July 2018 - Lnc-business - Moellman Enterprises Email

Re: [Lnc-business] Test
by john.phillips＠lp.org 26 Jul '18

26 Jul '18

Yep John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973 ------ Original message------From: Whitney Bilyeu via Lnc-business Date: Thu, Jul 26, 2018 4:40 PMTo: lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org;Cc: Whitney Bilyeu;Subject:[Lnc-business] Test Is this working? -- Whitney BilyeuLibertarian National CommitteeRegion 7 Representative281.433.4966

2 1

Re: [Lnc-business] HTML being turned off business list
by john.phillips＠lp.org 26 Jul '18

26 Jul '18

Yeah mine do that too. Definitely not that way when I hit send John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973 ------ Original message------From: Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business Date: Thu, Jul 26, 2018 1:55 PMTo: Libertarian National Committee list;Cc: Alicia Mattson;Subject:Re: [Lnc-business] HTML being turned off business list While we're talking email quirks, I presume that the way the text looks on messages like this: http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/2018/014336.html is not the way they look when Caryn Ann sends them. When they reach the list, there are no line breaks, and it all runs together in a hard-to-parse lump. Maybe this symptom helps diagnose? -Alicia On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 10:18 AM, Nicholas Sarwark via Lnc-business < lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: > Dear Caryn Ann, > > It's only your emails that have all the appended references at the > bottom of them. I think the fix can be done with how you send email > and not require the entire list to exclude attachments. > > -Nick > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 10:14 AM Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business > wrote: > > > > Wes I don’t understand your question. > > > > The problem is that a good chunk of the LNC in long email chains gets > > pages and pages of html junk and miss messages (I’ve missed votes) and > > for at least one LNC member it crashes their phone. > > > > My understanding from Ken (perhaps he needs to discuss with you - this > > is about sheer utility not my preferences) is that this is the only > > solution. > > > > APRC emails don’t get long enough nor sent to dozens of emails and > thus > > doesn’t have this issue. > > > > Ken- do I have this right? > > > > Caryn Ann > > > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 11:03 AM Wes Benedict via Lnc-business > > <[1]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: > > > > Caryn Ann, do you prefer the list setup with the restrictions > > described > > below to the way the APRC and probably most of our other email lists > > work, where almost anything goes formatting wise? > > I like the way the APRC list works where you can add formatting > > (rich > > text / html) and attachments. My understanding is that the single > > downside to the way lists like the APRC work is that attachments > > don't > > make it to the LNC business email archives. > > [2]https://www.lp.org/lnc-minutes-and-discussion/ > > Wes Benedict, Executive Director > > Libertarian National Committee, Inc. > > [3]1444 Duke St., Alexandria, VA 22314 > > (202) 333-0008 ext. 232, [4]wes.benedict(a)lp.org > > [5]facebook.com/libertarians @LPNational > > Join the Libertarian Party at: [6]http://lp.org/membership > > On 7/26/2018 12:28 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote: > > > This means you will no longer be able to add attachments as well > > to > > > your emails. If you have something (other than reports) to > > attach, > > > you will need to use a file-sharing site and share the link. > > Google > > > has very easy solutions for this. > > > > > > If it is a report, please send to me at [7]secretary(a)lp.org and I > > will > > > put in a One-Note Notebook and publish that to the list. I will > > have > > > an organized One-Note notebook prepared for your e-use for the LNC > > > meetings. > > > > > > Robert and Tim - if you could do that as well with the membership > > and > > > financial reports I will do the same thing. > > > > > > -Caryn Ann > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 7:08 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos > > > <[8]carynannharlos(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >> Ken is trying this to see if it fixes the garbled text issues. > > >> > > >> -- > > >> In Liberty, > > >> Caryn Ann Harlos > > >> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - > > >> Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org or Secretary(a)LP.org. > > >> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia(a)LP.org > > >> > > >> > > >> A haiku to the Statement of Principles: > > >> We defend your rights > > >> And oppose the use of force > > >> Taxation is theft > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > -- > > In Liberty, > > Caryn Ann Harlos > > Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary > > - [9]Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org or Secretary(a)LP.org. > > Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia(a)LP.org > > A haiku to the Statement of Principles: > > We defend your rights > > And oppose the use of force > > Taxation is theft > > > > References > > > > 1. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > > 2. https://www.lp.org/lnc-minutes-and-discussion/ > > 3. https://maps.google.com/?q=1444+Duke+St.,+Alexandria,+VA+223 > 14&entry=gmail&source=g > > 4. mailto:wes.benedict@lp.org > > 5. http://facebook.com/libertarians > > 6. http://lp.org/membership > > 7. mailto:secretary@lp.org > > 8. mailto:carynannharlos@gmail.com > > 9. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org > While we're talking email quirks, I presume that the way the text looks on messages like this: [1]http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/2018/014336.html is not the way they look when Caryn Ann sends them. When they reach the list, there are no line breaks, and it all runs together in a hard-to-parse lump. Maybe this symptom helps diagnose? -Alicia On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 10:18 AM, Nicholas Sarwark via Lnc-business <[2]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: Dear Caryn Ann, It's only your emails that have all the appended references at the bottom of them. I think the fix can be done with how you send email and not require the entire list to exclude attachments. -Nick On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 10:14 AM Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <[3]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: > > Wes I don’t understand your question. > > The problem is that a good chunk of the LNC in long email chains gets > pages and pages of html junk and miss messages (I’ve missed votes) and > for at least one LNC member it crashes their phone. > > My understanding from Ken (perhaps he needs to discuss with you - this > is about sheer utility not my preferences) is that this is the only > solution. > > APRC emails don’t get long enough nor sent to dozens of emails and thus > doesn’t have this issue. > > Ken- do I have this right? > > Caryn Ann > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 11:03 AM Wes Benedict via Lnc-business > <[1][4]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: > > Caryn Ann, do you prefer the list setup with the restrictions > described > below to the way the APRC and probably most of our other email lists > work, where almost anything goes formatting wise? > I like the way the APRC list works where you can add formatting > (rich > text / html) and attachments. My understanding is that the single > downside to the way lists like the APRC work is that attachments > don't > make it to the LNC business email archives. > [2][5]https://www.lp.org/lnc-minutes-and-discussion/ > Wes Benedict, Executive Director > Libertarian National Committee, Inc. > [3]1444 Duke St., Alexandria, VA 22314 > (202) 333-0008 ext. 232, [4][6]wes.benedict(a)lp.org > [5][7]facebook.com/libertarians @LPNational > Join the Libertarian Party at: [6][8]http://lp.org/membership > On 7/26/2018 12:28 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote: > > This means you will no longer be able to add attachments as well > to > > your emails. If you have something (other than reports) to > attach, > > you will need to use a file-sharing site and share the link. > Google > > has very easy solutions for this. > > > > If it is a report, please send to me at [7][9]secretary(a)lp.org and I > will > > put in a One-Note Notebook and publish that to the list. I will > have > > an organized One-Note notebook prepared for your e-use for the LNC > > meetings. > > > > Robert and Tim - if you could do that as well with the membership > and > > financial reports I will do the same thing. > > > > -Caryn Ann > > > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 7:08 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos > > <[8][10]carynannharlos(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> Ken is trying this to see if it fixes the garbled text issues. > >> > >> -- > >> In Liberty, > >> Caryn Ann Harlos > >> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - > >> Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org or Secretary(a)LP.org. > >> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia(a)LP.org > >> > >> > >> A haiku to the Statement of Principles: > >> We defend your rights > >> And oppose the use of force > >> Taxation is theft > > > > > > -- > > -- > In Liberty, > Caryn Ann Harlos > Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary > - [9]Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org or Secretary(a)LP.org. > Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia(a)LP.org > A haiku to the Statement of Principles: > We defend your rights > And oppose the use of force > Taxation is theft > > References > > 1. mailto:[11]lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 2. [12]https://www.lp.org/lnc-minutes-and-discussion/ > 3. [13]https://maps.google.com/?q=144 4+Duke+St.,+Alexandria,+VA+22314&entry=gmail&source=g > 4. mailto:[14]wes.benedict@lp.org > 5. [15]http://facebook.com/libertarians > 6. [16]http://lp.org/membership > 7. mailto:[17]secretary@lp.org > 8. mailto:[18]carynannharlos@gmail.com > 9. mailto:[19]Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org References 1. http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/2018/014336.html 2. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 3. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 4. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 5. https://www.lp.org/lnc-minutes-and-discussion/ 6. mailto:wes.benedict@lp.org 7. http://facebook.com/libertarians 8. http://lp.org/membership 9. mailto:secretary@lp.org 10. mailto:carynannharlos@gmail.com 11. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 12. https://www.lp.org/lnc-minutes-and-discussion/ 13. https://maps.google.com/?q=1444+Duke+St 14. mailto:wes.benedict@lp.org 15. http://facebook.com/libertarians 16. http://lp.org/membership 17. mailto:secretary@lp.org 18. mailto:carynannharlos@gmail.com 19. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org Yeah mine do that too. Definitely not that way when I hit send John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell [1]217-412-5973 ------ Original message------ From: Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business Date: Thu, Jul 26, 2018 1:55 PM To: Libertarian National Committee list; Cc: Alicia Mattson; Subject:Re: [Lnc-business] HTML being turned off business list While we're talking email quirks, I presume that the way the text looks on messages like this: [2]http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/2018/014336.html is not the way they look when Caryn Ann sends them. When they reach the list, there are no line breaks, and it all runs together in a hard-to-parse lump. Maybe this symptom helps diagnose? -Alicia On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 10:18 AM, Nicholas Sarwark via Lnc-business <[3] lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: > Dear Caryn Ann, > > It's only your emails that have all the appended references at the > bottom of them. I think the fix can be done with how you send email > and not require the entire list to exclude attachments. > > -Nick > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 10:14 AM Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business > wrote: > > > > Wes I don’t understand your question. > > > > The problem is that a good chunk of the LNC in long email chains gets > > pages and pages of html junk and miss messages (I’ve missed votes) and > > for at least one LNC member it crashes their phone. > > > > My understanding from Ken (perhaps he needs to discuss with you - this > > is about sheer utility not my preferences) is that this is the only > > solution. > > > > APRC emails don’t get long enough nor sent to dozens of emails and > thus > > doesn’t have this issue. > > > > Ken- do I have this right? > > > > Caryn Ann > > > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 11:03 AM Wes Benedict via Lnc-business > > <[1[4]]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: > > > > Caryn Ann, do you prefer the list setup with the restrictions > > described > > below to the way the APRC and probably most of our other email lists > > work, where almost anything goes formatting wise? > > I like the way the APRC list works where you can add formatting > > (rich > > text / html) and attachments. My understanding is that the single > > downside to the way lists like the APRC work is that attachments > > don't > > make it to the LNC business email archives. > > [2][5]https://www.lp.org/lnc-minutes-and-discussion/ > > Wes Benedict, Executive Director > > Libertarian National Committee, Inc. > > [3]1444 Duke St., Alexandria, VA 22314 > > [6](202) 333-0008 ext. 232, [4[7]]wes.benedict(a)lp.org > > [5][8]facebook.com/libertarians @LPNational > > Join the Libertarian Party at: [6][9]http://lp.org/membership > > On 7/26/2018 12:28 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote: > > > This means you will no longer be able to add attachments as well > > to > > > your emails. If you have something (other than reports) to > > attach, > > > you will need to use a file-sharing site and share the link. > > Google > > > has very easy solutions for this. > > > > > > If it is a report, please send to me at [7[10]]secretary(a)lp.org and I > > will > > > put in a One-Note Notebook and publish that to the list. I will > > have > > > an organized One-Note notebook prepared for your e-use for the LNC > > > meetings. > > > > > > Robert and Tim - if you could do that as well with the membership > > and > > > financial reports I will do the same thing. > > > > > > -Caryn Ann > > > > > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 7:08 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos > > > <[8[11]]carynannharlos(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > >> Ken is trying this to see if it fixes the garbled text issues. > > >> > > >> -- > > >> In Liberty, > > >> Caryn Ann Harlos > > >> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - > > >> [12]Caryn.Ann.[13] Harlos(a)LP.org or[14] Secretary(a)LP.org. > > >> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[15] LPedia(a)LP.org > > >> > > >> > > >> A haiku to the Statement of Principles: > > >> We defend your rights > > >> And oppose the use of force > > >> Taxation is theft > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > -- > > In Liberty, > > Caryn Ann Harlos > > Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary > > - [9][16]Caryn.Ann.