[Lnc-business] [COC 2018-20] Fwd: Request for LNC Consideration

Fri May 8 11:04:50 EDT 2020

I've heard Roberts referenced a lot in terms of no electronic meetings.
However, I've never seen anyone with "expert level" knowledge respond to
the ratification advisory put out by the folks at Roberts and I may simply
missed it. I understand what the rules are and say but everytime they are
brought up, I bring up the ratifying change and all discussion on Roberts
stops or the ratification argument is ignored. That's not good enough to
take it off the table for me.

Please explain, someone, anyone, why Roberts says electronic business can
be ratified but that our parliamentarians on this committee seem convinced
that the authors of Roberts are wrong. Even in talking with others around
the party, inxlluding those in favor of poI want to understand why and how
the authors are wrong a little better and am not trying to be a thorn or
argumentative.

For reference, I've attached a screenshot of the decision which seems to
indicate electronic meeting is ok with ratification this meaning an
electronic setting would be acceptable. Someone please answer this directly
and leave any other convoluted argument out. This is a very specific
question.

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 Fri, May 8, 2020, 00:45 Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <
lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:

> And what is being obfuscated is that the issue isn’t over the meaning of
> “place.”  Accepting for sake of argument that it could mean a digital room,
> absent an express provision allowing for digital conventions they are
> expressly forbidden.
>
> This is not in question whatsoever, and the bait and switch might distract
> someone not terribly familiar with RONR but not someone who is.
>
> No amount of lawyering things up changes that.
>
> On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 1:13 AM Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business <
> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
>
> > Parliamentarians are trained to say, "I am not an attorney, and I am not
> > giving legal advice" when treading near legal-advice territory.
> Paralegals
> > know to do that also.  It seems to me that attorneys also ought to
> preface
> > with, "I am not a parliamentarian" when they tread in the other
> direction.
> >
> > -Alicia
> >
> >
> > On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 9:13 PM Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <
> > lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
> >
> > > We HAVE decided no matter how much our Chair would prefer that we did
> > not.
> > > I do respect being peace makers but there comes a time when it turns
> into
> > > Solomon's baby and it ends up gas-lighting those who say, Houston,
> there
> > is
> > > a problem.  Our Chair has gone beyond the role of a presiding officer
> and
> > > is having an extended tantrum about not getting his way.
> > >
> > > *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 Thu, May 7, 2020 at 9:04 PM john.phillips--- via Lnc-business <
> > > lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Steven and Alex I love you guys but it clearly says it IS his ruling,
> > not
> > > > what his ruling would be.
> > > >
> > > > This is in direct contradiction to his statements around my complaint
> > > > during the membership affair.
> > > >
> > > > I do appreciate you trying to be peace makers though. Much respect.
> > > >
> > > > John Phillips
> > > > Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
> > > > Cell 217-412-5973
> > > >
> > > > On May 7, 2020 8:50 PM, Steven Nekhaila via Lnc-business <
> > > > lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Mr. Merced is correct,
> > > >
> > > > The Chair stated what his ruling of the Chair would be, if it came
> to a
> > > > vote regarding the subject. Nothing more, nothing less.
> > > >
> > > > As a body, we still need to make a decision according to our rules
> > using
> > > > our best individual judgements to come to a conclusion.
> > > >
> > > > Nothing has changed.
> > > >
> > > > In Liberty,
> > > >
> > > > Steven Nekhaila
> > > > Region 2 Representative
> > > > Libertarian National Committee
> > > >
> > > > Impotentes defendere libertatum non possunt
> > > > "Those without power cannot defend freedom"
> > > >
> > > > On 2020-05-07 04:08 PM, Alex Merced (LNC Vice Chair) via Lnc-business
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > From what I understand Nicks post is an indication of a potential
> > > > > ruling not an edict which means...
> > > > >
> > > > > - it can be challenged if needed
> > > > >
> > > > > - doesn’t change the motion currently passed last Saturday
> > > > >
> > > > > - Doesnt force any action by the LNC on Saturday.
> > > > >
> > > > > So technically nothing has changed yet? Or am I wrong?
> > > > >
> > > > > Technically does an email declaration of a ruling not yet asked for
> > > > > have any weight? So if we theoretically passed a motion that was
> > > > > challenged, wouldn’t Nick have to make this ruling explicitly again
> > at
> > > > > which point it would be challenged?
