[Lnc-business] Request for Co-Sponsors

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

There may however be a defect in the emeeting request in that no date
specified.

I will be writing the chair for guidance today.  I will not be dealing with
this until after Christmas.



- Caryn Ann

On Tue, Dec 24, 2019 at 2:43 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org>
wrote:

> Yes there was Mr Smith.
>
> Mr Merced both have enough with your vote so you need to choose which one
> - sorry
>
> On Tue, Dec 24, 2019 at 2:37 PM <joshua.smith at lp.org> wrote:
>
>> There was never a motion to hold an E Meeting Mrs. Harlos. There was a
>> motion to appeal the ruling of the chair. I made it. Mr. Nekhaila, Mr.
>> Phillips, and Mr. Merced all seconded. So did Erin Adam's, who you said
>> could not second because of her Alt status. They may have said they are not
>> opposed to an E meeting, but that motion was not made, and there is
>> currently another motion on the table with the required amount of support.
>>
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Joshua
>>
>> On Dec 24, 2019 1:29 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <
>> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>>
>> Well I need clarification on what exactly everyone is sponsoring.
>>
>> And I will not be dealing with it until after Christmas.
>>
>> So a list of names and what they are sponsoring will need to be given to
>> me.  It is not my job to guess.
>>
>> I have sponsored an emeeting for the appeal AND the underlying issue but
>> I
>> will add my name to either.
>>
>> The resistance to an emeeting and a rush to email does not look good
>> IMHO.
>> I have yet to hear a good argument as to how email - completely
>> discouraged
>> in RONR - is better.  It only favours those who have endless time to
>> write
>> and it provides little more than social media fodder.
>>
>> -Caryn Ann
>>
>> On Tue, Dec 24, 2019 at 2:23 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org>
>>
>> wrote:
>>
>> > To clarify to clear up social media innuendo:  yes it was EVH who
>> > unilaterally made it public.
>> >
>> > However she is not to be used as an excuse or scapegoat for everyone
>> who
>> > took it as an open door to throw out all their discretion to the wind
>> and
>> > throw around this name.
>> >
>> > That fault is theirs not EVH.
>> >
>> > -Caryn Ann
>> >
>> > On Tue, Dec 24, 2019 at 2:04 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <
>> caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org>
>> > wrote:
>> >
>> >> Mr. Merced, I need your clarification.
>> >>
>> >> There are two issues here.
>> >>
>> >> One is the appeal over email vote.
>> >>
>> >> The other is the appeal by emeeting.
>> >>
>> >> Those two seem to me to be mutually exclusive.  Which of the two are
>> you
>> >> supporting?
>> >>
>> >> -Caryn Ann
>> >>
>> >> *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 Tue, Dec 24, 2019 at 1:40 PM Alex Merced (LNC Vice Chair) via
>> >> Lnc-business <lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>> >>
>> >>> I also support the appeal and the emeeting, this won’t die down till
>> one
>> >>> of these things happen. I do generally echo the thoughts of Regional
>> Reps
>> >>> O’Donnell and Nekhalia on how this overall was handled.
>> >>>
>> >>> Alex Merced
>> >>> Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP
>> >>>
>> >>> > On Dec 24, 2019, at 2:25 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <
>> >>> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>> >>> >
>> >>> > I urge the chair to call an e-meeting.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > I do not agree, but many are now suspecting that this public
>> shameful
>> >>> > display is politically motivated and designed to set up a social
>> media
>> >>> > campaign against our chair.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > I thankfully have little clue what is going on with FB since I have
>> >>> been
>> >>> > avoiding it for a few months now except for very disciplined and
>> >>> limited
>> >>> > sessions.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > My life is better for it.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Our ED sent this privately.  No one LNC member or even several had
>> the
>> >>> > right to make this into a public shitshow without every attempt to
>> >>> avoid.
>> >>> > The lack of judgement is abysmal.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Discipline for private individuals is private.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > How hard is that to understand?
