October 2016 - Lnc-business - Moellman Enterprises Email

Re: [Lnc-business] Letter of Censure
by Starchild 30 Oct '16

30 Oct '16

Thank you to the members of the Audacious Caucus for having the audacity to send us this resolution. :-) Florid language aside, I can't argue with the basic sentiment either – although I realize that as part of the minority who voted against the expenditure, I leave myself open to the "easy for you to say" charge. Since we are still in the process of considering the practical extent of our own collective disappointment as a body with John Moore's votes and your caucus appears to be a step ahead of us, I would recommend that you go ahead and convey your disappointment to him directly rather than waiting on us, if you do not consider making this resolution public to have already achieved that effect. According to Nevada state government info I found online, he can be reached at John.Moore(a)asm.state.nv.us or (702) 482-7676. Do caucus members have any practical advice for reforming our leadership culture or practices to avoid repeating this sort of mistake? Love & Liberty, ((( starchild ))) At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee (415) 625-FREE @StarchildSF On Oct 27, 2016, at 10:16 PM, Arvin Vohra wrote: > Sadly, I agree. We should have done this better, and will, I hope, do better in the future. -Arvin > > On Thu, Oct 27, 2016 at 1:34 PM, Audacious Caucus <beaudaciouslp(a)gmail.com> wrote: > With 22 in favor, 1 opposed, and 2 abstaining, the following resolution was passed by the Libertarian Party Audacious Caucus: > > For trusting a Republican still dripping with old party slime, > For giving away $10,000 without even verifying his membership, > For thinking somebody who hadn't pledged the NAP would stand up for it under pressure, > For totally neglecting to exercise one iota of caution much less the abundance demanded here, > For being complete fiduciary nincompoops, and most importantly, > For not unanimously voting against the expenditure in the first place, > The Libertarian Party Audacious Caucus hereby censures the Libertarian National Committee, > and asks you to convey our deep disappointment to Assemblyman John Moore for failing miserably at his one job, for bringing shame upon himself, our party, and our governing body, and for being the man who pulled the trigger on an armed robbery that is now in progress along with an invoice for $10,000 due upon receipt. > > Additionally, "Taxation is Theft" and "Justice for Harambe" received 4 and 3 votes respectively. > > -- > Libertarian Party Audacious Caucus > FB/TW: @LPAudacious > > "If I can't dance, it's not my revolution." - Emma Goldman > > > > -- > Arvin Vohra > > www.VoteVohra.com > VoteVohra(a)gmail.com > (301) 320-3634

6 13

Re: [Lnc-business] Fw: Fw: Motion: Assemblyman Moore - request for co-sponsors
by Starchild 30 Oct '16

30 Oct '16

John, If you do not choose to send a redacted statement, then I feel you leave me little choice but to rely on your original statement and make that public, because I would like to be informed at least to your immediate rationale for the votes in question, and I do not agree that this rationale should be hidden from our members. Although Tim may have told you (or he may not have, I am not sure) that he would keep the statement secret in accord with your wishes, I have made no such promise. Love & Liberty, ((( starchild ))) At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee (415) 625-FREE @StarchildSF On Oct 30, 2016, at 4:08 PM, John Moore wrote: > Hi Tim, > > Please pass on to members of the LNC, > > I have no intention of sending a redacted statement. I have been present on two different occasions when the LNC used the "Executive session" to discuss issues in confidence and behind closed doors. This is no different in my view. If members choose not to read my statement that is their choice however they would then be casting a vote without being educated or having all of the facts. > > It appears that the LNC has and is using a "Double Standard" > > Thanks, > John Moore > Nevada State Assembly > > > On Oct 30, 2016 3:46 PM, "John Moore" <john.moore(a)lpnevada.org> wrote: > Hi Starchild, > > The LNC as well as every other political organization use the "Executive session" to discuss issues in confidence behind closed doors so I consider my statement to the LNC in that manner. > > Thanks, > John John Moore > Nevada State Assembly > > > On Oct 30, 2016 12:27 PM, "Starchild" <sfdreamer(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > You're welcome John, and good to hear from you. Not infrequently when someone asks to tell me something in confidence, I will let them know it's better that they not tell me, because I don't want to be bound to keeping something secret if it turns out to be something that I think ought to be made public, not to mention it means more mental work for me to try to keep track of what I'm not supposed to tell others! > > When it comes to representative organizations (of which the Libertarian Party is one), I believe in institutional transparency. I think secrecy is way overused, to the detriment of our party. Circumstances in which some members of a group have access to information that others do not tends to create a two-tiered or multi-tiered group in which insiders have more power, and that is anathema to bottom-up governance. One of the faults of party leadership, in my view, is that we have often been too insular and too much of the opinion that we can't trust ordinary LP members with information. > > If you feel it is productive to share your views about the Nevada LP leadership with members of the LNC, my opinion is that other party members also ought to have the benefit of hearing those views, and that if you feel they cannot productively be shared with members of the public, then it is probably not productive to share them with the LNC either and I would suggest you redact them from your statement before you send it to us. Please note that I'm not arguing either for redaction or for sharing with the world in this case – not knowing what you may have to say, there's no way for me to know whether I would consider it in the best interests of the party and movement that you keep this information to yourself, or make it known to a wider audience. > > But if we were to agree to accept your statement on the condition of keeping it secret, we would be putting ourselves in the position of receiving negative input about other Libertarian Party members without those members knowing what was being said about them or having any opportunity to respond to the points being made, and that does not seem fair or desirable. If Nevada LP officials had come to us while we were debating whether to donate to your campaign, and given us information critical of you but asked that we keep it secret, my response would have been similar. > > Love & Liberty, > ((( starchild ))) > At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee > (415) 625-FREE > @StarchildSF > > > On Oct 30, 2016, at 5:30 AM, John Moore wrote: >> Thank you starchild for your response to my statement. The reason I have it marked as "confidential" is for the statements that I made regarding the Nevada Libertarian party leadership. I respect your opinion and input on this issue. >> >> Thanks, >> John Moore >> Nevada State Assembly >> >> >> On Oct 29, 2016 11:11 PM, "Starchild" <sfdreamer(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >> Thanks Tim, that answers my question (i.e. he didn't say why he wants secrecy). Since votes on the motion are due Monday but that being Halloween I might forget if I wait until the last day, I'll probably vote tomorrow evening. If you (or John) have sent me the attached documents by then, I'll read them and take what he has to say into consideration when voting. >> >> Love & Liberty, >> ((( starchild ))) >> At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee >> (415) 625-FREE >> @StarchildSF >> >> >> On Oct 29, 2016, at 10:53 PM, Tim Hagan wrote: >> >>> This is the e-mail I received from John Moore, but with the attachments removed. The documents attached started with a statement that he considers it to be a confidential document to be shared only with the Libertarian National Committee as well as all contents of his statement. >>> >>> Tim Hagan >>> >>> >>> ----- Forwarded Message ----- >>> From: John Moore <john.moore(a)lpnevada.org> >>> To: Tim Hagan <timhagan-tyr(a)yahoo.com> >>> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 5:25 PM >>> Subject: Re: Fw: [Lnc-business] Motion: Assemblyman Moore - request for co-sponsors >>> >>> Hi Tim, >>> >>> Please pass the attached documents to the LNC. Please do not disseminate the contents with anyone outside of the LNC. >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> John Moore >>> Nevada Assembly >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Tim Hagan <timhagan-tyr(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>> John, >>> >>> As you've probably already heard, many Libertarians are disappointed and perplexed about your votes during the special session. Caryn Ann Harlos is moving the motion below in the Libertarian National Committee concerning your votes in support of tax increases. Let me know if you have anything you wish me to pass on to the LNC. She and her co-sponsors are asking for an e-mail ballot, so the debate and votes will be via e-mail during the next ten days. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Tim Hagan >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Forwarded Message ----- >>> >>> From: Lnc-business [mailto:lnc-business-bounces@ hq.lp.org] On Behalf Of Caryn Ann Harlos >>> Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2016 7:45 PM >>> To: lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org >>> Subject: [Lnc-business] Motion: Assemblyman Moore - request for co-sponsors >>> >>> Multiple party members including region 1 members have acted that the LNC take action regarding Assemblyman Moore. While normally, I would say that is solely an issue for the state party to handle, unless possibly, a Federal candidate, but in this case, we spent National Party member's direct monies, and thus I do agree this is our responsibility. As someone who advocated for the funds allocation, I believe it is my responsibility to address this once members raised a concern: >>> >>> Whereas Nevada Assemblyman John Moore, a former Republican who in January 2016 switched to the Libertarian Party while in office, has during the past month voted not once but twice in the span of as many days to raise taxes on his constituents, including a vote to support a "More Cops" tax which the Libertarian Party of Nevada has tirelessly and thus far successfully opposed, and a vote to provide a $750 million subsidy to finance a billionaire-owned sports stadium at the expense of, among others, indigent persons renting weekly rooms in motels; and >>> >>> Whereas the elected leaders of our state affiliate party in Nevada have rightfully voted to censure Assemblyman Moore for these egregious votes; and >>> >>> Whereas we wish to convey a strong message to all and sundry that while we welcome sitting legislators in the Republican or Democrat parties who decide to switch to the Libertarian Party as an act of conscience, we do not welcome them if they intend, as members of our party, to continue voting and acting like Republicans or Democrats; >>> >>> Therefore be it resolved that the Libertarian National Committee hereby censures Assemblyman Moore for his recent votes in support of tax increases, requests that he return the $10,000 campaign contribution which the LNC this season voted to send him, and admonishes him to henceforward be a better champion of the values held by members of the political party with which he has chosen to affiliate if he intends to remain a Libertarian. >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> In Liberty, >>> Caryn Ann Harlos >>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org >>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado >>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus >>> >

2 1

Re: [Lnc-business] Fw: Fw: Motion: Assemblyman Moore - request for co-sponsors
by Starchild 30 Oct '16

