Since the published ending time of the ballot
>       resulted
>          in
>               a
>                    voting
>                       period which exceeded 8 days, Ms. Mattson had
>    expressed
>       a
>               belief
>                    that
>                       the end date should be changed from 7/19/18 to
>    7/18/18.
>               During
>                    this
>                       final day of voting which is disputed, Mr. Redpath
>       changed
>               his
>                    vote
>                       from "no" to "yes".  These reported results reflect
>    the
>               changed
>                    vote
>                       during the disputed time period, but the outcome of
>    the
>          vote
>               is
>                    not
>                       impacted by the question of how to report this one
>       vote.
>                       If they're footnoted, given that it doesn't impact
>    the
>               result, I
>                    won't
>                       feel a need to raise a point of order about the
>       reported
>               results
>                    and
>                       ask the LNC to make a decision on how to report that
>       vote
>               change.
>                       -Alicia
>                       On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 12:18 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos
>    via
>                    Lnc-business
>
>                           <[1][3][6][8][10][11]lnc-business at hq.lp.org>
>    wrote:
>                                Voting has ENDED for the email ballot TITLE
>         Voting
>                   "aye":
>                        Bilyeu,
>                                Hagan, Harlos, Hewitt, Longstreth, Lyons,
>         Mattson,
>                   Merced,
>                             Phillips,
>                                Redpath, Smith Voting "nay":
>    Bishop-Henchman,
>                   Goldstein, Van
>                        Horn
>                                Express Abstention: Lark, Nekhaila With a
>         final
>              vote
>                   tally
>                        of
>                             11-3-2,
>                                the motion PASSES. Note: Sarwark did not
>         vote. You
>              can
>                   keep
>                        track
>                             of
>                                the Secretary's manual tally of votes here:
>
>                                  [1][2][4][7][9][11][12]https://tinyur
>           [13]l.com/lncvoting
>                                  On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 7:30 AM, William
>           Redpath
>                via
>                          Lnc-business
>                                  <[2][3][5][8][10][12][14]lnc-
>      business at hq.lp.org>
>           wrote:
>                                    I will change my vote on an LNC
>      At-Large
>           voting
>                audit
>                     to
>                          Yes.
>                               Bill
>                                    Redpath
>                                  On 2018-07-19 02:11, Alicia Mattson via
>                Lnc-business
>                     wrote:
>                                    I vote yes.
>                                       -Alicia
>                                       On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 11:53 PM,
>      Caryn
>           Ann
>                Harlos
>                     via
>                                    Lnc-business
>                                     <[1][3][4][6][9][11][13]lnc-busine
>
>         [15]ss at hq.lp.org>
>          wrote:
>                                      We have an electronic mail ballot.
>    Votes
>          are
>               due
>                    to the
>                                   LNC-Business
>                                      list by July 19, 2018 at 11:59:59pm
>       Pacific
>               time.
>                              Co-Sponsors:
>                                   Bowden,
>                                      Harlos, Longstreth, Mattson
>                                      Motion: Move that the LNC would have
>    an
>          audit
>               of
>                    the At
>                              Large
>                                   ballots
>                                      done by two independent auditors
>       appointed
>          by
>               the
>                         Chair, ie
>                                   someone not
>                                      in the race.  You can keep track of
>    the
>                    Secretary's
>                         manual
>                              tally
>                                   of
>                                      votes here:
>
>                     [1][2][4][5][7][10][12][14][16]https://tinyurl.co
>                          m/lncvoting
>                                            --
>                                            --
>                                            In Liberty,
>                                            Caryn Ann Harlos
>                                            Libertarian Party and
>      Libertarian
>                National
>                          Committee
>                                    Secretary
>                                            - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org
>      or
>                     Secretary at LP.org.
>                                            Chair, LP Historical
>      Preservation
>                Committee -
>                               LPedia at LP.org
>                                            A haiku to the Statement of
>           Principles:
>                                            We defend your rights
>                                            And oppose the use of force