>> >>> >
>> >>> > It is not this man that hurt our reputation.  It is the reckless
>> acts
>> >>> of a
>> >>> > few that have.
>> >>> >
>> >>> > -Caryn Ann
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Mr. Nekhaila - we are the Party of individual not collective
>> rights.  I
>> >>> > find that collective argument alarming.  Who’s next to be
>> sacrificed?
>> >>> The
>> >>> > allegedly tiny percentage of anarchists?
>> >>> >
>> >>> > Mark my words.  You sow the wind, you reap the whirlwind.
>> >>> >
>> >>> >> On Tue, Dec 24, 2019 at 9:45 AM Erin Adams via Lnc-business <
>> >>> >> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> I support the appeal and the e meeting as long as the e meeting
>> deals
>> >>> >> SPECIFICALLY with what actions are taken concerning a refund and
>> >>> >> "expungement" of membership or not.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> On Dec 24, 2019 10:20 AM, "john.phillips--- via Lnc-business" <
>> >>> >> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> As always, a well thought out and thought provoking statement sir.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> John Phillips
>> >>> >> Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
>> >>> >> Cell 217-412-5973
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> On Dec 24, 2019 10:14 AM, Steven Nekhaila <steven.nekhaila at lp.org>
>>
>> >>> wrote:
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Dear All,
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Between preparations for the holidays and "hell week" coming up in
>> the
>> >>> >> Florida Keys it has already been a busy week, and with the latest
>> >>> >> controversy a troubling past few days.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> I have been giving this issue a lot of thought and it has weighed
>> on
>> >>> me
>> >>> >> as the Chairman of the Libertarian Party of Florida, the last
>> thing I
>> >>> >> want to do is promote an internet lynch mob and attack an
>> individual
>> >>> of
>> >>> >> which I am not his judge nor jury.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> I want to start off by expressing my sheer dissappointment at the
>> >>> >> individuals name becoming public. Here is a man, through whatever
>> >>> >> cascading torrent of events in his life, felt the need to dispatch
>> a
>> >>> >> signed NAP and a $25 check to the Libertarian Party in the hopes
>> that
>> >>> we
>> >>> >> would fight for him in some way or serve as a part of a greater
>> >>> >> political purpose in his life. Or perhaps he's mad at the world
>> and
>> >>> >> thinks we could make it worse, I do not know. Nor do I know the
>> >>> >> circumstances of his case, the only thing I know is the conviction
>> by
>> >>> >> the State. Sex trafficking minors, or pimping 16 year old girls on
>> >>> >> Backpages. That was his crime, and now he is currently
>> incarcerated,
>> >>> his
>> >>> >> name is being spread on social media by an organization he applied
>> >>> for,
>> >>> >> an organization which could have simply turned him down or blindly
>> >>> >> accepted his money.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> It was not the right decision to make this case public,
>> transparency
>> >>> is
>> >>> >> not always our best option and not every member needs a say in
>> every
>> >>> >> decision the LNC makes. Furthermore, does joining the Libertarian
>> >>> Party
>> >>> >> now constitute the fact that your past may be publicly scrutinized
>> and
>> >>> >> remain available on an online list forever with strangers who get
>> to
>> >>> >> debate about your character?
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> I am assuming our Executive Director may be more cautious in the
>> >>> future
>> >>> >> as to bring certain issues to the board, or simply confide with
>> the
>> >>> >> Chair or a few select members on advice before taking action.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Is that the culture we want to set for the board? Where all
>> >>> >> controversial issues become public and a point of contention
>> amongst
>> >>> us
>> >>> >> and our members? I would think not.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Some day, there will be a point where we cannot afford to vet
>> every
>> >>> >> single individual who joins our organization, that point may have
>> >>> >> already passed. However, there does come times when we receive a
>> >>> choice,
>> >>> >> and that choice should be given the full weight of repercussions
>> and
>> >>> >> must not be taken lightly when it does come. Now, the
>> Non-Aggression
>> >>> >> Pledge was designed to distance ourselves from people who do do
>> >>> terrible
>> >>> >> things in our name if/when it does happen, but what if they've
>> already
>> >>> >> done something?