30 Oct '16

John, it's true that secret meetings (sometimes described using the euphemism "executive session") have been not uncommonly used by the Libertarian National Committee. This is one of the practices I had in mind when I noted that "we have often been too insular and too much of the opinion that we can't trust ordinary LP members with information." But even under LNC policies which I regard as flawed in allowing too much secrecy, the use of secret meetings is authorized only under narrow circumstances which I do not believe apply in this situation. Love & Liberty, ((( starchild ))) At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee (415) 625-FREE @StarchildSF On Oct 30, 2016, at 3:46 PM, John Moore wrote: > Hi Starchild, > > The LNC as well as every other political organization use the "Executive session" to discuss issues in confidence behind closed doors so I consider my statement to the LNC in that manner. > > Thanks, > John John Moore > Nevada State Assembly > > > On Oct 30, 2016 12:27 PM, "Starchild" <sfdreamer(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > You're welcome John, and good to hear from you. Not infrequently when someone asks to tell me something in confidence, I will let them know it's better that they not tell me, because I don't want to be bound to keeping something secret if it turns out to be something that I think ought to be made public, not to mention it means more mental work for me to try to keep track of what I'm not supposed to tell others! > > When it comes to representative organizations (of which the Libertarian Party is one), I believe in institutional transparency. I think secrecy is way overused, to the detriment of our party. Circumstances in which some members of a group have access to information that others do not tends to create a two-tiered or multi-tiered group in which insiders have more power, and that is anathema to bottom-up governance. One of the faults of party leadership, in my view, is that we have often been too insular and too much of the opinion that we can't trust ordinary LP members with information. > > If you feel it is productive to share your views about the Nevada LP leadership with members of the LNC, my opinion is that other party members also ought to have the benefit of hearing those views, and that if you feel they cannot productively be shared with members of the public, then it is probably not productive to share them with the LNC either and I would suggest you redact them from your statement before you send it to us. Please note that I'm not arguing either for redaction or for sharing with the world in this case – not knowing what you may have to say, there's no way for me to know whether I would consider it in the best interests of the party and movement that you keep this information to yourself, or make it known to a wider audience. > > But if we were to agree to accept your statement on the condition of keeping it secret, we would be putting ourselves in the position of receiving negative input about other Libertarian Party members without those members knowing what was being said about them or having any opportunity to respond to the points being made, and that does not seem fair or desirable. If Nevada LP officials had come to us while we were debating whether to donate to your campaign, and given us information critical of you but asked that we keep it secret, my response would have been similar. > > Love & Liberty, > ((( starchild ))) > At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee > (415) 625-FREE > @StarchildSF > > > On Oct 30, 2016, at 5:30 AM, John Moore wrote: >> Thank you starchild for your response to my statement. The reason I have it marked as "confidential" is for the statements that I made regarding the Nevada Libertarian party leadership. I respect your opinion and input on this issue. >> >> Thanks, >> John Moore >> Nevada State Assembly >> >> >> On Oct 29, 2016 11:11 PM, "Starchild" <sfdreamer(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >> Thanks Tim, that answers my question (i.e. he didn't say why he wants secrecy). Since votes on the motion are due Monday but that being Halloween I might forget if I wait until the last day, I'll probably vote tomorrow evening. If you (or John) have sent me the attached documents by then, I'll read them and take what he has to say into consideration when voting. >> >> Love & Liberty, >> ((( starchild ))) >> At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee >> (415) 625-FREE >> @StarchildSF >> >> >> On Oct 29, 2016, at 10:53 PM, Tim Hagan wrote: >> >>> This is the e-mail I received from John Moore, but with the attachments removed. The documents attached started with a statement that he considers it to be a confidential document to be shared only with the Libertarian National Committee as well as all contents of his statement. >>> >>> Tim Hagan >>> >>> >>> ----- Forwarded Message ----- >>> From: John Moore <john.moore(a)lpnevada.org> >>> To: Tim Hagan <timhagan-tyr(a)yahoo.com> >>> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 5:25 PM >>> Subject: Re: Fw: [Lnc-business] Motion: Assemblyman Moore - request for co-sponsors >>> >>> Hi Tim, >>> >>> Please pass the attached documents to the LNC. Please do not disseminate the contents with anyone outside of the LNC. >>> >>> >>> >>> Thanks, >>> John Moore >>> Nevada Assembly >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Tim Hagan <timhagan-tyr(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>> John, >>> >>> As you've probably already heard, many Libertarians are disappointed and perplexed about your votes during the special session. Caryn Ann Harlos is moving the motion below in the Libertarian National Committee concerning your votes in support of tax increases. Let me know if you have anything you wish me to pass on to the LNC. She and her co-sponsors are asking for an e-mail ballot, so the debate and votes will be via e-mail during the next ten days. >>> >>> Thanks, >>> Tim Hagan >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Forwarded Message ----- >>> >>> From: Lnc-business [mailto:lnc-business-bounces@ hq.lp.org] On Behalf Of Caryn Ann Harlos >>> Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2016 7:45 PM >>> To: lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org >>> Subject: [Lnc-business] Motion: Assemblyman Moore - request for co-sponsors >>> >>> Multiple party members including region 1 members have acted that the LNC take action regarding Assemblyman Moore. While normally, I would say that is solely an issue for the state party to handle, unless possibly, a Federal candidate, but in this case, we spent National Party member's direct monies, and thus I do agree this is our responsibility. As someone who advocated for the funds allocation, I believe it is my responsibility to address this once members raised a concern: >>> >>> Whereas Nevada Assemblyman John Moore, a former Republican who in January 2016 switched to the Libertarian Party while in office, has during the past month voted not once but twice in the span of as many days to raise taxes on his constituents, including a vote to support a "More Cops" tax which the Libertarian Party of Nevada has tirelessly and thus far successfully opposed, and a vote to provide a $750 million subsidy to finance a billionaire-owned sports stadium at the expense of, among others, indigent persons renting weekly rooms in motels; and >>> >>> Whereas the elected leaders of our state affiliate party in Nevada have rightfully voted to censure Assemblyman Moore for these egregious votes; and >>> >>> Whereas we wish to convey a strong message to all and sundry that while we welcome sitting legislators in the Republican or Democrat parties who decide to switch to the Libertarian Party as an act of conscience, we do not welcome them if they intend, as members of our party, to continue voting and acting like Republicans or Democrats; >>> >>> Therefore be it resolved that the Libertarian National Committee hereby censures Assemblyman Moore for his recent votes in support of tax increases, requests that he return the $10,000 campaign contribution which the LNC this season voted to send him, and admonishes him to henceforward be a better champion of the values held by members of the political party with which he has chosen to affiliate if he intends to remain a Libertarian. >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> In Liberty, >>> Caryn Ann Harlos >>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org >>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado >>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus >>> >

1 0

Re: [Lnc-business] Fw: Fw: Motion: Assemblyman Moore - request for co-sponsors
by Starchild 30 Oct '16

30 Oct '16

You're welcome John, and good to hear from you. Not infrequently when someone asks to tell me something in confidence, I will let them know it's better that they not tell me, because I don't want to be bound to keeping something secret if it turns out to be something that I think ought to be made public, not to mention it means more mental work for me to try to keep track of what I'm not supposed to tell others! When it comes to representative organizations (of which the Libertarian Party is one), I believe in institutional transparency. I think secrecy is way overused, to the detriment of our party. Circumstances in which some members of a group have access to information that others do not tends to create a two-tiered or multi-tiered group in which insiders have more power, and that is anathema to bottom-up governance. One of the faults of party leadership, in my view, is that we have often been too insular and too much of the opinion that we can't trust ordinary LP members with information. If you feel it is productive to share your views about the Nevada LP leadership with members of the LNC, my opinion is that other party members also ought to have the benefit of hearing those views, and that if you feel they cannot productively be shared with members of the public, then it is probably not productive to share them with the LNC either and I would suggest you redact them from your statement before you send it to us. Please note that I'm not arguing either for redaction or for sharing with the world in this case – not knowing what you may have to say, there's no way for me to know whether I would consider it in the best interests of the party and movement that you keep this information to yourself, or make it known to a wider audience. But if we were to agree to accept your statement on the condition of keeping it secret, we would be putting ourselves in the position of receiving negative input about other Libertarian Party members without those members knowing what was being said about them or having any opportunity to respond to the points being made, and that does not seem fair or desirable. If Nevada LP officials had come to us while we were debating whether to donate to your campaign, and given us information critical of you but asked that we keep it secret, my response would have been similar. Love & Liberty, ((( starchild ))) At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee (415) 625-FREE @StarchildSF On Oct 30, 2016, at 5:30 AM, John Moore wrote: > Thank you starchild for your response to my statement. The reason I have it marked as "confidential" is for the statements that I made regarding the Nevada Libertarian party leadership. I respect your opinion and input on this issue. > > Thanks, > John Moore > Nevada State Assembly > > > On Oct 29, 2016 11:11 PM, "Starchild" <sfdreamer(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > Thanks Tim, that answers my question (i.e. he didn't say why he wants secrecy). Since votes on the motion are due Monday but that being Halloween I might forget if I wait until the last day, I'll probably vote tomorrow evening. If you (or John) have sent me the attached documents by then, I'll read them and take what he has to say into consideration when voting. > > Love & Liberty, > ((( starchild ))) > At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee > (415) 625-FREE > @StarchildSF > > > On Oct 29, 2016, at 10:53 PM, Tim Hagan wrote: > >> This is the e-mail I received from John Moore, but with the attachments removed. The documents attached started with a statement that he considers it to be a confidential document to be shared only with the Libertarian National Committee as well as all contents of his statement. >> >> Tim Hagan >> >> >> ----- Forwarded Message ----- >> From: John Moore <john.moore(a)lpnevada.org> >> To: Tim Hagan <timhagan-tyr(a)yahoo.com> >> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 5:25 PM >> Subject: Re: Fw: [Lnc-business] Motion: Assemblyman Moore - request for co-sponsors >> >> Hi Tim, >> >> Please pass the attached documents to the LNC. Please do not disseminate the contents with anyone outside of the LNC. >> >> >> >> Thanks, >> John Moore >> Nevada Assembly >> >> >> On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Tim Hagan <timhagan-tyr(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> John, >> >> As you've probably already heard, many Libertarians are disappointed and perplexed about your votes during the special session. Caryn Ann Harlos is moving the motion below in the Libertarian National Committee concerning your votes in support of tax increases. Let me know if you have anything you wish me to pass on to the LNC. She and her co-sponsors are asking for an e-mail ballot, so the debate and votes will be via e-mail during the next ten days. >> >> Thanks, >> Tim Hagan >> >> >> >> ----- Forwarded Message ----- >> >> From: Lnc-business [mailto:lnc-business-bounces@ hq.lp.org] On Behalf Of Caryn Ann Harlos >> Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2016 7:45 PM >> To: lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org >> Subject: [Lnc-business] Motion: Assemblyman Moore - request for co-sponsors >> >> Multiple party members including region 1 members have acted that the LNC take action regarding Assemblyman Moore. While normally, I would say that is solely an issue for the state party to handle, unless possibly, a Federal candidate, but in this case, we spent National Party member's direct monies, and thus I do agree this is our responsibility. As someone who advocated for the funds allocation, I believe it is my responsibility to address this once members raised a concern: >> >> Whereas Nevada Assemblyman John Moore, a former Republican who in January 2016 switched to the Libertarian Party while in office, has during the past month voted not once but twice in the span of as many days to raise taxes on his constituents, including a vote to support a "More Cops" tax which the Libertarian Party of Nevada has tirelessly and thus far successfully opposed, and a vote to provide a $750 million subsidy to finance a billionaire-owned sports stadium at the expense of, among others, indigent persons renting weekly rooms in motels; and >> >> Whereas the elected leaders of our state affiliate party in Nevada have rightfully voted to censure Assemblyman Moore for these egregious votes; and >> >> Whereas we wish to convey a strong message to all and sundry that while we welcome sitting legislators in the Republican or Democrat parties who decide to switch to the Libertarian Party as an act of conscience, we do not welcome them if they intend, as members of our party, to continue voting and acting like Republicans or Democrats; >> >> Therefore be it resolved that the Libertarian National Committee hereby censures Assemblyman Moore for his recent votes in support of tax increases, requests that he return the $10,000 campaign contribution which the LNC this season voted to send him, and admonishes him to henceforward be a better champion of the values held by members of the political party with which he has chosen to affiliate if he intends to remain a Libertarian. >> >> >> >> -- >> In Liberty, >> Caryn Ann Harlos >> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org >> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado >> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus >>

2 2

Fwd: Colorado's unconstitutional "ballot selfie" law
by Caryn Ann Harlos 30 Oct '16

30 Oct '16

Dear fellow LNC members: I am presently involved in a fight for free political speech in Colorado. Please see email and attachment sent to our Attorney General. I will be the Plaintiff in a federal complaint seeking an injunction if we do not get confirmation that CO will not prosecute this "offense." ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Adam Frank <adam(a)fas-law.com> Date: Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 3:42 PM Subject: Colorado's unconstitutional "ballot selfie" law To: "info(a)denverda.org" <info(a)denverda.org>, "attorney.general(a)coag.gov" < attorney.general(a)coag.gov> Cc: Faisal Salahuddin <fas(a)fas-law.com> Dear Attorney General Coffman and District Attorney Morrissey, Please find attached a letter concerning C.R.S. 1-13-712. The letter requests a response by October 26. I look forward to hearing from each of you. Sincerely, Adam Frank Frank & Salahuddin LLC 1741 High Street Denver, CO 80218 Phone: 303-974-1084 Fax: 303-974-1085 www.fas-law.com CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE: This e-mail transmission contains information from Frank & Salahuddin LLC which may be confidential or protected by the attorney-client privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that you must not read this transmission and that any disclosure, copying, printing, distribution or use of any of the information contained in or attached to this transmission is prohibited. If you have received this transmission in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the original transmission. -- *In Liberty,* *Caryn Ann Harlos* Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos(a)LP.org> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado <http://www.lpcolorado.org> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org>

1 1

Fw: Fw: Motion: Assemblyman Moore - request for co-sponsors
by Tim Hagan 30 Oct '16

30 Oct '16

This is the e-mail I received from John Moore, but with the attachments removed. The documents attached started with a statement that he considers it to be a confidential document to be shared only with the Libertarian National Committee as well as all contents of his statement. Tim Hagan ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: John Moore <john.moore(a)lpnevada.org> To: Tim Hagan <timhagan-tyr(a)yahoo.com> Sent: Saturday, October 29, 2016 5:25 PM Subject: Re: Fw: [Lnc-business] Motion: Assemblyman Moore - request for co-sponsors Hi Tim, Please pass the attached documents to the LNC. Please do not disseminate the contents with anyone outside of the LNC. Thanks,John MooreNevada Assembly On Fri, Oct 21, 2016 at 8:36 AM, Tim Hagan <timhagan-tyr(a)yahoo.com> wrote: John, As you've probably already heard, many Libertarians are disappointed and perplexed about your votes during the special session. Caryn Ann Harlos is moving the motion below in the Libertarian National Committee concerning your votes in support of tax increases. Let me know if you have anything you wish me to pass on to the LNC. She and her co-sponsors are asking for an e-mail ballot, so the debate and votes will be via e-mail during the next ten days. Thanks,Tim Hagan ----- Forwarded Message ----- From: Lnc-business [mailto:lnc-business-bounces@ hq.lp.org] On Behalf Of Caryn Ann Harlos Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2016 7:45 PM To: lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org Subject: [Lnc-business] Motion: Assemblyman Moore - request for co-sponsors Multiple party members including region 1 members have acted that the LNC take action regarding Assemblyman Moore. While normally, I would say that is solely an issue for the state party to handle, unless possibly, a Federal candidate, but in this case, we spent National Party member's direct monies, and thus I do agree this is our responsibility. As someone who advocated for the funds allocation, I believe it is my responsibility to address this once members raised a concern: Whereas Nevada Assemblyman John Moore, a former Republican who in January 2016 switched to the Libertarian Party while in office, has during the past month voted not once but twice in the span of as many days to raise taxes on his constituents, including a vote to support a "More Cops" tax which the Libertarian Party of Nevada has tirelessly and thus far successfully opposed, and a vote to provide a $750 million subsidy to finance a billionaire-owned sports stadium at the expense of, among others, indigent persons renting weekly rooms in motels; and Whereas the elected leaders of our state affiliate party in Nevada have rightfully voted to censure Assemblyman Moore for these egregious votes; and Whereas we wish to convey a strong message to all and sundry that while we welcome sitting legislators in the Republican or Democrat parties who decide to switch to the Libertarian Party as an act of conscience, we do not welcome them if they intend, as members of our party, to continue voting and acting like Republicans or Democrats; Therefore be it resolved that the Libertarian National Committee hereby censures Assemblyman Moore for his recent votes in support of tax increases, requests that he return the $10,000 campaign contribution which the LNC this season voted to send him, and admonishes him to henceforward be a better champion of the values held by members of the political party with which he has chosen to affiliate if he intends to remain a Libertarian. -- In Liberty,Caryn Ann HarlosRegion 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.orgCommunications Director, Libertarian Party of ColoradoColorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus ______________________________ _________________ Lnc-business mailing list Lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org http://hq.lp.org/mailman/ listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp. org

