[Lnc-business] NOTICE OF SPECIAL E-MEETING MARCH 26 9PM-11PM EASTERN
Sam Goldstein
sam.goldstein at lp.org
Sun Mar 15 18:32:15 EDT 2020
Ha! I just got your twice. Our email is multiplying aster than the
damn virus.
---
Sam Goldstein, At Large Member
Libertarian National Committee
317-850-0726 Cell
On 2020-03-15 18:05, Richard Longstreth wrote:
> S, I only received it once. Maybe our email glitch is back again...
>
> Richard Longstreth
> Region 1 Representative (AK, AZ, CO, HI, KS, MT, NM, OR, UT, WA, WY)
> Libertarian National Committee
> richard.longstreth at lp.org
> 931.538.9300
>
> Sent from my Mobile Device
>
> On Sun, Mar 15, 2020, 14:52 Sam Goldstein via Lnc-business <lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>
>> John,
>>
>> I know from your email that you are tired and irritable, but did you
>> have to send the email 6 times?
>>
>> Stay Free!
>>
>> ---
>> Sam Goldstein, At Large Member
>> Libertarian National Committee
>> 317-850-0726 Cell
>>
>> On 2020-03-15 12:34, john.phillips--- via Lnc-business wrote:
>>
>>> I am tired. I am irritable. I am frustrated. So I probably should not speak at all. But since much of my frustration is with this crap here you go.
>>>
>>> The intention was clear to the co-sponsors, suck it up and deal with it.
>>>
>>> Stop with the damn rules lawyering obstructionist BS. Are there times it is appropriate, yes, but 90% of the time it is being thrown out there to forward some personal agenda, or just satisfy some deep OCD issues. Give it an effen rest.
>>>
>>> It is clear that enough members of the body desire a discussion. It is clear that enough members of the party would like this discussion to happen.
>>>
>>> I very personally will suggest that if you spend half or more of your time trying being petty over dotted i's and crossed t's that make no real difference - allowing for the times it actually does - that perhaps every now and then step back and realize that it really doesnt mean a damn thing and you are just being a PITA for nothing.
>>>
>>> Yes I am aware of the hypocrisy of this after the crap I gave about civility, but enough is damn well enough.
>>>
>>> John Phillips
>>> Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
>>> Cell 217-412-5973
>>>
>>> On Mar 15, 2020 9:27 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I had today's date wrong in my head as I am traveling lol over the country
>>>> and barely know what state I am in.
>>>>
>>>> I will let the chair decide if it's correct.
>>>>
>>>> This to me is an example of using the rules to make things difficult for no
>>>> real purpose. And I simply won't waste time on that. Everyone knows the
>>>> intent and everyone knows the date was to accommodate the ten day notice
>>>> period without being wayyyy out. The fact that one angel isn't dancing on
>>>> the pin head is not relevant IMHO. It is apparent that a certain
>>>> contingent doesn't want a meeting and that is fine - but some of us do and
>>>> I stand by my call.
>>>>
>>>> The chair can unilaterally reset at his choice and I would welcome it.
>>>>
>>>> On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 8:23 AM Richard Longstreth via Lnc-business <
>>>> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Alicia does have some points in the 12 days and time arena, but I believe
>>>>> the motion itself passed correctly. I believe the secretary may have set
>>>>> the meeting up incorrectly.
>>>>>
>>>>> In the original ask the time and subject were included. I'm happy to move
>>>>> this meeting two days sooner as we passed. There should be no other issues
>>>>> beyond that. The reason I'm not in arms over the date is because it was
>>>>> proposed and passed on the same day with the language of starting 10 days
>>>>> after passing. None of the cosponsors sponsored on a different day so there
>>>>> cannot be any implied confusion on what the cosponsors passed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Richard Longstreth
>>>>> Region 1 Representative (AK, AZ, CO, HI, KS, MT, NM, OR, UT, WA, WY)
>>>>> Libertarian National Committee
>>>>> richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>>> 931.538.9300
>>>>>
>>>>> Sent from my Mobile Device
>>>>>
>>>>> On Sun, Mar 15, 2020, 07:17 Richard Longstreth <richard.longstreth at lp.org>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> I cosponsored the proposed meeting, time, and subject. Because no changes
>>>>>> were made to the original ask, and how email threads work, I thought
>>>>>> everything was implied. If the members of this body would rather a
>>>>> minimum
>>>>>> of six separate email threads calling for this meeting, with debate
>>>>>> occurring in each, I would be happy to comply. Just let me know how
>>>>> formal
>>>>>> we would like to be on a call that received 8 cosponsors, all not making
>>>>>> changes to the original motion thus implicitly echoing the time, date,
>>>>>> subject matter, etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I feel the policy manual requirements were met and defer to the chair to
>>>>>> make a decision otherwise.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Richard Longstreth
>>>>>> Region 1 Representative (AK, AZ, CO, HI, KS, MT, NM, OR, UT, WA, WY)
>>>>>> Libertarian National Committee
>>>>>> richard.longstreth at lp.org
>>>>>> 931.538.9300
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Sent from my Mobile Device
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 15, 2020, 04:13 Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business <
>>>>>> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Besides the detail of the subject matter, Mr. Goldstein already pointed
>>>>>>> out
>>>>>>> that our policy requires, "Each committee member calling for an
>>>>> electronic
>>>>>>> meeting must do so by emailing the entire committee and specifying the
>>>>>>> date
>>>>>>> of the meeting, time of the meeting, meeting link including the identity
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>> the Electronic Meeting Provider, and the topic(s) to be addressed."
