[Lnc-business] Request for Co-Sponsors to Amend Policy Manual to Allow Zoom for E-Meetings

Daniel Hayes daniel.hayes at lp.org
Thu May 24 07:07:49 EDT 2018


Dear Mr Katz,,

Stop telling the lady with the pink hair she’s being overly dramatic.   That’s not part of her personality.

Daniel Hayes

Sent from my iPhone

> On May 23, 2018, at 10:05 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
> 
>   ===Well, I think that's overly dramatic.===
>   I got over a dozen people on the Platform Committee that would disagree
>   with you.  Both Yahoo groups and Adobe Connect need to die in a fire.
>   ===  It's not perfect, and I'm perfectly open to the idea that Zoom is
>   better.  I just don't think it's that bad, although it has plenty of
>   glitches.===
>   It's awful.  I would have been miraculous 5 years ago.  It has remained
>   there.
>   ===Would our contract with Zoom allow us to share those host
>   credentials as described?  I know we physically can do it, but would it
>   be allowed?  ===
>   There is no contract - and I never saw anything precluding it.  Worst
>   case, we add a host on the fly.  No lock-ins.
>   ==I understand that the calling in better with Zoom, but is there an
>   additional cost when people call in, the way there is with Adobe?==
>   No.
>   ==I would prefer more than just up or down, but I agree that's
>   liveable.  Is there a text chat feature people can use to say they have
>   a privileged motion?==
>   Yes and awesome screen sharing.
>   ==If we required that we always meet at a Holiday Inn, I wouldn't have
>   had my anniversary day expire while staying at Hyatts, etc., but I
>   agree that's not a sufficient reason to have that rule.  I'm not sure
>   it's exactly analogous, though.  ===
>   It's not analogous because its moved passed that.  But imagine that
>   hotels were a new emerging thing and most of them were terrible or had
>   security dangers.  It would make sense to say Holiday Inn is vetted, we
>   will only use them.  But then time passes and better hotels pop up.
>   That is where we are at now.
> 
>   On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:38 PM, Joshua Katz
>   <[1]planning4liberty at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>   Well, I think that's overly dramatic.  It's not perfect, and I'm
>   perfectly open to the idea that Zoom is better.  I just don't think
>   it's that bad, although it has plenty of glitches.
>   Would our contract with Zoom allow us to share those host credentials
>   as described?  I know we physically can do it, but would it be
>   allowed?
>   I understand that the calling in better with Zoom, but is there an
>   additional cost when people call in, the way there is with Adobe?
>   I would prefer more than just up or down, but I agree that's liveable.
>   Is there a text chat feature people can use to say they have a
>   privileged motion?
>   If we required that we always meet at a Holiday Inn, I wouldn't have
>   had my anniversary day expire while staying at Hyatts, etc., but I
>   agree that's not a sufficient reason to have that rule.  I'm not sure
>   it's exactly analogous, though.
> 
>   Joshua A. Katz
>   On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 9:21 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos
>   <[2]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:
> 
>   === Well, okay, but this won't actually save us the cost of Adobe
>   since,
>      unless I am misreading it, we'll still maintain an Adobe option.
>   ====
>   Temporarily as a fail-safe.
>   === I    don't see the cost of Adobe as an argument here when we'll
>   still be
>      paying it.  (That's not a criticism, there are plenty of reasons
>   this
>      motion makes more sense than one to get out of Adobe, not least
>   being
>      that we're in a contract.  I just don't think it's a good argument
>   for
>      this motion.)===
>   Temporarily.  And Adobe allows only one person to admin the meetings.
>   That is completely nonfeasible if this is to be an option for
>   committees.
>     ===On Zoom, it looks to me like we'd be limited to the Pro package.
>   How
>      many hosts would we anticipate, umm, what's the right word?
>   Buying?====
>   You only need one.  The  master account.  Wes could then give those
>   credentials to whoever needed them.  And IF we ever needed more you can
>   drop and add at any time.
>   ==You know what I mean.  Also, does Zoom have the multiple statuses
>   we have on Adobe - raised hand, agree/disagree, rabbit for privileged
>      motions, etc.?===
>   It has hand up and hand down.  That can be used for everything.
>   [3]https://support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/articles/200941109-Attendee
>   -Controls-in-a-Meeting
>   ===I agree with Daniel's point that we looked at various options
>   for several weeks before choosing Adobe.  If people want to move on to
>      something else, fine with me, but I would prefer a process similar
>   to the one we used last time.===
>   Adobe is a living hell to use.  While not for the LNC I have done this
>   process for many years, and hands down, zoom is it.  Close second is Go
>   To Meeting.  If the LPCO had to live on Adobe we would disband it is
>   that awful.
>   Ideally I want the policy manual to be option to many hosting options.
>   I mean how silly would it be if it said we could ONLY meet at Holiday
>   Inn?  And only if a certain person was there?  The PM should just be a
>   list of requirements.
>   But we need to have the freedom now to actually do things, and the
>   Platform Committee will be having about 4 or so more e-meetings and we
>   will all commit ritual suicide if we have to deal with that level of
>   Dante's Inferno called Adobe Connect.
> 
>   On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 6:10 PM, Joshua Katz via Lnc-business
>   <[4]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
> 
>        Well, okay, but this won't actually save us the cost of Adobe
>     since,
>        unless I am misreading it, we'll still maintain an Adobe option.
>     I
>        don't see the cost of Adobe as an argument here when we'll still
>     be
>        paying it.  (That's not a criticism, there are plenty of reasons
>     this
>        motion makes more sense than one to get out of Adobe, not least
>     being
>        that we're in a contract.  I just don't think it's a good
>     argument for
>        this motion.)
>        On Zoom, it looks to me like we'd be limited to the Pro package.
>     How
>        many hosts would we anticipate, umm, what's the right word?
>     Buying?
>        You know what I mean.  Also, does Zoom have the multiple statuses
>     we
>        have on Adobe - raised hand, agree/disagree, rabbit for
>     privileged
>        motions, etc.?
>        I agree with Daniel's point that we looked at various options for
>        several weeks before choosing Adobe.  If people want to move on
>     to
>        something else, fine with me, but I would prefer a process
>     similar to
>        the one we used last time.
>        Joshua A. Katz
>        On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 8:37 AM, Elizabeth Van Horn via
>     Lnc-business
>        <[1][5]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>          I'll do a quick argument for Zoom:  It's cheap and easy.