3 2

Re: [Lnc-business] LP.org website transition botched (as predicted)
by Daniel Hayes 27 Oct '16

27 Oct '16

I have not looked very hard yet, but even at 5 am central in the morning the website is godawful slow to load. That's not a bitch, consider that informational purposes. On the LNC page. ( https://www.lp.org/libertarian-national-committee/ )Many of us paid for head shots. Moving away from that I think is a bad idea. Also, there are a lot of problems with this page from the standpoint of basic human psychology. Most of what I say below is Nov. 9th stuff, but I think correcting the pictures is a bit more pressing. Nick's looks real young and innocent. He reminds me of a kindergarten student in that picture. It's his picture but I suggest his pro head shot. I do think Valerie might like this one though but he convinced her to marry him so I think he is past the phase of convincing her he is credible and competent. Arvin's looks surprised like someone just told him he got selected to represent the school in the spelling bee and responded with. "REALLY? ME?!!!" Alicia's picture has her looking away and you can't see her eyes. She looks occupied. Its not as bad as the others but once again... Pro Head shot. Bill's picture is the one that caught my attention with this initially. Bill looks pissed off. He might have been pissed off. I feel ya Bill...I get pissed off a lot too like I will be in my next email after this one to the list. That said..NOT the picture to use. Pro head shot I think Larry's is a decent one but why not use a Pro head shot if he has one for consistency. That said... WHY? I now find myself involved in the task that this board shouldn't be involved in.. Micromanaging things. But at the same time, I am annoyed that staff time was spent deciding on putting these pictures here when all of the people I mentioned with "bad" pics in my opinion had professional head shots that they PAID for. Also where is Sam's? Never mind..I thought it was a broken link but it just failed to load the first time. Also, I think his picture is less than flattering compared to his head shot. I know there were others that had professional head shots. Now we have a bunch of blank spaces and many of our board members not looking very inspiring of confidence. e Additionally, the form of the page. Get the pictures of the people at the TOP instead of a Wall O Text mapping out all the regions. Put that below the pictures. IF someone needs to figure out their region or is interested they will look. Leave the link to the LNC reflector list at the top. Also, lose the spot where it lists the region of every member below the pictures because almost half the people listed don't have a region. Just list the region number in between the word Region and Representative where that is listed below each person's name. Let's include a place for people's phone numbers that want those included. Mine is 504-258-6176. Also where is the link to the Policy manual these days? I used to be able to find it by going to this page. It doesn't seem to be listed here anymore and doesn't seem to be in with the bylaws. Daniel Hayes LNC At Large Member Region:At Large On Oct 26, 2016, at 05:05 PM, Starchild <sfdreamer(a)earthlink.net> wrote: Thanks, Kevin. Can you tell me which issues that I mentioned are not being addressed, and if/when you plan to address them? I'm also wondering about the specific issue I mentioned in my previous message about the LNC page losing information on the way over, because I got the impression from your comment "Staff has copied over existing pages and so nothing is lost or destroyed or anything of this sort", that this should not have occurred. Do you know how it happened in this case, and whether it may have happened in other cases as well? Love & Liberty, ((( starchild ))) At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee (415) 625-FREE @StarchildSF On Oct 26, 2016, at 8:32 AM, Kevin Ludlow wrote: Thanks, Starchild. Your feedback is well-taken and to your point, most of the issues you mention are being addressed. -Kevin On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 4:04 AM, Starchild <sfdreamer(a)earthlink.net> wrote: On Oct 25, 2016, at 9:05 PM, Kevin Ludlow wrote: Thanks, Ken, for the constructive position. As noted, I would really like to get actual problems with the site organized so that they can be tackled. Staff has been working on testing; I have been building the infrastructure. It is very useful to be informed of visible problems so that we can address them so any effort you're willing to make in that regard is highly appreciated. ~k Hi Kevin, Not sure whether you saw my original post to the LNC list informing on a number of actual problems with the site, but in case you missed it, here it is. In light of your explanations in response to Chuck and Caryn, I'm curious about one page which has been ported over to the new site but still somehow lost some information along the way, namely the LNC page (https://www.lp.org/libertarian-national-committee/) which no longer lists any phone numbers or other contact info beyond email addresses. I would like my phone number [(415) 625-FREE] and twitter handle (@StarchildSF) added to that page. (Ideally I think every LNC member's listing should include a phone number at which they can be contacted.) Thanks, and please let me know if you have any questions about anything else I wrote below. Love & Liberty, ((( starchild ))) At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee (415) 625-FREE @StarchildSF On 10/25/2016 12:53 PM, Starchild wrote: Yesterday, I'm told, the launch of the new and improved LP.org website took place. And on the whole, at a quick look, I'd say it is an improvement. Both appearance-wise and organizationally, I like the new site. I wouldn't call the difference earth-shattering, but my initial impression is generally positive. There are however a number of issues that have come to my attention which could use fixing, some more serious than others: • While the site looks good on the web, it looks terrible on my phone! The "Latest News" boxes show up as long, narrow, unreadable columns of type with a couple letters on each line. Considering how many people access websites on mobile devices, fixing this should be a high priority. • I don't see either the "Party of Principle" or "Minimum Government, Maximum Freedom" slogans shown anywhere (a search for key terms doesn't turn them up). Nor do I see the Nolan Chart except buried in a link. Each of these ought to be listed prominently, imho. The brief introduction statement when you click on "Libertarian Party" at the top of the main page is rather weak ("The Libertarian Party (LP) is your representative in American politics. We are the only political organization which respects you as a unique and responsible individual.") • The more detailed description of the party has a conservative leaning. Under "The Libertarian Option" (at http://libparty.zocalodesign.com/about/ , a URL that like that of many pages should also be fixed so that it doesn't include the web design company's website), it reads: Consider voting Libertarian or joining the Libertarian Party because… We seek to substantially reduce the size and intrusiveness of government and cut and eliminate taxes at every opportunity. We believe that peaceful, honest people should be able to offer their goods and services to willing consumers without inappropriate interference from government. We believe that peaceful, honest people should decide for themselves how to live their lives, without fear of criminal or civil penalties. We believe that government’s only responsibility, if any, should be protecting people from force and fraud. The first two points above appeal more to conservatives or people on the right (economic freedoms), while the second two points are more neutral in terms of left/right appeal. There is no balancing appeal to people on the left by explicitly mentioning things like a non-interventionist foreign policy or civil liberties such as ending Prohibition and reining in police abuse. • The URL for the candidate page has changed (hat tip to Thomas Knapp), and entering the former URL (http://www.lp.org/2016-libertarian-party-candidates) apparently now results in a page error rather than connecting people to the new page (https://www.lp.org/2016-candidates/) • If the information about how to subscribe to the LNC email list as a non-LNC member got ported over, I cannot find it. I would suggest listing this both on the LNC leadership page, and on the LNC meeting archives page. • The LNC page only lists email addresses. Previously at least a couple LNC members' listings included phone number and/or other info such as Twitter address, but now those listings are gone and only email addresses are listed. I would personally like my phone number and Twitter handle listed, and encourage my colleagues to request their phone numbers likewise be listed, so that our members can readily reach us directly as well as in writing. • Where email addresses are listed on the website (for candidates, LNC members, staff, college chapter reps., etc.), they are spelled out. That's unfortunately asking to get us spammed by web-crawling bots that harvest email addresses. I recommend changing this so that addresses are listed in a less literal format such as Nick.Sarwark[at]LP.org • The page https://www.lp.org/_2016/ mentions Johnson and Weld being our presidential and VP candidates, but the photo next to the text is not a photo of Johnson and Weld, but of Johnson and a woman I'm guessing is his girlfriend (which is fine, but should be labeled as such so as not to give visitors the impression that the images reflect the text). • Our bylaws are referred to in the info at the bottom of each page as "LNC Bylaws" rather than "Libertarian Party Bylaws" • A number of people (staff, LNC members) are missing photos. To whom can we send photos of these individuals, if we have them, as well as our contact info updates for the LNC page? I realize the site has just been updated; hopefully some of the above issues are being addressed even as I type this message. And on the bright side, the new "candidate pledges" section listing candidates who've signed each pledge is a nice addition, along with the listing by name and state of life members, candidates, and elected officials, not to mention the attractive photos from the convention scattered throughout the site. I like that the membership and donation forms are single-page, and that the FAQ page addresses arguments against participating in the system at all. And I love the "Help Us Grow" page (http://libparty.zocalodesign.com/how-to-help/) and the addition of a "worldwide" link in addition to the state affiliates and campus organizations! But I would suggest that link directly to a list of the libertarian parties around the world, with that page then containing a link to and information about the International Alliance of Libertarian Parties. Right now it immediately leads offsite to the IALP page, which is a little confusing. That's my feedback at this time. If staff would acknowledge receipt of this message and keep us appraised of the progress in addressing the above-mentioned issues, that would be great. Love & Liberty, ((( starchild ))) At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee (415) 625-FREE @StarchildSF On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:59 PM, Ken Moellman <ken.moellman(a)lpky.org> wrote: I've been involved in lots of various projects throughout my IT career. This website project seems to fit the stereotypical IT project. I personally don't like the layout of the website, but I'm a grumpy "old" man who still likes 2006-era website layouts with drop-down menus and whatnot. The design we need, however, is one targeted at millenials. We know this because of the Johnson campaign's polling. That's the future of this party. I believe that this website accomplishes that task. I'd be interested to see how it looks on a mobile (I'm also still using a Blackberry. Don't ask.) Kevin - Thank you for continuing onward with this project, even though you are no longer on the LNC. As one who's been embroiled in volunteer projects that have run over time and over budget, I know how much of a PITA it is to put the time in and also take the inevitable hits. I'm sure you're all too aware, as well. But I wanted to make sure you knew that at least I knew and recognized what's up. Chuck, and others with concerns - Let's make a list of the "what's wrong", try to prioritize that list based on importance and easy of resolution, and try to work through them. Any website changeover will take time to fix. I know there are some "broken links" where people externally linked things like LP.org/join ... I have a cool graphic from The Advocates that we used on LPKY.org that has the same problem. These can ad should be resolved. As the new IT committee is formed, I'm sure we'll be tasked with assessing these issues and implementing fixes. I ask that everyone please be patient. We have 2 weeks until the election is over. If there's anything election-related that's not working, then we definitely need to address that immediately. Otherwise, let's get through Nov 8th and then we can push forward with this and other projects. --- Ken C. Moellman, Jr. LNC Region 3 Alternate Representative LPKY Judicial Committee On 2016-10-25 23:38, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote: Thank you Kevin. I will cool my jets on that issue for a few days and check back in. -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus On Tuesday, October 25, 2016, Kevin Ludlow <ludlow(a)gmail.com> wrote: No problem, Caryn. I wouldn't even think days. I would think A day. Staff was tasked with taking each page from the old Drupal system and importing it into the new one. As far as I know ALL pages were copied over. They were copied into 1 of 6 (or so) different page templates that were created to serve different formats of data. So I'm certain we have everything. Even if it hadn't been copied over, we still have it and it would just need TO BE copied over, but I don't believe this is the case. I believe in those cases the links structure may have changed. We have been updating these so that all incoming links to the old structure point to the appropriate new structure and send out PERMANENT REDIRECT notifications to Google and such (so things are updated). ~k On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:28 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos(a)gmail.com> wrote: Thank you Kevin. That is why I was asking staff about them. If we are talking a matter of days for that content - that is reasonable. If moreso, not so much. -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus On Tuesday, October 25, 2016, Kevin Ludlow <ludlow(a)gmail.com> wrote: Caryn, I genuinely am not trying to avoid those issues. I know content is there. What I'm trying to convey is that from my point of view, if those documents are "opaque" for another 12 hours, I'm okay with that. I realize you might not be, but this goes back to my volunteering work. I have to prioritize work that I am personally responsible for. So I will happily weigh in with staff and get links to them. I can even check the admin pages and see what the current URL is provided they have been copied and not linked. But I really need to know if anything is actually not functioning. This is what my current workload is. I apologize if any of that sounds dismissive. It's not my intent, but I can't do specific projects for you and/or Chuck or the LNC or whomever else right now as I need to make sure the site is fully functional. If/when it IS fully functional (which it very well may already be), then we can address any missing pieces. ~k On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:15 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos(a)gmail.com> wrote: Thank you Kevin for all your work. I can't though not desire answers on the minutes archives and LNC business list not being there. That is essential for members and cannot be optional. Can staff answer when those can be restored? This is an acceptable situation of opacity. -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus On Tuesday, October 25, 2016, Kevin Ludlow <ludlow(a)gmail.com> wrote: Caryn, I've always gotten along with you just fine as you're very reasonable. In this case, I respectfully disagree that it's useful to deliver a 6-page rant citing the "I told you so" lines when the decision has been done, executed, and is live. Further, I have been in this business for 20 years now. We had roughly 2.5 hours of outages this morning between roughly 7:45AM and 9:15AM EST. This was only because of the unknown. Staff has spent a lot of time testing this software. It was rolled over twice already and rolled back just to ensure we COULD roll it back if there was a major problem. The point being that we transitioned an entire infrastructure from 6 services to ONE, the monthly cost savings should be about $500 once everything is in place, and best I can tell nothing is broken - there are just complaints that some things are missing (which they're definitely not, but I'll concede that perhaps staff hasn't finished adding links - I honestly don't know right now). There are no major problems that anyone has reported save for the overloading this morning. The page content was always intended to / has been / and IS preserved. If a link isn't immediately visible, then staff can correct that if appropriate. IF there are broken links, namely as a URL may have changed and needs to be forwarded now, I would really, genuinely like to know so I can fix those problems. I offered that to Chuck. I offered it to you. That said, we can start however necessary. I have ostensibly worked on this for 3.5 straight weeks. That is not because of the website itself, but rather the years of garbaged up infrastructure. We would have rolled the site out 6 weeks ago if not for all of that. My point being that I've been voluntarily taking on FAR more work than was entailed in the website redesign itself because our infrastructure couldn't handle the modern codebase (it is roughly 8 years out of spec). I would ask that you leave whatever issues you have with content alone for the time being. I'm not saying they won't be addressed, I'm saying that it's not a primary concern. The primary concern is ensuring that the site is running so it can serve up any content. IF there is a problem with something not loading, we need to know that. Staff has copied over existing pages and so nothing is lost or destroyed or anything of this sort. I need to convey though, that I am not on the clock for the people on this thread. I have been, and am continuing to volunteer a tremendous amount of time to ensure this is completed smoothly. I am happy to try and fix things that are broken. I'm very uninterested in listening to Mr. Molton rant on about his discontent with the structure. It's done. That ship sailed in February. So that's where I'm at. By all means, please inform me of broken pieces so we can look at and correct anything ASAP. ~k On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:01 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos(a)gmail.com> wrote: Kevin, He was writing as a member to a