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

Fri May 8 11:31:09 EDT 2020

The opinion is not wrong.  But it doesn't help us unless you are speaking
only of P/VP with a subsequent in person convention because the
ratification has to be done at a proper in person convention.

that opinion also presumes impossibility of following their bylaws which is
not present for us

*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 Fri, May 8, 2020 at 9:26 AM Richard Longstreth via Lnc-business <
lnc-business at hq.lp.org> wrote:

> That does not answer my question or even attempt to and I am happy to go
> down that rabbit hole once my question is addressed.
>
> Again, why is the authoritative opinion from RONR wrong and violates RONR?
>
> 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, 08:11 Sam Goldstein <sam.goldstein at lp.org> wrote:
>
> > Richard,
> >
> > So what happens if we nominate a POTUS candidate by an electronic
> > meeting then the delegates in convention subsequently choose to not
> > ratify that candidate and nominate someone else?  This is the
> > Libertarian Party, you know.
> >
> > ---
> > Sam Goldstein, At Large Member
> > Libertarian National Committee
> > 317-850-0726 Cell
> >
> > On 2020-05-08 11:04, Richard Longstreth via Lnc-business wrote:
> > > 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. *
> > >>
> >
>