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Now, do we allow this individual, who we have made the center of
>> an
>> >>> >> avoidable feeding frenzy, to join our organization or do we reject
>> his
>> >>> >> membership and/or donation?
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> After much thought into the issue, I must consider who I owe my
>> >>> >> allegiance to, which is the membership. The membership will not
>> >>> benefit
>> >>> >> from one convicted and currently incarcerated man from becoming a
>> >>> member
>> >>> >> at the expense of the organization's reputation, of which directly
>> >>> >> effects the standing of our members. Our reputation is everything,
>> and
>> >>> >> must be protected with care and molded like a great artist. We
>> cannot
>> >>> >> leave our reputation to chance or gossip. We must not allow the
>> Party
>> >>> to
>> >>> >> look weak and allow our membership to suffer because of the
>> >>> consequences
>> >>> >> of the LNC making this public (regardless of what our decision
>> would
>> >>> >> have been). Many members in Florida believe this is a waste of
>> time,
>> >>> and
>> >>> >> I agree. However, to many members, child abuse, despite whatever
>> >>> >> arguments may be made that the acts could have been consensual or
>> that
>> >>> >> they could have been underprivileged, are just excuses to those
>> who
>> >>> hear
>> >>> >> child abuse.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Thus, I have made the decision to co-sponsor the motion on the
>> floor
>> >>> as
>> >>> >> well as join in appealing the ruling of the Chair.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Let is be a lesson to us all.
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> In Liberty,
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Steven Nekhaila
>> >>> >> Region 2 Representative
>> >>> >> Libertarian National Committee
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> Impotentes defendere libertatum non possunt
>> >>> >> "Those without power cannot defend freedom"
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>> On 2019-12-24 09:38 AM, john.phillips--- via Lnc-business wrote:
>> >>> >>> I will point out to those weighing whether to object that it was
>> the
>> >>> >>> actions of the chair that set up this ruling.
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> If he had not directed the E.D. to process the application during
>> >>> >>> ongoing discussion there would not yet be a membership to cause
>> his
>> >>> >>> bylaws interpretation.
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> The chair is a very intelligent man, and as such it is my OPINION
>> -
>> >>> >>> not known fact - that he knew this would be the case, and did so
>> >>> >>> intentionally.
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> In my experience, despite his rebuttal that while Rulings of the
>> >>> Chair
>> >>> >>> only coming after a motion being is technically true, it is
>> customary
>> >>> >>> in every board I have worked with to give one, or at least what
>> it
>> >>> >>> would be, when asked. A custom I have witnessed being followed on
>> >>> this
>> >>> >>> board.  That custom not being followed here supports supports my
>> >>> >>> opinion in my mind. Not only that, but it is my belief that a
>> ruling
>> >>> >>> could and should have been made at the time it was first brought
>> to
>> >>> >>> us.
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> It is my opinion that we cannot allow this kind of manipulation
>> by
>> >>> the
>> >>> >>> chair to go unchallenged.  Even if I believe his motives were
>> good,
>> >>> >>> which I do, I will never be ok with the means.  Regardless of how
>> you
>> >>> >>> vote on the original motion itself, I ask that you consider the
>> >>> appeal
>> >>> >>> carefully.
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> This is a large part of my consideration for going ahead with the
>> >>> >>> appeal, as well as my other email.  I find the bylaws in this
>> case
>> >>> >>> open to interpretation.  I see the merits of both sides. I think
>> that
>> >>> >>> the interpretation that the bylaws specify requirements for the
>> >>> >>> member, not require the party to accept is stronger.
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> I think that as a political party we need to keep the political
>> >>> >>> aspect in mind, as much as it sucks.  This could easily be our
>> >>> Epstein
>> >>> >>> moment, do we really want to jump in with both feet?