busy elected to SERVE members. That means sometimes we will hear things we don't want to and have to respond to very upset complaints. No matter what anyone says - high-handed responses are not appropriate IMHO. I didn't agree with Chuck's desire to see heads roll. I said so respectfully, Can we start again? -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus On Tuesday, October 25, 2016, Kevin Ludlow <ludlow(a)gmail.com> wrote: Caryn, Chuck opened with whoever made the decision was a MORON and should be FIRED. I think my response was in line. Regardless, I remain open to seeing links broken. I'm sure some still exist. We launched the site this morning. Staff has spent weeks testing the site and fixing links and such. I'm all for fixing dead links, but 6 pages of complaints without any information is not helpful. Also, I'm not a member of the LNC. I'm a volunteer only. So I don't really owe anyone anything. I've delightfully put in a couple hundred hours so far. That's the best I'm willing to do at this point given such a response. K On Tuesday, October 25, 2016, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos(a)gmail.com> wrote: Kevin, that was an inappropriate response to concerns of a member IMHO- his concerns are valid and shouldn't be dismissed as "oh you Libertarians, you are a minority - we can safely ignore you." Where are the links to the LNC Business list, the old blog articles, and the past minutes? Can we have the discussion without sarcasm and without putting down Libertarians as inconsequential? -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 8:19 PM, Kevin Ludlow <ludlow(a)gmail.com> wrote: Hey Chuck, Thanks for the constructive feedback. I'll delightfully take credit/responsibility for whatever and all actions you've written about. Please pardon Nick, Robert, Wes, and anybody else in your crosshairs. I'm sure they'll be relieved to be spared. I'm not going to read that entire document you've sent as I've spent the last 3 weeks trying to fix the party's infrastructure for the website TO go live. It was finished two days ago, it was launched last night. That was my call. What would be useful right now would be if you could point out the broken links so that we can assign permanent redirects to them. Any page content that existed STILL exists. This has been made clear over and over again. It's possible that some page links have not been forwarded, but I've been monitoring logs on all 4 servers all day and have not seen many 404s. The downtime this morning wasn't actually from an outage, but rather ME under-predicting the load our servers would take. This is admittedly because I didn't have any data to go on because -- well -- we've not really ever kept any before. I made the best prediction I could; I way under-estimated. The servers were scaled up and unless you're seeing something different, the site has been running fine all day since about 9:45am CST. It was running before that just fine too, but the morning surge in traffic overwhelmed it. So anyway, if you'd like to submit broken links, we'd love to set up additional forwards. Overall though, I'm pretty happy with the change. I'm happy we've done it before the election - even if it wound up being delayed from our proposed launch of September 29th. The old site was very, very bad. I know you're a tech guy all the way. I know words resonate with you and not colors and images and feelings and emotions. But you comprise a very, very, VERY small portion of the American electorate and the new site was designed to appeal to people who are visually oriented, not interested in reading walls of text, and might have the attention span of a few seconds at best (eg: the vast majority of people). It was designed for people who might not care about the Libertarian Party - in hopes that something grabs their attention and they begin to care. We don't need to "win over" existing Libertarians -- or at least one would think, but it's honestly hard to tell these days. Regardless, it was decided. It's done. You can hate it. But I'd still love your help in knowing where links are broken instead of mostly ignoring another wall of text. That would help ensure that it's in good shape. If you'd like to vent further, feel free to call me at 512-773-3968 to spare the group. Sincerely, Kevin On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 8:56 PM, Chuck Moulton <chuck(a)moulton.org> wrote: LNC members, Many of the problems I warned about have in fact come to pass. It is Cassandra's Curse: always right but never believed. See the exchange from IPR quoted below (in the P.S.) for context and institutional memory. I'll quote and discuss some of the highlights here. WARNING #1: TRANSITIONS CAN BE BOTCHED, LEADING TO DOWNTIME — AT THE WORST TIME IN THE ELECTION CYCLE FOR SUCH DOWNTIME: THE PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN. This buggy transition was implemented 13 days before the presidential election. That is the 13th worst day in a 4 year cycle to unveil a new a new website. There were/are 1,448 better days to change to a new website in a 4 year cycle. Whatever MORON decided to switch to a new website today instead of after the election should be immediately FIRED. Do not pass go, do not collect $200. FIRED. I can't imagine a stupider, more incompetent, strategically insane decision than pulling the plug on a working website and trying out a new, buggy website immediately before a presidential election. It is INSANE. I like staff, but if Wes Benedict made this idiotic decision, FIRE HIM IMMEDIATELY. I like much of the LNC, but if Nick Sarwark made this idiotic decision, SUSPEND HIM FOR CAUSE IMMEDIATELY (I'll gladly recuse myself as a member of the Judicial Committee if he appeals). If Kevin Ludlow made this idiotic decision, RESCIND THE FEBRUARY 2016 MOTION GIVING LUDLOW UNILATERAL AUTHORITY OVER THE LP'S MOST IMPORTANT ASSET IMMEDIATELY. Everything we were told about a professional transition that does not suffer from the pitfalls I highlighted was a lie. It takes significantly more time for lp.org pages to load than before. The site has been down on & off all day long. For a while people were directed to another domain whenever they went to a LP page: libparty.zocalodesign.com. WARNING #2: A LOT OF CONTENT IS REMOVED. LACK OF THAT CONTENT MAKES IT MUCH HARDER TO ENERGIZE PROSPECTS; GET DONATIONS, VOLUNTEERS, AND CANDIDATES; AND TRAIN LIBERTARIANS ON BEST PRACTICES. In fact (as predicted), a lot of content has been removed from lp.org. For example, as chair of the Judicial Committee I wonder what happened to the webpage listing bylaws mandated committee members? Where is the link to the LP Business list? Where are the LNC minute archives before 2015? I could go on and on, but I cover this point more broadly in my next unheeded warning. I was repeatedly assured that content would not be removed, except that the front page would be made less cluttered. That was a lie. WARNING #3: BOTH CONTENT REMOVAL AND TRANSITIONS TO A NEW SYSTEM MAY LEAD SOME PAGES TO BE REMOVED OR MOVED, BREAKING LINKS TO PARTS OF THE SITE FROM ALL AROUND THE INTERNET AND MAKING US LOOK UNPROFESSIONAL WITH 404 ERRORS. The number of 404 errors is shocking! Activists have been out there for months / years promoting our website by linking to it -- especially during this presidential election. Most of those links are now broken. Just try clicking on many of these links: https://www.google.com/search?site=&source=hp&q=site%3Alp.org&oq=site%3Alp.… I've been told the solution is just to report each broken link. That is ridiculous! It is completely unprofessional for a website transition to be reactive instead of proactive -- especially given that broken links probably number in the thousands. We were assured that this would be a professional transition, but that was a lie. WARNING #4: A NEW SYSTEM REQUIRES RETRAINING STAFF ON PROCESSES — TIME THAT COULD HAVE BEEN DEVOTED TO OTHER THINGS. EVEN AFTER RETRAINING THERE WILL BE A LEARNING CURVE... EXTRA TIME FOR WEBSITE RELATED TASKS THAT COULD HAVE BEEN DEVOTED TO OTHER THINGS. In fact (as predicted), staff has mentioned that the website transition has taken staff time that could have been devoted to other matters in this busy election season. Wes Benedict wrote: http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business_hq.lp.org/2016/006577.html I hope we can get those things below implemented early in 2017, however, and get back to LPedia and many other projects, but first we're trying to roll out the new LP.org website. WARNING #5: INTERNAL SCRIPTS THAT CURRENTLY AUTOMATICALLY SHOOT DATA TO STATE AFFILIATES SUCH AS THE VOLUNTEER FORM, THE WANT TO BE A CANDIDATE FORM, THE INFO FORM, ETC. MAY STOP WORKING, WHICH WOULD DEPRIVE STATES OF A VALUABLE SOURCE OF LEADS DURING A TRANSITION PERIOD. Do these all still work? I don't know. I can't currently test this as I am not a state chair right now. I hope someone is testing this stuff. Based on all of the other monumental errors highlighted above, I certainly don't trust whoever oversaw the website transition to have done this testing. You all made a monumental error when you voted on this website. Please do whatever you can to minimize the damage and triage the website that is being butchered before your very eyes. I hope the lost content can be restored and the bugs can be fixed ASAP. Even if everything is fixed within the next week though, the timing is still horrendous. Chuck Moulton Life Member & Monthly Pledger, Libertarian Party P.S. See below for context on this botched website transition and eerily accurate prophesies from people with a clue. Kevin Ludlow wrote: http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business_hq.lp.org/2016/004164.html 1) Our website is a joke. I mean a real, horrible, laughable, "maybe it's 1996 and the www portion of the internet has just been unleashed" joke. It's got ridiculous internal ads all over it. It's terribly organized. It uses bad images. It has an outdated font, not great font colors, and antiquated font-spacing and sizing. It barely functions on mobile devices. It's full of information it doesn't need to have. It conveys that we're not a serious organization. Kevin Ludlow wrote: http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business_hq.lp.org/2016/004283.html We want to do all of these things. So I'm asking you, just stop what you're doing for 30 seconds, reflect what could happen if we actually tried to accomplish this one little task. What is the WORST that could happen? We fail? We're in a very slightly worse financial position than we already are? But now consider what is the BEST that could happen? Maybe this tailspin of a cash hole we're in stops. MAYBE people would see that the LNC is doing something external. MAYBE people would have their morale boosted just a little bit and be more inclined to donate. MAYBE we could use it as a way to leverage requesting donations from people. Chuck Moulton wrote: http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-national-committe… What's the worst that can happen? It's not $20,000 wasted. That is pretty stupid thinking there... accounting rather than economics. The worst that can happen is the site is much worse than before. A lot of content is removed. Lack of that content makes it much harder to energize prospects; get donations, volunteers, and candidates; and train libertarians on best practices. A new system requires retraining staff on processes — time that coupd have been devoted to other things. Even after retraining there will be a learning curve... extra time for website related tasks that could have been devoted to other things. Will conversion of new visitors go up with a new flashy styled website? Maybe, but it could also go down, which is a potential cost. This is especially likely when the focus is on design/style rather than the technical features under the hood. When content is removed it may piss off current donors and activists, who may reduce their donations and activism. Both content removal and transitions to a new system may lead some pages to be removed or moved, breaking links to parts of the site from all around the Internet and making us look unprofessional with 404 errors. New sites often start out with a few bugs and errors which can take a while to track down... the site may look less professional in the interim. Transitions can be botched, leading to downtime — at the worst time in the election cycle for such downtime: the presidential campaign. Internal scripts that currently automatically shoot data to state affiliates such as the volunteer form, the want to be a candidate form, the info form, etc. may stop working, which would deprive states of a valuable source of leads during a transition period. That's just what I could come up with off the top of my head... there are probably a lot more. Kevin Ludlow wrote: http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-national-committe… I've launched many large scale sites just in the past year and not a single one of those sites had any of the problems you're referring to. They DID – when they were on our development and testing servers – but not when they went into production. That's how web launches are done professionally. A thorough maintenance schedule would also be implemented and the website would be designed for minimal maintainability in the first place. ...also in accordance with best practices. Kevin Ludlow wrote: http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-national-committe… Furthermore, there is absolutely NO intention to remove Libertarian content from the website. This crowd has an astounding ability to spin half-truths and bake them into something entirely different. I will clarify specifically what is meant by moving them around. The FRONT PAGE of a website (for a non-profit, business, or any other organization) is NOT to leave people with walls of text. It is to create a fast and positive impression and to get a call to action. Having dozens and dozens of options is incredibly poor design, thoroughly proven to be ineffective, and generally an archaic website idea. The current website is not responsive; it does not work well (and not at all in some cases) on mobile and tablet devices. Chuck Moulton wrote: http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-national-committe… Great! Somehow in all your emails to the LNC (I read every LNC business list email) you never mentioned anything about the transition process. All you talk about is design/style. If you can manage a transition process well, that's wonderful. It certainly hasn't been done in the past. The transition from FoxPro to Raiser's Edge was a disaster... it resulted in states not receiving working dumps for a year and a lot of records being screwed up (e.g., deceased coming back to life, etc.). During the website transition a decade ago, the LNC meeting minutes archive and the Success 97 and Success 99 seminars were removed. See the IT Committee discussion and report (pp. 15-16, pp. 51-59): https://www.lp.org/archives/lnc20061111.pdf If there will be no transition hiccups, that's wonderful news. You still didn't address all the scripts on the website right now and the technical considerations Shane discussed. I'm concerned about giving management of the transition job who only talks about design/style, wants to remove content (supposedly... though I see you have now clarified that), and never mentions a transition plan to minimize problems. It's great that you're finally talking about a transition plan! It's not my fault it's the first I've heard of it though. There are lots of people in the LP (myself included) who have seen transitions mismanaged and are worried of a repeat of those disasters. We're not saying the sky is going to fall because of you. We're saying the sky has fallen in the past, we have documented evidence of this, and you don't seem as on top of the process as we would hope to prevent similar problems. (You also seem to lack the institutional memory to be aware of these past issues.) That's a matter of you not communicating your transition plan and experience, not a matter of us being overly pessimistic. Kevin Ludlow wrote: http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-national-committe… I'm sorry you've had people half-ass these efforts in the past. I definitely cannot say I'm surprised. I focus on style because to the external world, style IS the most important thing. This in no way means I neglect the engine, but in 20 years of delivering projects, nearly 100% of clients will respond positively to a broken system that looks amazing over a badass functioning system that looks ugly. It's just psychology. Again, it doesn't mean it doesn't all get done. http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-national-committe… I've found libertarians have a different psychology than much of the world. The tech saavy folks will feel talked down to or ignored if you only talk about style, ignoring tech under the hood. The ideological folks will feel defensive if you malign content. I fall in both categories, as do others on this thread. Just something to keep in mind for the future. Stewart Flood wrote: http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-national-committe… So they're creating a new website committee and giving it authority to screw everything up without having to go back to the LNC to get approval on which one of their pals they give the money to? Chuck Moulton wrote: http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-national-committe… Yes, they created a new committee with unlimited power over the website. Then they spent the whole time debating an irrelevant $10,000. Chuck Moulton wrote: http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-national-committe… I am hugely concerned about giving any one person carte blanche over the website. -- ======================================================== Kevin Ludlow 512-773-3968 http://www.kevinludlow.com -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus -- ======================================================== Kevin Ludlow 512-773-3968 http://www.kevinludlow.com -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus -- ======================================================== Kevin Ludlow 512-773-3968 http://www.kevinludlow.com -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus -- ======================================================== Kevin Ludlow 512-773-3968 http://www.kevinludlow.com -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus -- ======================================================== Kevin Ludlow 512-773-3968 http://www.kevinludlow.com -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus _______________________________________________ Lnc-business mailing list Lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org -- ======================================================== Kevin Ludlow 512-773-3968 http://www.kevinludlow.com _______________________________________________ Lnc-business mailing list Lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org -- ======================================================== Kevin Ludlow 512-773-3968 http://www.kevinludlow.com _______________________________________________ Lnc-business mailing list Lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org

