[Lnc-business] Seeking Co-Sponsors to work on Policy Manual style issues postponed from last meeting

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

No problem, but FYI there is no difference.  I literally attached the same
things already sent before the meeting that I had from that folder.  How
long do you think you need?

*In Liberty,*

* Personal Note:  I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome
(part of the autism spectrum).  This can affect inter-personal
communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas.  If anyone
found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux
pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *



On Mon, Oct 21, 2019 at 2:00 PM Joe Bishop-Henchman <
joe.bishop-henchman at lp.org> wrote:

> I would appreciate additional time. I had reviewed the document before
> the previous meeting, and this version is different, at least
> cosmetically. This week is particularly busy at work - a lot of people
> are visiting town for a big conference - and the time I do spend on LP
> this week will be spent reviewing the Bylaws applications.
>
> JBH
>
> ------------
> Joe Bishop-Henchman
> LNC Member (At-Large)
> joe.bishop-henchman at lp.org
> www.facebook.com/groups/189510455174837
>
> On 2019-10-20 17:16, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote:
> > Ms. Mattson, you are mischaracterizing the situation.  Each category
> > was
> > going to be addressed separately - but nonetheless - I said this
> > multiple
> > times since then but you decided to wait until I actually asked for
> > sponsors to bring this up.  I understand you are busy - everyone is
> > busy -
> > and if I were too busy to do my responsibilities I would not insist
> > that
> > nothing could be done until I was ready but trust the rest of the
> > committee
> > to do their job.  None of this revolves around one person.  You didn't
> > even
> > give me the courtesy of asking for more time.  You waited.
> >
> > Now instead of continuing to argue about how things are not done to
> > your
> > satisfaction, do you have a productive suggestion for proceeding?  I am
> > not
> > a mind-reader.  This is really silly.
> >
> > *In Liberty,*
> >
> > * Personal Note:  I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome
> > (part of the autism spectrum).  This can affect inter-personal
> > communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas.  If anyone
> > found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social
> > faux
> > pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
> >
> >
> >
> > On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 2:49 PM Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business <
> > lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
> >
> >> We had the color-coded categories at the last meeting, but the nature
> >> of
> >> the discussion was NOT merely having them described in various
> >> categories,
> >> but actually dividing the motion into several motions based on the
> >> categories because there were objections to some but not to others.
> >> That
> >> is what I expected next, a proposal for how to take them up in smaller
> >> bites.  Instead we got only one category carved out separately and all
> >> the
> >> rest lumped together in a single motion.  I have reviewed the audio
> >> from
> >> the last meeting to make sure my memory is correct to expect more
> >> subdivision of the question.
> >>
> >> Not much was said during the meeting because this quickly became the
> >> understanding, and there was no need to spend meeting time on
> >> something
> >> that was going to be addressed by the person proposing the changes.
> >> However, one of the feedback items from Dr. Lark during the meeting
> >> was
> >> that he also did not prefer the "five (5)" edits.  There's public
> >> record
> >> that such an item should probably be separated from the rest, but this
> >> motion does not even do that.  Instead it uses things with probably no
> >> objection (Oxford commas, inserting a missing "the" into a sentence)
> >> to
> >> leverage wholesale agreement on the package including things that do
> >> have
> >> objection, and when division is requested, the requester is attacked.
> >>
> >> As most of the LNC knows, I've been on a petition drive that has
> >> consumed
> >> nearly every waking moment of my time for three months, and I'm just
> >> not
> >> going to feel badly for not having set that aside in favor of
> >> correcting
> >> editorial errors on this draft which others could have also caught.  I
> >> got
> >> annoyed at how many times I had to set aside that project to review
> >> incomplete corrections to many versions of the minutes during that
> >> time
> >> frame, having to send the same requests for the same changes more than
> >> once.  That petitioning project is wrapping up now (have some residual
> >> work
> >> to do this week, turning in by Oct 29, but not nearly so pressed for
> >> time
> >> now), and I've got a lot of catching up to do on matters like this.  I
> >> have
> >> started but have not completed my feedback on this extensive list of
> >> proposed changes, and I can have it to you within a few days.  There
> >> are so
> >> many changes being proposed at once that even my commentary needs
> >> organization, but I'm not going to accept things I don't agree with