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>> John Phillips
>> >>> >>> Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
>> >>> >>> Cell 217-412-5973
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>>> On Dec 24, 2019 7:57 AM, john.phillips at lp.org wrote:
>> >>> >>>
>> >>> >>>> I do not object to that ruling. If we are asking it to be done
>> by
>> >>> >>>> email, email rules should apply.
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> John Phillips
>> >>> >>>> Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
>> >>> >>>> Cell 217-412-5973
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>> On Dec 23, 2019 9:05 PM, Nicholas Sarwark via Lnc-business
>> >>> >>>> <lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>
>> >>> >>>>> Mail ballots have a seconding requirement of four cosponsors
>> (or
>> >>> >>>>> the
>> >>> >>>>> Chair), it would make sense that appealing a ruling of the
>> Chair
>> >>> >>>>> by mail
>> >>> >>>>> ballot would require the same number of seconds.
>> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >>>>> You could appeal this interpretation of the rules by the Chair,
>> >>> >>>>> but at some
>> >>> >>>>> point this is going to become absurd.
>> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >>>>> -Nick
>> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >>>>> On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 9:51 PM joshua.smith--- via
>> Lnc-business <
>> >>> >>>>> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> It requires one second.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> Can you direct me to the section in RONR that says "an appeal
>> to
>> >>> >>>>> the
>> >>> >>>>>> ruling of the chair requires 4 seconds"?
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> Thanks,
>> >>> >>>>>> Joshua
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> On Dec 23, 2019 6:41 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos
>> >>> >>>>> <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> It would require four sponsors in my understanding.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> I would seek the chairs guidance however as that is not my
>> call.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 5:35 PM <john.phillips at lp.org> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> Yes the bylaws limit our power and they should, however I do
>> not
>> >>> >>>>> believe
>> >>> >>>>>> it is being well applied here.  Boards exist to handle the
>> >>> >>>>> situations where
>> >>> >>>>>> rules and standard procedures do not quite fit.  I believe
>> this
>> >>> >>>>> is one of
>> >>> >>>>>> those cases.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> As I believe the appeal must be seconded I will do so.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> While the order of operations normal in an appeal is difficult
>> >>> >>>>> in an
>> >>> >>>>>> email, it is an issue that I believe is negligible.  Mr
>> Sarwark
>> >>> >>>>> is free to
>> >>> >>>>>> speak whenever he chooses, nor do I believe much in the way of
>> >>> >>>>> repetition
>> >>> >>>>>> of the same arguments is needed, though of course I welcome
>> >>> >>>>> anyone to do
>> >>> >>>>>> so.  7 days of time allows ample opportunity.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> I believe I will leave it at that, as I am AGAIN disappointed
>> in
>> >>> >>>>> people's
>> >>> >>>>>> willingness to see the positives of compromise - to be fair
>> much
>> >>> >>>>> of which
>> >>> >>>>>> was not in this group.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> John Phillips
>> >>> >>>>>> Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
>> >>> >>>>>> Cell 217-412-5973
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> On Dec 23, 2019 6:14 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos
>> >>> >>>>> <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> Mr. Smith I too received emails with choice words about LNC
>> >>> >>>>> overreach.
>> >>> >>>>>> That does not excuse me to treat you or anyone indecorously.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> Keeping one’s cool is an important part of leadership.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> I learned that the hard way when I quite literally lost my
>> shit
>> >>> >>>>> at an LPRC
>> >>> >>>>>> convention over this same issue (ie nothing triggers me more
>> >>> >>>>> than harm to
>> >>> >>>>>> children).  I felt I was doing the right thing.  That I was on
>> >>> >>>>> the side of
>> >>> >>>>>> the angels.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> In retrospect I demonstrated immaturity in treating my peers
>> and
>> >>> >>>>> I’m
>> >>> >>>>>> thoroughly embarrassed by that memory.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> Peers and friends don’t treat each other that way.  You and I
>> >>> >>>>> are both.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> -Caryn Ann
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 5:05 PM <joshua.smith at lp.org> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> You'll have to take that characterization up with our
>> membership
>> >>> >>>>> and the
>> >>> >>>>>> state chairs I've spoken with. Those words did not come from
>> me.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> Thanks,
>> >>> >>>>>> Joshua
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> On Dec 23, 2019 4:03 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos
>> >>> >>>>> <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> The order of operations for one.  In an e-meeting members can
>> >>> >>>>> attend.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> I ask you to please stop mischaracterizing those who disagree
>> in
>> >>> >>>>> good
>> >>> >>>>>> faith.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> -Caryn Ann
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 4:54 PM <joshua.smith at lp.org> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> This thing is public and causing a lot of our membership to be
>> >>> >>>>> very upset.