2 2

Re: [Lnc-business] LP.org website transition botched (as predicted)
by Starchild 26 Oct '16

26 Oct '16

Thanks, Kevin. Can you tell me which issues that I mentioned are not being addressed, and if/when you plan to address them? I'm also wondering about the specific issue I mentioned in my previous message about the LNC page losing information on the way over, because I got the impression from your comment "Staff has copied over existing pages and so nothing is lost or destroyed or anything of this sort", that this should not have occurred. Do you know how it happened in this case, and whether it may have happened in other cases as well? Love & Liberty, ((( starchild ))) At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee (415) 625-FREE @StarchildSF On Oct 26, 2016, at 8:32 AM, Kevin Ludlow wrote: > Thanks, Starchild. > > Your feedback is well-taken and to your point, most of the issues you mention are being addressed. > > -Kevin > > On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 4:04 AM, Starchild <sfdreamer(a)earthlink.net> wrote: > On Oct 25, 2016, at 9:05 PM, Kevin Ludlow wrote: > >> Thanks, Ken, for the constructive position. >> As noted, I would really like to get actual problems with the site organized so that they can be tackled. Staff has been working on testing; I have been building the infrastructure. >> It is very useful to be informed of visible problems so that we can address them so any effort you're willing to make in that regard is highly appreciated. >> >> ~k > > Hi Kevin, > > Not sure whether you saw my original post to the LNC list informing on a number of actual problems with the site, but in case you missed it, here it is. In light of your explanations in response to Chuck and Caryn, I'm curious about one page which has been ported over to the new site but still somehow lost some information along the way, namely the LNC page (https://www.lp.org/libertarian-national-committee/) which no longer lists any phone numbers or other contact info beyond email addresses. I would like my phone number [(415) 625-FREE] and twitter handle (@StarchildSF) added to that page. (Ideally I think every LNC member's listing should include a phone number at which they can be contacted.) Thanks, and please let me know if you have any questions about anything else I wrote below. > > Love & Liberty, > ((( starchild ))) > At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee > (415) 625-FREE > @StarchildSF > > > >> On 10/25/2016 12:53 PM, Starchild wrote: >> >>> Yesterday, I'm told, the launch of the new and improved LP.org website took place. And on the whole, at a quick look, I'd say it is an improvement. Both appearance-wise and organizationally, I like the new site. I wouldn't call the difference earth-shattering, but my initial impression is generally positive. >>> >>> There are however a number of issues that have come to my attention which could use fixing, some more serious than others: >>> >>> • While the site looks good on the web, it looks terrible on my phone! The "Latest News" boxes show up as long, narrow, unreadable columns of type with a couple letters on each line. Considering how many people access websites on mobile devices, fixing this should be a high priority. >>> >>> • I don't see either the "Party of Principle" or "Minimum Government, Maximum Freedom" slogans shown anywhere (a search for key terms doesn't turn them up). Nor do I see the Nolan Chart except buried in a link. Each of these ought to be listed prominently, imho. The brief introduction statement when you click on "Libertarian Party" at the top of the main page is rather weak ("The Libertarian Party (LP) is your representative in American politics. We are the only political organization which respects you as a unique and responsible individual.") >>> >>> • The more detailed description of the party has a conservative leaning. Under "The Libertarian Option" (at http://libparty.zocalodesign.com/about/ , a URL that like that of many pages should also be fixed so that it doesn't include the web design company's website), it reads: >>> >>>> Consider voting Libertarian or joining the Libertarian Party because… >>>> We seek to substantially reduce the size and intrusiveness of government and cut and eliminate taxes at every opportunity. >>>> We believe that peaceful, honest people should be able to offer their goods and services to willing consumers without inappropriate interference from government. >>>> We believe that peaceful, honest people should decide for themselves how to live their lives, without fear of criminal or civil penalties. >>>> We believe that government’s only responsibility, if any, should be protecting people from force and fraud. >>> The first two points above appeal more to conservatives or people on the right (economic freedoms), while the second two points are more neutral in terms of left/right appeal. There is no balancing appeal to people on the left by explicitly mentioning things like a non-interventionist foreign policy or civil liberties such as ending Prohibition and reining in police abuse. >>> >>> • The URL for the candidate page has changed (hat tip to Thomas Knapp), and entering the former URL (http://www.lp.org/2016-libertarian-party-candidates) apparently now results in a page error rather than connecting people to the new page (https://www.lp.org/2016-candidates/) >>> >>> • If the information about how to subscribe to the LNC email list as a non-LNC member got ported over, I cannot find it. I would suggest listing this both on the LNC leadership page, and on the LNC meeting archives page. >>> >>> • The LNC page only lists email addresses. Previously at least a couple LNC members' listings included phone number and/or other info such as Twitter address, but now those listings are gone and only email addresses are listed. I would personally like my phone number and Twitter handle listed, and encourage my colleagues to request their phone numbers likewise be listed, so that our members can readily reach us directly as well as in writing. >>> >>> • Where email addresses are listed on the website (for candidates, LNC members, staff, college chapter reps., etc.), they are spelled out. That's unfortunately asking to get us spammed by web-crawling bots that harvest email addresses. I recommend changing this so that addresses are listed in a less literal format such as Nick.Sarwark[at]LP.org >>> >>> • The page https://www.lp.org/_2016/ mentions Johnson and Weld being our presidential and VP candidates, but the photo next to the text is not a photo of Johnson and Weld, but of Johnson and a woman I'm guessing is his girlfriend (which is fine, but should be labeled as such so as not to give visitors the impression that the images reflect the text). >>> >>> • Our bylaws are referred to in the info at the bottom of each page as "LNC Bylaws" rather than "Libertarian Party Bylaws" >>> >>> • A number of people (staff, LNC members) are missing photos. To whom can we send photos of these individuals, if we have them, as well as our contact info updates for the LNC page? >>> >>> I realize the site has just been updated; hopefully some of the above issues are being addressed even as I type this message. And on the bright side, the new "candidate pledges" section listing candidates who've signed each pledge is a nice addition, along with the listing by name and state of life members, candidates, and elected officials, not to mention the attractive photos from the convention scattered throughout the site. I like that the membership and donation forms are single-page, and that the FAQ page addresses arguments against participating in the system at all. And I love the "Help Us Grow" page (http://libparty.zocalodesign.com/how-to-help/) and the addition of a "worldwide" link in addition to the state affiliates and campus organizations! But I would suggest that link directly to a list of the libertarian parties around the world, with that page then containing a link to and information about the International Alliance of Libertarian Parties. Right now it immediately leads offsite to the IALP page, which is a little confusing. >>> >>> That's my feedback at this time. If staff would acknowledge receipt of this message and keep us appraised of the progress in addressing the above-mentioned issues, that would be great. >>> >>> Love & Liberty, >>> ((( starchild ))) >>> At-Large Representative, Libertarian National Committee >>> (415) 625-FREE >>> @StarchildSF > > >> >> >> >> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:59 PM, Ken Moellman <ken.moellman(a)lpky.org> wrote: >> >> I've been involved in lots of various projects throughout my IT career. This website project seems to fit the stereotypical IT project. >> >> I personally don't like the layout of the website, but I'm a grumpy "old" man who still likes 2006-era website layouts with drop-down menus and whatnot. The design we need, however, is one targeted at millenials. We know this because of the Johnson campaign's polling. That's the future of this party. I believe that this website accomplishes that task. I'd be interested to see how it looks on a mobile (I'm also still using a Blackberry. Don't ask.) >> >> Kevin - Thank you for continuing onward with this project, even though you are no longer on the LNC. As one who's been embroiled in volunteer projects that have run over time and over budget, I know how much of a PITA it is to put the time in and also take the inevitable hits. I'm sure you're all too aware, as well. But I wanted to make sure you knew that at least I knew and recognized what's up. >> >> Chuck, and others with concerns - Let's make a list of the "what's wrong", try to prioritize that list based on importance and easy of resolution, and try to work through them. Any website changeover will take time to fix. I know there are some "broken links" where people externally linked things like LP.org/join ... I have a cool graphic from The Advocates that we used on LPKY.org that has the same problem. These can ad should be resolved. >> >> >> As the new IT committee is formed, I'm sure we'll be tasked with assessing these issues and implementing fixes. I ask that everyone please be patient. We have 2 weeks until the election is over. If there's anything election-related that's not working, then we definitely need to address that immediately. Otherwise, let's get through Nov 8th and then we can push forward with this and other projects. >> >> --- >> Ken C. Moellman, Jr. >> LNC Region 3 Alternate Representative >> LPKY Judicial Committee >> >> >> On 2016-10-25 23:38, Caryn Ann Harlos wrote: >> >>> Thank you Kevin. I will cool my jets on that issue for a few days and check back in. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> In Liberty, >>> Caryn Ann Harlos >>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org >>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado >>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tuesday, October 25, 2016, Kevin Ludlow <ludlow(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> No problem, Caryn. >>> >>> I wouldn't even think days. I would think A day. Staff was tasked with taking each page from the old Drupal system and importing it into the new one. As far as I know ALL pages were copied over. They were copied into 1 of 6 (or so) different page templates that were created to serve different formats of data. So I'm certain we have everything. Even if it hadn't been copied over, we still have it and it would just need TO BE copied over, but I don't believe this is the case. I believe in those cases the links structure may have changed. We have been updating these so that all incoming links to the old structure point to the appropriate new structure and send out PERMANENT REDIRECT notifications to Google and such (so things are updated). >>> >>> ~k >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:28 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> Thank you Kevin. >>> >>> That is why I was asking staff about them. If we are talking a matter of days for that content - that is reasonable. If moreso, not so much. >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> In Liberty, >>> Caryn Ann Harlos >>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org >>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado >>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tuesday, October 25, 2016, Kevin Ludlow <ludlow(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> Caryn, >>> >>> I genuinely am not trying to avoid those issues. I know content is there. What I'm trying to convey is that from my point of view, if those documents are "opaque" for another 12 hours, I'm okay with that. I realize you might not be, but this goes back to my volunteering work. I have to prioritize work that I am personally responsible for. >>> >>> So I will happily weigh in with staff and get links to them. I can even check the admin pages and see what the current URL is provided they have been copied and not linked. >>> >>> But I really need to know if anything is actually not