[17] Harlos(a)LP.org or[18] Secretary(a)LP.org. > > Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[19] LPedia(a)LP.org > > A haiku to the Statement of Principles: > > We defend your rights > > And oppose the use of force > > Taxation is theft > > > > References > > > > 1. mailto[20]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > > 2. [21]https://www.lp.org/lnc-minutes-and-discussion/ > > 3. [22]https://maps.google.com/?q=1444+Duke+St.,+Alexandria,+VA+223 > 14&entry=gmail&source=g > > 4. mailto[23]:wes.benedict@lp.org > > 5. [24]http://facebook.com/libertarians > > 6. [25]http://lp.org/membership > > 7. mailto[26]:secretary@lp.org > > 8. mailto[27]:carynannharlos@gmail.com > > 9. mailto[28]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org > While we're talking email quirks, I presume that the way the text looks on messages like this: [1][29]http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/2018/014336.html is not the way they look when Caryn Ann sends them. When they reach the list, there are no line breaks, and it all runs together in a hard-to-parse lump. Maybe this symptom helps diagnose? -Alicia On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 10:18 AM, Nicholas Sarwark via Lnc-business <[2[30]]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: Dear Caryn Ann, It's only your emails that have all the appended references at the bottom of them. I think the fix can be done with how you send email and not require the entire list to exclude attachments. -Nick On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 10:14 AM Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <[3[31]]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: > > Wes I don’t understand your question. > > The problem is that a good chunk of the LNC in long email chains gets > pages and pages of html junk and miss messages (I’ve missed votes) and > for at least one LNC member it crashes their phone. > > My understanding from Ken (perhaps he needs to discuss with you - this > is about sheer utility not my preferences) is that this is the only > solution. > > APRC emails don’t get long enough nor sent to dozens of emails and thus > doesn’t have this issue. > > Ken- do I have this right? > > Caryn Ann > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 11:03 AM Wes Benedict via Lnc-business > <[1][4[32]]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: > > Caryn Ann, do you prefer the list setup with the restrictions > described > below to the way the APRC and probably most of our other email lists > work, where almost anything goes formatting wise? > I like the way the APRC list works where you can add formatting > (rich > text / html) and attachments. My understanding is that the single > downside to the way lists like the APRC work is that attachments > don't > make it to the LNC business email archives. > [2][5][33]https://www.lp.org/lnc-minutes-and-discussion/ > Wes Benedict, Executive Director > Libertarian National Committee, Inc. > [3]1444 Duke St., Alexandria, VA 22314 > [34](202) 333-0008 ext. 232, [4][6[35]]wes.benedict(a)lp.org > [5][7][36]facebook.com/libertarians @LPNational > Join the Libertarian Party at: [6][8][37]http://lp.org/membership > On 7/26/2018 12:28 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote: > > This means you will no longer be able to add attachments as well > to > > your emails. If you have something (other than reports) to > attach, > > you will need to use a file-sharing site and share the link. > Google > > has very easy solutions for this. > > > > If it is a report, please send to me at [7][9[38]]secretary(a)lp.org and I > will > > put in a One-Note Notebook and publish that to the list. I will > have > > an organized One-Note notebook prepared for your e-use for the LNC > > meetings. > > > > Robert and Tim - if you could do that as well with the membership > and > > financial reports I will do the same thing. > > > > -Caryn Ann > > > > On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 7:08 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos > > <[8][10[39]]carynannharlos(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >> Ken is trying this to see if it fixes the garbled text issues. > >> > >> -- > >> In Liberty, > >> Caryn Ann Harlos > >> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - > >> [40]Caryn.Ann.[41] Harlos(a)LP.org or[42] Secretary(a)LP.org. > >> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[43] LPedia(a)LP.org > >> > >> > >> A haiku to the Statement of Principles: > >> We defend your rights > >> And oppose the use of force > >> Taxation is theft > > > > > > -- > > -- > In Liberty, > Caryn Ann Harlos > Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary > - [9][44]Caryn.Ann.[45] Harlos(a)LP.org or[46] Secretary(a)LP.org. > Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[47] LPedia(a)LP.org > A haiku to the Statement of Principles: > We defend your rights > And oppose the use of force > Taxation is theft > > References > > 1. mailto:[11[48]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 2. [12][49]https://www.lp.org/lnc-minutes-and-discussion/ > 3. [13][50]https://maps.google.com/?q=144 4+Duke+St.,+Alexandria,+VA+22314&entry=gmail&source=g > 4. mailto:[14[51]]wes.benedict@lp.org > 5. [15][52]http://facebook.com/libertarians > 6. [16][53]http://lp.org/membership > 7. mailto:[17[54]]secretary@lp.org > 8. mailto:[18[55]]carynannharlos@gmail.com > 9. mailto:[19[56]]Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org References 1. [57]http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/2018/014336.html 2. mailto[58]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 3. mailto[59]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 4. mailto[60]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 5. [61]https://www.lp.org/lnc-minutes-and-discussion/ 6. mailto[62]:wes.benedict@lp.org 7. [63]http://facebook.com/libertarians 8. [64]http://lp.org/membership 9. mailto[65]:secretary@lp.org 10. mailto[66]:carynannharlos@gmail.com 11. mailto[67]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 12. [68]https://www.lp.org/lnc-minutes-and-discussion/ 13. [69]https://maps.google.com/?q=1444+Duke+St 14. mailto[70]:wes.benedict@lp.org 15. [71]http://facebook.com/libertarians 16. [72]http://lp.org/membership 17. mailto[73]:secretary@lp.org 18. mailto[74]:carynannharlos@gmail.com 19. mailto[75]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org References 1. tel:217-412-5973 2. http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/2018/014336.html 3. mailto: lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org 4. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 5. https://www.lp.org/lnc-minutes-and-discussion/ 6. tel:(202) 333-0008 7. mailto:]wes.benedict@lp.org 8. http://facebook.com/libertarians 9. http://lp.org/membership 10. mailto:]secretary@lp.org 11. mailto:]carynannharlos@gmail.com 12. http://Caryn.An/ 13. mailto: Harlos(a)LP.org 14. mailto: Secretary(a)LP.org. 15. mailto: LPedia(a)LP.org 16. http://Caryn.An/ 17. mailto: Harlos(a)LP.org 18. mailto: Secretary(a)LP.org. 19. mailto: LPedia(a)LP.org 20. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 21. https://www.lp.org/lnc-minutes-and-discussion/ 22. https://maps.google.com/?q=1444+Duke+St.,+Alexandria,+VA+223 23. mailto::wes.benedict@lp.org 24. http://facebook.com/libertarians 25. http://lp.org/membership 26. mailto::secretary@lp.org 27. mailto::carynannharlos@gmail.com 28. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org 29. http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/2018/014336.html 30. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 31. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 32. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 33. https://www.lp.org/lnc-minutes-and-discussion/ 34. tel:(202) 333-0008 35. mailto:]wes.benedict@lp.org 36. http://facebook.com/libertarians 37. http://lp.org/membership 38. mailto:]secretary@lp.org 39. mailto:]carynannharlos@gmail.com 40. http://Caryn.An/ 41. mailto: Harlos(a)LP.org 42. mailto: Secretary(a)LP.org. 43. mailto: LPedia(a)LP.org 44. http://Caryn.An/ 45. mailto: Harlos(a)LP.org 46. mailto: Secretary(a)LP.org. 47. mailto: LPedia(a)LP.org 48. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 49. https://www.lp.org/lnc-minutes-and-discussion/ 50. https://maps.google.com/?q=144 51. mailto:]wes.benedict@lp.org 52. http://facebook.com/libertarians 53. http://lp.org/membership 54. mailto:]secretary@lp.org 55. mailto:]carynannharlos@gmail.com 56. mailto:]Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org 57. http://hq.lp.org/pipermail/lnc-business/2018/014336.html 58. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 59. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 60. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 61. https://www.lp.org/lnc-minutes-and-discussion/ 62. mailto::wes.benedict@lp.org 63. http://facebook.com/libertarians 64. http://lp.org/membership 65. mailto::secretary@lp.org 66. mailto::carynannharlos@gmail.com 67. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 68. https://www.lp.org/lnc-minutes-and-discussion/ 69. https://maps.google.com/?q=1444+Duke+St 70. mailto::wes.benedict@lp.org 71. http://facebook.com/libertarians 72. http://lp.org/membership 73. mailto::secretary@lp.org 74. mailto::carynannharlos@gmail.com 75. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org