>                                            Taxation is theft
>                                         References
>                                            1.
>           [3][5][6][8][11][13][15][17]https://tinyur
>                [16][18]l.co
>                     m/lncvoting
>                                            2.
>      mailto:[4]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.
>           org
>                                    References
>                                       1. mailto:[6][7][9][12][14]lnc-
>      busine
>                [17][19]ss at hq.lp.org
>                                       2.
>      [7][8][10][13][15][18][20]https://tiny
>           url.
>                com/lncvoting
>                                       3.
>      [8][9][11][14][16][19][21]https://tiny
>           url.
>                com/lncvoting
>                                       4. mailto:[9]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.
>      org
>                                  --
>                                  --
>                                  In Liberty,
>                                  Caryn Ann Harlos
>                                  Libertarian Party and Libertarian
>      National
>                Committee
>                          Secretary
>                                  - [10]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org or
>                Secretary at LP.org.
>                                  Chair, LP Historical Preservation
>      Committee -
>                     LPedia at LP.org
>                                  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
>         Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
>         - [20]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org or Secretary at LP.org.
>         Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org
>         A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>         We defend your rights
>         And oppose the use of force
>         Taxation is theft
>      References
>         1. mailto:[22]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
>         2. mailto:[23]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>         3. mailto:[24]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
>         4. mailto:[25]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>         5. mailto:[26]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
>         6. mailto:[27]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
>         7. mailto:[28]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>         8. mailto:[29]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
>         9. mailto:[30]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>        10. mailto:[31]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>        11. [32]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
>        12. mailto:[33]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>        13. mailto:[34]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>        14. [35]https://tinyurl.co/
>        15. [36]https://tinyur/
>        16. [37]http://l.co/
>        17. mailto:[38]ss at hq.lp.org
>        18. [39]https://tinyurl/
>        19. [40]https://tinyurl/
>        20. mailto:[41]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>
>    --
>    --
>    In Liberty,
>    Caryn Ann Harlos
>    Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
>    - [42]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org or Secretary at LP.org.
>    Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org
>    A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>    We defend your rights
>    And oppose the use of force
>    Taxation is theft
>
> References
>
>    1. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    2. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
>    3. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    4. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
>    5. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    6. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
>    7. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
>    8. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    9. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
>   10. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   11. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   12. https://tinyur/
>   13. http://l.com/lncvoting
>   14. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   15. mailto:ss at hq.lp.org
>   16. https://tinyurl.co/
>   17. https://tinyur/
>   18. http://l.co/
>   19. mailto:ss at hq.lp.org
>   20. https://tiny/
>   21. https://tiny/
>   22. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
>   23. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   24. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
>   25. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   26. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
>   27. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
>   28. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   29. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
>   30. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   31. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   32. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
>   33. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   34. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   35. https://tinyurl.co/
>   36. https://tinyur/
>   37. http://l.co/
>   38. mailto:ss at hq.lp.org
>   39. https://tinyurl/
>   40. https://tinyurl/
>   41. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>   42. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>
-- 
Richard Longstreth
Region 1 Representative (AK, AZ, CO, KS, MT, NM, OR, HI, UT, WA, WY)
Libertarian National Committee
richard.longstreth at lp.org
931.538.9300
-------------- next part --------------
   Alicia, stop playing a victim. I admit I skimmed most of your message,
   but I have to destroy your perceived bias based on one line.

