[Lnc-business] Convention kibbitzing

[Caryn Ann Harlos]

Mr. Wiener, I will forward your email on to the list. Your analysis is spot
on.  As a hybrid would require 2/3, I do not think it would pass from my
informal speaking with delegates. But then again, people blow smoke when it
is hypothetical, and the group can often gel together and make different
decisions when push comes to shove.

I am at this point not in favour of a hybrid.  However, if the delegates
decide to do so and make it "kosher" within our bylaws, I am amenable to
persuasion as I am on any issue that does not violate either the Party
principles or our bylaws.

*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, May 4, 2020 at 5:36 PM Daniel Wiener <wiener at alum.mit.edu> wrote:

> Hello LNC members,
>
> First let me express my sympathies to all of you as you are faced with an
> extremely difficult problem for which there is no good solution, only
> degrees of bad ones.  On the one hand I'm just as glad that I'm no longer
> on the LNC and tasked with picking one of those bad options.  On the other
> hand I can't help kibbitzing a little.  So here are a few comments:
>
> 1. An in-person convention, even if postponed or otherwise limited, will
> have numerous drawbacks:  Flights from (and through) many locations will be
> unavailable.  Many people will be prevented from personally attending due
> to quarantine or disease affecting themselves or family members, or fall
> into high-risk categories.  (For myself, I am 71 years old and my daughter
> has me on lock-down at home.  Even if the epidemic begins to rapidly tail
> off and the country starts to re-open, large gatherings such as conventions
> will still pose at least some contagious risks for the next several
> months.)  Many other people who'd normally attend are financially unable
> due to job losses and business closures and similar exigencies.)
>
> 2. Our Bylaws do not currently have provisions for electronically-held
> conventions, nor can the Bylaws be amended outside of a regular convention.
>  (I've previously supported proposals which would have allowed the LNC to
> amend the Bylaws with super-super majorities for just these kinds of
> between-convention emergencies, but those Bylaws amendments were never
> passed.)  Any end-run due to this emergency situation will inevitably
> generate heated opposition from a significant fraction of Libertarians, a
> problem made worse by the questionable legitimacy of the current Judicial
> Committee.
>
> 3. I'm attracted to the proposal for a hybrid convention. We could set a
> near-term date and location for an in-person convention, with the intent
> that whatever small number of delegates are willing to attend will
> immediately take the following actions: (1) Suspend the rules to first
> consider amendments to the Bylaws.  (2) Pass appropriate amendments to
> authorize electronic attendance (probably on a one-time basis) and adopt
> the necessary procedures to do so.  (3) Pass an amendment to allow the LNC
> to take whatever other emergency measures might be necessary (probably with
> a super-majority).  (4) Recess the convention to a later date if that is
> deemed to be desirable to complete the remainder of the convention's
> business electronically.
>
> 4. The obvious problem with a hybrid convention is that the delegates in
> attendance might fail to take the above actions.  I'd suggest sending out
> an email blast to all currently-known delegates asking them if (1) They
> would support the above proposal, and (2) If they personally would be
> willing and able to attend an in-person convention to approve the above
> proposal.  This will only work if there is a strong consensus among all
> potential delegates in favor of it, and if there is a large supporting
> number (significantly greater than 2/3) among likely attendees.
>
> Good luck,
> Daniel Wiener
>
> P.S. I'm sending this message to those LNC members I have email addresses
> for, and I apologize to any others I may be missing.
>
>