> > > > >
> > > > > If this is correct wouldn’t the previous email really just be Nick
> > > > > making clear how he will rule if that comes to be or am I
> misreading
> > > > > this?
> > > > >
> > > > > If it’s an edict unilaterally changing or forcing an action by the
> > LNC
> > > > > that’s a problem (the wording doesn’t say that from my reading), if
> > > > > it’s an indication of how a chair will rule if a particular
> conflict
> > > > > arises well then it just gives time for those who’d challenge the
> > > > > ruling to be more prepared.
> > > > >
> > > > > I’m just trying to clarify before we escalate beyond where we are
> > > > > actually at in this process.
> > > > >
> > > > > Alex Merced
> > > > > Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP
> > > > >
> > > > >> On May 7, 2020, at 3:55 PM, joshua.smith--- via Lnc-business
> > > > >> <lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> 
> > > > >> Hello all,
> > > > >>
> > > > >> I would ask that the Chairman of this board either resign if he
> can
> > no
> > > > >> longer fairly respect the will of the board with impartiality, or
> go
> > > > >> back to being the impartial mediator that he is elected to be.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> The Chairman is not elected to push his own agenda on the board,
> or
> > > > >> the membership, and with each passing day it looks more and more
> > like
> > > > >> the Chairman has overstepped the duties entrusted in him by those
> > very
> > > > >> people.
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> In liberty,
> > > > >> Joshua
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >> On May 7, 2020 2:41 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business
> > > > >> <lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
> > > > >> I have a question for the body.  I believe that the entire LNC is
> > not
> > > > >> being
> > > > >> represented by our general counsel but rather Mr. Sarwark is.  Do
> we
> > > > >> have
> > > > >> any recourse to ask for additional counsel?  This is pretty
> > > > >> outrageous,
> > > > >> that I would join in costs if other LNC members felt we needed
> > > > >> representation due to this usurping of power by our Chair.  I have
> > > > >> said for
> > > > >> two years now there are no officers in this party other than our
> > > > >> Chair.
> > > > >> Now there is effectively no LNC.  Figureheads would be a
> promotion.
> > > > >>
> > > > >> *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 Thu, May 7, 2020 at 1:35 PM Caryn Ann Harlos
> > > > >> <caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org>
> > > > >> wrote:
> > > > >>
> > > > >> > I too would like to know how the "vast majority" was determined.
> > > Our
> > > > >> > largest affiliate California has instructed the LNC otherwise.
> > > > Colorado is
> > > > >> > nothing to sneeze at and there is nothing preventing us from
> > > > attending.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > Respect the decision of the LNC.  You are presiding officer not
> > > > overlord.
> > > > >> > If you insist on putting our general counsel in the untenable
> > > > position of
> > > > >> > rendering a parliamentarian opinion, I will be moving that the
> LNC
> > > > retain
> > > > >> > and actual PRP.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > I do not know what has caused this strange shift of behaviour
> but
> > > > this is
> > > > >> > not the very tempered behaviour of the Chair I have worked with
> > for
> > > > four
> > > > >> > years now who knew how to respect the hierarchy in place and
> > accept
> > > > things
> > > > >> > he thought were bad decisions.  You are free to appeal to the
> > > > Judicial
> > > > >> > Committee l like anyone else.  You are not free to disregard the
> > LNC
> > > > and
> > > > >> > usurp all power to yourself.
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> > *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 Thu, May 7, 2020 at 1:32 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <
> > > > caryn.ann.harlos at lp.org>
> > > > >> > wrote:
> > > > >> >
> > > > >> >> Our counsel is not a parliamentarian.  I am aghast he would
> offer
> > > an
> > > > >> >> opinion outside his area of speciality.  No parliamentarian
> would
> > > > render
> > > > >> >> that opinion.  If anyone decided to sue over this, I firmly
> > believe
> > > > Mr.
> > > > >> >> Hall would be in danger of malpractice.  This LNC is in
> > dereliction
> > > > of its
> > > > >> >> duty by not retaining a PRP for that determination.  Further,
> you
> > > do
> > > > not
> > > > >> >> have authority as Chair to override the decision of the LNC.
> > This
> > > > has gone
> > > > >> >> beyond a ridiculous power grab.  The LNC has decided.  Period.