2 2

HTML being turned off business list
by Caryn Ann Harlos 26 Jul '18

26 Jul '18

Ken is trying this to see if it fixes the garbled text issues. -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org or Secretary(a)LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia(a)LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft

5 6

update on convention revenues
by Lauren Daugherty 26 Jul '18

26 Jul '18

Dear LNC, It takes a while to calculate our final, official numbers for the convention because we have to wait on pledges to be fulfilled, have to follow up with folks who wrote their credit card # down incorrectly at the gala, etc. Months in advance, we knew this convention was going to be big because we had so many early package sales; however, I had thought there was no way we'd surpass the 2016 convention's revenue because 2016 was just so exceptional. Then, early in the convention I started to see that this might be possible and so we made that our goal. I'm very happy to share that we DID surpass the 2016 convention's revenue! And, we hit about TRIPLE the convention revenue from 2014. These numbers include package sales, fundraising at the gala, etc. These numbers do not include those few pledges which have not yet been fulfilled. I'm very proud of this and you should be too. A lot of factors came together to create this level of success and it is a really robust indicator of the growth of our party. Lauren Lauren Daugherty Development Director Libertarian National Committee

2 1

Re: [Lnc-business] HTML being turned off business list
by Caryn Ann Harlos 26 Jul '18

26 Jul '18

So it’s not my emails correct? I permanently use plain text. If everyone would force their email clients to use plain text (get with me if you want to know how to do that in gmail)- let me know. However I have no idea if that works on mobile - only desktop -Caryn Ann On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 12:10 PM Ken Moellman <ken.moellman(a)lp.org> wrote: > Anyone emailing the list in HTML format will cause the list to break > things up. > > What would be lost is the ability to embed or attach files, where to use > colors, bold, italic, strikethrough, or anything else that isn't just plain > text. > > What would be gained is cleaner message threads, and a cleaner message > archive. > > It's up to you all to decide. Just let me know. > > Ken > -- -- *In Liberty,* *Caryn Ann Harlos* Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos(a)LP.org> or Secretary(a)LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia(a)LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: *We defend your rights* *And oppose the use of force* *Taxation is theft* So it’s not my emails correct? I permanently use plain text. If everyone would force their email clients to use plain text (get with me if you want to know how to do that in gmail)- let me know. However I have no idea if that works on mobile - only desktop -Caryn Ann On Thu, Jul 26, 2018 at 12:10 PM Ken Moellman <[1]ken.moellman(a)lp.org> wrote: Anyone emailing the list in HTML format will cause the list to break things up. What would be lost is the ability to embed or attach files, where to use colors, bold, italic, strikethrough, or anything else that isn't just plain text. What would be gained is cleaner message threads, and a cleaner message archive. It's up to you all to decide. Just let me know. Ken -- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org or Secretary(a)LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia(a)LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft References 1. mailto:ken.moellman@lp.org 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org

1 0

"Wasted Vote" article - I review this article periodically and wanted to pass it along
by Caryn Ann Harlos 26 Jul '18

26 Jul '18

https://fee.org/articles/how-not-to-waste-your-vote-a-mathematical-analysis/ -- *In Liberty,* *Caryn Ann Harlos* Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org <Caryn.Ann.Harlos(a)LP.org> or Secretary(a)LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia(a)LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: *We defend your rights* *And oppose the use of force* *Taxation is theft* [1]https://fee.org/articles/how-not-to-waste-your-vote-a- mathematical-analysis/ -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org or Secretary(a)LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia(a)LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft References 1. https://fee.org/articles/how-not-to-waste-your-vote-a-mathematical-analysis/ 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org

1 0

Re: [Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2018-19: AGREE TO "JC" DECISIONS
by john.phillips＠lp.org 25 Jul '18