>> >>> >>>>>> To the point of lifetime members threatening to ask for
>> refunds
>> >>> >>>>> and to be
>> >>> >>>>>> removed from our membership list. I have fielded call after
>> call
>> >>> >>>>> and
>> >>> >>>>>> message after message today with members upset that we
>> wouldn't
>> >>> >>>>> do
>> >>> >>>>>> something as basic as protect our organization and membership
>> >>> >>>>> from
>> >>> >>>>>> associating with a child predator. Several from state chairs.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> It won't wait till February, and I'm not going to watch TWO
>> >>> >>>>> motions be
>> >>> >>>>>> ignored while some of us are working to represent and protect
>> >>> >>>>> our
>> >>> >>>>>> membership.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> What part of an appeal to the ruling of the chair cannot be
>> >>> >>>>> handled
>> >>> >>>>>> adequately through email?
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> -Joshua
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> On Dec 23, 2019 3:38 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos
>> >>> >>>>> <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> I urge you to get sponsors for electronic meeting or wait
>> until
>> >>> >>>>> Feb.
>> >>> >>>>>> appeals cannot be adequately handled by email.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> -Caryn Ann
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 4:23 PM <joshua.smith at lp.org> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> I'd like to start this email off with a motion appealing the
>> >>> >>>>> ruling of the
>> >>> >>>>>> chair.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> There is no bylaw explicitly saying that we HAVE to accept
>> >>> >>>>> someone's
>> >>> >>>>>> contribution. There is also not one stating that we cannot
>> >>> >>>>> return a
>> >>> >>>>>> donation or terminate a membership.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> Do we not frequently refer to RONR for things that may not be
>> >>> >>>>> covered in
>> >>> >>>>>> the bylaws like pretty much every other major organization or
>> >>> >>>>> society? If
>> >>> >>>>>> so, this is a dog and pony show, and we have the authority to
>> >>> >>>>> return the
>> >>> >>>>>> donation and terminate membership because that's covered on
>> >>> >>>>> pages 643-644,
>> >>> >>>>>> being the first two pages on Discipline in Chapter XX.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> If we must follow those procedures, I will gladly make a
>> motion
>> >>> >>>>> as well to
>> >>> >>>>>> get that started, but I'm first appealing the ruling of the
>> >>> >>>>> chair as there
>> >>> >>>>>> was a motion made by Mr. Phillips with a second.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> In liberty,
>> >>> >>>>>> -Joshua
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> On Dec 23, 2019 2:13 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <
>> >>> >>>>>> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> The bylaws limit our power.  Just as the constitution was
>> >>> >>>>> supposed to
>> >>> >>>>>> limit
>> >>> >>>>>> the state.  They have had many good reasons to violate it -
>> and
>> >>> >>>>> we now see
>> >>> >>>>>> the result.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> I think the mistake you are making is viewing this as about
>> any
>> >>> >>>>> particular
>> >>> >>>>>> person rather than the objective action.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> Our dogma and everything about our beliefs anathematizes the
>> act
>> >>> >>>>> of the
>> >>> >>>>>> victimization of children.  The act can be condemned
>> objectively
>> >>> >>>>> and that
>> >>> >>>>>> is the Party position.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> There are also acts that many of us do in secret that are
>> >>> >>>>> condemned (from
>> >>> >>>>>> minor to major).
