[Lnc-business] update on timing

Caryn Ann Harlos caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
Wed Jul 11 05:15:10 EDT 2018


Hi Alicia,

==  I can't help but notice that you were fine with my tabulation of the
   Secretary's race, but then you were happier with the outcome of that
   one.  You're not rattling the cages about that, only about the one in
   which you seem to be unhappy with the result. ==

I am not unhappy with the result.  I am unhappy with the way it was
handled.  Please don't make accusations or assumptions.  I hope all of the
races are audited and anyone in those races should not be involved with
that.  I am sure you agree that margins of less than 20 votes are
significantly different than margins of 150 votes.

== You have recklessly asserted that "a region 1 candidate was pretty
screwed by this whole process", and that carries some pretty unfair
implications.==

The implications are that the At-Large candidates, which include a region 1
candidate, were not proper.  I have asserted that from the beginning.

==  You keep complaining that I'm not done yet, as though heckling the person
doing the work will make it go faster. ===

Alicia, now you are going overboard.  I am entitled to ask, and that is not
heckling.  I already begged your forgiveness if the intent came off
differently but now you are attacking me.  I am not complaining you are not
done.  I am asking for a timeframe.  That is all.  You could take three
months and I think that is reasonable.

== Your offer to "assist" is not practical, as any means for that to happen
would necessarily make it take longer, and thus it contradicts your other
complaint that it isn't happening fast enough.==

First I never complained it is not happening fast enough.  And second, it
would seem desirable for me to assist to learn what you are doing.   That
is part of a standard hand-off practice.

== You keep asking for a "timeline".  I previously informed you when I'd get
back home so I could start on it.  After my first day of working on t, I
updated on the substantial progress I made, indicated what was left to do,
and assured you that it is my top priority to complete as soon as I could.
Yet you're acting as though I have told you nothing and have done nothing
so far.  ==

I am getting asked and asked and asked by members for a timeline.  I think
you are reading into things that are not there.  I have no doubt that you
have done an immense amount.  I am not sure where this is coming from, but
it is not accurate.

==In spite of me describing my progress and approaching the finishing line,
you're portraying this as though the people requesting
   information are being "ignored".==

The Utah Chair would like a timeline.  He feels ignored.

And I don't think a timeline is unreasonable - such as "Dr. Buchman you can
expect that in two weeks."

That is all I am asking.  I think this going on the attack here is not
appropriate.  If *I* have one complaint (that is not transmitting a
complaint from a member) it would be that I should be included on this
process.  That is part of training and handoff.  And yes that may mean
things will take a little bit longer and that can be blamed totally on me.

There is no need to go on the attack.  I am not attacking you.  I don't
attack you.  I have only the utmost respect and admiration for your skills
as I have said numerous times which is one reason I do want to be included
in the process for training purposes.

I am not attacking you.  Please stop attacking me.  None of this is
productive.  I already apologized if the tone of other requests came off
wrong.  Please accept that.

However, a timeline is not unreasonable and I am requesting that on behalf
of members who keep asking me.  A request that people involved in an
election not be involved in the recount is not unreasonable, in fact, I am
rather shocked that is not standard practice so I am requesting an
independent audit of any race in which an auditor was also a candidate  We
would expect this of other organizations.



On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 2:22 AM, Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business <
lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:

