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

Caryn Ann Harlos caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
Thu May 24 09:13:26 EDT 2018


I’m the epitome of subtlety

On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 5:07 AM Daniel Hayes <daniel.hayes at lp.org> wrote:

> 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/
>
> --
-- 
*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 --------------
   I’m the epitome of subtlety
   On Thu, May 24, 2018 at 5:07 AM Daniel Hayes <[1]daniel.hayes at lp.org>
   wrote:

     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
     <[2]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][3]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][4]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][5]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][6]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][7]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][8]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][9]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][10]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][11]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][12]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][13]daniel.hayes at lp.org
     >             2. mailto:[8][12][14]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
     >             3. mailto:[9][13][15]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
     >             4. mailto:[10][14][16]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
     >             5. mailto:[11]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
     >             6. [12][15][17]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
     >             7. mailto:[13]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
     >             8. [14][16][18]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
     >     References
     >        1. mailto:[17][19]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
     >        2. [18][20]https://zoom.us/pricing
     >        3. mailto:[19][21]daniel.hayes at lp.org
     >        4. mailto:[20][22]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
     >        5. mailto:[21][23]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
     >        6. mailto:[22][24]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
     >        7. mailto:[23][25]daniel.hayes at lp.org
     >        8. mailto:[24][26]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
     >        9. mailto:[25][27]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
     >       10. mailto:[26][28]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
     >       11. mailto:[27]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
     >       12. [28][29]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
     >       13. mailto:[29]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
     >       14. [30][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:[31]planning4liberty at gmail.com
     >   2. mailto:[32]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
     >   3.
     [33]https://support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/articles/200941109-Attendee-Con
     trols-in-a-Meeting
     >   4. mailto:[34]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
     >   5. mailto:[35]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
     >   6. [36]https://zoom.us/pricing
     >   7. mailto:[37]daniel.hayes at lp.org
     >   8. mailto:[38]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
     >   9. mailto:[39]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
     >  10. mailto:[40]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
     >  11. mailto:[41]daniel.hayes at lp.org
     >  12. mailto:[42]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
     >  13. mailto:[43]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
     >  14. mailto:[44]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
     >  15. [45]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
     >  16. [46]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
     >  17. mailto:[47]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
     >  18. [48]https://zoom.us/pricing
     >  19. mailto:[49]daniel.hayes at lp.org
     >  20. mailto:[50]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
     >  21. mailto:[51]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
     >  22. mailto:[52]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
     >  23. mailto:[53]daniel.hayes at lp.org
     >  24. mailto:[54]caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
     >  25. mailto:[55]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
     >  26. mailto:[56]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
     >  27. mailto:[57]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
     >  28. [58]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
     >  29. mailto:[59]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
     >  30. [60]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
     >  31. mailto:[61]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
     >  32. [62]http://www.lpcolorado.org/
     >  33. mailto:[63]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
     >  34. [64]http://www.lpcolorado.org/

   --

   --
   In Liberty,
   Caryn Ann Harlos
   Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska,
   Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington)
   - [65]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org
   Communications Director, [66]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:daniel.hayes at lp.org
   2. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   3. mailto:planning4liberty at gmail.com
   4. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
   5. https://support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/articles/200941109-Attendee
   6. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   7. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   8. https://zoom.us/pricing
   9. mailto:daniel.hayes at lp.org
  10. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
  11. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  12. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  13. mailto:daniel.hayes at lp.org
  14. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
  15. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  16. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  17. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
  18. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
  19. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  20. https://zoom.us/pricing
  21. mailto:daniel.hayes at lp.org
  22. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
  23. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  24. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  25. mailto:daniel.hayes at lp.org
  26. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
  27. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  28. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  29. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
  30. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
  31. mailto:planning4liberty at gmail.com
  32. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
  33. https://support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/articles/200941109-Attendee-Controls-in-a-Meeting
  34. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  35. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  36. https://zoom.us/pricing
  37. mailto:daniel.hayes at lp.org
  38. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
  39. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  40. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  41. mailto:daniel.hayes at lp.org
  42. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
  43. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  44. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  45. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
  46. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
  47. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  48. https://zoom.us/pricing
  49. mailto:daniel.hayes at lp.org
  50. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
  51. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  52. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  53. mailto:daniel.hayes at lp.org
  54. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
  55. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  56. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  57. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
  58. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
  59. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
  60. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
  61. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
  62. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
  63. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
  64. http://www.lpcolorado.org/
  65. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
  66. http://www.lpcolorado.org/


More information about the Lnc-business mailing list