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> It is the same way the party doesn’t judge whether someone is
>> >>> >>>>> libertarian
>> >>> >>>>>> enough - only whether a particular belief or act is consistent
>> >>> >>>>> with
>> >>> >>>>>> libertarianism.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> If this were not so, anarchists could theoretically claim the
>> >>> >>>>> pledge as an
>> >>> >>>>>> anarchist blood oath as some have claimed and call everyone
>> else
>> >>> >>>>> a
>> >>> >>>>>> statist.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> That is obviously not the correct path.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> All membership confers is the status of member in minimal
>> >>> >>>>> compliance.  It
>> >>> >>>>>> does not declare any person clean.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> We must respect that the delegates knew of these kinds of
>> issues
>> >>> >>>>> for
>> >>> >>>>>> decades and never gave us that power.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> They can choose to do so in Austin.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> I will not grasp power not explicitly given to us.  That was
>> my
>> >>> >>>>> raison
>> >>> >>>>>> d’être for being on the LNC to begin with.
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> -Caryn Ann
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 2:57 PM <john.phillips at lp.org> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> That question was a cut and paste from a member.
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> I see both sides on this.  So I am debating my next step.
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> My motion was a compromise one to attempt to reconcile both
>> >>> >>>>> sides.
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> I will point out that under the logic presented Hitler and
>> >>> >>>>> Stalin could
>> >>> >>>>>>> sign the form and be members were they still alive.  So it is
>> >>> >>>>> not the
>> >>> >>>>>>> weightiest of responses to me, though I will not say it is
>> >>> >>>>> wrong, just
>> >>> >>>>>>> carries less weight.
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> The question will come, are we a haven for those who prey on
>> >>> >>>>> children?
>> >>> >>>>>> Or
>> >>> >>>>>>> do we flatly reject those actions?
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> It will also come, do we believe in second chances, and if so
>> >>> >>>>> what must
>> >>> >>>>>> be
>> >>> >>>>>>> done to earn that?
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> Are we as Libertarians so bound in the dogma of our bylaws
>> >>> >>>>> that we will
>> >>> >>>>>>> not look at interpretations to do what is right?
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> Those questions will weigh heavily on my soul, and then in
>> >>> >>>>> which
>> >>> >>>>>> priority
>> >>> >>>>>>> do I place them?
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> If we are to be a haven for predators, I do not know if I
>> will
>> >>> >>>>> be able
>> >>> >>>>>> to
>> >>> >>>>>>> wrap my conscience around that enough to continue to
>> represent
>> >>> >>>>> this
>> >>> >>>>>> party.
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> This will take some thought.
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> John Phillips
>> >>> >>>>>>> Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
>> >>> >>>>>>> Cell 217-412-5973
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> On Dec 23, 2019 3:36 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos
>> >>> >>>>> <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org>
>> >>> >>>>>> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> Mr. Phillips please allow me to give some history here.  The
>> >>> >>>>> pledge WAS
>> >>> >>>>>>> never intended to be a gatekeeper to exclude people from the
>> >>> >>>>> Party
>> >>> >>>>>> because
>> >>> >>>>>>> as David Nolan said, bad people will lie.  While it
>> >>> >>>>> legitimately
>> >>> >>>>>> reflects
>> >>> >>>>>>> our beliefs and it is hoped it is signed in sincerity of
>> >>> >>>>> internal
>> >>> >>>>>> beliefs,
>> >>> >>>>>>> its purpose was to protect the Party from the government and
>> >>> >>>>> to educate
>> >>> >>>>>>> members.  Further, if any evil person reformed themselves,
>> >>> >>>>> they could
>> >>> >>>>>>> legitimately sign the pledge.  I doubt any of us are free
>> from
>> >>> >>>>> past
>> >>> >>>>>>> aggression.  I have no idea of this individual's current
>> state
>> >>> >>>>> of
>> >>> >>>>>>> repentance, but such difficulties are exactly why that was
>> >>> >>>>> never the
>> >>> >>>>>>> purpose of the pledge as originally intended.