>    Caryn Ann,
>    I can't help but notice that you were fine with my tabulation of the
>    Secretary's race, but then you were happier with the outcome of that
>    one.  You're not rattling the cages about that, only about the one in
>    which you seem to be unhappy with the result.  You have recklessly
>    asserted that "a region 1 candidate was pretty screwed by this whole
>    process", and that carries some pretty unfair implications.
>    You keep complaining that I'm not done yet, as though heckling the
>    person doing the work will make it go faster.  Your offer to "assist"
>    is not practical, as any means for that to happen would necessarily
>    make it take longer, and thus it contradicts your other complaint that
>    it isn't happening fast enough.
>    You keep asking for a "timeline".  I previously informed you when I'd
>    get back home so I could start on it.  After my first day of working on
>    it, I updated on the substantial progress I made, indicated what was
>    left to do, and assured you that it is my top priority to complete as
>    soon as I could.  Yet you're acting as though I have told you nothing
>    and have done nothing so far.  Today I finished the dozen states that I
>    didn't get to yesterday.  Next I need to write up my notes and scan
>    some supporting documents.  That's where things are, and it's where
>    I'll pick up later today.
>    In spite of me describing my progress and approaching the finishing
>    line, you're portraying this as though the people requesting
>    information are being "ignored".  That's just not a rational
>    description of the situation.
>    All of this just makes me think that this whole conversation is more
>    about generating noise than anything else.  Regardless, I'll finish the
>    task soon and then move on to the rest of my to-do list.
>    -Alicia
>
>    On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 8:32 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business
>    <[1]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>
>         The At-Large results shouldn’t be a one-person audit in this
>      case.
>         And no one who ran should conduct it.
>         I continue to offer to assist.
>         There was no intent to have an inappropriate tone and if anything
>         presented that way you have my abject apology.
>         What is being asked - by several state Chairs - is a timeline.  I
>      don’t
>         think that is unreasonable.  They feel like they are being
>      ignored.
>         On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 9:24 PM Richard Longstreth via
>      Lnc-business
>         <[1][2]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>              Thank you for your work Alicia. I appreciate your hasty
>      efforts
>           and
>              dedication in getting these items available as soon as you
>      can.
>              Richard
>              On Tue, Jul 10, 2018, 05:09 Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business
>
>            <[1][2][3]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>                 Ms. Harlos,
>                 I indicated before that I would be traveling with a full
>         schedule
>              and
>                 only sporadic internet access, and would not return to my
>         more
>              normal
>                 routine until Monday.  I got home from my trip Sunday
>    night,
>         and
>                 starting in the wee hours of Monday morning you started
>    the
>         "Are
>              we
>                 there yet?" messages about the At-Large details.  Then
>         throughout
>              the
>                 day it became rather unfair characterizations that I was
>         saying
>              "well,
>                 whenever" as though I'm blowing it off.  That tone is not
>              warranted nor
>                 appreciated.
>                 Yes, the state-by-state numbers that add up to the totals
>    I
>         sent
>              do
>                 exist, but providing that will not be the end of the
>    story.
>         If
>              all I
>                 send is that, immediately the questions will begin about
>    the
>              instances
>                 where those numbers vary from the delegation tally sheets
>         because
>              we
>                 caught and corrected errors.  Then while I am researching
>    to
>              answer
>                 those questions, we all know the internet gossip will get
>         silly,
>              with
>                 people not being careful to say only things they know to
>    be
>         true
>              while
>                 waiting on answers to the questions.
>                 My usual practice is to do the post-convention audit as
>    part
>         of
>                 building the convention minutes, which is near the end of
>    my
>              to-do list
>                 after having updated other minutes with timing deadlines,
>         policy,
>                 bylaws, platform, etc.  Instead, so I can answer most
>         questions
>              on
>                 at-large before they are asked, because there was a very
>         close
>              outcome
>                 that involves me, I've prioritized the audit of the
>    At-Large
>         race
>              to do
>                 it mostly first...though I did also send updated minutes
>    to
>         meet
>              a
>                 posting deadline and update the Policy Manual earlier.
>                 When I provide the state-by-state numbers, I'll scan the
>         state
>              tally
>                 sheets, plus provide my notes about what's different
>    between
>         the
>              two
>                 and why so that those questions can be addressed
>         simultaneously
>              in one
>                 message, rather than being spread out in different places
>    at
>              different
>                 times where people might miss some of it.
>                 You're well aware of how long it took a team of 10 people
>    to
>         go
>              through
>                 the Judicial Committee votes after the LNC meeting on July
>         2nd?
>              You
>                 can deduce from that how long it takes one person to give
>         the
>              At-Large
>                 the second-pass, fine-tooth-comb treatment.  Today I spent
>    a
>              LARGE
>                 number of hours on the project.  I think I have about a
>         dozen
>              states
>                 left to go, plus tally sheet scanning and writing up my
>         notes.
>              It
>                 takes only a few seconds for you to ask, "Are we there
>         yet?", but
>              it
>                 takes a lot longer to actually accomplish it.
>                 I didn't have the crystal ball at the start of the project
>         to
>              know
>                 precisely how long I would get to work on it today, or how
>         long
>              it
>                 would take to complete.  Rather than emailing the LNC
>    every
>         30
>              minutes,
>                 (and I haven't even taken time to comment on the two email
>              ballots yet,
>                 though I have a bit to say there), I'm focusing on just
>         getting
>              this
>                 task done so I can move on to the next.  It is a high
>         priority on
>              my
>                 list, and when I finish it, I'll send it.
>                 To others who have been asking about the rest of my to-do
>         list,
>              I'm
>                 doing this project first.  In the case of adopted
>         resolutions,
>              please
>                 recall that our convention forges ahead and adopts all
>    sorts
>         of
>              things
>                 from the floor while the Secretary is trying to tally
>         election
>                 results.  I suppose I should be flattered that some
>    believe
>         I can
>                 document those fully on the fly while I'm simultaneously
>              aggregating
>                 election results, and have completed minutes immediately
>              following
>                 adjournment, but that's a bit overly optimistic.  I am a
>         human
>              who is
>                 constrained by the laws of time and space.  I could only
>         make
>              sparse
>                 notes about the nature of other proceedings while I was
>         working
>              on
>                 elections, and when I start building the convention
>    minutes,
>         I'll
>              have
>                 to go back and review the recordings to verify that I
>    caught
>         all
>              the
>                 relevant details.  I have a large envelope of lots of
>    things
>         that
>              were
>                 submitted in writing, so I'll fish out what was actually
>         voted
>              on,
>                 verify that the written submission matches what the
>         delegates
>              were told
>                 they were voting on, etc.
>                 Again, all these items are in the queue, and I'll get to
>         them all
>              as
>                 soon as I reasonably can now that I am back at home with
>    my
>         usual
>                 workspace, but it is unreasonable to expect it to all
>    happen
>                 instantaneously.
>                 -Alicia
>
>           References
>              1. mailto:[3][4]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>         --
>         --
>         In Liberty,
>         Caryn Ann Harlos
>         Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
>         - [4]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org or Secretary at LP.org.
>         Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org
>         A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
>         We defend your rights
>         And oppose the use of force
>         Taxation is theft
>      References
>         1. mailto:[5]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>         2. mailto:[6]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>         3. mailto:[7]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>         4. mailto:[8]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>
> References
>
>    1. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    2. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    3. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    4. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    5. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    6. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    7. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
>    8. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
>



