<div dir='auto'>They're increasing the cap </div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Mar 26, 2020 9:06 PM, William Redpath via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:<br type="attribution" /><blockquote class="quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><p dir="ltr">Tried calling in. Also full.
<br>
<br>
On 2020-03-26 20:02, William Redpath via Lnc-business wrote:
<br>
> I can't get into this meeting. I am told that it is full.
<br>
>
<br>
> On 2020-03-26 14:36, Joe Bishop-Henchman via Lnc-business wrote:
<br>
>> Here's what was sent out earlier - I'm sure if it's changed or wrong
<br>
>> someone will let us know
<br>
>>
<br>
>> Topic: LNC Special Meeting Re: Convention
<br>
>> Time: Mar 26, 2020 09:00 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada)
<br>
>> Join Zoom Meeting
<br>
>> https://zoom.us/j/239017962
<br>
>> Meeting ID: 239 017 962
<br>
>> One tap mobile
<br>
>> +13126266799,,239017962# US (Chicago)
<br>
>> +16465588656,,239017962# US (New York)
<br>
>> Dial by your location
<br>
>> +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
<br>
>> +1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
<br>
>> +1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
<br>
>> +1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
<br>
>> +1 253 215 8782 US
<br>
>> +1 301 715 8592 US
<br>
>> Meeting ID: 239 017 962
<br>
>> Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/adyM24yilG
<br>
>>
<br>
>> JBH
<br>
>>
<br>
>> ------------
<br>
>> Joe Bishop-Henchman
<br>
>> LNC Member (At-Large)
<br>
>> joe.bishop-henchman@lp.org
<br>
>> www.facebook.com/groups/189510455174837
<br>
>>
<br>
>> On 2020-03-26 13:53, Steven Nekhaila via Lnc-business wrote:
<br>
>>> Hello Dan,
<br>
>>>
<br>
>>> Is there a call in line for us to join?
<br>
>>>
<br>
>>> In Liberty,
<br>
>>>
<br>
>>> Steven Nekhaila
<br>
>>> Region 2 Representative
<br>
>>> Libertarian National Committee
<br>
>>>
<br>
>>> Impotentes defendere libertatum non possunt
<br>
>>> "Those without power cannot defend freedom"
<br>
>>>
<br>
>>> On 2020-03-25 02:52 PM, Daniel Fishman via Lnc-business wrote:
<br>
>>>> Confirming that this meeting is still on for tomorrow at 9pm
<br>
>>>> Eastern. I am
<br>
>>>> planning on attending and asking Ms. Desisto and Mr Kraus to listen
<br>
>>>> in as
<br>
>>>> well.
<br>
>>>>
<br>
>>>> Dan
<br>
>>>> ---
<br>
>>>> Daniel Fishman
<br>
>>>> Executive Director
<br>
>>>> The Libertarian Party
<br>
>>>> Join Us <http://www.lp.org/join>
<br>
>>>>
<br>
>>>>
<br>
>>>> On Mon, Mar 16, 2020 at 4:54 PM Sam Goldstein <sam.goldstein@lp.org>
<br>
>>>> wrote:
<br>
>>>>
<br>
>>>>> I was in contact with Ken Moelmann last night about this.
<br>
>>>>> Hopefully he
<br>
>>>>> gets it resolved when he is freed from the chains of his paying job
<br>
>>>>> later today.
<br>
>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> ---
<br>
>>>>> Sam Goldstein, At Large Member
<br>
>>>>> Libertarian National Committee
<br>
>>>>> 317-850-0726 Cell
<br>
>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> On 2020-03-16 16:21, francis.wendt@lp.org wrote:
<br>
>>>>> > It appears the email server is glitching again. I got repeated emails
<br>
>>>>> > from
<br>
>>>>> > both John and Caryn Ann. Dan, is there a fix to this?