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> http://lpedia.org/Libertarian_Membership_Pledge
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> Just recently we had a few members calling for the expulsion
>> >>> >>>>> of any
>> >>> >>>>>> parent
>> >>> >>>>>>> that spanks their children - that is not a fallacious
>> slippery
>> >>> >>>>> slope, it
>> >>> >>>>>> is
>> >>> >>>>>>> one supported with evidence.  I am NAPster purist as they
>> >>> >>>>> come, but we
>> >>> >>>>>> are
>> >>> >>>>>>> not the judgment throne of God.
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> -Caryn Ann
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> *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, Dec 23, 2019 at 2:21 PM john.phillips--- via
>> >>> >>>>> Lnc-business <
>> >>> >>>>>>> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> I question whether someone who has engaged in child
>> >>> >>>>> prostitution can
>> >>> >>>>>>> legitimately sign the NAP.  Would we have to accept Jeffrey
>> >>> >>>>> Dahmer or
>> >>> >>>>>>> Timothy Mcveigh's applications?
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> John Phillips
>> >>> >>>>>>> Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
>> >>> >>>>>>> Cell 217-412-5973
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> On Dec 23, 2019 2:35 PM, Nicholas Sarwark via Lnc-business <
>> >>> >>>>>>> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> Dear All,
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> I'm going to start with the relevant section of the Bylaws,
>> >>> >>>>> since it
>> >>> >>>>>> makes
>> >>> >>>>>>> it easier to reference for those reading:
>> >>> >>>>>>> "ARTICLE 4: MEMBERSHIP
>> >>> >>>>>>> 1. Members of the Party shall be those persons who have
>> >>> >>>>> certified in
>> >>> >>>>>>> writing
>> >>> >>>>>>> that they oppose the initiation of force to achieve political
>> >>> >>>>> or social
>> >>> >>>>>>> goals.
>> >>> >>>>>>> 2. The National Committee may offer life memberships, and
>> must
>> >>> >>>>> honor all
>> >>> >>>>>>> prior and future life memberships.
>> >>> >>>>>>> 3. The National Committee may create other levels of
>> >>> >>>>> membership and
>> >>> >>>>>> shall
>> >>> >>>>>>> determine the contribution or dues levels for such
>> >>> >>>>> memberships.
>> >>> >>>>>>> 4. “Sustaining members” are members of the Party who: a.
>> >>> >>>>> During the
>> >>> >>>>>> prior
>> >>> >>>>>>> twelve months have donated, or have had donated on their
>> >>> >>>>> behalf, an
>> >>> >>>>>> amount
>> >>> >>>>>>> of at least $25; or b. Are Life members."
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> The person mentioned in the motion has met the conditions set
>> >>> >>>>> forth in
>> >>> >>>>>> the
>> >>> >>>>>>> bylaws (Art. 4, Sec. 1 and 4) to be a sustaining member of
>> the
>> >>> >>>>>> Libertarian
>> >>> >>>>>>> Party as of the date that the contribution and attached
>> signed
>> >>> >>>>>>> certification were processed.
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> It may be in order to refund the person's contribution as
>> part
>> >>> >>>>> of the
>> >>> >>>>>>> LNC's
>> >>> >>>>>>> prerogative to issue directives overriding those of the
>> Chair,
>> >>> >>>>> though it
>> >>> >>>>>>> would not be in order if it had the effect of denying that
>> >>> >>>>> person a
>> >>> >>>>>>> sustaining membership. Art. 4, Sec. 4 can be read as applying
>> >>> >>>>> by the
>> >>> >>>>>> fact
>> >>> >>>>>>> of the person making the donation, even if the donation was
>> >>> >>>>> subsequently
>> >>> >>>>>>> refunded.  That's a somewhat strained reading of it, so it
>> >>> >>>>> would be
>> >>> >>>>>> better
>> >>> >>>>>>> if the motion made it clear that it was a refund without a
>> >>> >>>>> change in
>> >>> >>>>>>> sustaining
>> >>> >>>>>>> membership status.
