[Lnc-business] NOTICE OF SPECIAL E-MEETING MARCH 26 9PM-11PM EASTERN

Wed Mar 25 14:52:31 EDT 2020

Confirming that this meeting is still on for tomorrow at 9pm Eastern. I am
planning on attending and asking Ms. Desisto and Mr Kraus to listen in as
well.

Dan
---
Daniel Fishman
Executive Director
The Libertarian Party
Join Us <http://www.lp.org/join>

On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 4:54 PM Sam Goldstein <sam.goldstein at lp.org> wrote:

> I was in contact with Ken Moelmann last night about this.  Hopefully he
> gets it resolved when he is freed from the chains of his paying job
> later today.
>
> ---
> Sam Goldstein, At Large Member
> Libertarian National Committee
> 317-850-0726 Cell
>
> On 2020-03-16 16:21, francis.wendt at lp.org wrote:
> > It appears the email server is glitching again. I got repeated emails
> > from
> > both John and Caryn Ann. Dan, is there a fix to this?
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Lnc-business <lnc-business-bounces at hq.lp.org> On Behalf Of Sam
> > Goldstein via Lnc-business
> > Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2020 3:52 PM
> > To: lnc-business at hq.lp.org
> > Cc: Sam Goldstein <sam.goldstein at lp.org>
> > Subject: Re: [Lnc-business] NOTICE OF SPECIAL E-MEETING MARCH 26
> > 9PM-11PM
> > EASTERN
> >
> > 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. *
>