[Lnc-business] Hubbub email chain length for 134-member LNC

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

I like it better than what is proposed, but I have other issues in general
(different ones that are more logistical).

And with this, yes there is an inevitable.  And this is a good example.

Our government has checks and balances too.  That's worked out so well.

On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 11:02 PM, Elizabeth Van Horn <
elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org> wrote:

> So, you like my idea?!  Yay!  I should have been in the bylaws gang!
>
> Pfft, there's no inevitable.  No reason it would happen, as everything
> would be set-up with checks and balances.
>
> ---
> Elizabeth Van Horn
>
> On 2018-01-15 00:49, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>
> With a rep per state my other issues would be resolved.  Small states
> would be protected (there is another issue, but not that one)
>
> There is still an issue with scale, but not the other issues, and it is
> not what the Bylaws committee is proposing (and something similar to your
> idea I think was proposed before - don't know the history etc but can find
> out).
>
> And my other comment is NOT about intention.  It is about inevitable
> result REGARDLESS of intention. I have pretty consistently said that.  It
> is what would happen.  As night follows day.
>
> -Caryn Ann
>
> On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 10:39 PM, Elizabeth Van Horn <
> elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org> wrote:
>
>> *laughing out loud!*    I meant 50 one per state.  See?  It's even
>> better!
>> ---
>> Elizabeth Van Horn
>>
>>
>> On 2018-01-15 00:37, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>>
>> How is one per state = 100?
>>
>> On Sun, Jan 14, 2018 at 10:25 PM, Elizabeth Van Horn <
>> elizabeth.vanhorn at lp.org> wrote:
>>
>>> I think expanding to one representative per state, for a total of 100
>>> members, would be a plus.  (I know that's not what the bylaws people want.)
>>>
>>> Because, it would be easier to get feedback from the members.  The
>>> actual people we represent.
>>>
>>> Then some posting rules could be in place, such as no burdening the rest
>>> of the LNC with personal rambles and dreams.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> ---
>>> Elizabeth Van Horn
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On 2018-01-15 00:17, david.demarest at lp.org wrote:
>>>
>>> Can you imagine the length of this bruhaha email chain if the bylaws
>>>> committee proposal to expand the the LNC to 134 members was already in
>>>> place. It boggles the imagination.
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> 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
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20180114/0e06e94a/attachment-0002.html>