-- 
-- 
*In Liberty,*
*Caryn Ann Harlos*
Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann.
Harlos at LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org> or Secretary at LP.org.
Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org

A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
*We defend your rights*
*And oppose the use of force*
*Taxation is theft*
-------------- next part --------------
   Hi Alicia,
   ==  I can't help but notice that you were fine with my tabulation of
   the
      Secretary's race, but then you were happier with the outcome of that
      one.  You're not rattling the cages about that, only about the one
   in
      which you seem to be unhappy with the result. ==
   I am not unhappy with the result.  I am unhappy with the way it was
   handled.  Please don't make accusations or assumptions.  I hope all of
   the races are audited and anyone in those races should not be involved
   with that.  I am sure you agree that margins of less than 20 votes are
   significantly different than margins of 150 votes.
   == You have recklessly asserted that "a region 1 candidate was pretty
   screwed by this whole process", and that carries some pretty unfair
   implications.==
   The implications are that the At-Large candidates, which include a
   region 1 candidate, were not proper.  I have asserted that from the
   beginning.
   ==  You keep complaining that I'm not done yet, as though heckling
   the person doing the work will make it go faster. ===
   Alicia, now you are going overboard.  I am entitled to ask, and that is
   not heckling.  I already begged your forgiveness if the intent came off
   differently but now you are attacking me.  I am not complaining you are
   not done.  I am asking for a timeframe.  That is all.  You could take
   three months and I think that is reasonable.
   == Your offer to "assist" is not practical, as any means for that to
   happen would necessarily make it take longer, and thus it contradicts
   your other complaint that it isn't happening fast enough.==
   First I never complained it is not happening fast enough.  And second,
   it would seem desirable for me to assist to learn what you are doing.
    That is part of a standard hand-off practice.
   == You keep asking for a "timeline".  I previously informed you when
   I'd get back home so I could start on it.  After my first day of
   working on t, I updated on the substantial progress I made, indicated
   what was left to do, and assured you that it is my top priority to
   complete as soon as I could.  Yet you're acting as though I have told
   you nothing and have done nothing so far.  ==
   I am getting asked and asked and asked by members for a timeline.  I
   think you are reading into things that are not there.  I have no doubt
   that you have done an immense amount.  I am not sure where this is
   coming from, but it is not accurate.
   ==In spite of me describing my progress and approaching the finishing
   line, you're portraying this as though the people requesting
      information are being "ignored".==
   The Utah Chair would like a timeline.  He feels ignored.
   And I don't think a timeline is unreasonable - such as "Dr. Buchman you
   can expect that in two weeks."
   That is all I am asking.  I think this going on the attack here is not
   appropriate.  If *I* have one complaint (that is not transmitting a
   complaint from a member) it would be that I should be included on this
   process.  That is part of training and handoff.  And yes that may mean
   things will take a little bit longer and that can be blamed totally on
   me.
   There is no need to go on the attack.  I am not attacking you.  I don't
   attack you.  I have only the utmost respect and admiration for your
   skills as I have said numerous times which is one reason I do want to
   be included in the process for training purposes.
   I am not attacking you.  Please stop attacking me.  None of this is
   productive.  I already apologized if the tone of other requests came
   off wrong.  Please accept that.
   However, a timeline is not unreasonable and I am requesting that on
   behalf of members who keep asking me.  A request that people involved
   in an election not be involved in the recount is not unreasonable, in
   fact, I am rather shocked that is not standard practice so I am
   requesting an independent audit of any race in which an auditor was
   also a candidate  We would expect this of other organizations.