functioning. This is what my current workload is. >>> >>> I apologize if any of that sounds dismissive. It's not my intent, but I can't do specific projects for you and/or Chuck or the LNC or whomever else right now as I need to make sure the site is fully functional. If/when it IS fully functional (which it very well may already be), then we can address any missing pieces. >>> >>> ~k >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:15 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> Thank you Kevin for all your work. >>> >>> I can't though not desire answers on the minutes archives and LNC business list not being there. That is essential for members and cannot be optional. >>> >>> Can staff answer when those can be restored? This is an acceptable situation of opacity. >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> In Liberty, >>> Caryn Ann Harlos >>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org >>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado >>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tuesday, October 25, 2016, Kevin Ludlow <ludlow(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> Caryn, >>> >>> I've always gotten along with you just fine as you're very reasonable. >>> >>> In this case, I respectfully disagree that it's useful to deliver a 6-page rant citing the "I told you so" lines when the decision has been done, executed, and is live. Further, I have been in this business for 20 years now. We had roughly 2.5 hours of outages this morning between roughly 7:45AM and 9:15AM EST. This was only because of the unknown. Staff has spent a lot of time testing this software. It was rolled over twice already and rolled back just to ensure we COULD roll it back if there was a major problem. The point being that we transitioned an entire infrastructure from 6 services to ONE, the monthly cost savings should be about $500 once everything is in place, and best I can tell nothing is broken - there are just complaints that some things are missing (which they're definitely not, but I'll concede that perhaps staff hasn't finished adding links - I honestly don't know right now). >>> >>> There are no major problems that anyone has reported save for the overloading this morning. The page content was always intended to / has been / and IS preserved. If a link isn't immediately visible, then staff can correct that if appropriate. >>> >>> IF there are broken links, namely as a URL may have changed and needs to be forwarded now, I would really, genuinely like to know so I can fix those problems. I offered that to Chuck. I offered it to you. >>> >>> That said, we can start however necessary. I have ostensibly worked on this for 3.5 straight weeks. That is not because of the website itself, but rather the years of garbaged up infrastructure. We would have rolled the site out 6 weeks ago if not for all of that. My point being that I've been voluntarily taking on FAR more work than was entailed in the website redesign itself because our infrastructure couldn't handle the modern codebase (it is roughly 8 years out of spec). >>> >>> I would ask that you leave whatever issues you have with content alone for the time being. I'm not saying they won't be addressed, I'm saying that it's not a primary concern. The primary concern is ensuring that the site is running so it can serve up any content. IF there is a problem with something not loading, we need to know that. >>> >>> Staff has copied over existing pages and so nothing is lost or destroyed or anything of this sort. >>> >>> I need to convey though, that I am not on the clock for the people on this thread. I have been, and am continuing to volunteer a tremendous amount of time to ensure this is completed smoothly. I am happy to try and fix things that are broken. I'm very uninterested in listening to Mr. Molton rant on about his discontent with the structure. It's done. That ship sailed in February. >>> >>> So that's where I'm at. By all means, please inform me of broken pieces so we can look at and correct anything ASAP. >>> >>> ~k >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 10:01 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> Kevin, >>> >>> He was writing as a member to a busy elected to SERVE members. That means sometimes we will hear things we don't want to and have to respond to very upset complaints. No matter what anyone says - high-handed responses are not appropriate IMHO. >>> >>> I didn't agree with Chuck's desire to see heads roll. I said so respectfully, >>> >>> Can we start again? >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> In Liberty, >>> Caryn Ann Harlos >>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org >>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado >>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tuesday, October 25, 2016, Kevin Ludlow <ludlow(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> Caryn, >>> >>> Chuck opened with whoever made the decision was a MORON and should be FIRED. >>> >>> I think my response was in line. >>> >>> Regardless, I remain open to seeing links broken. I'm sure some still exist. We launched the site this morning. Staff has spent weeks testing the site and fixing links and such. I'm all for fixing dead links, but 6 pages of complaints without any information is not helpful. >>> >>> Also, I'm not a member of the LNC. I'm a volunteer only. So I don't really owe anyone anything. I've delightfully put in a couple hundred hours so far. That's the best I'm willing to do at this point given such a response. >>> >>> K >>> >>> On Tuesday, October 25, 2016, Caryn Ann Harlos <carynannharlos(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> Kevin, that was an inappropriate response to concerns of a member IMHO- his concerns are valid and shouldn't be dismissed as "oh you Libertarians, you are a minority - we can safely ignore you." >>> >>> Where are the links to the LNC Business list, the old blog articles, and the past minutes? >>> >>> Can we have the discussion without sarcasm and without putting down Libertarians as inconsequential? >>> >>> -- >>> In Liberty, >>> Caryn Ann Harlos >>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org >>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado >>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 8:19 PM, Kevin Ludlow <ludlow(a)gmail.com> wrote: >>> Hey Chuck, >>> >>> Thanks for the constructive feedback. >>> >>> I'll delightfully take credit/responsibility for whatever and all actions you've written about. Please pardon Nick, Robert, Wes, and anybody else in your crosshairs. I'm sure they'll be relieved to be spared. >>> >>> I'm not going to read that entire document you've sent as I've spent the last 3 weeks trying to fix the party's infrastructure for the website TO go live. It was finished two days ago, it was launched last night. That was my call. >>> >>> What would be useful right now would be if you could point out the broken links so that we can assign permanent redirects to them. Any page content that existed STILL exists. This has been made clear over and over again. It's possible that some page links have not been forwarded, but I've been monitoring logs on all 4 servers all day and have not seen many 404s. The downtime this morning wasn't actually from an outage, but rather ME under-predicting the load our servers would take. This is admittedly because I didn't have any data to go on because -- well -- we've not really ever kept any before. I made the best prediction I could; I way under-estimated. The servers were scaled up and unless you're seeing something different, the site has been running fine all day since about 9:45am CST. It was running before that just fine too, but the morning surge in traffic overwhelmed it. >>> >>> So anyway, if you'd like to submit broken links, we'd love to set up additional forwards. Overall though, I'm pretty happy with the change. I'm happy we've done it before the election - even if it wound up being delayed from our proposed launch of September 29th. >>> >>> The old site was very, very bad. I know you're a tech guy all the way. I know words resonate with you and not colors and images and feelings and emotions. But you comprise a very, very, VERY small portion of the American electorate and the new site was designed to appeal to people who are visually oriented, not interested in reading walls of text, and might have the attention span of a few seconds at best (eg: the vast majority of people). It was designed for people who might not care about the Libertarian Party - in hopes that something grabs their attention and they begin to care. We don't need to "win over" existing Libertarians -- or at least one would think, but it's honestly hard to tell these days. Regardless, it was decided. It's done. You can hate it. But I'd still love your help in knowing where links are broken instead of mostly ignoring another wall of text. That would help ensure that it's in good shape. >>> >>> If you'd like to vent further, feel free to call me at 512-773-3968 to spare the group. >>> >>> Sincerely, >>> Kevin >>> >>> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 8:56 PM, Chuck Moulton <chuck(a)moulton.org> wrote: >>> LNC members, >>> >>> Many of the problems I warned about have in fact come to pass. It is Cassandra's Curse: always right but never believed. >>> >>> See the exchange from IPR quoted below (in the P.S.) for context and institutional memory. I'll quote and discuss some of the highlights here. >>> >>> >>> WARNING #1: TRANSITIONS CAN BE BOTCHED, LEADING TO DOWNTIME — AT THE WORST TIME IN THE ELECTION CYCLE FOR SUCH DOWNTIME: THE PRESIDENTIAL CAMPAIGN. >>> >>> This buggy transition was implemented 13 days before the presidential election. That is the 13th worst day in a 4 year cycle to unveil a new a new website. There were/are 1,448 better days to change to a new website in a 4 year cycle. >>> >>> Whatever MORON decided to switch to a new website today instead of after the election should be immediately FIRED. Do not pass go, do not collect $200. FIRED. I can't imagine a stupider, more incompetent, strategically insane decision than pulling the plug on a working website and trying out a new, buggy website immediately before a presidential election. It is INSANE. >>> >>> I like staff, but if Wes Benedict made this idiotic decision, FIRE HIM IMMEDIATELY. >>> >>> I like much of the LNC, but if Nick Sarwark made this idiotic decision, SUSPEND HIM FOR CAUSE IMMEDIATELY (I'll gladly recuse myself as a member of the Judicial Committee if he appeals). >>> >>> If Kevin Ludlow made this idiotic decision, RESCIND THE FEBRUARY 2016 MOTION GIVING LUDLOW UNILATERAL AUTHORITY OVER THE LP'S MOST IMPORTANT ASSET IMMEDIATELY. >>> >>> Everything we were told about a professional transition that does not suffer from the pitfalls I highlighted was a lie. >>> >>> It takes significantly more time for lp.org pages to load than before. The site has been down on & off all day long. For a while people were directed to another domain whenever they went to a LP page: libparty.zocalodesign.com. >>> >>> >>> WARNING #2: A LOT OF CONTENT IS REMOVED. LACK OF THAT CONTENT MAKES IT MUCH HARDER TO ENERGIZE PROSPECTS; GET DONATIONS, VOLUNTEERS, AND CANDIDATES; AND TRAIN LIBERTARIANS ON BEST PRACTICES. >>> >>> In fact (as predicted), a lot of content has been removed from lp.org. >>> >>> For example, as chair of the Judicial Committee I wonder what happened to the webpage listing bylaws mandated committee members? >>> >>> Where is the link to the LP Business list? >>> >>> Where are the LNC minute archives before 2015? >>> >>> I could go on and on, but I cover this point more broadly in my next unheeded warning. >>> >>> I was repeatedly assured that content would not be removed, except that the front page would be made less cluttered. That was a lie. >>> >>> >>> WARNING #3: BOTH CONTENT REMOVAL AND TRANSITIONS TO A NEW SYSTEM MAY LEAD SOME PAGES TO BE REMOVED OR MOVED, BREAKING LINKS TO PARTS OF THE SITE FROM ALL AROUND THE INTERNET AND MAKING US LOOK UNPROFESSIONAL WITH 404 ERRORS. >>> >>> The number of 404 errors is shocking! Activists have been out there for months / years promoting our website by linking to it -- especially during this presidential election. Most of those links are now broken. >>> >>> Just try clicking on many of these links: >>> https://www.google.com/search?site=&source=hp&q=site%3Alp.org&oq=site%3Alp.