25 Jul '18

Agreed John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973 ------ Original message------From: Craig Bowden via Lnc-business Date: Wed, Jul 25, 2018 7:47 PMTo: lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org;Cc: Craig Bowden;Subject:Re: [Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2018-19: AGREE TO "JC" DECISIONS One of the reasons I support this, is that it most closely echoed what I said about a temporary appellate committee until we can confirm an official JC at a Convention. It is the least horrible of the options present. I will also add that we must make sure that we also address the need for election reform in our party so that we never again find ourselves in such a position. Craig Bowden Region 1 Alternate On 2018-07-25 18:40, Alex Merced (LNC Vice Chair) via Lnc-business wrote: > I vote yes, from my understanding this does not appoint them as the > judicial committee which if successfully elected by delegates we’d be > bound to follow. > > Instead this just says the LNC will voluntarily bind itself to the > decisions of the top 7 vote getters in matters in which a JC would > operate. > > This seems to me an effort to self-regulate in a spirit that Best > represents an effort to represent the wishes of the delegation to the > extent such can be discernible with the existing votes. > > This motion does not say they are the JC but just that we will hold > their deliberations voluntarily binding in same way we’d be > mandatorily bound had they’d successfully been elected. > > An unfortunate compromise, but the best one I’ve seen. It isn’t the > LNC Creating new powers but voluntarily putting a back stop on its > existing ones temporarily since no other backstops exist formally for > the time being. > > Alex Merced > Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP > >> On Jul 25, 2018, at 2:12 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business >> wrote: >> >> It is better than having zero protection at all for the members. And >> IF after making this agreement, anyone who voted to then renege I >> would hope would not be re-elected. This "JC" has already submitted >> it appellate rules. >> >> Our Party structure NEVER imagined an unaccountable LNC. >> >> -Caryn Ann >> >>> On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Sam Goldstein >>> wrote: >>> I vote No on this motion. >>> >>> 1. The Bylaws are clear that only delegates at convention can elect >>> the >>> Judicial Committee >>> 2. The Top Seven mentioned in this motion were not approved by >>> margins of at >>> least 60% of the >>> delegates so would not meet the precedent set by the last JC of >>> requiring >>> a majority approval of delegates >>> 3. There is no provision in either the Bylaws or Policy Manual of how >>> this >>> pretend JC would function, whether it >>> would follow Appellate rules set by the last JC or would dream up >>> its' >>> own rules that this motion would >>> have the LNC be bound to follow >>> 4. This has essentially already been rejected by the LNC per the >>> motion to >>> recognize the Top Seven as the JC (which I voted >>> in favor of but have reconsidered) >>> >>> Please consider my points before you vote on this motion. The entire >>> purpose of the Judicial Committee is to have a body >>> that is not beholden to the LNC. There is no guarantee that if the >>> pretend >>> JC makes a decision objectionable to the LNC that >>> the LNC cannot just reverse this motion by a majority vote. >>> >>> --- >>> Sam Goldstein >>> Libertarian National Committee >>> 317-850-0726 Cell >>> >>> >>>> On 2018-07-25 13:23, Craig Bowden via Lnc-business wrote: >>>> >>>> Yes >>>> >>>> Craig Bowden >>>> Region 1 Alternate >>>> >>>>> On 2018-07-25 06:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote: >>>>> >>>>> We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the >>>>> LNC-Business >>>>> list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: >>>>> Harlos, >>>>> Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian >>>>> National >>>>> Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven >>>>> vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as >>>>> if >>>>> they were elected in the normal course of convention business and >>>>> follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is >>>>> acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member >>>>> or >>>>> affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of >>>>> votes >>>>> here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting >>>>> -- >>>>> In Liberty, >>>>> Caryn Ann Harlos >>>>> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - >>>>> [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org or Secretary(a)LP.org. >>>>> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia(a)LP.org >>>>> A haiku to the Statement of Principles: >>>>> We defend your rights >>>>> And oppose the use of force >>>>> Taxation is theft >>>>> >>>>> References >>>>> >>>>> 1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting >>>>> 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org >> >> >> >> -- >> In Liberty, >> Caryn Ann Harlos >> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - >> Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org or Secretary(a)LP.org. >> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia(a)LP.org >> >> >> A haiku to the Statement of Principles: >> We defend your rights >> And oppose the use of force >> Taxation is theft Agreed John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell [1]217-412-5973 ------ Original message------ From: Craig Bowden via Lnc-business Date: Wed, Jul 25, 2018 7:47 PM To: [2]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org; Cc: Craig Bowden; Subject:Re: [Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2018-19: AGREE TO "JC" DECISIONS One of the reasons I support this, is that it most closely echoed what I said about a temporary appellate committee until we can confirm an official JC at a Convention. It is the least horrible of the options present. I will also add that we must make sure that we also address the need for election reform in our party so that we never again find ourselves in such a position. Craig Bowden Region 1 Alternate On [3]2018-07-25 18:40, Alex Merced (LNC Vice Chair) via Lnc-business wrote: > I vote yes, from my understanding this does not appoint them as the > judicial committee which if successfully elected by delegates we’d be > bound to follow. > > Instead this just says the LNC will voluntarily bind itself to the > decisions of the top 7 vote getters in matters in which a JC would > operate. > > This seems to me an effort to self-regulate in a spirit that Best > represents an effort to represent the wishes of the delegation to the > extent such can be discernible with the existing votes. > > This motion does not say they are the JC but just that we will hold > their deliberations voluntarily binding in same way we’d be > mandatorily bound had they’d successfully been elected. > > An unfortunate compromise, but the best one I’ve seen. It isn’t the > LNC Creating new powers but voluntarily putting a back stop on its > existing ones temporarily since no other backstops exist formally for > the time being. > > Alex Merced > Vice Chair of the Libertarian National Committee/LP > >> On Jul 25, 2018, at 2:12 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business >> wrote: >> >> It is better than having zero protection at all for the members. And >> IF after making this agreement, anyone who voted to then renege I >> would hope would not be re-elected. This "JC" has already submitted >> it appellate rules. >> >> Our Party structure NEVER imagined an unaccountable LNC. >> >> -Caryn Ann >> >>> On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 12:05 PM, Sam Goldstein >>> wrote: >>> I vote No on this motion. >>> >>> 1. The Bylaws are clear that only delegates at convention can elect >>> the >>> Judicial Committee >>> 2. The Top Seven mentioned in this motion were not approved by >>> margins of at >>> least 60% of the >>> delegates so would not meet the precedent set by the last JC of >>> requiring >>> a majority approval of delegates >>> 3. There is no provision in either the Bylaws or Policy Manual of how >>> this >>> pretend JC would function, whether it >>> would follow Appellate rules set by the last JC or would dream up >>> its' >>> own rules that this motion would >>> have the LNC be bound to follow >>> 4. This has essentially already been rejected by the LNC per the >>> motion to >>> recognize the Top Seven as the JC (which I voted >>> in favor of but have reconsidered) >>> >>> Please consider my points before you vote on this motion. The entire >>> purpose of the Judicial Committee is to have a body >>> that is not beholden to the LNC. There is no guarantee that if the >>> pretend >>> JC makes a decision objectionable to the LNC that >>> the LNC cannot just reverse this motion by a majority vote. >>> >>> --- >>> Sam Goldstein >>> Libertarian National Committee >>> [4]317-850-0726 Cell >>> >>> >>>> On [5]2018-07-25 13:23, Craig Bowden via Lnc-business wrote: >>>> >>>> Yes >>>> >>>> Craig Bowden >>>> Region 1 Alternate >>>> >>>>> On [6]2018-07-25 06:06, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business wrote: >>>>> >>>>> We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the >>>>> LNC-Business >>>>> list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: >>>>> Harlos, >>>>> Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian >>>>> National >>>>> Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven >>>>> vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as >>>>> if >>>>> they were elected in the normal course of convention business and >>>>> follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is >>>>> acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member >>>>> or >>>>> affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of >>>>> votes >>>>> here: [1][7]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting >>>>> -- >>>>> In Liberty, >>>>> Caryn Ann Harlos >>>>> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - >>>>> [2][8]Caryn.Ann.[9] Harlos(a)LP.org or[10] Secretary(a)LP.org. >>>>> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[11] LPedia(a)LP.org >>>>> A haiku to the Statement of Principles: >>>>> We defend your rights >>>>> And oppose the use of force >>>>> Taxation is theft >>>>> >>>>> References >>>>> >>>>> 1. [12]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting >>>>> 2. mailto[13]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org >> >> >> >> -- >> In Liberty, >> Caryn Ann Harlos >> Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - >> [14]Caryn.Ann.[15] Harlos(a)LP.org or[16] Secretary(a)LP.org. >> Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[17] LPedia(a)LP.org >> >> >> A haiku to the Statement of Principles: >> We defend your rights >> And oppose the use of force >> Taxation is theft References 1. tel:217-412-5973 2. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 3. tel:2018-07-25 18 4. tel:317-850-0726 5. tel:2018-07-25 13 6. tel:2018-07-25 06 7. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 8. http://Caryn.An/ 9. mailto: Harlos(a)LP.org 10. mailto: Secretary(a)LP.org. 11. mailto: LPedia(a)LP.org 12. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 13. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org 14. http://Caryn.An/ 15. mailto: Harlos(a)LP.org 16. mailto: Secretary(a)LP.org. 17. mailto: LPedia(a)LP.org

