[Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2018-12: INDEPENDENT AUDIT OF AT-LARGE VOTE RESULTS
john.phillips at lp.org
john.phillips at lp.org
Fri Jul 13 13:00:50 EDT 2018
Apologies if this went twice. My email is being dumb again ( or I am LOL)
1st. Please change my vote back to Yes.As my objection is currently being addressed.
2nd just a minor paperwork issue. It appears that we have a rep and alternate from the same region as sponsors on this. While that might normally be an issue leaving us with omly three, the solution is simple. I did indicate my willingness to Co- sponsor this when it came up. I got several emails about doing that in the wrong place, which I thought I had corrected, but given the other issue I had about replies not going to the list is possible that was missed.
Not a huge issue, other than I do not want this to get turned into another huge parliamentary argument.
John Phillips
Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
Cell 217-412-5973
------ Original message------From: William Redpath via Lnc-businessDate: Thu, Jul 12, 2018 10:13 AMTo: lnc-business at hq.lp.org;Cc: William Redpath;Subject:Re: [Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2018-12: INDEPENDENT AUDIT OF AT-LARGE VOTE RESULTS
I vote No. Bill Redpath
On 2018-07-12 11:09, Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business wrote:
> I vote no.
>
> -----
>
> Reasons:
>
> 1) I might have been inclined to vote yes, until I looked at the
> screenshots of the state tally sheets for At-Large. Some things
> struck me as potential problems, and if they could be problems in the
> At-Large votes, it could potentially be a problem on all the LNC
> votes. Joe Bishop-Henchman was a delegation chair and signed off on
> the tally sheet for his delegation. Joe Buchman was a delegation
> chair, and signed off on his delegation tally sheet. And so on. Do I
> think either of these men did anything wrong? No, but the possibly
> exists. Now, if I extrapolate that possibility to all the
> delegations, there's potential for plenty of problems, and not just in
> the At-Large race. Mr. Harlos was a delegation chair, and his wife
> was a candidate. Dan Reale was a delegation chair and was a candidate.
> Drew Layda also was a delegation chair, and was a candidate. There may
> be more that I missed. ALL of these *could* be potential problems.
> ---------------
> 2) The discussion of tallies, ballots, and votes has prompted a
> discussion in the Region 3 group. A person who was a candidate for
> the Region Alternate spot asked if anyone had the ballots from the
> region's voting, as he was interested in seeing them. One state still
> has theirs, two states indicated they'd disposed of the ballots, but
> think they did everything correct. (We know that the rate of error
> was fairly consistent with other ballots, so I suspect there're
> probably some errors in the Region 3 ballots and tallies too.) The
> fourth state in Region 3 hasn't responded to the question. Region 3
> had three good candidates from 3 different states vying for the
> Alternate spots. I'm fairly positive that the winner was Dustin Nanna
> who's on this email list, and I don't think anyone is calling that
> result into question. But, someone who was an alternate did ask about
> seeing the ballots and he won't be able to, and that is problematic.
> As we have no way to verify or audit the Region 3 votes. I'm thinking
> other regions are similar, in that they too couldn't do a proper audit
> now if asked.
> -------------
> 3 ) I'd probably vote for an audit that included ALL the LNC and the
> Judicial Committee races. (Taking into consideration that the Regions
> are probably ill-equipped to do so) As why should some leadership
> races be given more focus and prominence than others? This seems to
> be a trend, in that the regional votes were done in a haphazard
> manner. Yet this body has spent considerable time focused on other
> races. Region 3 did it's voting in a hallway, and we were given one
> hour to assemble all the delegates, do a role-call of sorts, which
> wasn't ideal. Acoustics not good and delegates couldn't hear the
> candidates, it was hot, and other people milling around, getting
> mixed-up with Region 3 people. Having our own room/space would've been
> preferable. (Hopefully, for 2020, regions can be given more
> consideration. This is LP business, and we shouldn't be shunted into
> halls and given short-shrift.)
> -----------
> 4) If the reason for doing an audit is principals, then there needs
> to be an audit of *all* the LP LNC races, including Chair, Vice-Chair,
> Secretary, and Treasurer, At-Large, and all the Regions too. Along
> with the Judicial Committee. (Which I now see the JC has it's own
> motion) I'd like to see ALL the races and candidates given the same
> consideration. On the LNC a Region Rep has one vote, the same as an
> At-Large or an Officer. Yet, there seems to be an undue level of
> importance placed on some candidates/races over others. For the sake
> of principals, I'd like to see more equity in treatment. I see no
> valid reason why the At-Large race is more likely to be error-prone
> than any of the races. If we want to be principled about the results,
> we do an audit of all the races.
>
>
>
>
> ---
> Elizabeth Van Horn
> LNC Region 3 (IN, MI, OH, KY)
> Secretary Libertarian Party of Madison Co, Indiana
> Chair-LP Social Media Process Review Committee
> Chair Libertarian Pragmatist Caucus
> http://www.lpcaucus.org/
>
>
>
> On 2018-07-12 02:53, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
>> We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business
>> list by July 19, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors:
>> Bowden,
>> Harlos, Longstreth, Mattson
>> Motion: Move that the LNC would have an audit of the At Large
>> ballots
>> done by two independent auditors appointed by the Chair, ie someone
>> not
>> in the race. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of
>> votes here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
>> --
>> --
>> In Liberty,
>> Caryn Ann Harlos
>> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
>> - [2]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. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
>> 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
-------------- next part --------------
Apologies if this went twice. My email is being dumb again ( or I am
LOL)
1st. Please change my vote back to Yes.
As my objection is currently being addressed.