… >>> >>> I've been told the solution is just to report each broken link. That is ridiculous! It is completely unprofessional for a website transition to be reactive instead of proactive -- especially given that broken links probably number in the thousands. We were assured that this would be a professional transition, but that was a lie. >>> >>> >>> WARNING #4: A NEW SYSTEM REQUIRES RETRAINING STAFF ON PROCESSES — TIME THAT COULD HAVE BEEN DEVOTED TO OTHER THINGS. EVEN AFTER RETRAINING THERE WILL BE A LEARNING CURVE... EXTRA TIME FOR WEBSITE RELATED TASKS THAT COULD HAVE BEEN DEVOTED TO OTHER THINGS. >>> >>> >>> In fact (as predicted), staff has mentioned that the website transition has taken staff time that could have been devoted to other matters in this busy election season. >>> >>> Wes Benedict wrote: >>> http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business_hq.lp.org/2016/006577.html >>> I hope we can get those things below implemented early in 2017, >>> however, and get back to LPedia and many other projects, but first >>> we're trying to roll out the new LP.org website. >>> >>> >>> WARNING #5: INTERNAL SCRIPTS THAT CURRENTLY AUTOMATICALLY SHOOT DATA TO STATE AFFILIATES SUCH AS THE VOLUNTEER FORM, THE WANT TO BE A CANDIDATE FORM, THE INFO FORM, ETC. MAY STOP WORKING, WHICH WOULD DEPRIVE STATES OF A VALUABLE SOURCE OF LEADS DURING A TRANSITION PERIOD. >>> >>> Do these all still work? I don't know. I can't currently test this as I am not a state chair right now. I hope someone is testing this stuff. Based on all of the other monumental errors highlighted above, I certainly don't trust whoever oversaw the website transition to have done this testing. >>> >>> >>> You all made a monumental error when you voted on this website. Please do whatever you can to minimize the damage and triage the website that is being butchered before your very eyes. I hope the lost content can be restored and the bugs can be fixed ASAP. Even if everything is fixed within the next week though, the timing is still horrendous. >>> >>> Chuck Moulton >>> Life Member & Monthly Pledger, Libertarian Party >>> >>> >>> >>> P.S. See below for context on this botched website transition and eerily accurate prophesies from people with a clue. >>> >>> Kevin Ludlow wrote: >>> http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business_hq.lp.org/2016/004164.html >>> 1) Our website is a joke. I mean a real, horrible, laughable, "maybe >>> it's 1996 and the www portion of the internet has just been >>> unleashed" joke. It's got ridiculous internal ads all over it. It's >>> terribly organized. It uses bad images. It has an outdated font, not >>> great font colors, and antiquated font-spacing and sizing. It barely >>> functions on mobile devices. It's full of information it doesn't need >>> to have. It conveys that we're not a serious organization. >>> >>> Kevin Ludlow wrote: >>> http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business_hq.lp.org/2016/004283.html >>> We want to do all of these things. So I'm asking you, just stop what >>> you're doing for 30 seconds, reflect what could happen if we >>> actually tried to accomplish this one little task. What is the WORST >>> that could happen? We fail? We're in a very slightly worse financial >>> position than we already are? But now consider what is the BEST that >>> could happen? Maybe this tailspin of a cash hole we're in stops. >>> MAYBE people would see that the LNC is doing something external. >>> MAYBE people would have their morale boosted just a little bit and >>> be more inclined to donate. MAYBE we could use it as a way to >>> leverage requesting donations from people. >>> >>> Chuck Moulton wrote: >>> http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-national-committe… >>> What's the worst that can happen? It's not $20,000 wasted. That is >>> pretty stupid thinking there... accounting rather than economics. The >>> worst that can happen is the site is much worse than before. A lot >>> of content is removed. Lack of that content makes it much harder to >>> energize prospects; get donations, volunteers, and candidates; and >>> train libertarians on best practices. A new system requires >>> retraining staff on processes — time that coupd have been devoted to >>> other things. Even after retraining there will be a learning curve... >>> extra time for website related tasks that could have been devoted to >>> other things. Will conversion of new visitors go up with a new >>> flashy styled website? Maybe, but it could also go down, which is a >>> potential cost. This is especially likely when the focus is on >>> design/style rather than the technical features under the hood. When >>> content is removed it may piss off current donors and activists, who >>> may reduce their donations and activism. Both content removal and >>> transitions to a new system may lead some pages to be removed or >>> moved, breaking links to parts of the site from all around the >>> Internet and making us look unprofessional with 404 errors. New >>> sites often start out with a few bugs and errors which can take a >>> while to track down... the site may look less professional in the >>> interim. Transitions can be botched, leading to downtime — at the >>> worst time in the election cycle for such downtime: the presidential >>> campaign. Internal scripts that currently automatically shoot data to >>> state affiliates such as the volunteer form, the want to be a >>> candidate form, the info form, etc. may stop working, which would >>> deprive states of a valuable source of leads during a transition >>> period. That's just what I could come up with off the top of my head... >>> there are probably a lot more. >>> >>> Kevin Ludlow wrote: >>> http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-national-committe… >>> I've launched many large scale sites just in the past year and not a >>> single one of those sites had any of the problems you're referring >>> to. They DID – when they were on our development and testing servers >>> – but not when they went into production. That's how web launches >>> are done professionally. A thorough maintenance schedule would also >>> be implemented and the website would be designed for minimal >>> maintainability in the first place. ...also in accordance with best >>> practices. >>> >>> Kevin Ludlow wrote: >>> http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-national-committe… >>> Furthermore, there is absolutely NO intention to remove Libertarian >>> content from the website. This crowd has an astounding ability to >>> spin half-truths and bake them into something entirely different. I >>> will clarify specifically what is meant by moving them around. >>> >>> The FRONT PAGE of a website (for a non-profit, business, or any >>> other organization) is NOT to leave people with walls of text. It is >>> to create a fast and positive impression and to get a call to >>> action. >>> >>> Having dozens and dozens of options is incredibly poor design, >>> thoroughly proven to be ineffective, and generally an archaic >>> website idea. The current website is not responsive; it does not work >>> well (and not at all in some cases) on mobile and tablet devices. >>> >>> Chuck Moulton wrote: >>> http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-national-committe… >>> Great! Somehow in all your emails to the LNC (I read every LNC >>> business list email) you never mentioned anything about the >>> transition process. All you talk about is design/style. >>> >>> If you can manage a transition process well, that's wonderful. It >>> certainly hasn't been done in the past. The transition from FoxPro >>> to Raiser's Edge was a disaster... it resulted in states not receiving >>> working dumps for a year and a lot of records being screwed up >>> (e.g., deceased coming back to life, etc.). During the website >>> transition a decade ago, the LNC meeting minutes archive and the >>> Success 97 and Success 99 seminars were removed. >>> >>> See the IT Committee discussion and report (pp. 15-16, pp. 51-59): >>> https://www.lp.org/archives/lnc20061111.pdf >>> >>> If there will be no transition hiccups, that's wonderful news. You >>> still didn't address all the scripts on the website right now and >>> the technical considerations Shane discussed. >>> >>> I'm concerned about giving management of the transition job who only >>> talks about design/style, wants to remove content (supposedly... >>> >>> though I see you have now clarified that), and never mentions a >>> transition plan to minimize problems. >>> >>> It's great that you're finally talking about a transition plan! It's >>> not my fault it's the first I've heard of it though. >>> >>> There are lots of people in the LP (myself included) who have seen >>> transitions mismanaged and are worried of a repeat of those >>> disasters. We're not saying the sky is going to fall because of you. >>> We're saying the sky has fallen in the past, we have documented >>> evidence of this, and you don't seem as on top of the process as we >>> would hope to prevent similar problems. (You also seem to lack the >>> institutional memory to be aware of these past issues.) That's a >>> matter of you not communicating your transition plan and experience, >>> not a matter of us being overly pessimistic. >>> >>> Kevin Ludlow wrote: >>> http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-national-committe… >>> I'm sorry you've had people half-ass these efforts in the past. I >>> definitely cannot say I'm surprised. I focus on style because to the >>> external world, style IS the most important thing. This in no way >>> means I neglect the engine, but in 20 years of delivering projects, >>> nearly 100% of clients will respond positively to a broken system >>> that looks amazing over a badass functioning system that looks ugly. >>> It's just psychology. Again, it doesn't mean it doesn't all get >>> done. >>> >>> http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-national-committe… >>> I've found libertarians have a different psychology than much of the >>> world. The tech saavy folks will feel talked down to or ignored if >>> you only talk about style, ignoring tech under the hood. The >>> ideological folks will feel defensive if you malign content. I fall >>> in both categories, as do others on this thread. >>> >>> Just something to keep in mind for the future. >>> >>> Stewart Flood wrote: >>> http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-national-committe… >>> So they're creating a new website committee and giving it authority >>> to screw everything up without having to go back to the LNC to get >>> approval on which one of their pals they give the money to? >>> >>> Chuck Moulton wrote: >>> http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-national-committe… >>> Yes, they created a new committee with unlimited power over the >>> website. Then they spent the whole time debating an irrelevant >>> $10,000. >>> >>> Chuck Moulton wrote: >>> http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-national-committe… >>> I am hugely concerned about giving any one person carte blanche over >>> the website. >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> ======================================================== >>> Kevin Ludlow >>> 512-773-3968 >>> http://www.kevinludlow.com >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> In Liberty, >>> Caryn Ann Harlos >>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org >>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado >>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> ======================================================== >>> Kevin Ludlow >>> 512-773-3968 >>> http://www.kevinludlow.com >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> In Liberty, >>> Caryn Ann Harlos >>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org >>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado >>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> ======================================================== >>> Kevin Ludlow >>> 512-773-3968 >>> http://www.kevinludlow.com >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> In Liberty, >>> Caryn Ann Harlos >>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org >>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado >>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> ======================================================== >>> Kevin Ludlow >>> 512-773-3968 >>> http://www.kevinludlow.com >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> In Liberty, >>> Caryn Ann Harlos >>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org >>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado >>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> ======================================================== >>> Kevin Ludlow >>> 512-773-3968 >>> http://www.kevinludlow.com >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> In Liberty, >>> Caryn Ann Harlos >>> Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org >>> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado >>> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Lnc-business mailing list >>> Lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org >>> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org >> >> >> >> -- >> ======================================================== >> Kevin Ludlow >> 512-773-3968 >> http://www.kevinludlow.com >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Lnc-business mailing list >> Lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org >> http://hq.lp.org/mailman/listinfo/lnc-business_hq.lp.org > > > > > -- > ======================================================== > Kevin Ludlow > 512-773-3968 > http://www.kevinludlow.com >