<br>
>>>>> >
<br>
>>>>> > -----Original Message-----
<br>
>>>>> > From: Lnc-business <lnc-business-bounces@hq.lp.org> On Behalf Of Sam
<br>
>>>>> > Goldstein via Lnc-business
<br>
>>>>> > Sent: Sunday, March 15, 2020 3:52 PM
<br>
>>>>> > To: lnc-business@hq.lp.org
<br>
>>>>> > Cc: Sam Goldstein <sam.goldstein@lp.org>
<br>
>>>>> > Subject: Re: [Lnc-business] NOTICE OF SPECIAL E-MEETING MARCH 26
<br>
>>>>> > 9PM-11PM
<br>
>>>>> > EASTERN
<br>
>>>>> >
<br>
>>>>> > John,
<br>
>>>>> >
<br>
>>>>> > I know from your email that you are tired and irritable, but did you
<br>
>>>>> > have to
<br>
>>>>> > send the email 6 times?
<br>
>>>>> >
<br>
>>>>> > Stay Free!
<br>
>>>>> >
<br>
>>>>> > ---
<br>
>>>>> > Sam Goldstein, At Large Member
<br>
>>>>> > Libertarian National Committee
<br>
>>>>> > 317-850-0726 Cell
<br>
>>>>> >
<br>
>>>>> > On 2020-03-15 12:34, john.phillips--- via Lnc-business wrote:
<br>
>>>>> >
<br>
>>>>> >> I am tired. I am irritable. I am frustrated. So I probably should not
<br>
>>>>> > speak at all. But since much of my frustration is with this crap here
<br>
>>>>> > you
<br>
>>>>> > go.
<br>
>>>>> >>
<br>
>>>>> >> The intention was clear to the co-sponsors, suck it up and deal with
<br>
>>>>> >> it.
<br>
>>>>> >>
<br>
>>>>> >> Stop with the damn rules lawyering obstructionist BS. Are there times
<br>
>>>>> >> it
<br>
>>>>> > is appropriate, yes, but 90% of the time it is being thrown out there
<br>
>>>>> > to
<br>
>>>>> > forward some personal agenda, or just satisfy some deep OCD issues.
<br>
>>>>> > Give it
<br>
>>>>> > an effen rest.
<br>
>>>>> >>
<br>
>>>>> >> It is clear that enough members of the body desire a discussion. It
<br>
>>>>> >> is
<br>
>>>>> > clear that enough members of the party would like this discussion to
<br>
>>>>> > happen.
<br>
>>>>> >
<br>
>>>>> >>
<br>
>>>>> >> I very personally will suggest that if you spend half or more of your
<br>
>>>>> >> time
<br>
>>>>> > trying being petty over dotted i's and crossed t's that make no real
<br>
>>>>> > difference - allowing for the times it actually does - that perhaps
<br>
>>>>> > every
<br>
>>>>> > now and then step back and realize that it really doesnt mean a damn
<br>
>>>>> > thing
<br>
>>>>> > and you are just being a PITA for nothing.
<br>
>>>>> >>
<br>
>>>>> >> Yes I am aware of the hypocrisy of this after the crap I gave about
<br>
>>>>> > civility, but enough is damn well enough.
<br>
>>>>> >>
<br>
>>>>> >> John Phillips
<br>
>>>>> >> Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell
<br>
>>>>> >> 217-412-5973
<br>
>>>>> >>
<br>
>>>>> >> On Mar 15, 2020 9:27 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business
<br>
>>>>> > <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
<br>
>>>>> >>
<br>
>>>>> >>> I had today's date wrong in my head as I am traveling lol over the
<br>
>>>>> >>> country and barely know what state I am in.
<br>
>>>>> >>>
<br>
>>>>> >>> I will let the chair decide if it's correct.
<br>
>>>>> >>>
<br>
>>>>> >>> This to me is an example of using the rules to make things difficult
<br>
>>>>> >>> for no real purpose. And I simply won't waste time on that.
<br>
>>>>> >>> Everyone knows the intent and everyone knows the date was to
<br>
>>>>> >>> accommodate the ten day notice period without being wayyyy out. The
<br>
>>>>> >>> fact that one angel isn't dancing on the pin head is not relevant
<br>
>>>>> >>> IMHO. It is apparent that a certain contingent doesn't want a
<br>
>>>>> >>> meeting and that is fine - but some of us do and I stand by my call.
