<div dir="ltr"><div>Just forwarding some data points from an off-list discussion when Paul Frankel answered my question.<br><br></div>-Alicia<br><div><div><br><br><div class="gmail_quote">---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>From: <b class="gmail_sendername"></b> <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:travellingcircus@gmail.com">travellingcircus@gmail.com</a>></span><br>Date: Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 2:30 PM<br>Subject: Re: [Lnc-votes] [Lnc-business] Oklahoma petition - Re: Fwd: Re: February LNC Meeting<br>To: Alicia Mattson <<a href="mailto:agmattson@gmail.com">agmattson@gmail.com</a>>, Ken Moellman <<a href="mailto:ken.moellman@lpky.org">ken.moellman@lpky.org</a>><br>Cc: Wes Benedict <<a href="mailto:wes.benedict@lp.org">wes.benedict@lp.org</a>><br><br><br><div dir="ltr"><i>Ken Moellman has an automated function that automatically does a 20% check on everything his team is checking at 100% and we have some others that we are just checking at 20% only. The batches that have been done at 20% include 11,368 signatures and included batches from everyone that is doing any kind of volume as well as representative samples of the smaller batches as well. 2943 signatures are in the batches that have been checked at 100%. All of the signatures that have been checked at 100% have also been checked at 20%. So at this point I am not expecting big surprises on validity even though it is not exact. I copied Ken also. </i><br></div><div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5"><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 4:17 PM, Alicia Mattson <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:agmattson@gmail.com" target="_blank">agmattson@gmail.com</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>Paulie,<br><br>I don't know what volume have been checked at 100% vs. 20%, but my instinct is that probably a much smaller number has been checked at 100% vs. 20% sampling.<br><br>If you combine them into one single measurement, what's the overall validity rate? In other words, the total number that we decided are valid out of the total number we tested. I realize even that's not a perfect measure because you may have tested more out of one petitioner who has been turning in lower validity rates, but at least it gives us a bigger pool to measure.<span><font color="#888888"><br></font></span></div><span><font color="#888888"><div> <br></div>-Alicia<br><br><br></font></span></div><div><div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 1:44 PM, <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:travellingcircus@gmail.com" target="_blank">travellingcircus@gmail.com</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"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 3:37 PM, <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:lnc-votes@hq.lp.org" target="_blank">lnc-votes@hq.lp.org</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><div>Since the 68% validity is an estimate, I'm assuming it's an optimistic estimate.</div></div></div></blockquote><div><br><br></div><div>The signatures that have been checked so far with a 20% sample are running at 68.79%. The ones checked with a 100% sample are running at 73.46%. <br></div><div><br> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><div> The finances for this drive have all turned out to be very optimistic estimates. On the previous EC call, I expressed my hunch that more money would be required, and I'm not at all surprised that here we are again with the large sunk costs now serving as strong leverage to spend whatever it takes to get some value from the sunk costs. Based on the numbers above, I'm expecting that tonight the EC will be asked to put somewhere in the ballpark of another $20,000 into the project. If that number proves to be the final allocation, then we will have spent $105,000 on a drive for which the original estimates were $65,000.<br><br></div><div>It does not actually change things at this point, but I am curious how many of the people who voted for this project at the start would have still voted for it if the price tag had instead been $105,000 for a state where the chance of retention for the next cycle is so unrealistic.<br></div><div><br></div>We need to deal in reality, not optimistic hopes. What is the lowest validity rate that we realistically think we could experience when we turn in? I realize this isn't hard science and any number is a guess, but what is the lowest validity rate that wouldn't be terribly surprising?<br><br></div><div>It would be a shame to spend $105,000 and then be disqualified for being a few signatures short because we were slightly too optimistic about the validity rate.<br></div><div><br></div>-Alicia<br><br><div><br><div><br></div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div><div>On Wed, Jan 6, 2016 at 10:34 AM, Wes Benedict <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:wes.benedict@lp.org" target="_blank">wes.benedict@lp.org</a>></span> wrote:<br></div></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div><div>
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
A few more details while we're at it.<br>
LNC has spent $71,753 on signatures, plus around $5,500 in other
expenses (like for my travel there and the petition organizer
there).<br>
I may have exact numbers later from the accounting system, but
$77,253 is a pretty close estimate unless I've forgotten about an
expense.<span><br>
<br>
<pre cols="72">Wes Benedict, Executive Director
Libertarian National Committee, Inc.