1 0

Lawsuit in CO against AG, SoS, and DA
by Caryn Ann Harlos 26 Oct '16

26 Oct '16

I have filed suit today in CO regarding the "ballot selfie" law but there is an additional provision of that law which kept getting ignored that prohibited verbal disclosure as well. Will forward copies of the suit. -- *In Liberty,* *Caryn Ann Harlos* Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos(a)LP.org> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado <http://www.lpcolorado.org> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org>

2 1

Re: [Lnc-business] LP.org website transition botched (as predicted)
by Caryn Ann Harlos 26 Oct '16

26 Oct '16

Kevin, that was an inappropriate response to concerns of a member IMHO- his concerns are valid and shouldn't be dismissed as "oh you Libertarians, you are a minority - we can safely ignore you." Where are the links to the LNC Business list, the old blog articles, and the past minutes? Can we have the discussion without sarcasm and without putting down Libertarians as inconsequential? -- *In Liberty,* *Caryn Ann Harlos* Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos(a)LP.org> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado <http://www.lpcolorado.org/> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org/> On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 8:19 PM, Kevin Ludlow <ludlow(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hey Chuck, > > Thanks for the constructive feedback. > > I'll delightfully take credit/responsibility for whatever and all actions > you've written about. Please pardon Nick, Robert, Wes, and anybody else in > your crosshairs. I'm sure they'll be relieved to be spared. > > I'm not going to read that entire document you've sent as I've spent the > last 3 weeks trying to fix the party's infrastructure for the website TO go > live. It was finished two days ago, it was launched last night. That was > my call. > > What would be useful right now would be if you could point out the broken > links so that we can assign permanent redirects to them. Any page content > that existed STILL exists. This has been made clear over and over again. > It's possible that some page links have not been forwarded, but I've been > monitoring logs on all 4 servers all day and have not seen many 404s. The > downtime this morning wasn't actually from an outage, but rather ME > under-predicting the load our servers would take. This is admittedly > because I didn't have any data to go on because -- well -- we've not really > ever kept any before. I made the best prediction I could; I way > under-estimated. The servers were scaled up and unless you're seeing > something different, the site has been running fine all day since about > 9:45am CST. It was running before that just fine too, but the morning > surge in traffic overwhelmed it. > > So anyway, if you'd like to submit broken links, we'd love to set up > additional forwards. Overall though, I'm pretty happy with the change. > I'm happy we've done it before the election - even if it wound up being > delayed from our proposed launch of September 29th. > > The old site was very, very bad. I know you're a tech guy all the way. I > know words resonate with you and not colors and images and feelings and > emotions. But you comprise a very, very, VERY small portion of the > American electorate and the new site was designed to appeal to people who > are visually oriented, not interested in reading walls of text, and might > have the attention span of a few seconds at best (eg: the vast majority of > people). It was designed for people who might not care about the > Libertarian Party - in hopes that something grabs their attention and they > begin to care. We don't need to "win over" existing Libertarians -- or at > least one would think, but it's honestly hard to tell these days. > Regardless, it was decided. It's done. You can hate it. But I'd still > love your help in knowing where links are broken instead of mostly ignoring > another wall of text. That would help ensure that it's in good shape. > > If you'd like to vent further, feel free to call me at 512-773-3968 to > spare the group. > > Sincerely, > Kevin > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 8:56 PM, Chuck Moulton <chuck(a)moulton.org> wrote: > >> LNC members, >> >> Many of the problems I warned about have in fact come to pass. It is >> Cassandra's Curse: always right but never believed. >> >> See the exchange from IPR quoted below (in the P.S.) for context and >> institutional memory. I'll quote and discuss some of the highlights here. >> >> >> WARNING #1: TRANSITIONS CAN BE BOTCHED, LEADING TO DOWNTIME — AT THE >> WORST TIME IN THE ELECTION CYCLE FOR SUCH DOWNTIME: THE PRESIDENTIAL >> CAMPAIGN. >> >> This buggy transition was implemented 13 days before the presidential >> election. That is the 13th worst day in a 4 year cycle to unveil a new a >> new website. There were/are 1,448 better days to change to a new website >> in a 4 year cycle. >> >> Whatever MORON decided to switch to a new website today instead of after >> the election should be immediately FIRED. Do not pass go, do not collect >> $200. FIRED. I can't imagine a stupider, more incompetent, strategically >> insane decision than pulling the plug on a working website and trying out a >> new, buggy website immediately before a presidential election. It is >> INSANE. >> >> I like staff, but if Wes Benedict made this idiotic decision, FIRE HIM >> IMMEDIATELY. >> >> I like much of the LNC, but if Nick Sarwark made this idiotic decision, >> SUSPEND HIM FOR CAUSE IMMEDIATELY (I'll gladly recuse myself as a member of >> the Judicial Committee if he appeals). >> >> If Kevin Ludlow made this idiotic decision, RESCIND THE FEBRUARY 2016 >> MOTION GIVING LUDLOW UNILATERAL AUTHORITY OVER THE LP'S MOST IMPORTANT >> ASSET IMMEDIATELY. >> >> Everything we were told about a professional transition that does not >> suffer from the pitfalls I highlighted was a lie. >> >> It takes significantly more time for lp.org pages to load than before. >> The site has been down on & off all day long. For a while people were >> directed to another domain whenever they went to a LP page: >> libparty.zocalodesign.com. >> >> >> WARNING #2: A LOT OF CONTENT IS REMOVED. LACK OF THAT CONTENT MAKES IT >> MUCH HARDER TO ENERGIZE PROSPECTS; GET DONATIONS, VOLUNTEERS, AND >> CANDIDATES; AND TRAIN LIBERTARIANS ON BEST PRACTICES. >> >> In fact (as predicted), a lot of content has been removed from lp.org. >> >> For example, as chair of the Judicial Committee I wonder what happened to >> the webpage listing bylaws mandated committee members? >> >> Where is the link to the LP Business list? >> >> Where are the LNC minute archives before 2015? >> >> I could go on and on, but I cover this point more broadly in my next >> unheeded warning. >> >> I was repeatedly assured that content would not be removed, except that >> the front page would be made less cluttered. That was a lie. >> >> >> WARNING #3: BOTH CONTENT REMOVAL AND TRANSITIONS TO A NEW SYSTEM MAY LEAD >> SOME PAGES TO BE REMOVED OR MOVED, BREAKING LINKS TO PARTS OF THE SITE FROM >> ALL AROUND THE INTERNET AND MAKING US LOOK UNPROFESSIONAL WITH 404 ERRORS. >> >> The number of 404 errors is shocking! Activists have been out there for >> months / years promoting our website by linking to it -- especially during >> this presidential election. Most of those links are now broken. >> >> Just try clicking on many of these links: >> https://www.google.com/search?site=&source=hp&q=site%3Alp.or >> g&oq=site%3Alp.org >> >> I've been told the solution is just to report each broken link. That is >> ridiculous! It is completely unprofessional for a website transition to be >> reactive instead of proactive -- especially given that broken links >> probably number in the thousands. We were assured that this would be a >> professional transition, but that was a lie. >> >> >> WARNING #4: A NEW SYSTEM REQUIRES RETRAINING STAFF ON PROCESSES — TIME >> THAT COULD HAVE BEEN DEVOTED TO OTHER THINGS. EVEN AFTER RETRAINING THERE >> WILL BE A LEARNING CURVE… EXTRA TIME FOR WEBSITE RELATED TASKS THAT COULD >> HAVE BEEN DEVOTED TO OTHER THINGS. >> >> In fact (as predicted), staff has mentioned that the website transition >> has taken staff time that could have been devoted to other matters in this >> busy election season. >> >> Wes Benedict wrote: >> http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business_hq.lp.org/2016/006577.html >> >>> I hope we can get those things below implemented early in 2017, >>> however, and get back to LPedia and many other projects, but first >>> we're trying to roll out the new LP.org website. >>> >> >> >> WARNING #5: INTERNAL SCRIPTS THAT CURRENTLY AUTOMATICALLY SHOOT DATA TO >> STATE AFFILIATES SUCH AS THE VOLUNTEER FORM, THE WANT TO BE A CANDIDATE >> FORM, THE INFO FORM, ETC. MAY STOP WORKING, WHICH WOULD DEPRIVE STATES OF A >> VALUABLE SOURCE OF LEADS DURING A TRANSITION PERIOD. >> >> Do these all still work? I don't know. I can't currently test this as I >> am not a state chair right now. I hope someone is testing this stuff. >> Based on all of the other monumental errors highlighted above, I certainly >> don't trust whoever oversaw the website transition to have done this >> testing. >> >> >> You all made a monumental error when you voted on this website. Please >> do whatever you can to minimize the damage and triage the website that is >> being butchered before your very eyes. I hope the lost content can be >> restored and the bugs can be fixed ASAP. Even if everything is fixed >> within the next week though, the timing is still horrendous. >> >> Chuck Moulton >> Life Member & Monthly Pledger, Libertarian Party >> >> >> >> P.S. See below for context on this botched website transition and eerily >> accurate prophesies from people with a clue. >> >> Kevin Ludlow wrote: >> http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business_hq.lp.org/2016/004164.html >> >>> 1) Our website is a joke. I mean a real, horrible, laughable, "maybe >>> it's 1996 and the www portion of the internet has just been >>> unleashed" joke. It's got ridiculous internal ads all over it. It's >>> terribly organized. It uses bad images. It has an outdated font, not >>> great font colors, and antiquated font-spacing and sizing. It barely >>> functions on mobile devices. It's full of information it doesn't need >>> to have. It conveys that we're not a serious organization. >>> >> >> Kevin Ludlow wrote: >> http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business_hq.lp.org/2016/004283.html >> >>> We want to do all of these things. So I’m asking you, just stop what >>> you’re doing for 30 seconds, reflect what could happen if we >>> actually tried to accomplish this one little task. What is the WORST >>> that could happen? We fail? We’re in a very slightly worse financial >>> position than we already are? But now consider what is the BEST that >>> could happen? Maybe this tailspin of a cash hole we’re in stops. >>> MAYBE people would see that the LNC is doing something external. >>> MAYBE people would have their morale boosted just a little bit and >>> be more inclined to donate. MAYBE we could use it as a way to >>> leverage requesting donations from people. >>> >> >> Chuck Moulton wrote: >> http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-na >> tional-committee-meeting-streaming-now/#comment-1321872 >> >>> What’s the worst that can happen? It’s not $20,000 wasted. That is >>> pretty stupid thinking there… accounting rather than economics. The >>> worst that can happen is the site is much worse than before. A lot >>> of content is removed. Lack of that content makes it much harder to >>> energize prospects; get donations, volunteers, and candidates; and >>> train libertarians on best practices. A new system requires >>> retraining staff on processes — time that coupd have been devoted to >>> other things. Even after retraining there will be a learning curve… >>> extra time for website related tasks that could have been devoted to >>> other things. Will conversion of new visitors go up with a new >>> flashy styled website? Maybe, but it could also go down, which is a >>> potential cost. This is especially likely when the focus is on >>> design/style rather than the technical features under the hood. When >>> content is removed it may piss off current donors and activists, who >>> may reduce their donations and activism. Both content removal and >>> transitions to a new system may lead some pages to be removed or >>> moved, breaking links to parts of the site from all around the >>> Internet and making us look unprofessional with 404 errors. New >>> sites often start out with a few bugs and errors which can take a >>> while to track down… the site may look less professional in the >>> interim. Transitions can be botched, leading to downtime — at the >>> worst time in the election cycle for such downtime: the presidential >>> campaign. Internal scripts that currently automatically shoot data to >>> state affiliates such as the volunteer form, the want to be a >>> candidate form, the info form, etc. may stop working, which would >>> deprive states of a valuable source of leads during a transition >>> period. That’s just what I could come up with off the top of my head… >>> there are probably a lot more. >>> >> >> Kevin Ludlow wrote: >> http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-na >> tional-committee-meeting-streaming-now/#comment-1321907 >> >>> I’ve launched many large scale sites just in the past year and not a >>> single one of those sites had any of the problems you’re referring >>> to. They DID – when they were on our development and testing servers >>> – but not when they went into production. That’s how web launches >>> are done professionally. A thorough maintenance schedule would also >>> be implemented and the website would be designed for minimal >>> maintainability in the first place. …also in accordance with best >>> practices. >>> >> >> Kevin Ludlow wrote: >> http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-na >> tional-committee-meeting-streaming-now/#comment-1322226 >> >>> Furthermore, there is absolutely NO intention to remove Libertarian >>> content from the website. This crowd has an astounding ability to >>> spin half-truths and bake them into something entirely different. I >>> will clarify specifically what is meant by moving them around. >>> >>> The FRONT PAGE of a website (for a non-profit, business, or any >>> other organization) is NOT to leave people with walls of text. It is >>> to create a fast and positive impression and to get a call to >>> action. >>> >>> Having dozens and dozens of options is incredibly poor design, >>> thoroughly proven to be ineffective, and generally an archaic >>> website idea. The current website is not responsive; it does not work >>> well (and not at all in some cases) on mobile and tablet devices. >>> >> >> Chuck Moulton wrote: >> http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-na >> tional-committee-meeting-streaming-now/#comment-1322257 >> >>> Great! Somehow in all your emails to the LNC (I read every LNC >>> business list email) you never mentioned anything about the >>> transition process. All you talk about is design/style. >>> >>> If you can manage a transition process well, that’s wonderful. It >>> certainly hasn’t been done in the past. The transition from FoxPro >>> to Raiser’s Edge was a disaster… it resulted in states not receiving >>> working dumps for a year and a lot of records being screwed up >>> (e.g., deceased coming back to life, etc.). During the website >>> transition a decade ago, the LNC meeting minutes archive and the >>> Success 97 and Success 99 seminars were removed. >>> >>> See the IT Committee discussion and report (pp. 15-16, pp. 51-59): >>> https://www.lp.org/archives/lnc20061111.pdf >>> >>> If there will be no transition hiccups, that’s wonderful news. You >>> still didn’t address all the scripts on the website right now and >>> the technical considerations Shane discussed. >>> >>> I’m concerned about giving management of the transition job who only >>> talks about design/style, wants to remove content (supposedly… >>> though I see you have now clarified that), and never mentions a >>> transition plan to minimize problems. >>> >>> It’s great that you’re finally talking about a transition plan! It’s >>> not my fault it’s the first I’ve heard of it though. >>> >>> There are lots of people in the LP (myself included) who have seen >>> transitions mismanaged and are worried of a repeat of those >>> disasters. We’re not saying the sky is going to fall because of you. >>> We’re saying the sky has fallen in the past, we have documented >>> evidence of this, and you don’t seem as on top of the process as we >>> would hope to prevent similar problems. (You also seem to lack the >>> institutional memory to be aware of these past issues.) That’s a >>> matter of you not communicating your transition plan and experience, >>> not a matter of us being overly pessimistic. >>> >> >> Kevin Ludlow wrote: >> http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-na >> tional-committee-meeting-streaming-now/#comment-1322261 >> >>> I’m sorry you’ve had people half-ass these efforts in the past. I >>> definitely cannot say I’m surprised. I focus on style because to the >>> external world, style IS the most important thing. This in no way >>> means I neglect the engine, but in 20 years of delivering projects, >>> nearly 100% of clients will respond positively to a broken system >>> that looks amazing over a badass functioning system that looks ugly. >>> It’s just psychology. Again, it doesn’t mean it doesn’t all get >>> done. >>> >> >> http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-na >> tional-committee-meeting-streaming-now/#comment-1322267 >> >>> I’ve found libertarians have a different psychology than much of the >>> world. The tech saavy folks will feel talked down to or ignored if >>> you only talk about style, ignoring tech under the hood. The >>> ideological folks will feel defensive if you malign content. I fall >>> in both categories, as do others on this thread. >>> >>> Just something to keep in mind for the future. >>> >> >> Stewart Flood wrote: >> http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-na >> tional-committee-meeting-streaming-now/#comment-1322926 >> >>> So they’re creating a new website committee and giving it authority >>> to screw everything up without having to go back to the LNC to get >>> approval on which one of their pals they give the money to? >>> >> >> Chuck Moulton wrote: >> http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-na >> tional-committee-meeting-streaming-now/#comment-1322930 >> >>> Yes, they created a new committee with unlimited power over the >>> website. Then they spent the whole time debating an irrelevant >>> $10,000. >>> >> >> Chuck Moulton wrote: >> http://independentpoliticalreport.com/2016/02/libertarian-na >> tional-committee-meeting-streaming-now/#comment-1322938 >> >>> I am hugely concerned about giving any one person carte blanche over >>> the website. >>> >> > > > -- > ======================================================== > Kevin Ludlow > 512-773-3968 > http://www.kevinludlow.com > > -- *In Liberty,* *Caryn Ann Harlos* Region 1 Representative, Libertarian National Committee (Alaska, Arizona, Colorado, Hawaii, Kansas, Montana, Utah, Wyoming, Washington) - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos(a)LP.org> Communications Director, Libertarian Party of Colorado <http://www.lpcolorado.org> Colorado State Coordinator, Libertarian Party Radical Caucus <http://www.lpradicalcaucus.org>

3 22