>          Against Abode:  It's costly and difficult.
>          Here's the Zoom pricing for comparison:
>          [2][6]https://zoom.us/pricing
>          ---
>          Elizabeth Van Horn
>        On 2018-05-23 09:33, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
>          I have enough co-sponsors and limited time.  It will pass or
>     fail -
>             I'll save the arguments for go-time.  I mentioned this a few
>          months ago
>             and waited.
>             On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 7:24 AM, Daniel Hayes
>          <[1][3][7]daniel.hayes at lp.org>
>             wrote:
>             It’s email you silly goose. The rules of debate don’t apply.
>     You
>          need
>             to lay it out first cause you can’t amend an email motion.
>             Daniel
>             Sent from my iPhone
>             On May 23, 2018, at 8:14 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos
>             <[2][4][8]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:
>             I’ll wait to argue for it when the ballot is started.
>             On Wed, May 23, 2018 at 6:53 AM Daniel Hayes via
>     Lnc-business
>             <[3][5][9]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>               What’s the cost on the Zoom service?  We had a committee
>     that
>               evaluated different video conferencing platforms for
>     months in
>          late
>               2014. Then I think we took the whole LNC on Adobe before
>     we
>          pulled
>               the trigger.
>               I’m not opposed to another platform because over 3 years
>     is
>          forever
>               in the technology arena but why Zoom? What else is out
>     there
>          now?
>               At THIS moment I am a “NO” on this because we have almost
>     NO
>          data on
>               this, unless I missed an email thread.
>               Daniel Hayes
>               LNC At Large Member
>               Sent from my iPhone
>> On May 23, 2018, at 7:03 AM, Dustin Nanna via
>     Lnc-business
> 
>             <[4][6][10]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>> 
>>  Did you get enough cosponsors? If not I cosponsor as well
>>  Dustin Nanna
>>  LNC Region 3 Alternate
>>  Vice Chair/Deputy Communications Director
>>  Libertarian Party of Ohio
>>  (740) 816-9805
>           --
>           --
>           In Liberty,
>           Caryn Ann Harlos
>           Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>   (Alaska,
>           Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming,
>        Washington)
>           - [5]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org
>           Communications Director, [6]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
>           --
>           --
>           In Liberty,
>           Caryn Ann Harlos
>           Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee
>   (Alaska,
>           Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming,
>        Washington)
>           - [7]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org
>           Communications Director, [8]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:[7][11]daniel.hayes at lp.org
>             2. mailto:[8][12]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
>             3. mailto:[9][13]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>             4. mailto:[10][14]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>             5. mailto:[11]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>             6. [12][15]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
>             7. mailto:[13]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>             8. [14][16]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
>     References
>        1. mailto:[17]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>        2. [18]https://zoom.us/pricing
>        3. mailto:[19]daniel.hayes at lp.org
>        4. mailto:[20]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
>        5. mailto:[21]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>        6. mailto:[22]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>        7. mailto:[23]daniel.hayes at lp.org
>        8. mailto:[24]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
>        9. mailto:[25]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>       10. mailto:[26]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>       11. mailto:[27]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>       12. [28]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
>       13. mailto:[29]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>       14. [30]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
> 
>   --
>   --
>   In Liberty,
>   Caryn Ann Harlos
>   Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
>   Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington)
>   - [31]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org
>   Communications Director, [32]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
> 
>   --
>   --
>   In Liberty,
>   Caryn Ann Harlos
>   Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
>   Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington)
>   - [33]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org
>   Communications Director, [34]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:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
>   3. https://support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/articles/200941109-Attendee-Controls-in-a-Meeting
>   4. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   5. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>   6. https://zoom.us/pricing
>   7. mailto:daniel.hayes at lp.org
>   8. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
>   9. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>  10. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>  11. mailto:daniel.hayes at lp.org
>  12. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
>  13. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>  14. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>  15. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
>  16. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
>  17. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>  18. https://zoom.us/pricing
>  19. mailto:daniel.hayes at lp.org
>  20. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
>  21. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>  22. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>  23. mailto:daniel.hayes at lp.org
>  24. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
>  25. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>  26. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>  27. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>  28. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
>  29. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>  30. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
>  31. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>  32. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
>  33. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>  34. http://www.lpcolorado.org/




More information about the Lnc-business mailing list