[Lnc-business] Second draft of 12/9/17 LNC Meeting Minutes

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

Alicia, since there was an objection does this just go automatically to the
next meeting agenda?

On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 5:31 PM, Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
wrote:

> Well, I object to auto-approval (and I note that the Policy Manual
> provision on this states "member," not "attendee.")  I will catalog my
> objections shortly (before the 8th) and see if they are amenable to email
> handling or would best be handled at a meeting.  Currently I've got 50
> pages to edit, and need to finish my note, so it may take a few days.
>
> Joshua A. Katz
>
>
> On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 5:49 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org>
> wrote:
>
>> When I objected in the past it was put on the agenda of the next meeting
>> if it couldn’t be resolved in email.
>>
>> I have previously objected to both meeting and convention minutes and
>> that is how handled.
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 2, 2018 at 4:37 PM Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> The Policy Manual does not explain what happens when there is objection.
>>> Can someone with more experience tell me what happens if there is
>>> objection?  I know how it would work at an in-person meeting, but multiple
>>> email ballots on amendments doesn't seem workable, nor does it make sense
>>> to me that a single person can prevent approval, but it would take 4 to
>>> move to amend.
>>>
>>> Joshua A. Katz
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jan 1, 2018 at 10:45 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <
>>> carynannharlos at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello everyone, attached is the version 2 draft of the last meeting
>>>> minutes.
>>>>
>>>> Please note that absent objections, these will auto-approve on January
>>>> 8, 2018.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I offer the following comments on the suggestions offered:
>>>>
>>>> *I changed all the instances of "passed" to "was adopted" except for
>>>> one instance of calling the question for which that would not be
>>>> appropriate.
>>>>
>>>> *I have reviewed past minutes and note that the seconder is not noted.
>>>> While I include that information in the minutes done for committees and the
>>>> LPCO, I have removed that from this draft as it has not been this body's
>>>> practice and consistency is important.
>>>>
>>>> *I amended the wording about Starchild's absence - I have included the
>>>> weather related comments.
>>>>
>>>> *Both addresses are correct for Nick's campaign site, but I amended to
>>>> spell out "for" - using the number 4 is more visually attractive when
>>>> writing.
>>>>
>>>> *It is correct that Starchild only expressed that the objection
>>>> regarding the CC interim chair was expressed verbally - I had the same
>>>> objection but did not express it at the time
>>>>
>>>> *I left it as Ms. Salvette and Ms. Hogarth as they were already
>>>> introduced by full names and referred to with those designations the day
>>>> prior.
>>>>
>>>> *I didn't name the two express abstentions in the first budget
>>>> amendment for two reasons.  One the recording is not clear, and second, if
>>>> the abstainers wanted a roll call vote it could have been requested so I
>>>> don't think it is proper to name them (I am somewhat surprised that
>>>> Starchild did not request a roll call vote).
>>>>
>>>> *I removed the word "key" from factor in the venue vote reluctantly.  I
>>>> do think it was key which later set the stage for the decision on the next
>>>> LNC meeting location, but since that is subjective, I removed it, though I
>>>> think it accurate.
>>>>
>>>> *On the ordering of the reports in the appendix, I note that I ordered
>>>> them in the same order that Ms. Mattson did for our last minutes with all
>>>> of Dr. Lark's reports (Region 5, Campus Organizing, and International
>>>> grouped together) - which may not have been immediately obvious in past
>>>> minutes as I included an index of appendixes.  I do agree that the order
>>>> suggested by Dr. Lark is more logical and I have changed that order and
>>>> suggest that for the future and also that an appendix be included to make
>>>> it easier for our members to find all the reports, particularly since
>>>> Region 1 tends to have an obnoxiously long report ;)
>>>>
>>>> *I noted the vote that Alicia noted was missing.
>>>>
>>>> *I accepted most of the re-wording suggestions though no meaning would
>>>> be changed and were strictly stylistic.
>>>>
>>>> So that you do not have to re-review the whole thing unless you wish
>>>> to, I have highlighted all the changes made (I have simply deleted the
>>>> seconders without any highlighting).  I will remove the highlighting in the
>>>> final version.
>>>>
>>>> --
>>>> *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*
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>>> http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
>>>>
>>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lnc-business mailing list
>>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>>> http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lnc-business mailing list
>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>> http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20180110/71726f61/attachment-0002.html>