<div dir='auto'>Caryn Ann, to be clear, are you saying you will not support us doing it, or will not support putting it on the in person convention agenda? Or both?<div dir="auto"><br><div data-smartmail="gmail_signature" dir="auto">John Phillips<br>Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative<br>Cell 217-412-5973</div></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On May 4, 2020 2:54 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org> wrote:<br type="attribution" /><blockquote class="quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr">I won't support that. If this is what we are going to pushing, I will go back to my family life and stick to my original position. <br clear="all" /><div><div dir="ltr" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div style="letter-spacing:0.2px"><div dir="ltr" style="font-family:'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;letter-spacing:normal"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-size:small"><b style="color:rgb( 102 , 102 , 102 );font-family:'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:large"> </b></div><div style="font-size:small"><b style="color:rgb( 102 , 102 , 102 );font-family:'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:large">In Liberty,</b><br /></div><div><div><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div dir="ltr"><div style="font-size:small"><b style="color:rgb( 255 , 0 , 255 );font-family:'arial' , 'helvetica' , sans-serif;font-size:large"><i><img src="https://drive.google.com/uc?id=1DeRjq-L8dvRZabgEG94VkkUvjoHatcfP&export=download" width="200" height="41" /></i></b><br /></div><div><i style="font-size:small"><font size="1"><b> Personal Note: </b> 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. </font></i><br /></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><div style="font-size:small"><div style="text-align:center"><br /></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div><br /></div><br /><div class="elided-text"><div dir="ltr">On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 1:43 PM john.phillips--- via Lnc-business <<a href="mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org">lnc-business@hq.lp.org</a>> wrote:<br /></div><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb( 204 , 204 , 204 );padding-left:1ex"><div dir="auto">Agreed Elizabeth. Tho i believe the easiest way to make that happen is making it first thing on the convention agenda. I believe bylaws is working on the language already, and most of us agree on the necessity. <div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">Perhaps that is something we could do on Saturday? Motion to "make consideration of bylaws amendment to allow remote participation first item on the agenda"?</div><div dir="auto"><br /></div><div dir="auto">A few of us were already discussing it, but since you brought it up here ...</div><div dir="auto"><br /><div dir="auto">John Phillips<br />Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative<br />Cell 217-412-5973</div></div></div><div><br /><div class="elided-text">On May 4, 2020 2:27 PM, Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business <<a href="mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org">lnc-business@hq.lp.org</a>> wrote:<br type="attribution" /><blockquote style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb( 204 , 204 , 204 );padding-left:1ex"><p dir="ltr">I will not support without a hybrid option. If a POTUS/VP nomination
<br />
can be done electronically/remotely. Then so can the other convention
<br />
business.
<br />
<br />
This isn't about "everyone gets something they want". It's about not
<br />
asking people to risk their health or that of family.
<br />
<br />
---
<br />
Elizabeth Van Horn
<br />
LNC Region 3 Representative (IN, MI, OH, KY)
<br />
<br />
On 2020-05-04 13:25, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
<br />
<br />
> I'm actually not sure I'd be willing to support a postponement that doesn't also allow remote participation but I could be swayed if that's what the delegation wants.
<br />
>
<br />
> On May 4, 2020 1:18 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <<a href="mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org">lnc-business@hq.lp.org</a>> wrote:
<br />
>
<br />
>> Tim and Dustin, there is a majority of LNC members now who are willing to
<br />
>> sign on to a different compromise. An all online P/VP election very soon
<br />
>> and an in person convention for everything else in July/august with no
<br />
>> hybrid option. This way everyone gets something of what they want. I am
<br />
>> willing to sign off on that.
<br />
>>
<br />
>> I hope you will too Tim.
<br />
>>
<br />
>> *In Liberty,*
<br />
>>
<br />
>> * Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome
<br />
>> (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal
<br />
>> communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone
<br />
>> found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux
<br />
>> pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
<br />
>>
<br />
>> On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 10:51 AM Tim Hagan via Lnc-business <
<br />
>> <a href="mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org">lnc-business@hq.lp.org</a>> wrote:
<br />
>>
<br />
>>> According to Rule 3 of the Convention Special Rules of Order, delegates
<br />
>>> can be polled individually if a state's vote report is challenged, and
<br />
>>> they must sign computer readable ballots if they're used. There's no
<br />
>>> requirement for a secret ballot.
<br />
>>>
<br />
>>> I listened in on the Bylaws Committee meeting yesterday. They worked on
<br />
>>> an amendment that would allow a hybrid convention. I'd fully support
<br />
>>> what they had at the end of their meeting, and it's very similar to your
<br />
>>> idea. Of course, It would need to be passed by the in-person attendees
<br />
>>> to become in effect.
<br />
>>>
<br />
>>> ---
<br />
>>> Tim Hagan
<br />
>>> Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee
<br />
>>>
<br />
>>> On 2020-05-04 09:34, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
<br />
>>>
<br />
>>>> Attached is a rough idea that I had that might satisfy both sides of the
<br />
>>> issue. It was relatively popular with Ohio folks
<br />
>>>>
<br />
>>>> I want to get your guys' thoughts on a hybrid convention. Here's how it
<br />
>>> would work roughly:
<br />
>>>>
<br />
>>>> As many delegates as possible/want to would meet at a time and place
<br />
>>> best suited and ASAP. They would then authorize emergency bylaws allowing
<br />
>>> remote voting for those with health concerns, compromised family, etc. Each
<br />
>>> delegation chair would make the decision on who would meet the criteria and
<br />
>>> the delegation chair would need to be on site at the physical portion of
<br />
>>> convention. Those voting remote could only vote on things that aren't
<br />
>>> voice. (Such as President, VC, LNC officers and at large, and JC) and would
<br />
>>> do so by email ballot (my only concern here is no secret ballot). The state
<br />
>>> chairs would then tabulate the combined votes and send them to the on site
<br />
>>> secretary as usual.
<br />
>>>
<br />
</p>
</blockquote></div><br /></div></blockquote></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div>