<br>
>>>>> >>>
<br>
>>>>> >>> The chair can unilaterally reset at his choice and I would welcome
<br>
>>>>> >>> it.
<br>
>>>>> >>>
<br>
>>>>> >>> On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 8:23 AM Richard Longstreth via Lnc-business <
<br>
>>>>> >>> lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
<br>
>>>>> >>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>> Alicia does have some points in the 12 days and time arena, but I
<br>
>>>>> >>>> believe the motion itself passed correctly. I believe the secretary
<br>
>>>>> >>>> may have set the meeting up incorrectly.
<br>
>>>>> >>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>> In the original ask the time and subject were included. I'm happy to
<br>
>>>>> >>>> move this meeting two days sooner as we passed. There should be no
<br>
>>>>> >>>> other issues beyond that. The reason I'm not in arms over the date
<br>
>>>>> >>>> is because it was proposed and passed on the same day with the
<br>
>>>>> >>>> language of starting 10 days after passing. None of the cosponsors
<br>
>>>>> >>>> sponsored on a different day so there cannot be any implied
<br>
>>>>> >>>> confusion on
<br>
>>>>> > what the cosponsors passed.
<br>
>>>>> >>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>> Richard Longstreth
<br>
>>>>> >>>> Region 1 Representative (AK, AZ, CO, HI, KS, MT, NM, OR, UT, WA, WY)
<br>
>>>>> >>>> Libertarian National Committee richard.longstreth@lp.org
<br>
>>>>> >>>> 931.538.9300
<br>
>>>>> >>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>> Sent from my Mobile Device
<br>
>>>>> >>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>> On Sun, Mar 15, 2020, 07:17 Richard Longstreth
<br>
>>>>> >>>> <richard.longstreth@lp.org>
<br>
>>>>> >>>> wrote:
<br>
>>>>> >>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>> I cosponsored the proposed meeting, time, and subject. Because no
<br>
>>>>> >>>>> changes were made to the original ask, and how email threads work,
<br>
>>>>> >>>>> I thought everything was implied. If the members of this body would
<br>
>>>>> >>>>> rather a
<br>
>>>>> >>>> minimum
<br>
>>>>> >>>>> of six separate email threads calling for this meeting, with debate
<br>
>>>>> >>>>> occurring in each, I would be happy to comply. Just let me know how
<br>
>>>>> >>>> formal
<br>
>>>>> >>>>> we would like to be on a call that received 8 cosponsors, all not
<br>
>>>>> >>>>> making changes to the original motion thus implicitly echoing the
<br>
>>>>> >>>>> time, date, subject matter, etc.
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>> I feel the policy manual requirements were met and defer to the
<br>
>>>>> >>>>> chair to make a decision otherwise.
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>> Richard Longstreth
<br>
>>>>> >>>>> Region 1 Representative (AK, AZ, CO, HI, KS, MT, NM, OR, UT, WA,
<br>
>>>>> >>>>> WY) Libertarian National Committee richard.longstreth@lp.org
<br>
>>>>> >>>>> 931.538.9300
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>> Sent from my Mobile Device
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Mar 15, 2020, 04:13 Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business <
<br>
>>>>> >>>>> lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> Besides the detail of the subject matter, Mr. Goldstein already
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> pointed out that our policy requires, "Each committee member
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> calling for an
<br>
>>>>> >>>> electronic
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> meeting must do so by emailing the entire committee and specifying
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> the date of the meeting, time of the meeting, meeting link
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> including the identity of the Electronic Meeting Provider, and the
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> topic(s) to be addressed."
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> Yet the co-sponsors were obtained based on the topic, but not with
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> the other details specified. In the middle of the process the
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> original requestor said the meeting would be set for 10 days from
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> when the final sponsor was obtained, at 9-11 pm Eastern on that
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> date. The final
<br>
>>>>> >>>> sponsor
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> was obtained on 03/14, but the call of the meeting is for 12 days
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> later rather than the 10 days later indicated. There was no way
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> for Dr. Lark
<br>
>>>>> >>>> to
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> know to ask for an earlier time to accommodate his 03/26 schedule
<br>
>>>>> >>>> conflict
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> before the meeting call was sent out, given that the information
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> given
<br>
>>>>> >>>> to
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> him previously did not suggest 03/26 would be the resulting date.
