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

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

No Jurisdiction doesn’t mean silence.  It’s something that touches on a
subject we know something about - the whole holy sanctity of committee
discussions is part of the issue.

The more people talking about proposals the better.

Part of the explosive bomb we are seeing these past few days is that
members don’t feel heard- better to hear it out.

On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 10:42 AM Tim Hagan <tim.hagan at lp.org> wrote:

> But the LNC has no jurisdiction on the proposal; it's up to the Bylaws
> Committee and the Convention Delegates. Also, there are 51 affiliates. You
> all forgot about DC. :)
> ---
> Tim Hagan
> Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee
>
>
> On 2018-01-15 09:34, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote:
>
> Sam as we say to those who don't like a tv channel - don't watch.
>
> The issues of that Bylaws proposal and how to improve or not are
> definitely on point of Liberty.
>
> And a good demonstration of how a larger LNC will not work.
>
> Hey Montana - X group of us doesn't care about your concern - take it
> elsewhere - and that also removes from public view.
>
>
> On Mon, Jan 15, 2018 at 7:45 AM Whitney Bilyeu <whitneycb76 at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> E-mail chains would still be 100+....with 50 alternates in place.
>>
>> On Jan 14, 2018 11:39 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
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20180115/849fc6b2/attachment-0002.html>