1 0

Announcement: Jess Mears promoted to Membership Manager
by Nicholas Sarwark 25 Jul '18

25 Jul '18

Dear All, I am pleased to announce that Jess Mears has accepted a position with the Libertarian Party as Membership Manager. She will be based out of the Alexandria office once her relocation from Florida is complete. Her responsibilities as Membership Manager are to manage prospecting, membership fulfillment, member relations, and improving member retention. She will also collaborate with LNC staff and assist with other projects as needed and as requested by the Executive Director. An additional role that she has been assigned is management and coordination of the Libertarian Party's social media assets, including, but not limited to Facebook, Twitter, Snapchat, Instagram, and YouTube. In this role, she will be providing a single point of responsibility for the social media teams and will be developing social media best practices and guidelines in collaboration with our volunteers and work to improve communication and cooperation within those teams. With her education and training in communications and public relations, as well as the track record she has established in working with Lauren Daugherty on development, I am confident that Jess will be successful in her new position. Please join me in congratulating Jess on her promotion. Yours in liberty, Nicholas Sarwark Chair, Libertarian National Committee

6 6

Re: [Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2018-19: AGREE TO "JC" DECISIONS
by john.phillips＠lp.org 25 Jul '18

25 Jul '18

Yes. For all the reasons I have already put forth ad nauseam. John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973 ------ Original message------From: Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business Date: Wed, Jul 25, 2018 7:07 AMTo: Libertarian National Committee list;Cc: Caryn Ann Harlos;Subject:[Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2018-19: AGREE TO "JC" DECISIONS We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by *AUGUST 1, 2018* at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: *Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate.* You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting -- *In Liberty,* *Caryn Ann Harlos* Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org or Secretary(a)LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia(a)LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: *We defend your rights* *And oppose the use of force* *Taxation is theft* We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org or Secretary(a)LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia(a)LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft References 1. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org Yes. For all the reasons I have already put forth ad nauseam. John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell [1]217-412-5973 ------ Original message------ From: Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business Date: Wed, Jul 25, 2018 7:07 AM To: Libertarian National Committee list; Cc: Caryn Ann Harlos; Subject:[Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2018-19: AGREE TO "JC" DECISIONS We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by *AUGUST 1, 2018* at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: *Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate.* You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [2]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting -- *In Liberty,* *Caryn Ann Harlos* Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [3]Caryn.Ann.[4 ] Harlos(a)LP.org or[5] Secretary(a)LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[6] LPedia(a)LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: *We defend your rights* *And oppose the use of force* *Taxation is theft* We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by AUGUST 1, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Harlos, Longstreth, Merced, Phillips Motion: Move that the Libertarian National Committee agree to be bound by the decisions of the top-seven vote-getters for the Judicial Committee at the 2018 Convention as if they were elected in the normal course of convention business and follow the procedures and rules set forth in our Bylaws. It is acknowledged that this agreement is not binding upon any member or affiliate. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1][7]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2][8]Caryn.Ann.[9] Harlos(a)LP.org or[10] Secretary(a)LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[11] LPedia(a)LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft References 1. [12]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 2. mailto[13]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org References 1. tel:217-412-5973 2. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 3. http://Caryn.An/ 4. mailto: Harlos(a)LP.org 5. mailto: Secretary(a)LP.org. 6. mailto: LPedia(a)LP.org 7. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 8. http://Caryn.An/ 9. mailto: Harlos(a)LP.org 10. mailto: Secretary(a)LP.org. 11. mailto: LPedia(a)LP.org 12. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 13. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org

3 2

Re: [Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2018-12: INDEPENDENT AUDIT OF AT-LARGE VOTE RESULTS
by john.phillips＠lp.org 25 Jul '18

