[Lnc-business] Membership Recruitment
Caryn Ann Harlos
caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
Fri Mar 9 22:12:43 EST 2018
Thank you Joshua.
You must admit though we excel at finding ways to put a wet rag on
everything. In your first part you nailed it.
In second part I believe we all have an implied duty to grow the party
within our talents. My talent is to make those damn t-shirts irresistible.
The topping on the pie would be if we could throw RONR into the mix.
On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 7:49 PM Joshua Katz <planning4liberty at gmail.com>
wrote:
> As usual, I'm not going to make an effort to read this entire thread
> carefully (look away from email for one day...). As is also common, I
> disagree with everyone.
> First, on the question posed. It seems to me that people who sign up
> for memberships receive certain items - this is a decision made by
> staff, equally applicable to all (new) members, within the discretion
> the board has given to staff in the budget. How they get the items
> doesn't seem to me to be an item of concern, nor does it raise, in my
> opinion, the issues raised by paying for travel. I have no objection,
> even if the LNC member is running for a position on the next LNC -
> because my primary objection to travel costs was that the transaction
> was with an LNC member (and not available to all LNC members), not the
> potential for the LNC member to seek another position. Here we have an
> expenditure that would take place without the LNC member anyway - that
> is, the giving of an item to the new member - and so it doesn't raise
> my concerns.
> Second, on the 'obligation' to sign up new members, which everyone
> replying to this email seems to agree exists. I have no objection to
> saying LNC members should help recruit members (although also noting
> that other LNC members do other things, such as gather thousands of
> volunteer signatures, run petition drives, etc.). But I do not agree
> that it's specially implied by serving on the LNC, at least directly.
> Boards are tasked with general oversight and governance of an
> organization, and unless the organization's rules say otherwise,
> there's no duty on individual members to do anything - Microsoft
> probably doesn't expect its board members, in their individual
> capacity, to go around encouraging people to buy Windows (although it
> certainly doesn't mind if they do, and those who do should get the
> product, and I don't think anyone would care if a board member, for
> some reason, had a small supply of CD-roms in their garage and sold
> them to customers with the money going to the company). I don't see
> anything in our rules establishing such an expectation. Therefore, I
> conclude that LNC members have the same expectation to sign up new
> members as anyone else in the party does, as well as any expectation
> any particular member takes on, but nothing more.
>
> Joshua A. Katz
> On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 7:03 PM, Daniel Hayes <[1]daniel.hayes at lp.org>
> wrote:
>
> Mr, O’Donnell,
> I agree with your point. Please sign your posts, rookie. Don’t get
> the list readers mad at you. It can be hard to tell on the
> reflector list who made a post if it’s not signed I think.
> Daniel Hayes
> LNC At Large Member
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Mar 9, 2018, at 6:43 PM, Justin O'Donnell
> <[2]justin.odonnell at lp.org> wrote:
> >
> > From my understanding, there isnt a matter of opportunity to the
> > members of the LNC, but rather an implied duty to grow memberships,
> and
> > provide representation of the National Party at state conventions.
> > I have spoken with the NH state chair, and his concern in hearing
> of
> > this debate we are having, is that He invited Ms. Harlos to the
> LPNH
> > Convention with the specific intent to conduct her usual membership
> > drive activities.
> > Rather than arguing about who is doing it, perhaps we should be
> > focusing on why more of us are not.
> > I applaud the idea of the Vice Chair candidates coming together to
> do
> > so on their own, and would love to see MORE targeted outreach to
> state
> > party members to join national, as well as the inverse in
> encouraging
> > national members who are not members of their state parties to
> become
> > so as well.
>
> References
>
> 1. mailto:daniel.hayes at lp.org
> 2. mailto:justin.odonnell at lp.org
>
--
--
*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*
-------------- next part --------------
Thank you Joshua.
You must admit though we excel at finding ways to put a wet rag on
everything. In your first part you nailed it.