   You said

   "When I noted your call for recount wasn’t in both elections..."

   CAH didn't call for an audit. I did and I called for auditing both.
   Unless you think Caryn Ann somehow controls my independent actions and
   calls from my Regional Caucus you are not remembering the past
   correctly at all.

   And yes, at Large was a bigger concern to me initially because of the
   one vote margin so I only called for an audit there initially. After a
   few days, I also introduced auditing the second election as well,
   something you could have easily done previously if you thought a bias
   was in play.

   Honestly, I don't know what the source of the conflict is for you two,
   but Alicia, I'm consistently seeing a woe is me attitude from you and
   regular attacks on Caryn Ann and it needs to stop. CAH isn't innocent
   either. We all need to act like the professional leaders of the party
   we were elected to be.

   Nobody wants to read blocks of accusations or attacks any more. While
   we all have the freedom to post and share as we please, I'd urge all of
   the LNC to take pause before sending something like Alicia's message to
   the public via this email list.

   Richard
   On Wed, Jul 25, 2018, 07:29 Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business
   <[1]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:

        Skimmed and skipped.
        Not going to that dance Alicia.  Continue solo if you wish.
        -Caryn Ann
        On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 5:20 AM, Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business
        <[1][2]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
             Caryn Ann,
             I see we have again reached the play-the-victim portion of
     the
          script.
             How rude of me to defend my actual words when they are being
             misrepresented.  Defense is now accused of being aggression
     and
             hostility.
             When I initially pointed out that it was unfair
     representation to
          say I
             would be supervising the audit, your first reaction was the
             not-me-and-I-didn't-want-to-do-it bit.  Later you expressed
     that
          you do
             actually agree with the mischaracterization, even after I
     pointed
          out
             it’s not what I said.  You projected your complaints about
     the
          first
             tally onto a future audit by others.  You continued to
          re-characterize
             my proposal that I, "sit in a corner and work on something
     else
          while
             they do their task" as "being involved", which sounds like
          something
             different.
             I see Wayne Harlos' signature on the Colorado tally sheet in
     the
             Secretary's race.  I see Dr. Buchman's signature on the Utah
          tally
             sheet in this At-Large race in which he was a candidate.
     After
             telling everyone else that EVH noticed that they had also
          committed
             lapses of judgment, you're now suggesting that I'm so toxic
     that
          I
             cannot even sit in the corner of the room, lest my presence
          hypnotize
             Nick's chosen independent auditors into failing to do their
     job,
          but
             you would be happy to be present instead, as if you were
     some
          kind of
             non-partisan here.
             Don't forget that you were a nominator for Dr. Buchman. I
     presume
          him
             to be the candidate about whom you have publicly described
     as
          having
             been "screwed by this whole process", in the next breath
     calling
          it a
             "suspect election".  You didn’t say all candidates were
     screwed
          by the
             process, just one particular candidate, as though he was
     entitled
          to
             win but he didn’t.  That told me you were unhappy with the
          result.
             When I noted your call for recount wasn’t in both elections
     that
          I
             tabulated in which I was a candidate, only the one where you
     had
             already expressed displeasure with the result, out came the
          victim
             card.  You said I was attacking you, and ridiculously
     accused me
          of
             using a "shaming and silencing tactic", though 1 out of
     every 3
          emails
             to this list is from you.
             While I was spending many hours assembling
     more-than-requested
             information, and giving you updates on my progress, I was
     accused
          of
             "ignoring" the situation.  When you singled out Aaron with
     no
          mention
             of the others, we got the drama of, “I think the optic of
     this
          make
             Arvin's comments look like the height of civility.”  Really?
          Worse
             than a guy saying school board shootings are a good idea?
     Worse
          than
             Arvin’s philosophies about 14-year-old girls?
             You're not exactly a neutral party in this matter, and yet
     you
          think
             it's fine for you to be present for the next audit, but
     somehow
          it’s a
             “huge mis-step in judgment” for me to even sit in a corner
     and do
             something else while others do the audit.
             The comments you posted here about Aaron’s role also do not
          accurately
             portray the situation.  I realize you haven’t had to
     actually do
          the
             job yet, so you haven’t experienced that time pressure to
     get the
          data
             assembled and announced.  It feels like installing a roof
     during
          a
             hurricane.
             I have manually tallied three conventions, including our two
          largest,
             with an unusually large number of candidates this year.  The
     2018
             At-Large race had 604 delegates voting for a whopping 36
          options.  (In
             2016, only 418 delegates voted for 20 At-Large options.)
             This year, while the tellers were still trying to
     double-check
          the
             At-Large tally sheets, we had to pause and distribute and
     collect
          the
             ballots on which 501 delegates voted for 22 Judicial
     Committee
             candidates.  I was running out of At-Large data to enter
     because
          the
             tellers were spread too thin by the overlapping elections.
             To keep the process from completely stalling, and have a
     higher
          chance
             of getting results before adjournment, I pulled Aaron in to
          assist,
             plus a couple of more tellers.  Aaron is a former auditor,
     and
          his
             brain is wired to find anomalies in a system.  I knew he
     would do
          the
             job well, cleanly, and help train the other newcomers so we
     could
          keep
             the At-Large process moving.  And he did.
             Aaron worked with a partner.  When they checked California’s
             submission, right off the bat they realized that the number
     of
          votes
             written on the ballots was one more than the total on the