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >> *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 Thu, May 7, 2020 at 12:55 PM Whitney Bilyeu via
> Lnc-business <
> > > > >> >> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >> >>> Nick, how do you intend to demonstrate that it will be
> > > "impossible"
> > > > for a
> > > > >> >>> "vast majority" of the delegates to travel to a convention in
> > > July?
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 1:36 PM Nicholas Sarwark via
> > Lnc-business <
> > > > >> >>> lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> > Dear Colleagues,
> > > > >> >>> >
> > > > >> >>> > It is my ruling as Chair, and supported by the opinion of
> the
> > > > >> >>> Libertarian
> > > > >> >>> > National Committee's special counsel, Oliver Hall, that
> > “place”
> > > > in the
> > > > >> >>> > bylaws can mean a virtual convention in the situation where
> it
> > > is
> > > > >> >>> > impossible for the vast majority of the selected delegates
> in
> > > the
> > > > >> >>> party to
> > > > >> >>> > travel to a physical location.
> > > > >> >>> >
> > > > >> >>> > As such, a virtual convention held on Memorial Day weekend
> > would
> > > > be a
> > > > >> >>> > proper convention and compliant with the bylaws.
> > > > >> >>> >
> > > > >> >>> > Yours in liberty,
> > > > >> >>> > Nick
> > > > >> >>> >
> > > > >> >>> >
> > > > >> >>> > On Thu, May 7, 2020 at 2:26 PM Whitney Bilyeu via
> > Lnc-business <
> > > > >> >>> > lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:
> > > > >> >>> >
> > > > >> >>> > > The COC's job is to plan a convention, in accordance with
> > > > bylaws.
> > > > >> >>> The LNC
> > > > >> >>> > > is responsible for final decisions. No one is being forced
> > to
> > > > do
> > > > >> >>> > anything,
> > > > >> >>> > > especially by the COC. It is not the COC's job to suggest
> a
> > > > >> >>> convention
> > > > >> >>> > plan
> > > > >> >>> > > that is not in line with bylaws. The COC's job is to put
> > > > together
> > > > >> >>> plans,
> > > > >> >>> > > offer options for the LNC to choose, and make suggestions
> > > where
> > > > >> >>> > applicable.
> > > > >> >>> > >
> > > > >> >>> > > The LNC could have moved to change plans at any time...it
> > > > didn't.
> > > > >> >>> The LNC
> > > > >> >>> > > could have voted this past Saturday to do something other
> > than
> > > > >> >>> > > postpone......It didn't.
> > > > >> >>> > >
> > > > >> >>> > > If an LNC member wants something other than an in-person
> > > > convention,
> > > > >> >>> in
> > > > >> >>> > > accordance with bylaws, they should move such. The LNC
> will
> > > > >> >>> > > decide.....again.
> > > > >> >>> > >
> > > > >> >>> > >
> > > > >> >>> > >
> > > > >> >>> > > On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 9:36 AM BetteRose via Conventions <
> > > > >> >>> > > conventions at hq.lp.org> wrote:
> > > > >> >>> > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > I believe it was the LNC that voted for the in person
> > > > convention.
> > > > >> >>> The
> > > > >> >>> > CoC
> > > > >> >>> > > > may have 'pushed' for that outcome but we didn't make
> the
> > > > final
> > > > >> >>> > decision.
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > My concern is, that as deaths continue to rise we may
> > again
> > > > have to
> > > > >> >>> > find
> > > > >> >>> > > > another venue and move the convention once again.  This
> > will
> > > > be
> > > > >> >>> hard on
> > > > >> >>> > > > most of the delegates and won't play well in the
> press.  I
> > > > see
> > > > >> >>> that the
> > > > >> >>> > > > Democrats are already having trouble with that same
> issue.
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > BetteRose Ryan
> > > > >> >>> > > > Publisher
> > > > >> >>> > > > Bent Briar Publishing <http://www.bentbriarbooks.com/>
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > -----Original Message-----
> > > > >> >>> > > > From: Alicia Mattson via Conventions <
> > conventions at hq.lp.org
> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > To: Libertarian National Committee list <
> > > > lnc-business at hq.lp.org>
> > > > >> >>> > > > Cc: Alicia Mattson <alicia.mattson at lp.org>; Convention
> > > > Oversight
> > > > >> >>> > > > Committee <conventions at hq.lp.org>
> > > > >> >>> > > > Sent: Sun, May 3, 2020 11:34 pm
> > > > >> >>> > > > Subject: Re: [COC 2018-20] [Lnc-business] Fwd: Request
> for
> > > > LNC
> > > > >> >>> > > > Consideration
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > Well, I meant to send that to the COC email list, but I
> > was
> > > > going
> > > > >> >>> to
> > > > >> >>> > come
> > > > >> >>> > > > here and say pretty much the same thing.
