<div dir="ltr"><div><div>So far I haven't gotten a fourth co-sponsor for my alternate Oregon resolution. If there's insufficient interest from the rest of the LNC, so be it. But I don't want to leave it hanging out there indefinitely. So I'll give it one more day, and if nothing happens by the end of tomorrow, July 19th (the same time as voting ends on the other Oregon resolution), I will withdraw my proposed motion and my co-sponsorship of it. I ask that the Secretary hereby take official notice of my intention.<br>
<br></div>Daniel Wiener<br></div>Region 4 Representative<br></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jul 17, 2014 at 4:57 PM, Daniel Wiener <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:wiener@alum.mit.edu" target="_blank">wiener@alum.mit.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div>With two days remaining in the voting, the current count on "Email Ballot 2014-08: Oregon Resolution" is 1 Yes vote and 10 No votes. So it appears very unlikely that this resolution will pass. I would therefore again invite co-sponsors for my alternate Oregon resolution (below). There are already three co-sponsors, so one more is needed for an email ballot.<br>
<br></div>Daniel Wiener<br><div class="gmail_extra"><div><div class="h5"><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Sat, Jul 12, 2014 at 10:12 AM, Daniel Wiener <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:wiener@alum.mit.edu" target="_blank">wiener@alum.mit.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">I move to adopt the following resolution, and request co-sponsors for an email ballot:<br><div><div><br>
<blockquote style="margin-right:0px"><p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3"><b><i>Whereas, the Bylaws of the Libertarian Party state that “delegates to a
Regular Convention shall be selected by a method adopted by each affiliate
party” (Article 11, 3 (b)), and</i></b></font></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3"><b><i>
</i></b></font><p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3"><b><i>Whereas, the Bylaws of the Libertarian Party state that “each state-level
affiliate party shall, in accordance with its own Bylaws and these Bylaws,
determine who shall be its delegates to all Regular Conventions.” (Article 6,
3), and </i></b></font></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3"><b><i>
</i></b></font><p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3"><b><i>Whereas, the Bylaws of the Libertarian Party state that “the autonomy of the
affiliate and sub-affiliate parties shall not be abridged by the National
Committee or any other committee of the Party…” (Article 6, 5), and</i></b></font></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3"><b><i>
</i></b></font><p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3"><b><i>Whereas, a dispute over the Oregon delegation was placed before the
Credentials Committee, which subsequently presented a report to the Libertarian
Party National Convention on June 27, 2014 which did not describe the details
of that dispute, and</i></b></font></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3"><b><i>
</i></b></font><p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3"><b><i>Whereas, a motion was made to amend the Credentials Committee report to
include three individuals as delegates within the Oregon delegation, and</i></b></font></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3"><b><i>
</i></b></font><p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3"><b><i>Whereas, in response to a Point of Order the Chair of the National
Convention ruled that the proposed amendment was in order, the Chair’s ruling
was appealed, the Chair’s ruling was sustained by a vote of the assembly, and
the assembly subsequently approved the amendment, and</i></b></font></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3"><b><i>
</i></b></font><p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3"><b><i>Whereas, the 11th edition of Robert’s Rules of Order Newly Revised, which is
the Parliamentary Authority for the Libertarian Party as stated in Article 16
of its Bylaws, states (p. 483) that “In any event, no action of the board can
alter or conflict with any decision made by the assembly of the society, and
any such action of the board is null and void (see p. 577, II. 23-33).”, and </i></b></font></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3"><b><i>
</i></b></font><p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3"><b><i>Whereas, the Libertarian National Committee nevertheless regrets the
situation wherein <font face="Times New Roman">some</font> delegates believe the above decision was incorrectly
decided, therefore</i></b></font></p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3"><b><i>
</i></b></font><p><font color="#000000" face="Times New Roman" size="3"><b><i>Be it resolved that it is the sense of the Libertarian National Committee that
it wishes to convey those regrets to the Libertarian Party of Oregon.</i></b></font></p></blockquote><span><font color="#888888"><br><span><font color="#888888"><div>Daniel Wiener</div><div>
Region 4 Representative</div></font></span><br><br><br><div dir="ltr"><br></div>
</font></span></div></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br></div></div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">-- <br><div dir="ltr"><font size="1"><i>"In general, we look for a new law by the following process. First, we guess it (audience laughter), no, don’t laugh, that’s the truth. Then we compute the consequences of the guess, to see what, if this is right, if this law we guess is right, to see what it would imply and then we compare the computation results to nature or we say compare to experiment or experience, compare it directly with observations to see if it works.<font><b> If it disagrees with experiment, it’s WRONG. In that simple statement is the key to science.</b></font> It doesn’t make any difference how beautiful your guess is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are, who made the guess, or what his name is. If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong. That’s all there is to it.”</i> -- Richard Feynman</font><br>
</div>
</font></span></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br><div dir="ltr"><font size="1"><i>"In general, we look for a new law by the following process. First, we guess it (audience laughter), no, don’t laugh, that’s the truth. Then we compute the consequences of the guess, to see what, if this is right, if this law we guess is right, to see what it would imply and then we compare the computation results to nature or we say compare to experiment or experience, compare it directly with observations to see if it works.<font><b> If it disagrees with experiment, it’s WRONG. In that simple statement is the key to science.</b></font> It doesn’t make any difference how beautiful your guess is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are, who made the guess, or what his name is. If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong. That’s all there is to it.”</i> -- Richard Feynman</font><br>
</div>
</div>