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> Even
<br>
>>>>> >>>> if
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> it had been set for 10 days rather than 12, the fact that the date
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> was
<br>
>>>>> >>>> not
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> locked by the sponsors in advance but was instead a floating
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> relative
<br>
>>>>> >>>> date
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> meant that one had to predict when the final sponsor would develop
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> to check their calendar for conflicts.
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> This call-to-meeting changes the details after-the-fact. The real
<br>
>>>>> >>>> impact
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> of not following the protocol established by our policy is to
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> interfere with one member's ability to fully participate. This
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> sort of thing is exactly why the policy says the cosponsors must
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> agree to all those details.
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> -Alicia
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> On Sun, Mar 15, 2020 at 1:54 AM Alicia Mattson
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> <alicia.mattson@lp.org>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> wrote:
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> I think the subject matter given in this meeting notice is
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> improperly broad.
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> The initial sponsor of the idea started an email with a subject
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> line referring only to "convention" and asked for a meeting to
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> discuss this matter. Mr. Goldstein asked for clarification of
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> what matter. The response was, "our contingency plans and status
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> in light of the
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> pandemic."
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> That was the given understanding when other LNC members agreed to
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> join
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> the
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> call of the meeting. Yet this meeting notice says the subject is
<br>
>>>>> >>>> again
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> just the very broad "convention" topic, rather than the narrowed
<br>
>>>>> >>>> answer
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> which was given in that email thread.
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> Some other topics that came up in that email thread go beyond the
<br>
>>>>> >>>> scope
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> of
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> contingency plans and into brainstorming potential bylaws
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> amendments
<br>
>>>>> >>>> on
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> other topics not related to the stated purpose of the meeting. I
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> am
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> quite
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> concerned that stating the topic as "convention" rather than "our
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> contingency plans and status in light of the pandemic" could lead
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> to
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> some
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> trying to bring those subjects into the meeting, when that was
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> not the purpose stated.
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> I will object to topics other than "our contingency plans and
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> status
<br>
>>>>> >>>> in
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> light of the pandemic" as being outside of the scope of the
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> special
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> meeting.
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> -Alicia
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> On Sat, Mar 14, 2020 at 5:25 PM Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>> < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> Here is the Zoom information. This meeting was sponsored by
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> Hagan, Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Nekhaila, Phillips, Smith,
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> Van Horn
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> Caryn Ann Harlos is inviting you to a scheduled Zoom meeting.
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> Topic: LNC Special Meeting Re: Convention
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> Time: Mar 26, 2020 09:00 PM Eastern Time (US and Canada)
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> Join Zoom Meeting
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> https://zoom.us/j/239017962
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> Meeting ID: 239 017 962
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> One tap mobile
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> +13126266799,,239017962# US (Chicago) 16465588656,,239017962# US
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> +(New York)
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> Dial by your location
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> +1 312 626 6799 US (Chicago)
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> +1 646 558 8656 US (New York)
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> +1 346 248 7799 US (Houston)
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> +1 669 900 9128 US (San Jose)
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> +1 253 215 8782 US
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> +1 301 715 8592 US
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> Meeting ID: 239 017 962
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> Find your local number: https://zoom.us/u/adyM24yilG
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> * In Liberty,*
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> * Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's
<br>
>>>>> >>>> Syndrome
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If
<br>
>>>>> >>>> anyone
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> social
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> faux
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>> pas) in an actual email, please contact me privately and let me
<br>
>>>>> > know.
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>> *
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>>>
<br>
>>>>> >>> --
<br>
>>>>> >>>
<br>
>>>>> >>> *In Liberty,*
<br>
>>>>> >>>
<br>
>>>>> >>> * Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's
<br>
>>>>> >>> Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect
<br>
>>>>> >>> inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic
<br>
>>>>> >>> arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or
<br>
>>>>> >>> some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me
<br>
>>>>> >>> know. *
<br>
>>>>>
<br>
</p>
</blockquote></div><br></div>