1444 Duke St., Alexandria, VA 22314
<a href="tel:%28202%29%20333-0008%20ext.%20232" value="+12023330008" target="_blank">(202) 333-0008 ext. 232</a>, <a href="mailto:wes.benedict@lp.org" target="_blank">wes.benedict@lp.org</a>
<a href="http://facebook.com/libertarians" target="_blank">facebook.com/libertarians</a> @LPNational
Join the Libertarian Party at: <a href="http://lp.org/membership" target="_blank">http://lp.org/membership</a></pre>
</span><span><div>On 1/6/2016 1:02 PM, Wes Benedict
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
Roland, <br>
We have 31,721 raw signatures. <br>
We need 24,712 valid signatures. Validity estimates are only
estimates, but are around 68%. If we indeed have 68% validity,
we'd need 36,341 signatures to hit right on the nose. But validity
estimates are only our estimates--we can not be sure how county
officials will interpret their guidelines.<br>
I'm nervous.<br>
I think we need between 37,000 and 40,000 raw signatures.<br>
We don't have enough funds approved to pay for 37,000 raw
signatures.<br>
If you could make it there and collect 1,000 signatures for free,
that would be a big gift from you to this petition drive.<br>
<br>
Below, embedded in this email directly following this sentence, is
a graph showing the progress.<br>
<br>
<img src="cid:part1.01070801.07040701@lp.org" alt=""><br>
<br>
<pre cols="72">Wes Benedict, Executive Director
Libertarian National Committee, Inc.
1444 Duke St., Alexandria, VA 22314
<a href="tel:%28202%29%20333-0008%20ext.%20232" value="+12023330008" target="_blank">(202) 333-0008 ext. 232</a>, <a href="mailto:wes.benedict@lp.org" target="_blank">wes.benedict@lp.org</a>
<a href="http://facebook.com/libertarians" target="_blank">facebook.com/libertarians</a> @LPNational
Join the Libertarian Party at: <a href="http://lp.org/membership" target="_blank">http://lp.org/membership</a></pre>
<div>On 1/6/2016 12:40 PM, Roland Riemers
wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite">
<div style="color:#000;background-color:#fff;font-family:HelveticaNeue,Helvetica Neue,Helvetica,Arial,Lucida Grande,sans-serif;font-size:16px">
<div><span></span></div>
<div>Wes,</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>Well last night I
had my van packed and ready to travel to Tulsa for a week
but looking over the weather situation for the next week at
the last minute decided I did not want to spend a day
plugging along on ice slick roads at 20 mph to get there.
So, I put it off for later in month. I did talk to Charles
Tuttle, and he will probably be starting in Tulsa
tomorrow. If, by chance I do not make it later, I have
paid Tuttle a $1,000 advance against Ok signatures, and
will have him credit that amount against his signature
collection.</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div>So, where do we
stand in numbers in OK now?</div>
<div><br>
</div>
<div dir="ltr">Roland
Riemers<br>
</div>
<div><br>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
</blockquote>
<br>
</span></div>
<br></div></div><span>_______________________________________________<br>
Lnc-business mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lnc-business@hq.lp.org" target="_blank">Lnc-business@hq.lp.org</a><br>
<a href="http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org</a><br>
<br></span></blockquote></div><br></div><div><div>
<p></p>
-- <br>
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lncvotes" group.<br>
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to <a href="mailto:lncvotes+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com" target="_blank">lncvotes+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br>
For more options, visit <a href="https://groups.google.com/d/optout" target="_blank">https://groups.google.com/d/optout</a>.<br>
</div></div><br>_______________________________________________<br>
Lnc-business mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lnc-business@hq.lp.org" target="_blank">Lnc-business@hq.lp.org</a><br>
<a href="http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org</a><span><font color="#888888"><br>
<br>
--<br>
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lncvotes" group.<br>
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to <a href="mailto:lncvotes%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com" target="_blank">lncvotes+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br>
For more options, visit <a href="https://groups.google.com/d/optout" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://groups.google.com/d/optout</a>.<br>
<br>_______________________________________________<br>
Lnc-votes mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:Lnc-votes@hq.lp.org" target="_blank">Lnc-votes@hq.lp.org</a><br>
<a href="http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-votes_hq.lp.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-votes_hq.lp.org</a><br>
<br>
--<br>
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "lncvotes" group.<br>
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to <a href="mailto:lncvotes%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups.com" target="_blank">lncvotes+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com</a>.<br>
For more options, visit <a href="https://groups.google.com/d/optout" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://groups.google.com/d/optout</a>.<br>
<br></font></span></blockquote></div><br></div></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
</div></div></div><br></div></div></div>