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > From this forwarded message below, Valerie Sarwark wrote
> > to
> > > > us:
> > > > >> >>> "The
> > > > >> >>> > > > Convention Oversight Committee is essentially committing
> > > > >> >>> suppression of
> > > > >> >>> > > > delegates by attempting to force an in-person
> convention."
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > Force?  Suppression of delegates?  Those of differing
> > > > opinions are
> > > > >> >>> > > > attempting to achieve their desired result, too.  Is
> that
> > > > force?
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > We're getting a lot of email these days, and it's easy
> to
> > > > skim and
> > > > >> >>> miss
> > > > >> >>> > > > details, so I wanted to highlight this.  The demonizing
> of
> > > > the COC
> > > > >> >>> is
> > > > >> >>> > as
> > > > >> >>> > > > shameful as it is absurd.
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > -Alicia
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > On Sun, May 3, 2020 at 10:28 PM Alicia Mattson <
> > > > >> >>> alicia.mattson at lp.org>
> > > > >> >>> > > > wrote:
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > Forwarding for those of you not on the LNC.  The
> rhetoric
> > > > being
> > > > >> >>> spewed
> > > > >> >>> > > > about the COC is becoming more and more outrageous.
> There
> > > > was
> > > > >> >>> quite a
> > > > >> >>> > > bit
> > > > >> >>> > > > of it flung around during the Bylaws and Rules Committee
> > > > meeting
> > > > >> >>> today
> > > > >> >>> > as
> > > > >> >>> > > > well...
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > -Alicia
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > ---------- Forwarded message ---------
> > > > >> >>> > > > From: *justin.odonnell--- via Lnc-business* <
> > > > >> >>> lnc-business at hq.lp.org>
> > > > >> >>> > > > Date: Sun, May 3, 2020 at 12:01 PM
> > > > >> >>> > > > Subject: [Lnc-business] Fwd: Request for LNC
> Consideration
> > > > >> >>> > > > To: <lnc-business at hq.lp.org>
> > > > >> >>> > > > Cc: <justin.odonnell at lp.org>
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > Attached is a letter to the LNC from a Region 8 Member
> and
> > > > New
> > > > >> >>> > Hampshire
> > > > >> >>> > > > delegate for the LNC's consideration.
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > Justin O'Donnell
> > > > >> >>> > > > LNC Region 8 Representative
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > > > >> >>> > > > From: Valerie Sarwark
> > > > >> >>> > > > Date: May 3, 2020 2:55 PM
> > > > >> >>> > > > Subject: Request for LNC Consideration
> > > > >> >>> > > > To: Justin.Odonnell at lp.org
> > > > >> >>> > > > Cc: Pat.Ford at lp.org
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > Justin,
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > As my regional representative, please forward this
> letter
> > to
> > > > the
> > > > >> >>> LNC
> > > > >> >>> > > > business list.
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > Pat,
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > Thank you for your responsible "no" vote in yesterday's
> > > > meeting.
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > ****
> > > > >> >>> > > > Dear Members of the Board,
> > > > >> >>> > > > I am a delegate to the National Convention representing
> > the
> > > > state
> > > > >> >>> of
> > > > >> >>> > New
> > > > >> >>> > > > Hampshire. This is the third convention to which I have
> > the
> > > > great
> > > > >> >>> > > privilege
> > > > >> >>> > > > of serving as a delegate.
> > > > >> >>> > > > I would like you to strongly consider retaining the
> > original
> > > > >> >>> convention
> > > > >> >>> > > > dates and move to an electronic business meeting. The
> > > > nomination of
> > > > >> >>> > > > presidential ticket and LNC positions should be filled
> as
> > > > soon as
> > > > >> >>> > > possible
> > > > >> >>> > > > to ensure we have the strongest start to Election Day
> > (which
> > > > is
> > > > >> >>> only
> > > > >> >>> > 180
> > > > >> >>> > > > days from now).
> > > > >> >>> > > > The Convention Oversight Committee is essentially
> > committing
> > > > >> >>> > suppression
> > > > >> >>> > > > of delegates by attempting to force an in-person
> > convention.
