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

[Alicia Mattson]

Bill, we'll shortly get an email with a new link now that the account has
been upgraded to allow more participants.

-Alicia

On Thu, Mar 26, 2020 at 6:08 PM joe.bishop-henchman--- via Lnc-business <
lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:

> They're increasing the cap
>
> On Mar 26, 2020 9:06 PM, William Redpath via Lnc-business <
> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>
> Tried calling in.  Also full.
>
> On 2020-03-26 20:02, William Redpath via Lnc-business wrote:
> > I can't get into this meeting.  I am told that it is full.
> >
> > On 2020-03-26 14:36, Joe Bishop-Henchman via Lnc-business wrote:
> >> Here's what was sent out earlier - I'm sure if it's changed or wrong
> >> someone will let us know
> >>
> >> 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
> >>
> >> JBH
> >>
> >> ------------
> >> Joe Bishop-Henchman
> >> LNC Member (At-Large)
> >> joe.bishop-henchman at lp.org
> >> www.facebook.com/groups/189510455174837
> >>
> >> On 2020-03-26 13:53, Steven Nekhaila via Lnc-business wrote:
> >>> Hello Dan,
> >>>
> >>> Is there a call in line for us to join?
> >>>
> >>> In Liberty,
> >>>
> >>> Steven Nekhaila
> >>> Region 2 Representative
> >>> Libertarian National Committee
> >>>
> >>> Impotentes defendere libertatum non possunt
> >>> "Those without power cannot defend freedom"
> >>>
> >>> On 2020-03-25 02:52 PM, Daniel Fishman via Lnc-business wrote:
> >>>> 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. *
> >>>>>
>
>
>