     tally
          sheet.
             When they realized the discrepancy impacted my vote total,
     Aaron
             stepped back and asked two other tellers to verify it and
     have
          them –
             not him – make the change to the tally sheet and sign it.
     Aaron
          also
             insisted that several others present witness a recount of
     the
             California ballots that had my name on it.
             At that point NOBODY knew how close the race was going to
          ultimately
             be.  I was only partially through data entry.  Perhaps
     people
          imagine
             that I’m up there looking at the totals every few seconds so
     that
          I
             constantly know where it stands, but the push to get the job
     done
          ASAP
             means that all I can afford to think about is keeping the
     data
          entry
             moving and watching for any anomalies.  Another teller was
     beside
          me
             for the duration of the data entry.
             Regarding the “rumor” as you called it, I suspect someone
     just
          wasn't
             precise in their choice of words.  It would require a time
          machine for
             the situation to have been, “…the vote for the last seat was
     a
          tie
             until Mr. Starr found an additional vote for Ms. Mattson in
     CA.”
          That
             phrasing could give the reader the impression that all the
     data
          entry
             was done, we knew it was a tie, and we went searching for a
     way
          to
             break the tie.  That didn’t happen.  Many people were
     standing
          around
             waiting for the data entry to be complete, and snapshots of
     my
          screen
             were taken within a few seconds of data entry being
     completed and
             sorted into a ranking order to see just how close it was.
             Had Aaron and his fellow teller not noticed that the
     California
          ballots
             contained one more vote than was on the tally sheet, when
     the
          data
             entry was LATER completed, the initially-reported results
     would
          have
             mistakenly been reported as a tie, and it would have been
     REALLY
             awkward had this fact gone unnoticed until post-convention.
          Instead,
             it was noticed in the presence of, and was verified and
     corrected
          by,
             other tellers before the initially-reported results.
             For most of a decade, I have been saying that we should move
     to
             electronic voting.  The delegates have previously rejected
     it,
          leaving
             me with no choice but to do my best to try to catch and fix
     the
          errors
             before the initial results.  I have been pointing out how
             error-susceptible our human-tallying elections are.  I have
     been
             educating about how difficult it is to get exact results
     with the
          time
             pressures, multi-tasking, noise levels, disruption levels,
     etc.
          that
             are experienced during the convention.  I have argued
     against the
             convention conducting other business during the votes
     because it
          makes
             it harder to get the really important tallying job done.
             I wrote the proposal which became Convention Rule 10,
     adopted by
             delegates to require tellers to double-check the state
     tallies,
          and to
             require the on-screen review of the tally spreadsheet
     (previously
          that
             step was often skipped just to save time).  Though it still
          doesn’t fix
             everything, those things do increase the number of errors we
          catch
             onsite before the results are displayed.
             For me to now be portrayed with such inflammatory rhetoric
     as
          someone
             who ran a “suspect election”, as someone making the party
     look
          worse
             than Arvin Vohra did, and now to have you taint the
     perception of
          the
             future audit with misrepresentations of my words…well,
     that’s
          just a
             special experience.  I do not deserve that.
             -Alicia
             On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 4:05 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos
             <[1][2][3]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:
             Alicia, I am not going to engage the aggression here.  Your
          comment is
             completely out of bounds on multiple levels and I ask that
     you
          stop the
             personal hostility.  But you are free to make it, and I
     shall
          decline
             to engage further.  All those allegedly are a smooth way to
     try
          to call
             me a liar.
             I do respect you for all the reason I said in the past
          (intelligence,
             skill-set, competence).  I do think being involved in this
     count
          at all
             both past and present is a huge mis-step in judgment. And I
     also
          think
             - and communicated to the persons that EVH pointed out -
     that
             delegation chairs similarly situated demonstrated a mis-step
     in
             judgment as well.  And I do think you should step out of
     this
          entire
             process entirely.
             PS: I don't think the member was entirely incorrect so I
     would
          not say
             that to them.  The reason I was reluctant to share it is
          precisely
             because of this.  It seems you want to keep making things
          personal
             between you and me.  They are not.  A political race is not
          personal.
             I never got personal with you or about you in my campaign,
     and I
          don't
             intend to start now.
             -Caryn Ann
             On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 4:35 PM, Alicia Mattson via
     Lnc-business
             <[2][3][4]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
                  Caryn Ann,
                  When you received this feedback from the anonymous
     member,
          you
               had the
                  opportunity to tell them, "That's not what she said.
     Go
          back and
               read
                  her post again."  Instead you repeated the
          misrepresentation,
               with all
                  its implications, here on a public list to give it a
     broad
               audience.
                  For someone who allegedly is not attacking me, and
     allegedly
          has
                  respect for me, and allegedly "did not even want to
     pass
          along",
               ya
                  just flopped it right out there...  Don't pretend that
     you
          had an
                  obligation to do it.  You're not fooling anyone with
     this
          game.
                  -Alicia
                  On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 3:59 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos
                  <[1][3][4][5]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:
                  Alicia I am passing along directly what the member
     said.
          That
               member
                  reads the list and can decide if they think they were
     being
               unfair.  I
                  did not solicit this feedback and did not even want to
     pass
          along
               but
                  it is member feedback.
                  -Caryn Ann
                  On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 12:35 AM, Alicia Mattson via
          Lnc-business
                  <[2][4][5][6]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
                       CAH> A concerned member (no permission to share
     name)
          wrote
               me
                    and
                       inquired if any audit should be supervised by a
          candidate.
                       Seriously?  Do you think that's a fair way to
     portray
          what I
                    proposed?
                       What I actually said was, "I can sit in a corner
     and
          work on
                    something
                       else while they do their task, but if at some
     point
          their
               number
                       doesn't match mine, we can all take a look at it
     right
          then
                    without
                       going back and forth via email."
                       I also said to Nick, "Phoenix is within that zone,
     and
          you
               could
                       personally supervise if you wish."
                       I suggested that I sit in a corner, and I invited
     Nick
          to
                    supervise.
                       -Alicia
                       On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 2:26 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos
                       <[1][3][5][6][7]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:
                       A concerned member (no permission to share name)
     wrote
          me
               and
                    inquired
                       if any audit should be supervised by a candidate.
                       Since I agree with Alicia that the actual ballots
     are a
               better
                       solution, if the Chair wishes it, I can make
     myself
               available as
                    the
                       current Secretary to be personally present at any
          audit.
                       I can then confer with Alicia about any issues
     found.
                       -Caryn Ann
                       On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 2:59 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos
                       <[2][4][6][7][8]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:
                       I will make those two changes thank you Alicia.
                       On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 5:51 PM Alicia Mattson via
               Lnc-business
                 <[3][5][7][8][9]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
                      Sorry for needing to send one more email on this
     subject,
                   however, it
                      has occurred to me that if the start/end dates in
     the
              Secretary's
                      report are listed as 07/12/18 to 07/19/18, then the
        footnote
              that
                   I
                      wrote will make me sound like a person who can't
     subtract
        12
              from
                   19.
                      I should have written the footnote to be more
     specific as
                   follows:
                      * Since the published vote period of 11:53 p.m.
     Pacific
        on
                   07/11/18 to
                      11:59:59 p.m. Pacific on 07/19/18 resulted in a
     voting
           period
                   which
                      exceeded 8 days, Ms. Mattson had expressed a belief
     that
        the
              end
                   date
                      should be changed from 7/19/18 to 7/18/18.  During
     this
           final
              day
                   of
                      voting which is disputed, Mr. Redpath changed his
     vote
        from
              "no"
                   to
                      "yes".  These reported results reflect the changed
     vote
           during
                   the
                      disputed time period, but the outcome of the vote
     is not
              impacted
                   by
                      the question of how to report this one vote.
                      -Alicia
                      On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 1:55 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos
                            <[1][4][6][8][9][10]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org>
     wrote:
                            I added that note to the tally sheet and will
          include
               that
                    in my
                            Secretary's Report.
                            -Caryn Ann
                            On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 2:44 PM, Alicia
     Mattson
          via
                    Lnc-business
                      <[2][5][7][9][10][11]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
                           Since these results include a vote change
     during the
           final
                   day, I
                        do
                           think these results need to be footnoted as
     follows:
                           * Since the published ending time of the
     ballot
           resulted
              in
                   a
                        voting
                           period which exceeded 8 days, Ms. Mattson had
        expressed
           a
                   belief
                        that
                           the end date should be changed from 7/19/18 to
        7/18/18.
                   During
                        this
                           final day of voting which is disputed, Mr.
     Redpath
           changed
                   his
                        vote
                           from "no" to "yes".  These reported results
     reflect
        the
                   changed
                        vote
                           during the disputed time period, but the
     outcome of
        the
              vote
                   is
                        not
                           impacted by the question of how to report this
     one
           vote.
                           If they're footnoted, given that it doesn't
     impact
        the
                   result, I
                        won't
                           feel a need to raise a point of order about
     the
           reported
                   results
                        and
                           ask the LNC to make a decision on how to
     report that
           vote
                   change.
                           -Alicia
                           On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 12:18 PM, Caryn Ann
     Harlos
        via
                        Lnc-business