2nd just a minor paperwork issue. It appears that we have a rep and
alternate from the same region as sponsors on this. While that might
normally be an issue leaving us with omly three, the solution is
simple. I did indicate my willingness to Co- sponsor this when it came
up. I got several emails about doing that in the wrong place, which I
thought I had corrected, but given the other issue I had about replies
not going to the list is possible that was missed.
Not a huge issue, other than I do not want this to get turned into
another huge parliamentary argument.
John Phillips
Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
Cell [1]217-412-5973
------ Original message------
From: William Redpath via Lnc-business
Date: Thu, Jul 12, 2018 10:13 AM
To: [2]lnc-business at hq.lp.org;
Cc: William Redpath;
Subject:Re: [Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2018-12: INDEPENDENT AUDIT OF
AT-LARGE VOTE RESULTS
I vote No. Bill Redpath
On [3]2018-07-12 11:09, Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business wrote:
> I vote no.
>
> -----
>
> Reasons:
>
> 1) I might have been inclined to vote yes, until I looked at the
> screenshots of the state tally sheets for At-Large. Some things
> struck me as potential problems, and if they could be problems in the
> At-Large votes, it could potentially be a problem on all the LNC
> votes. Joe Bishop-Henchman was a delegation chair and signed off on
> the tally sheet for his delegation. Joe Buchman was a delegation
> chair, and signed off on his delegation tally sheet. And so on. Do I
> think either of these men did anything wrong? No, but the possibly
> exists. Now, if I extrapolate that possibility to all the
> delegations, there's potential for plenty of problems, and not just in
> the At-Large race. Mr. Harlos was a delegation chair, and his wife
> was a candidate. Dan Reale was a delegation chair and was a candidate.
> Drew Layda also was a delegation chair, and was a candidate. There may
> be more that I missed. ALL of these *could* be potential problems.
> ---------------
> 2) The discussion of tallies, ballots, and votes has prompted a
> discussion in the Region 3 group. A person who was a candidate for
> the Region Alternate spot asked if anyone had the ballots from the
> region's voting, as he was interested in seeing them. One state still
> has theirs, two states indicated they'd disposed of the ballots, but
> think they did everything correct. (We know that the rate of error
> was fairly consistent with other ballots, so I suspect there're
> probably some errors in the Region 3 ballots and tallies too.) The
> fourth state in Region 3 hasn't responded to the question. Region 3
> had three good candidates from 3 different states vying for the
> Alternate spots. I'm fairly positive that the winner was Dustin Nanna
> who's on this email list, and I don't think anyone is calling that
> result into question. But, someone who was an alternate did ask about
> seeing the ballots and he won't be able to, and that is problematic.
> As we have no way to verify or audit the Region 3 votes. I'm thinking
> other regions are similar, in that they too couldn't do a proper audit
> now if asked.
> -------------
> 3 ) I'd probably vote for an audit that included ALL the LNC and the
> Judicial Committee races. (Taking into consideration that the Regions
> are probably ill-equipped to do so) As why should some leadership
> races be given more focus and prominence than others? This seems to
> be a trend, in that the regional votes were done in a haphazard
> manner. Yet this body has spent considerable time focused on other
> races. Region 3 did it's voting in a hallway, and we were given one
> hour to assemble all the delegates, do a role-call of sorts, which
> wasn't ideal. Acoustics not good and delegates couldn't hear the
> candidates, it was hot, and other people milling around, getting
> mixed-up with Region 3 people. Having our own room/space would've been
> preferable. (Hopefully, for 2020, regions can be given more
> consideration. This is LP business, and we shouldn't be shunted into
> halls and given short-shrift.)
> -----------
> 4) If the reason for doing an audit is principals, then there needs
> to be an audit of *all* the LP LNC races, including Chair, Vice-Chair,
> Secretary, and Treasurer, At-Large, and all the Regions too. Along
> with the Judicial Committee. (Which I now see the JC has it's own
> motion) I'd like to see ALL the races and candidates given the same
> consideration. On the LNC a Region Rep has one vote, the same as an
> At-Large or an Officer. Yet, there seems to be an undue level of
> importance placed on some candidates/races over others. For the sake
> of principals, I'd like to see more equity in treatment. I see no
> valid reason why the At-Large race is more likely to be error-prone
> than any of the races. If we want to be principled about the results,
> we do an audit of all the races.
>
>
>
>
> ---
> Elizabeth Van Horn
> LNC Region 3 (IN, MI, OH, KY)
> Secretary Libertarian Party of Madison Co, Indiana
> Chair-LP Social Media Process Review Committee
> Chair Libertarian Pragmatist Caucus
> [4]http://www.lpcaucus.org/
>
>
>
> On [5]2018-07-12 02:53, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
>> We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business
>> list by July 19, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors:
>> Bowden,
>> Harlos, Longstreth, Mattson
>> Motion: Move that the LNC would have an audit of the At Large
>> ballots
>> done by two independent auditors appointed by the Chair, ie someone
>> not
>> in the race. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of
>> votes here: [1][6]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
>> --
>> --
>> In Liberty,
>> Caryn Ann Harlos
>> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary
>> - [2][7]Caryn.Ann.[8] Harlos at LP.org or[9] Secretary at LP.org.
>> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[10] 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. [11]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
>> 2. mailto[12]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
References
1. tel:217-412-5973
2. mailto:lnc-business at hq.lp.org
3. tel:2018-07-12 11
4. http://www.lpcaucus.org/
5. tel:2018-07-12 02
6. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
7. http://Caryn.An/
8. mailto: Harlos at LP.org
9. mailto: Secretary at LP.org.
10. mailto: LPedia at LP.org
11. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting
12. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos at LP.org
More information about the Lnc-business
mailing list