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> The latter half of the motion is out of order as the
>> >>> >>>>> membership
>> >>> >>>>>>> application
>> >>> >>>>>>> has been processed.
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> The mover has the option to rewrite the motion to fit within
>> >>> >>>>> my
>> >>> >>>>>>> interpretation of the bylaws outlined above, appeal from the
>> >>> >>>>> ruling of
>> >>> >>>>>> the
>> >>> >>>>>>> Chair, or ask for time on the agenda in February.
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> Yours truly,
>> >>> >>>>>>> Nick
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 11:47 AM john.phillips--- via
>> >>> >>>>> Lnc-business <
>> >>> >>>>>>> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>> A point I considered Caryn Ann and Alex, and appreciate.  I
>> >>> >>>>> considered
>> >>> >>>>>>> it
>> >>> >>>>>>>> moot as someone else had already made the name public, but
>> >>> >>>>> still had
>> >>> >>>>>>> qualms
>> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>> I agree on not using it going forward.
>> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>> John Phillips
>> >>> >>>>>>>> Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
>> >>> >>>>>>>> Cell 217-412-5973
>> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>> On Dec 23, 2019 7:40 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos
>> >>> >>>>> <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org>
>> >>> >>>>>>> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>> I would encourage you to add this to February agenda.  The
>> >>> >>>>> chair has
>> >>> >>>>>>>> indicated that discussion of non-public figures is not
>> >>> >>>>> appropriate for
>> >>> >>>>>> a
>> >>> >>>>>>>> public list.
>> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>> -Caryn Ann
>> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>> On Mon, Dec 23, 2019 at 5:58 AM john.phillips--- via
>> >>> >>>>> Lnc-business <
>> >>> >>>>>>>> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>> Given that the nature of this is no longer as time
>> >>> >>>>> sensitive, I
>> >>> >>>>>> disagree
>> >>> >>>>>>>> with the interpretation that it is not a matter we can
>> >>> >>>>> address, as was
>> >>> >>>>>>>> pointed out no ruling of the chair was officially given, and
>> >>> >>>>> I find
>> >>> >>>>>> the
>> >>> >>>>>>>> situation in general disturbing, I will ask for co-sponsors
>> >>> >>>>> for the
>> >>> >>>>>>>> following motion.
>> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>> "The L.N.C. directs the Executive Director to refund the
>> >>> >>>>> donation of
>> >>> >>>>>>> Royce
>> >>> >>>>>>>> Corley, and further not accept his membership application
>> >>> >>>>> until after
>> >>> >>>>>>> the
>> >>> >>>>>>>> National Convention in May of 2020."
>> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>> This will allow the delegates, if they choose to address it,
>> >>> >>>>> to make a
>> >>> >>>>>>>> decision either in specific or in general about such
>> >>> >>>>> situations, while
>> >>> >>>>>>>> addressing the current objections of several members of this
>> >>> >>>>> board and
>> >>> >>>>>>> many
>> >>> >>>>>>>> of the party members currently.
>> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>> As always I am open to suggestions and motions regarding
>> >>> >>>>> alternative
>> >>> >>>>>>>> wording.
>> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>> John Phillips
>> >>> >>>>>>>> Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
>> >>> >>>>>>>> Cell 217-412-5973
>> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>> --
>> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>> *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. *
>> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>> --
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> *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. *
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> --
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> *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. *
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> --
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> *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. *
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> --
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> *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. *
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> --
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>> *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. *
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>>>>>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >>
>> >>> >> --
>> >>> >
>> >>> > *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. *
>> >>>
>> >>> --
>> >
>> > *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. *
>> >
>> > --
>>
>> *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. *
>>
>>
>> --
>
> *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. *
>
> --

*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. *