   On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 2:22 AM, Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business
   <[1]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:

        Caryn Ann,
        I can't help but notice that you were fine with my tabulation of
     the
        Secretary's race, but then you were happier with the outcome of
     that
        one.  You're not rattling the cages about that, only about the
     one in
        which you seem to be unhappy with the result.  You have
     recklessly
        asserted that "a region 1 candidate was pretty screwed by this
     whole
        process", and that carries some pretty unfair implications.
        You keep complaining that I'm not done yet, as though heckling
     the
        person doing the work will make it go faster.  Your offer to
     "assist"
        is not practical, as any means for that to happen would
     necessarily
        make it take longer, and thus it contradicts your other complaint
     that
        it isn't happening fast enough.
        You keep asking for a "timeline".  I previously informed you when
     I'd
        get back home so I could start on it.  After my first day of
     working on
        it, I updated on the substantial progress I made, indicated what
     was
        left to do, and assured you that it is my top priority to
     complete as
        soon as I could.  Yet you're acting as though I have told you
     nothing
        and have done nothing so far.  Today I finished the dozen states
     that I
        didn't get to yesterday.  Next I need to write up my notes and
     scan
        some supporting documents.  That's where things are, and it's
     where
        I'll pick up later today.
        In spite of me describing my progress and approaching the
     finishing
        line, you're portraying this as though the people requesting
        information are being "ignored".  That's just not a rational
        description of the situation.
        All of this just makes me think that this whole conversation is
     more
        about generating noise than anything else.  Regardless, I'll
     finish the
        task soon and then move on to the rest of my to-do list.
        -Alicia
        On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 8:32 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via
     Lnc-business
        <[1][2]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
             The At-Large results shouldn’t be a one-person audit in this
          case.
             And no one who ran should conduct it.
             I continue to offer to assist.
             There was no intent to have an inappropriate tone and if
     anything
             presented that way you have my abject apology.
             What is being asked - by several state Chairs - is a
     timeline.  I
          don’t
             think that is unreasonable.  They feel like they are being
          ignored.
             On Tue, Jul 10, 2018 at 9:24 PM Richard Longstreth via
          Lnc-business
             <[1][2][3]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
                  Thank you for your work Alicia. I appreciate your hasty
          efforts
               and
                  dedication in getting these items available as soon as
     you
          can.
                  Richard
                  On Tue, Jul 10, 2018, 05:09 Alicia Mattson via
     Lnc-business