> >> just
> >> because of the window dressing around them.
> >>
> >> I don't agree that just because someone has invested time in an idea
> >> that
> >> it obligates the rest of the board to sponsor a motion on it or
> >> approve of
> >> it.  I've been on the losing side of that equation many times,
> >> developing
> >> proposals, gathering info, and it goes nowhere because the rest of the
> >> board doesn't agree with my goal.  That's how group decisions work.
> >> The
> >> idea has to be successfully sold, and it may require an investment of
> >> time
> >> that ultimately doesn't pay off with a sale.  It's not dismissive and
> >> rude
> >> of a used car shopper to not buy a particular used car.
> >>
> >> I can't agree with Mr. Phillips that the substantive matters have been
> >> completely segregated from the non-substantive ones.  There are couple
> >> of
> >> the items that may appear to be minor edits, but I think they impact
> >> the
> >> meaning and should not be called mere editorial matters.  Mr. Phillips
> >> may
> >> be dismissive of the importance of comma placement, but there's a
> >> classic
> >> meme that goes:
> >>
> >> Let's eat Grandma.
> >> Let's eat, Grandma.
> >> Commas save lives.
> >>
> >> They can wholly change the meaning, so things that may on the surface
> >> look
> >> like minor edits need to be reviewed with a careful eye and not just
> >> blindly accepted.
> >>
> >> -Alicia
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 2:38 AM Caryn Ann Harlos
> >> <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > At the meeting, I had indicated the categories as indicated by the
> colour
> >> > coding.  The only person who has indicated that they have actually
> >> reviewed
> >> > with specific comments has been Dr. Lark who corresponded with me on
> the
> >> > issues in the month following the LNC meeting without any prompting
> from
> >> me
> >> > because we all left knowing what was left, so no, my comments are not
> >> > unfair.  My comments about email motions weren't solely about this,
> >> however
> >> > -- other LNC members have said the same thing about other motions and
> >> there
> >> > are more than a few who will no longer volunteer to do so in order to
> cut
> >> > agenda time.  I just happen to be a bit more vocal, but I can assure
> you,
> >> > this is not an isolated feeling.  We can blame the messenger or deal
> with
> >> > the issue.  All the same to me either way because if I am one thing,
> it
> >> is
> >> > persistent.  I maintain my position - and anyone is free to disagree -
> >> that
> >> > when someone does voluntarily and out of courtesy move something off
> of
> >> the
> >> > agenda that it is discourteous to not do the homework to be able to
> >> conduct
> >> > the business nearly two months later.  *I asked for comments and input
> >> > several times without response.  *It took me finally getting the
> sponsors
> >> > to prompt even a vague conversation.  Style clean-ups are necessary
> >> > periodically despite not being the most sexy of tasks, and myself and
> >> > several volunteers put in over a dozen hours on this, and we deserve
> the
> >> > respect of consideration of the work.  This is an endemic problem in
> the
> >> > Party as Mr. Longstreth and I share the agony of working on something
> >> > instructed by a board for several years only to have it ignored
> without
> >> > even a thank you.  It is unprofessional.
> >> >
> >> > *If there had been ANY earlier input about breaking into different
> >> > categories, I would have.* Even a simple request asking for more time
> etc
> >> > could have been made.  It was not.  This has happened before to
> several
> >> > people, there is absolutely no interaction until they finally ask for
> >> email
> >> > sponsors then all of a sudden there is commentary.  That is quite
> >> > frustrating on items for which there is PLENTY of notice.  It is rude,
> >> and
> >> > that is my position.  I do not treat anyone's work in that manner and
> >> none
> >> > of us should.
> >> >
> >> > *In Liberty,*
> >> >
> >> > * Personal Note:  I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome
> >> > (part of the autism spectrum).  This can affect inter-personal
> >> > communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas.  If
> anyone
> >> > found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social
> faux
> >> > pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > On Sun, Oct 20, 2019 at 1:59 AM Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business <
> >> > lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> It's unfair to your LNC colleagues to describe the discussion from
> the
> >> >> last
> >> >> meeting as allegedly the LNC talked you into doing this by email
> ballot
> >> >> with "no real intention to handle by email ballot."
> >> >>
> >> >> The first the LNC saw of this material was in the wee hours of Friday
> >> >> morning before the LNC meeting started on Saturday.  There was no
> way we
> >> >> could have reviewed this and been ready for a vote so quickly.  Even
> the
> >> >> minutes portray that you had merely distributed something for our
> >> review,
> >> >> and didn't even make a motion on the subject.  The end of the
> discussion
> >> >> was that further work was needed, and in order to take it up by email