     <[1][3][6][8][10][11][12]lnc-business at hq.lp.org>
        wrote:
                                    Voting has ENDED for the email ballot
     TITLE
             Voting
                       "aye":
                            Bilyeu,
                                    Hagan, Harlos, Hewitt, Longstreth,
     Lyons,
             Mattson,
                       Merced,
                                 Phillips,
                                    Redpath, Smith Voting "nay":
        Bishop-Henchman,
                       Goldstein, Van
                            Horn
                                    Express Abstention: Lark, Nekhaila
     With a
             final
                  vote
                       tally
                            of
                                 11-3-2,
                                    the motion PASSES. Note: Sarwark did
     not
             vote. You
                  can
                       keep
                            track
                                 of
                                    the Secretary's manual tally of votes
     here:

     [1][2][4][7][9][11][12][13]https://tinyur
               [13][14]l.com/lncvoting
                                      On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 7:30 AM,
     William
               Redpath
                    via
                              Lnc-business
                                      <[2][3][5][8][10][12][14]lnc-
          [15]business at hq.lp.org>
               wrote:
                                        I will change my vote on an LNC
          At-Large
               voting
                    audit
                         to
                              Yes.
                                   Bill
                                        Redpath
                                      On 2018-07-19 02:11, Alicia Mattson
     via
                    Lnc-business
                         wrote:
                                        I vote yes.
                                           -Alicia
                                           On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 11:53
     PM,
          Caryn
               Ann
                    Harlos
                         via
                                        Lnc-business

     <[1][3][4][6][9][11][13]lnc-busine
             [15][16]ss at hq.lp.org>
              wrote:
                                          We have an electronic mail
     ballot.
        Votes
              are
                   due
                        to the
                                       LNC-Business
                                          list by July 19, 2018 at
     11:59:59pm
           Pacific
                   time.
                                  Co-Sponsors:
                                       Bowden,
                                          Harlos, Longstreth, Mattson
                                          Motion: Move that the LNC would
     have
        an
              audit
                   of
                        the At
                                  Large
                                       ballots
                                          done by two independent
     auditors
           appointed
              by
                   the
                             Chair, ie
                                       someone not
                                          in the race.  You can keep
     track of
        the
                        Secretary's
                             manual
                                  tally
                                       of
                                          votes here:

     [1][2][4][5][7][10][12][14][16][17]https://tinyurl.co
                              m/lncvoting
                                                --
                                                --
                                                In Liberty,
                                                Caryn Ann Harlos
                                                Libertarian Party and
          Libertarian
                    National
                              Committee
                                        Secretary
                                                - [2]Caryn.Ann.
     Harlos at LP.org
          or
                         Secretary at LP.org.
                                                Chair, LP Historical
          Preservation
                    Committee -
                                   LPedia at LP.org
                                                A haiku to the Statement
     of
               Principles:
                                                We defend your rights
                                                And oppose the use of
     force
                                                Taxation is theft
                                             References
                                                1.
               [3][5][6][8][11][13][15][17][18]https://tinyur
                    [16][18][19]l.co
                         m/lncvoting
                                                2.
          mailto:[4]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.
               org
                                        References
                                           1.
     mailto:[6][7][9][12][14]lnc-
          busine
                    [17][19][20]ss at hq.lp.org
                                           2.
          [7][8][10][13][15][18][20][21]https://tiny
               url.
                    com/lncvoting
                                           3.
          [8][9][11][14][16][19][21][22]https://tiny
               url.
                    com/lncvoting
                                           4.
     mailto:[9]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.
          org
                                      --
                                      --
                                      In Liberty,
                                      Caryn Ann Harlos
                                      Libertarian Party and Libertarian
          National
                    Committee
                              Secretary
                                      - [10]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org or
                    Secretary at LP.org.
                                      Chair, LP Historical Preservation
          Committee -
                         LPedia at LP.org
                                      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
             Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee
     Secretary
             - [20]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org or Secretary at LP.org.
             Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org
             A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
             We defend your rights
             And oppose the use of force
             Taxation is theft
          References
             1. mailto:[22][23]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
             2. mailto:[23][24]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
             3. mailto:[24][25]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
             4. mailto:[25][26]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
             5. mailto:[26][27]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
             6. mailto:[27][28]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
             7. mailto:[28][29]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
             8. mailto:[29][30]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
             9. mailto:[30][31]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
            10. mailto:[31][32]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
            11. [32][33]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
            12. mailto:[33][34]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
            13. mailto:[34][35]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
            14. [35][36]https://tinyurl.co/
            15. [36][37]https://tinyur/
            16. [37][38]http://l.co/
            17. mailto:[38][39]ss at hq.lp.org
            18. [39][40]https://tinyurl/
            19. [40][41]https://tinyurl/
            20. mailto:[41]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
        --
        --
        In Liberty,
        Caryn Ann Harlos
        Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
        - [42]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org or Secretary at LP.org.
        Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org
        A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
        We defend your rights
        And oppose the use of force
        Taxation is theft
     References
        1. mailto:[42]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
        2. mailto:[43]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
        3. mailto:[44]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
        4. mailto:[45]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
        5. mailto:[46]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
        6. mailto:[47]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
        7. mailto:[48]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
        8. mailto:[49]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
        9. mailto:[50]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
       10. mailto:[51]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
       11. mailto:[52]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
       12. [53]https://tinyur/
       13. [54]http://l.com/lncvoting
       14. mailto:[55]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
       15. mailto:[56]ss at hq.lp.org
       16. [57]https://tinyurl.co/
       17. [58]https://tinyur/
       18. [59]http://l.co/
       19. mailto:[60]ss at hq.lp.org
       20. [61]https://tiny/
       21. [62]https://tiny/
       22. mailto:[63]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
       23. mailto:[64]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
       24. mailto:[65]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
       25. mailto:[66]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
       26. mailto:[67]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
       27. mailto:[68]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
       28. mailto:[69]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
       29. mailto:[70]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
       30. mailto:[71]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
       31. mailto:[72]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
       32. [73]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
       33. mailto:[74]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
       34. mailto:[75]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
       35. [76]https://tinyurl.co/
       36. [77]https://tinyur/
       37. [78]http://l.co/
       38. mailto:[79]ss at hq.lp.org
       39. [80]https://tinyurl/
       40. [81]https://tinyurl/
       41. mailto:[82]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
       42. mailto:[83]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org

   --

   Richard Longstreth
   Region 1 Representative (AK, AZ, CO, KS, MT, NM, OR, HI, UT, WA, WY)
   Libertarian National Committee
   [84]richard.longstreth at lp.org
   931.538.9300

References

   1. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   2. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   3. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
   4. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   5. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
   6. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   7. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
   8. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
   9. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  10. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
  11. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  12. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  13. https://tinyur/
  14. http://l.com/lncvoting
  15. mailto:business at hq.lp.org
  16. mailto:ss at hq.lp.org
  17. https://tinyurl.co/
  18. https://tinyur/
  19. http://l.co/
  20. mailto:ss at hq.lp.org
  21. https://tiny/
  22. https://tiny/
  23. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
  24. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  25. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
  26. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  27. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
  28. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
  29. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  30. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
  31. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  32. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  33. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
  34. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  35. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  36. https://tinyurl.co/
  37. https://tinyur/
  38. http://l.co/
  39. mailto:ss at hq.lp.org
  40. https://tinyurl/
  41. https://tinyurl/
  42. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  43. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
  44. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  45. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
  46. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  47. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
  48. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
  49. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  50. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
  51. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  52. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  53. https://tinyur/
  54. http://l.com/lncvoting
  55. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  56. mailto:ss at hq.lp.org
  57. https://tinyurl.co/
  58. https://tinyur/
  59. http://l.co/
  60. mailto:ss at hq.lp.org
  61. https://tiny/
  62. https://tiny/
  63. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
  64. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  65. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
  66. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  67. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
  68. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
  69. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  70. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
  71. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  72. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  73. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
  74. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  75. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  76. https://tinyurl.co/
  77. https://tinyur/
  78. http://l.co/
  79. mailto:ss at hq.lp.org
  80. https://tinyurl/
  81. https://tinyurl/
  82. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
  83. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
  84. mailto:richard.longstreth at lp.org


More information about the Lnc-business mailing list