              <[1][2][3][4]lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
                   Ms. Harlos,
                   I indicated before that I would be traveling with a
   full
           schedule
                and
                   only sporadic internet access, and would not return to
   my
           more
                normal
                   routine until Monday.  I got home from my trip Sunday
      night,
           and
                   starting in the wee hours of Monday morning you started
      the
           "Are
                we
                   there yet?" messages about the At-Large details.  Then
           throughout
                the
                   day it became rather unfair characterizations that I
   was
           saying
                "well,
                   whenever" as though I'm blowing it off.  That tone is
   not
                warranted nor
                   appreciated.
                   Yes, the state-by-state numbers that add up to the
   totals
      I
           sent
                do
                   exist, but providing that will not be the end of the
      story.
           If
                all I
                   send is that, immediately the questions will begin
   about
      the
                instances
                   where those numbers vary from the delegation tally
   sheets
           because
                we
                   caught and corrected errors.  Then while I am
   researching
      to
                answer
                   those questions, we all know the internet gossip will
   get
           silly,
                with
                   people not being careful to say only things they know
   to
      be
           true
                while
                   waiting on answers to the questions.
                   My usual practice is to do the post-convention audit as
      part
           of
                   building the convention minutes, which is near the end
   of
      my
                to-do list
                   after having updated other minutes with timing
   deadlines,
           policy,
                   bylaws, platform, etc.  Instead, so I can answer most
           questions
                on
                   at-large before they are asked, because there was a
   very
           close
                outcome
                   that involves me, I've prioritized the audit of the
      At-Large
           race
                to do
                   it mostly first...though I did also send updated
   minutes
      to
           meet
                a
                   posting deadline and update the Policy Manual earlier.
                   When I provide the state-by-state numbers, I'll scan
   the
           state
                tally
                   sheets, plus provide my notes about what's different
      between
           the
                two
                   and why so that those questions can be addressed
           simultaneously
                in one
                   message, rather than being spread out in different
   places
      at
                different
                   times where people might miss some of it.
                   You're well aware of how long it took a team of 10
   people
      to
           go
                through
                   the Judicial Committee votes after the LNC meeting on
   July
           2nd?
                You
                   can deduce from that how long it takes one person to
   give
           the
                At-Large
                   the second-pass, fine-tooth-comb treatment.  Today I
   spent
      a
                LARGE
                   number of hours on the project.  I think I have about a
           dozen
                states
                   left to go, plus tally sheet scanning and writing up my
           notes.
                It
                   takes only a few seconds for you to ask, "Are we there
           yet?", but
                it
                   takes a lot longer to actually accomplish it.
                   I didn't have the crystal ball at the start of the
   project
           to
                know
                   precisely how long I would get to work on it today, or
   how
           long
                it
                   would take to complete.  Rather than emailing the LNC
      every
           30
                minutes,
                   (and I haven't even taken time to comment on the two
   email
                ballots yet,
                   though I have a bit to say there), I'm focusing on just
           getting
                this
                   task done so I can move on to the next.  It is a high
           priority on
                my
                   list, and when I finish it, I'll send it.
                   To others who have been asking about the rest of my
   to-do
           list,
                I'm
                   doing this project first.  In the case of adopted
           resolutions,
                please
                   recall that our convention forges ahead and adopts all
      sorts
           of
                things
                   from the floor while the Secretary is trying to tally
           election
                   results.  I suppose I should be flattered that some
      believe
           I can
                   document those fully on the fly while I'm
   simultaneously
                aggregating
                   election results, and have completed minutes
   immediately
                following
                   adjournment, but that's a bit overly optimistic.  I am
   a
           human
                who is
                   constrained by the laws of time and space.  I could
   only
           make
                sparse
                   notes about the nature of other proceedings while I was
           working
                on
                   elections, and when I start building the convention
      minutes,
           I'll
                have
                   to go back and review the recordings to verify that I
      caught
           all
                the
                   relevant details.  I have a large envelope of lots of
      things
           that
                were
                   submitted in writing, so I'll fish out what was
   actually
           voted
                on,
                   verify that the written submission matches what the
           delegates
                were told
                   they were voting on, etc.
                   Again, all these items are in the queue, and I'll get
   to
           them all
                as
                   soon as I reasonably can now that I am back at home
   with
      my
           usual
                   workspace, but it is unreasonable to expect it to all
      happen
                   instantaneously.
                   -Alicia
             References

                  1. mailto:[3][4][5]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
             --
             --
             In Liberty,
             Caryn Ann Harlos
             Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee
     Secretary
             - [4]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org or Secretary at LP.org.
             Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org
             A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
             We defend your rights
             And oppose the use of force
             Taxation is theft
          References
             1. mailto:[5][6]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
             2. mailto:[6][7]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
             3. mailto:[7][8]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
             4. mailto:[8]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
     References
        1. mailto:[9]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
        2. mailto:[10]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
        3. mailto:[11]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
        4. mailto:[12]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
        5. mailto:[13]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
        6. mailto:[14]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
        7. mailto:[15]lnc-business at hq.lp.org
        8. mailto:[16]Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org

   --
   --
   In Liberty,
   Caryn Ann Harlos
   Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
   - [17]Caryn.Ann. Harlos at LP.org or Secretary at LP.org.
   Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia at LP.org
   A haiku to the Statement of Principles:
   We defend your rights
   And oppose the use of force
   Taxation is theft

References

   1. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   2. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   3. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   4. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   5. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   6. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   7. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   8. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
   9. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  10. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  11. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  12. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  13. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  14. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  15. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
  16. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
  17. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org


More information about the Lnc-business mailing list