> >> >> ballot it would need to be broken up into several categories of
> changes.
> >> >> Now you're asking for almost all of it in a single motion, and when I
> >> say
> >> >> it needs to be broken up, you impugn motives and act as though we are
> >> the
> >> >> ones changing the plan.  That is not what happened, and I don't want
> to
> >> >> leave that impression hanging for the readers.
> >> >>
> >> >> -Alicia
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >>
> >> >> On Sat, Oct 19, 2019 at 5:55 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <
> >> caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org
> >> >> >
> >> >> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >> > I have no issue putting back on agenda, and this time, I will not
> be
> >> so
> >> >> > accommodating to agree to email ballot knowing that there is no
> real
> >> >> > intention to handle by email ballot.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > In order to simply further, I will break out further - such as the
> >> >> > parentheticals and the lists.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > This has been in the possession of the LNC for several months now
> with
> >> >> > adequate time to review.  I am willing to work with everyone to
> >> present
> >> >> and
> >> >> > vote in the most logical manner but it is like pulling teeth to get
> >> >> > anything started which is not particularly motivating.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > This evening I will break out those categories.  I cannot do
> anything
> >> >> with
> >> >> > vague references to something that might be wrong.  I think we owe
> >> each
> >> >> > other a tad bit more specificity.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > *In Liberty,*
> >> >> >
> >> >> > * Personal Note:  I have what is commonly known as Asperger's
> Syndrome
> >> >> > (part of the autism spectrum).  This can affect inter-personal
> >> >> > communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas.  If
> >> anyone
> >> >> > found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other
> social
> >> >> faux
> >> >> > pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > On Sat, Oct 19, 2019 at 6:22 PM Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business <
> >> >> > lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> I have looked through some, but not all, of these million-ish
> items.
> >> I
> >> >> can
> >> >> >> support some, but I object to others and cannot co-sponsor or
> vote in
> >> >> >> favor
> >> >> >> of the bulk package.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I am writing from my phone, not sitting looking at the file now,
> but
> >> >> off
> >> >> >> the top of my head here are a few that I recall.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I do not wish to both spell out and write numbers in Arabic
> numerals.
> >> >> It
> >> >> >> may be standard for legal briefs, but it’s just bulky to read
> >> around. I
> >> >> >> know that “5” is the same thing as “five” without being told both.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> There was at least one instance in which changes were proposed to
> be
> >> >> made
> >> >> >> within the quotation marks of a RONR quote, adding text not in the
> >> >> >> original
> >> >> >> document.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> There were a number of places where the insert/strike formatting
> >> wasn’t
> >> >> >> done correctly making it hard to discern what was to be done with
> >> that
> >> >> >> text.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I don’t wish to change numbered/lettered lists to bullet points. I
> >> like
> >> >> >> being able to cite subsections more precisely.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Etc.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> This should not be done in such bulk by email when amendments
> aren’t
> >> >> >> feasible.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Even when amendments are feasible, this is too many things to roll
> >> into
> >> >> >> one
> >> >> >> motion.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> -Alicia
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> On Mon, Oct 14, 2019 at 12:46 AM Caryn Ann Harlos via
> Lnc-business <
> >> >> >> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> > Attached are the items I distributed last meeting comprising an
> >> index
> >> >> >> and a
> >> >> >> > marked-up copy of the Policy Manual.  I am seeking co-sponsors
> to
> >> >> make
> >> >> >> all
> >> >> >> > of the changes except for the ones marked in red which may be
> >> >> considered
> >> >> >> > substantive which I will address separately.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > *  In Liberty,*
> >> >> >> > * Personal Note:  I have what is commonly known as Asperger's
> >> >> Syndrome
> >> >> >> > (part of the autism spectrum).  This can affect inter-personal
> >> >> >> > communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas.  If
> >> >> anyone
> >> >> >> > found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other
> >> social
> >> >> >> faux
> >> >> >> > pas) in an actual email, please contact me privately and let me
> >> >> know.  *
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >>
> >> >
> >>
>