> > > > The
> > > > >> >>> > country
> > > > >> >>> > > is
> > > > >> >>> > > > in the middle of a pandemic with many states not even
> open
> > > > for
> > > > >> >>> > gatherings
> > > > >> >>> > > > of over 10 people. The country is in the middle of an
> > > > economic
> > > > >> >>> collapse
> > > > >> >>> > > > with millions unemployed and unable to pay rent. You are
> > now
> > > > asking
> > > > >> >>> > these
> > > > >> >>> > > > people to somehow rearrange their schedules, spend more
> > > money
> > > > and
> > > > >> >>> > > > potentially put their lives at risk.
> > > > >> >>> > > > In addition to the financial constraints on many of our
> > > > delegates
> > > > >> >>> (the
> > > > >> >>> > > > majority of which are dues-paying members of the party),
> > you
> > > > are
> > > > >> >>> not
> > > > >> >>> > > > considering those affected by scheduling as far as their
> > > > children.
> > > > >> >>> I
> > > > >> >>> > have
> > > > >> >>> > > > spent YEARS as active as possible and trying to make the
> > > > party a
> > > > >> >>> more
> > > > >> >>> > > > welcoming place for families. Although both my husband
> > and I
> > > > have
> > > > >> >>> been
> > > > >> >>> > > able
> > > > >> >>> > > > to work through this time, it seems financially
> > > irresponsible
> > > > to
> > > > >> >>> drag
> > > > >> >>> > the
> > > > >> >>> > > > entire family to a yet-to-be-determined site. With so
> many
> > > > that
> > > > >> >>> are in
> > > > >> >>> > > the
> > > > >> >>> > > > same situation (or potentially worse off), would you
> feel
> > > > >> >>> comfortable
> > > > >> >>> > > > asking them to go into debt just so they can have their
> > > > voices
> > > > >> >>> heard?
> > > > >> >>> > > > We’ve all blocked this time. We’re all ready for this
> > > > meeting. We
> > > > >> >>> all
> > > > >> >>> > > want
> > > > >> >>> > > > to participate but we are now being told that we have to
> > > > reschedule
> > > > >> >>> > > > everything within a couple of weeks. We are in the
> middle
> > of
> > > > an
> > > > >> >>> > emergency
> > > > >> >>> > > > and forcing people to shuffle their schedules, lives,
> and
> > > > finances
> > > > >> >>> > around
> > > > >> >>> > > > is quite ridiculous. This isn’t about courage or
> > principles.
> > > > This
> > > > >> >>> is
> > > > >> >>> > > about
> > > > >> >>> > > > doing the best thing for the delegates that represent
> the
> > > > party.
> > > > >> >>> Other
> > > > >> >>> > > > political meetings with greater participants have
> already
> > > > occurred.
> > > > >> >>> > > > Shouldn’t we show the world that we are serious,
> > > considerate,
> > > > >> >>> > innovative
> > > > >> >>> > > > and ready to adapt?
> > > > >> >>> > > > The best choice for some is not the best choice for all.
> > An
> > > > online
> > > > >> >>> > > > convention, held Memorial Day weekend, will not exclude
> > > > delegates.
> > > > >> >>> You
> > > > >> >>> > > need
> > > > >> >>> > > > to consider the right thing to do for ALL of the
> > delegates.
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > Sincerely,
> > > > >> >>> > > > Valerie A. Sarwark
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > >> >>> > > > Conventions mailing list
> > > > >> >>> > > > Conventions at hq.lp.org
> > > > >> >>> > > > http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conventions
> > > > >> >>> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > >> >>> > > > Conventions mailing list
> > > > >> >>> > > > Conventions at hq.lp.org
> > > > >> >>> > > > http://hq.lp.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/conventions
> > > > >> >>> > > >
> > > > >> >>> > >
> > > > >> >>> >
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>> --
> > > > >> >>> *Whitney Bilyeu*
> > > > >> >>> Libertarian National Committee
> > > > >> >>> Region 7 Representative
> > > > >> >>> 281.433.4966
> > > > >> >>> LP.ORG
> > > > >> >>>
> > > > >> >>
> > > > >>
> > > > >>
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> --
>
> *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. *
>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: FB_IMG_1588640571659.jpg
Type: image/jpeg
Size: 38836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/attachments/20200508/a5392ca7/attachment-0001.jpg>