In second part I believe we all have an implied duty to grow the party
within our talents. My talent is to make those damn t-shirts
irresistible.
The topping on the pie would be if we could throw RONR into the mix.
On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 7:49 PM Joshua Katz
<[1]planning4liberty at gmail.com> wrote:
As usual, I'm not going to make an effort to read this entire
thread
carefully (look away from email for one day...). As is also
common, I
disagree with everyone.
First, on the question posed. It seems to me that people who
sign up
for memberships receive certain items - this is a decision made
by
staff, equally applicable to all (new) members, within the
discretion
the board has given to staff in the budget. How they get the
items
doesn't seem to me to be an item of concern, nor does it raise,
in my
opinion, the issues raised by paying for travel. I have no
objection,
even if the LNC member is running for a position on the next LNC
-
because my primary objection to travel costs was that the
transaction
was with an LNC member (and not available to all LNC members),
not the
potential for the LNC member to seek another position. Here we
have an
expenditure that would take place without the LNC member anyway -
that
is, the giving of an item to the new member - and so it doesn't
raise
my concerns.
Second, on the 'obligation' to sign up new members, which
everyone
replying to this email seems to agree exists. I have no
objection to
saying LNC members should help recruit members (although also
noting
that other LNC members do other things, such as gather thousands
of
volunteer signatures, run petition drives, etc.). But I do not
agree
that it's specially implied by serving on the LNC, at least
directly.
Boards are tasked with general oversight and governance of an
organization, and unless the organization's rules say otherwise,
there's no duty on individual members to do anything - Microsoft
probably doesn't expect its board members, in their individual
capacity, to go around encouraging people to buy Windows
(although it
certainly doesn't mind if they do, and those who do should get
the
product, and I don't think anyone would care if a board member,
for
some reason, had a small supply of CD-roms in their garage and
sold
them to customers with the money going to the company). I don't
see
anything in our rules establishing such an expectation.
Therefore, I
conclude that LNC members have the same expectation to sign up
new
members as anyone else in the party does, as well as any
expectation
any particular member takes on, but nothing more.
Joshua A. Katz
On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 7:03 PM, Daniel Hayes
<[1][2]daniel.hayes at lp.org>
wrote:
Mr, O’Donnell,
I agree with your point. Please sign your posts, rookie. Don’t
get
the list readers mad at you. It can be hard to tell on the
reflector list who made a post if it’s not signed I think.
Daniel Hayes
LNC At Large Member
Sent from my iPhone
> On Mar 9, 2018, at 6:43 PM, Justin O'Donnell
<[2][3]justin.odonnell at lp.org> wrote:
>
> From my understanding, there isnt a matter of opportunity to
the
> members of the LNC, but rather an implied duty to grow
memberships,
and
> provide representation of the National Party at state
conventions.
> I have spoken with the NH state chair, and his concern in
hearing
of
> this debate we are having, is that He invited Ms. Harlos to
the
LPNH
> Convention with the specific intent to conduct her usual
membership
> drive activities.
> Rather than arguing about who is doing it, perhaps we should
be
> focusing on why more of us are not.
> I applaud the idea of the Vice Chair candidates coming
together to
do
> so on their own, and would love to see MORE targeted outreach
to
state
> party members to join national, as well as the inverse in
encouraging
> national members who are not members of their state parties
to
become
> so as well.
References
1. mailto:[4]daniel.hayes at lp.org
2. mailto:[5]justin.odonnell at lp.org
--
--
In Liberty,
Caryn Ann Harlos
Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington)
- [6]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org
Communications Director, [7]Libertarian Party of Colorado
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
References
1. mailto:planning4liberty at gmail.com
2. mailto:daniel.hayes at lp.org
3. mailto:justin.odonnell at lp.org
4. mailto:daniel.hayes at lp.org
5. mailto:justin.odonnell at lp.org
6. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
7. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
More information about the Lnc-business
mailing list