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Yet the co-sponsors were obtained based on the topic, but not with the
>>>>>>> other details specified. In the middle of the process the original
>>>>>>> requestor said the meeting would be set for 10 days from when the final
>>>>>>> sponsor was obtained, at 9-11 pm Eastern on that date. The final
>>>>> sponsor
>>>>>>> was obtained on 03/14, but the call of the meeting is for 12 days later
>>>>>>> rather than the 10 days later indicated. There was no way for Dr. Lark
>>>>> to
>>>>>>> know to ask for an earlier time to accommodate his 03/26 schedule
>>>>> conflict
>>>>>>> before the meeting call was sent out, given that the information given
>>>>> to
>>>>>>> him previously did not suggest 03/26 would be the resulting date. Even
>>>>> if
>>>>>>> it had been set for 10 days rather than 12, the fact that the date was
>>>>> not
>>>>>>> locked by the sponsors in advance but was instead a floating relative
>>>>> date
>>>>>>> meant that one had to predict when the final sponsor would develop to
>>>>>>> check
>>>>>>> their calendar for conflicts.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This call-to-meeting changes the details after-the-fact. The real
>>>>> impact
>>>>>>> of not following the protocol established by our policy is to interfere
>>>>>>> with one member's ability to fully participate. This sort of thing is
>>>>>>> exactly why the policy says the cosponsors must agree to all those
>>>>>>> details.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> -Alicia
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 1:54 AM Alicia Mattson <alicia.mattson at lp.org>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think the subject matter given in this meeting notice is improperly
>>>>>>>> broad.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The initial sponsor of the idea started an email with a subject line
>>>>>>>> referring only to "convention" and asked for a meeting to discuss this
>>>>>>>> matter. Mr. Goldstein asked for clarification of what matter. The
>>>>>>>> response was, "our contingency plans and status in light of the
>>>>>>> pandemic."
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> That was the given understanding when other LNC members agreed to join
>>>>>>> the
>>>>>>>> call of the meeting. Yet this meeting notice says the subject is
>>>>> again
>>>>>>>> just the very broad "convention" topic, rather than the narrowed
>>>>> answer
>>>>>>>> which was given in that email thread.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Some other topics that came up in that email thread go beyond the
>>>>> scope
>>>>>>> of
>>>>>>>> contingency plans and into brainstorming potential bylaws amendments
>>>>> on
>>>>>>>> other topics not related to the stated purpose of the meeting. I am
>>>>>>> quite
>>>>>>>> concerned that stating the topic as "convention" rather than "our
>>>>>>>> contingency plans and status in light of the pandemic" could lead to
>>>>>>> some
>>>>>>>> trying to bring those subjects into the meeting, when that was not the
>>>>>>>> purpose stated.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I will object to topics other than "our contingency plans and status
>>>>> in
>>>>>>>> light of the pandemic" as being outside of the scope of the special
>>>>>>> meeting.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -Alicia
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 5:25 PM Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <
>>>>>>>> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Here is the Zoom information. This meeting was sponsored by Hagan,
>>>>>>>>> Harlos,
>>>>>>>>> Longstreth, Merced, Nekhaila, Phillips, Smith, Van Horn
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Caryn Ann Harlos is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Topic: LNC Special Meeting Re: Convention
>>>>>>>>> Time: Mar 26, 2020 09:00 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Join Zoom Meeting
>>>>>>>>> https://zoom.us/j/239017962
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Meeting ID: 239 017 962
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> One tap mobile
>>>>>>>>> +13126266799,,239017962# US (Chicago)
>>>>>>>>> +16465588656,,239017962# US (New York)
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Dial by your location
>>>>>>>>> +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
>>>>>>>>> +1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
>>>>>>>>> +1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
>>>>>>>>> +1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
>>>>>>>>> +1 253 215 8782 US
>>>>>>>>> +1 301 715 8592 US
>>>>>>>>> Meeting ID: 239 017 962
>>>>>>>>> Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/adyM24yilG
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> * 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.
>>>>>>> *
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> --
>>>>
>>>> *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. *
More information about the Lnc-business
mailing list