[Lnc-business] Motion to suspend Arvin Vohra

[Elizabeth Van Horn]

Hi Caryn Ann, 

I agree that this is a topic that might do better in a medium other than
email.  As for "cause", I wasn't aware that it was needed for the actual
motion, as I looked back at previous motions to see how they were
worded. 

As I'm not familiar with the LNC meetings protocol, I'll listen for
suggestions on that method.  

---
Elizabeth Van Horn
LNC Region 3 (IN, MI, OH, KY)
Secretary Libertarian Party of Madison Co, Indiana
Chair-LP Social Media Process Review Committee
Vice-Chair Libertarian Pragmatist Caucus
http://www.lpcaucus.org/ 

On 2018-01-14 17:48, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:

> Elizabeth on reflection I think there are some flaws here.  I was getting ready to email my state chairs about whether or not to co-sponsor at a minimum but there is not enough information.  That section of the Bylaws is "for cause."    I know what my reasons are but they are not everyone's, and I would not put my name to something that might affirm something I do not (such supporting the current state of consent laws or fixing the LNC on a position within that contentious subject on which Libertarians disagree).  My concerns are behaviour and judgment. 
> 
> I also think this too weighty for an email. 
> 
> IMHO a meeting should be called.  And the motion IMHO is defective without the cause. 
> 
> -Caryn Ann 
> 
> On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 12:19 PM, <trent.somes at lp.org> wrote:
> 
> On 2018-01-14 14:04, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
> I find it very sad that a colleague has brought us to this place with
> his repeated utter lack of judgment.
> 
> I do not have my requisite Region 1 support at this time - Region 1 in
> the past had no use for National and I worked my ass to change that.
> Thanks to the incredibly destructive acts of our VC that work is
> crumbling.
> 
> If it were solely up to me I would co-sponsor and vote yes.  But I am
> a representative.
> 
> God help me, if I were ever this utterly destructive to an
> organization that I would realize this isn't about me and my
> edgelordiness and step down.
> 
> Despite the opinion of others or the narrative put forth by Arvin, for
> me, this isn't some moderate squeamishness about Principles.  I hold
> them - and though I think his understanding of how they apply to young
> people is shallow- that isn't the issue.  It is conduct and behavior
> repeatedly unbecoming a leader.  It is not just this incident, it is a
> repeated pattern and refusal to be able to work on a shared vision
> that requires utter selfishness to be put aside.
> 
> Things move slow in Region 1 and I don't even expect full answers in
> this short time frame.
> 
> On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 11:54 AM Caryn Ann Harlos
> <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:
> 
> On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 10:12 AM <steven.nekhaila at lp.org> wrote:
> 
> Dear Colleagues,
> 
> Coming from a State which has been targeted due to individuals
> within
> and experienced considerable flack for years despite the great
> work we
> have accomplished, my advice to this body is to not give in to the
> lynch
> mobs demands, as I do not believe our policies even give us an
> avenue to
> act, but instead to encourage those who want to change party
> leadership
> to participate in the 2018 Libertarian National Convention and
> elect the
> leadership they would like to see in charge. The leadership is a
> reflection of the memberships will, if the membership wills to see
> a
> regime change that is their right, and the most effective way of
> carrying that out is to book accommodations to be at the
> convention of
> the greatest political party in the United States of America and
> be a
> part of crafting the future of US politics and culture. That
> should be
> our only response, it is also the most genuine and effective way
> for
> anyone who wants leadership change to achieve it. Turning our
> muzzles at
> each other is not the answer and quite frankly our bylaws do not
> allow
> it (to my knowledge), and even if it did I would not recommend it.
> We
> must stay united and move business forward until convention,
> encourage
> participation in the 2018 convention, and stick to our mission.
> Everything is else will end up in futility and that is not what
> this
> body wants.
> 
> In Liberty,
> 
> Steven Nekhaila
> Region 2 Rep Alternate
> 
> Impotentes defendere libertatum non possunt
> "Those without power cannot defend freedom"
> 
> On 2018-01-14 10:13 AM, Patrick McKnight wrote:
> Thank you Elizabeth. I will co-sponsor this motion.
> 
> Patrick McKnight
> Region 8 Rep
> Chair, NJLP
> 
> On Jan 14, 2018 9:17 AM, "Daniel Hayes" <daniel.hayes at lp.org> wrote:
> 
> The reality is that people choose to quit.  Arvin doesn't
 make

>> them quit. Personal responsibility and all.  He sure is
 encouraging

>> the hell out of them though.
>> 
>> I sure wish those 50 people got this pissed off at Ohio State
>> Government.  It probably would have save us $100,000
>> 
>> Daniel Hayes
>> LNC At Large Member
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>> On Jan 14, 2018, at 8:07 AM, Dustin Nanna <dustin.nanna at lp.org>
>> wrote:
>> 
>> The possibility and reality that he HAS made people quit is why
 I

>> support this motion. That and the 50 or so Ohio members who are
>> completely disgusted.
>> 
>> Dustin Nanna
>> LNC Region 3 Alternate
>> 
>> Vice Chair/Deputy Communications Director
>> Libertarian Party of Ohio
>> 
>> (740) 816-9805 [1]
>> 
>> On Jan 14, 2018 9:05 AM, Dustin Nanna <dustin.nanna at lp.org>
 wrote:

>> Motion, not amendment. Typo
>> 
>> Dustin Nanna
>> LNC Region 3 Alternate
>> 
>> Vice Chair/Deputy Communications Director
>> Libertarian Party of Ohio
>> 
>> (740) 816-9805 [1]
>> 
>> On Jan 14, 2018 9:04 AM, Daniel Hayes <daniel.hayes at lp.org>
 wrote:

>> In Louisiana, we have been through some legendary infighting.
>> We've seen the wear and tear it puts on people and the
>> organization.
>> 
>> We had a SCC meeting yesterday and I brought the subject of
>> Arvin's latest statement up and asked if we wanted to create
 a

>> response.  The "No" was palpable.  We discussed it further
 and

>> everybody seemed to think that with the convention 5 1/2 months
>> away, allowing the delegates to handle it by not voting for
 Arvin if

>> he runs again was the way it should be handled.
>> 
>> I suspect that after a 3 year period of grievances and attempts
 to

>> remove people we maybe have a different perspective than others
 do.

>> What we learned the hard way was the infighting/attempts at
>> discipline was probably much more destructive than anything
 anybody

>> actually did.
>> 
>> I see a LOT of opportunistic and hypocritical behavior going on
>> relative to Arvin.  I find those people whipping up the mob to
 be

>> the bigger problem.  I think a lot of it likely violates the LP
>> "Pledge".  Attempting to use "force" for political
 gain.  I

>> don't mean people don't have a right to be upset. I just
 find it

>> curious that people that seem to think everyone should have a
>> platform coming out against Arvin, or groups that advocate
 against

>> age of consent laws doing the same.
>> 
>> I am also disturbed but not surprised by the lynch mob calling
 Arvin

>> a pedophile/pro-pedophile when he has very clearly stated he
>> definitively opposes pedophilia. This more so applies to people
 that

>> know the distinctions.
>> 
>> All that said, I am bothered by what seems to be Arvin's
 desire

>> to "purge" the party of the impure.  The possibility that
 he is

>> trying to get people to quit is the bigger issue.
>> 
>> Daniel Hayes
>> LNC At Large Member
>> 
>> Daniel Hayes
>> 
>> Sent from my iPhone
>> 
>> On Jan 14, 2018, at 7:28 AM, David Demarest
 <david.demerest at lp.org>

>> wrote:
>> 
>> The first stone has been cast.
>> 
>> This motion is not about ideology. It is about the crass
 politics of

>> avoiding scaring voters in order to get elected to top-down
>> authoritarian positions and hiding the dictates of one's
 conscience

>> 'between the sheets' instead courageously proclaiming one's
>> convictions 'on the streets'.
>> 
>> This motion will sort out those who have political, ideological
 and

>> moral courage. We will soon see whether the LNC chooses to
>> differentiate the Libertarian Party from the Republican and
>> Democratic parties. The future of the LP could be in the
 balance.

>> I will expressly NOT co-sponsor this motion. If it comes to a
 vote,

>> I will proudly, publicly, and emphatically vote "NO"!
>> 
>> Who among you is willing to cast the second stone?
>> 
>> Thoughts?
>> 
>> ~David Pratt Demarest
>> 
>> On Jan 14, 2018 4:52 AM, Elizabeth Van Horn
>> <elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org> wrote:
>> 
>> I make a motion to suspend Arvin Vohra from his position as
 Vice

>> Chair under Article 6, Section 7 of our Bylaws.

___________________________________________________________________________________________

> Three of the four state affiliate chairs in Region 3 are now
 backing

>> this motion. I told Region 3 that I'd need at least 3/4 of the
>> region in accord to make the motion to suspend Arvin.  That
 percent

>> was reached last night.
>> 
>> When I volunteered my time and energy to be a Regional Rep on
 the

>> LNC, I didn't do it under the circumstances of, "only if
>> convenient".
>> 
>> I'm doing this because I care about giving a voice to the many
 LP

>> members who are running for office, getting out the vote, and
>> spending their hard-earned money working toward electing
>> libertarians.
>> 
>> These are the people that make up the Libertarian Party. It is
 their

>> voice that I represent.
>> 
>> So, it is with calm resolve that I make this motion.
>> 
>> --
>> Elizabeth Van Horn
>> LNC Region 3 (IN, MI, OH, KY)
>> Secretary Libertarian Party of Madison Co, Indiana
>> Chair-LP Social Media Process Review Committee
>> Vice-Chair Libertarian Pragmatist Caucus
>> http://www.lpcaucus.org/
> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lnc-business mailing list
>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>> http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business [1] [2]
> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lnc-business mailing list
>> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>> http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business [1] [2]
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business [1] [2]
> 
> Links:
> ------
> [1] tel:(740)%20816-9805
> [2] http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business [1]
> _______________________________________________
> Lnc-business mailing list
> Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business [1]
 _______________________________________________
Lnc-business mailing list
Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business [1]
_______________________________________________
Lnc-business mailing list
Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business [1] If I could
co-sponsor, I absolutely would. I've been contacted by more constituents
about this issue than any other issue since I started this job. Thank
you for putting this forward. 
_______________________________________________
Lnc-business mailing list
Lnc-business at hq.lp.org
http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business 

Links:
------
[1] 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/20180114/7d952270/attachment-0002.html>