25 Jul '18

Yep. Though Richard put it a lot more politely than I did last time a similar issue came up with different participants. I also was involved in pushing the audits, particularly the JC audit, Richard made the motion for that one based on my concerns, which I appreciated, just dropped it when the acknowledge motion did not pass. We have plenty of things to argue about, take the crap elsewhere. We can always borrow a boxing ring in Phoenix and let people glove up if people need to work some shit out. John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973 ------ Original message------From: Richard Longstreth via Lnc-businessDate: Wed, Jul 25, 2018 9:21 AMTo: lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org;Cc: Richard Longstreth;Subject:Re: [Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2018-12: INDEPENDENT AUDIT OF AT-LARGE VOTE RESULTS Alicia, stop playing a victim. I admit I skimmed most of your message, but I have to destroy your perceived bias based on one line. You said "When I noted your call for recount wasn’t in both elections..." CAH didn't call for an audit. I did and I called for auditing both. Unless you think Caryn Ann somehow controls my independent actions and calls from my Regional Caucus you are not remembering the past correctly at all. And yes, at Large was a bigger concern to me initially because of the one vote margin so I only called for an audit there initially. After a few days, I also introduced auditing the second election as well, something you could have easily done previously if you thought a bias was in play. Honestly, I don't know what the source of the conflict is for you two, but Alicia, I'm consistently seeing a woe is me attitude from you and regular attacks on Caryn Ann and it needs to stop. CAH isn't innocent either. We all need to act like the professional leaders of the party we were elected to be. Nobody wants to read blocks of accusations or attacks any more. While we all have the freedom to post and share as we please, I'd urge all of the LNC to take pause before sending something like Alicia's message to the public via this email list. Richard On Wed, Jul 25, 2018, 07:29 Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business < lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: > Skimmed and skipped. > Not going to that dance Alicia. Continue solo if you wish. > -Caryn Ann > > On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 5:20 AM, Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business > <[1]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: > > Caryn Ann, > I see we have again reached the play-the-victim portion of the > script. > How rude of me to defend my actual words when they are being > misrepresented. Defense is now accused of being aggression and > hostility. > When I initially pointed out that it was unfair representation to > say I > would be supervising the audit, your first reaction was the > not-me-and-I-didn't-want-to-do-it bit. Later you expressed that > you do > actually agree with the mischaracterization, even after I pointed > out > it’s not what I said. You projected your complaints about the > first > tally onto a future audit by others. You continued to > re-characterize > my proposal that I, "sit in a corner and work on something else > while > they do their task" as "being involved", which sounds like > something > different. > I see Wayne Harlos' signature on the Colorado tally sheet in the > Secretary's race. I see Dr. Buchman's signature on the Utah > tally > sheet in this At-Large race in which he was a candidate. After > telling everyone else that EVH noticed that they had also > committed > lapses of judgment, you're now suggesting that I'm so toxic that > I > cannot even sit in the corner of the room, lest my presence > hypnotize > Nick's chosen independent auditors into failing to do their job, > but > you would be happy to be present instead, as if you were some > kind of > non-partisan here. > Don't forget that you were a nominator for Dr. Buchman. I presume > him > to be the candidate about whom you have publicly described as > having > been "screwed by this whole process", in the next breath calling > it a > "suspect election". You didn’t say all candidates were screwed > by the > process, just one particular candidate, as though he was entitled > to > win but he didn’t. That told me you were unhappy with the > result. > When I noted your call for recount wasn’t in both elections that > I > tabulated in which I was a candidate, only the one where you had > already expressed displeasure with the result, out came the > victim > card. You said I was attacking you, and ridiculously accused me > of > using a "shaming and silencing tactic", though 1 out of every 3 > emails > to this list is from you. > While I was spending many hours assembling more-than-requested > information, and giving you updates on my progress, I was accused > of > "ignoring" the situation. When you singled out Aaron with no > mention > of the others, we got the drama of, “I think the optic of this > make > Arvin's comments look like the height of civility.” Really? > Worse > than a guy saying school board shootings are a good idea? Worse > than > Arvin’s philosophies about 14-year-old girls? > You're not exactly a neutral party in this matter, and yet you > think > it's fine for you to be present for the next audit, but somehow > it’s a > “huge mis-step in judgment” for me to even sit in a corner and do > something else while others do the audit. > The comments you posted here about Aaron’s role also do not > accurately > portray the situation. I realize you haven’t had to actually do > the > job yet, so you haven’t experienced that time pressure to get the > data > assembled and announced. It feels like installing a roof during > a > hurricane. > I have manually tallied three conventions, including our two > largest, > with an unusually large number of candidates this year. The 2018 > At-Large race had 604 delegates voting for a whopping 36 > options. (In > 2016, only 418 delegates voted for 20 At-Large options.) > This year, while the tellers were still trying to double-check > the > At-Large tally sheets, we had to pause and distribute and collect > the > ballots on which 501 delegates voted for 22 Judicial Committee > candidates. I was running out of At-Large data to enter because > the > tellers were spread too thin by the overlapping elections. > To keep the process from completely stalling, and have a higher > chance > of getting results before adjournment, I pulled Aaron in to > assist, > plus a couple of more tellers. Aaron is a former auditor, and > his > brain is wired to find anomalies in a system. I knew he would do > the > job well, cleanly, and help train the other newcomers so we could > keep > the At-Large process moving. And he did. > Aaron worked with a partner. When they checked California’s > submission, right off the bat they realized that the number of > votes > written on the ballots was one more than the total on the tally > sheet. > When they realized the discrepancy impacted my vote total, Aaron > stepped back and asked two other tellers to verify it and have > them – > not him – make the change to the tally sheet and sign it. Aaron > also > insisted that several others present witness a recount of the > California ballots that had my name on it. > At that point NOBODY knew how close the race was going to > ultimately > be. I was only partially through data entry. Perhaps people > imagine > that I’m up there looking at the totals every few seconds so that > I > constantly know where it stands, but the push to get the job done > ASAP > means that all I can afford to think about is keeping the data > entry > moving and watching for any anomalies. Another teller was beside > me > for the duration of the data entry. > Regarding the “rumor” as you called it, I suspect someone just > wasn't > precise in their choice of words. It would require a time > machine for > the situation to have been, “…the vote for the last seat was a > tie > until Mr. Starr found an additional vote for Ms. Mattson in CA.” > That > phrasing could give the reader the impression that all the data > entry > was done, we knew it was a tie, and we went searching for a way > to > break the tie. That didn’t happen. Many people were standing > around > waiting for the data entry to be complete, and snapshots of my > screen > were taken within a few seconds of data entry being completed and > sorted into a ranking order to see just how close it was. > Had Aaron and his fellow teller not noticed that the California > ballots > contained one more vote than was on the tally sheet, when the > data > entry was LATER completed, the initially-reported results would > have > mistakenly been reported as a tie, and it would have been REALLY > awkward had this fact gone unnoticed until post-convention. > Instead, > it was noticed in the presence of, and was verified and corrected > by, > other tellers before the initially-reported results. > For most of a decade, I have been saying that we should move to > electronic voting. The delegates have previously rejected it, > leaving > me with no choice but to do my best to try to catch and fix the > errors > before the initial results. I have been pointing out how > error-susceptible our human-tallying elections are. I have been > educating about how difficult it is to get exact results with the > time > pressures, multi-tasking, noise levels, disruption levels, etc. > that > are experienced during the convention. I have argued against the > convention conducting other business during the votes because it > makes > it harder to get the really important tallying job done. > I wrote the proposal which became Convention Rule 10, adopted by > delegates to require tellers to double-check the state tallies, > and to > require the on-screen review of the tally spreadsheet (previously > that > step was often skipped just to save time). Though it still > doesn’t fix > everything, those things do increase the number of errors we > catch > onsite before the results are displayed. > For me to now be portrayed with such inflammatory rhetoric as > someone > who ran a “suspect election”, as someone making the party look > worse > than Arvin Vohra did, and now to have you taint the perception of > the > future audit with misrepresentations of my words…well, that’s > just a > special experience. I do not deserve that. > -Alicia > On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 4:05 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos > <[1][2]caryn.ann.harlos(a)lp.org> wrote: > Alicia, I am not going to engage the aggression here. Your > comment is > completely out of bounds on multiple levels and I ask that you > stop the > personal hostility. But you are free to make it, and I shall > decline > to engage further. All those allegedly are a smooth way to try > to call > me a liar. > I do respect you for all the reason I said in the past > (intelligence, > skill-set, competence). I do think being involved in this count > at all > both past and present is a huge mis-step in judgment. And I also > think > - and communicated to the persons that EVH pointed out - that > delegation chairs similarly situated demonstrated a mis-step in > judgment as well. And I do think you should step out of this > entire > process entirely. > PS: I don't think the member was entirely incorrect so I would > not say > that to them. The reason I was reluctant to share it is > precisely > because of this. It seems you want to keep making things > personal > between you and me. They are not. A political race is not > personal. > I never got personal with you or about you in my campaign, and I > don't > intend to start now. > -Caryn Ann > On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 4:35 PM, Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business > <[2][3]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: > Caryn Ann, > When you received this feedback from the anonymous member, > you > had the > opportunity to tell them, "That's not what she said. Go > back and > read > her post again." Instead you repeated the > misrepresentation, > with all > its implications, here on a public list to give it a broad > audience. > For someone who allegedly is not attacking me, and allegedly > has > respect for me, and allegedly "did not even want to pass > along", > ya > just flopped it right out there... Don't pretend that you > had an > obligation to do it. You're not fooling anyone with this > game. > -Alicia > On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 3:59 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos > <[1][3][4]caryn.ann.harlos(a)lp.org> wrote: > Alicia I am passing along directly what the member said. > That > member > reads the list and can decide if they think they were being > unfair. I > did not solicit this feedback and did not even want to pass > along > but > it is member feedback. > -Caryn Ann > On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 12:35 AM, Alicia Mattson via > Lnc-business > <[2][4][5]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: > CAH> A concerned member (no permission to share name) > wrote > me > and > inquired if any audit should be supervised by a > candidate. > Seriously? Do you think that's a fair way to portray > what I > proposed? > What I actually said was, "I can sit in a corner and > work on > something > else while they do their task, but if at some point > their > number > doesn't match mine, we can all take a look at it right > then > without > going back and forth via email." > I also said to Nick, "Phoenix is within that zone, and > you > could > personally supervise if you wish." > I suggested that I sit in a corner, and I invited Nick > to > supervise. > -Alicia > On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 2:26 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos > <[1][3][5][6]caryn.ann.harlos(a)lp.org> wrote: > A concerned member (no permission to share name) wrote > me > and > inquired > if any audit should be supervised by a candidate. > Since I agree with Alicia that the actual ballots are a > better > solution, if the Chair wishes it, I can make myself > available as > the > current Secretary to be personally present at any > audit. > I can then confer with Alicia about any issues found. > -Caryn Ann > On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 2:59 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos > <[2][4][6][7]caryn.ann.harlos(a)lp.org> wrote: > I will make those two changes thank you Alicia. > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 5:51 PM Alicia Mattson via > Lnc-business > > <[3][5][7][8]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: > Sorry for needing to send one more email on this subject, > however, it > has occurred to me that if the start/end dates in the > Secretary's > report are listed as 07/12/18 to 07/19/18, then the > footnote > that > I > wrote will make me sound like a person who can't subtract > 12 > from > 19. > I should have written the footnote to be more specific as > follows: > * Since the published vote period of 11:53 p.m. Pacific > on > 07/11/18 to > 11:59:59 p.m. Pacific on 07/19/18 resulted in a voting > period > which > exceeded 8 days, Ms. Mattson had expressed a belief that > the > end > date > should be changed from 7/19/18 to 7/18/18. During this > final > day > of > voting which is disputed, Mr. Redpath changed his vote > from > "no" > to > "yes". These reported results reflect the changed vote > during > the > disputed time period, but the outcome of the vote is not > impacted > by > the question of how to report this one vote. > -Alicia > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 1:55 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos > > <[1][4][6][8][9]caryn.ann.harlos(a)lp.org> wrote: > I added that note to the tally sheet and will > include > that > in my > Secretary's Report. > -Caryn Ann > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 2:44 PM, Alicia Mattson > via > Lnc-business > > <[2][5][7][9][10]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: > Since these results include a vote change during the > final > day, I > do > think these results need to be footnoted as follows: > * Since the published ending time of the ballot > resulted > in > a > voting > period which exceeded 8 days, Ms. Mattson had > expressed > a > belief > that > the end date should be changed from 7/19/18 to > 7/18/18. > During > this > final day of voting which is disputed, Mr. Redpath > changed > his > vote > from "no" to "yes". These reported results reflect > the > changed > vote > during the disputed time period, but the outcome of > the > vote > is > not > impacted by the question of how to report this one > vote. > If they're footnoted, given that it doesn't impact > the > result, I > won't > feel a need to raise a point of order about the > reported > results > and > ask the LNC to make a decision on how to report that > vote > change. > -Alicia > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 12:18 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos > via > Lnc-business > > <[1][3][6][8][10][11]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> > wrote: > Voting has ENDED for the email ballot TITLE > Voting > "aye": > Bilyeu, > Hagan, Harlos, Hewitt, Longstreth, Lyons, > Mattson, > Merced, > Phillips, > Redpath, Smith Voting "nay": > Bishop-Henchman, > Goldstein, Van > Horn > Express Abstention: Lark, Nekhaila With a > final > vote > tally > of > 11-3-2, > the motion PASSES. Note: Sarwark did not > vote. You > can > keep > track > of > the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: > > [1][2][4][7][9][11][12]https://tinyur > [13]l.com/lncvoting > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 7:30 AM, William > Redpath > via > Lnc-business > <[2][3][5][8][10][12][14]lnc- > business(a)hq.lp.org> > wrote: > I will change my vote on an LNC > At-Large > voting > audit > to > Yes. > Bill > Redpath > On 2018-07-19 02:11, Alicia Mattson via > Lnc-business > wrote: > I vote yes. > -Alicia > On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 11:53 PM, > Caryn > Ann > Harlos > via > Lnc-business > <[1][3][4][6][9][11][13]lnc-busine > > [15]ss(a)hq.lp.org> > wrote: > We have an electronic mail ballot. > Votes > are > due > to the > LNC-Business > list by July 19, 2018 at 11:59:59pm > Pacific > time. > Co-Sponsors: > Bowden, > Harlos, Longstreth, Mattson > Motion: Move that the LNC would have > an > audit > of > the At > Large > ballots > done by two independent auditors > appointed > by > the > Chair, ie > someone not > in the race. You can keep track of > the > Secretary's > manual > tally > of > votes here: > > [1][2][4][5][7][10][12][14][16]https://tinyurl.co > m/lncvoting > -- > -- > In Liberty, > Caryn Ann Harlos > Libertarian Party and > Libertarian > National > Committee > Secretary > - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org > or > Secretary(a)LP.org. > Chair, LP Historical > Preservation > Committee - > LPedia(a)LP.org > A haiku to the Statement of > Principles: > We defend your rights > And oppose the use of force > Taxation is theft > References > 1. > [3][5][6][8][11][13][15][17]https://tinyur > [16][18]l.co > m/lncvoting > 2. > mailto:[4]Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP. > org > References > 1. mailto:[6][7][9][12][14]lnc- > busine > [17][19]ss(a)hq.lp.org > 2. > [7][8][10][13][15][18][20]https://tiny > url. > com/lncvoting > 3. > [8][9][11][14][16][19][21]https://tiny > url. > com/lncvoting > 4. mailto:[9]Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP. > org > -- > -- > In Liberty, > Caryn Ann Harlos > Libertarian Party and Libertarian > National > Committee > Secretary > - [10]Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org or > Secretary(a)LP.org. > Chair, LP Historical Preservation > Committee - > LPedia(a)LP.org > A haiku to the Statement of Principles: > We defend your rights > And oppose the use of force > Taxation is theft > -- > -- > In Liberty, > Caryn Ann Harlos > Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary > - [20]Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org or Secretary(a)LP.org. > Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia(a)LP.org > A haiku to the Statement of Principles: > We defend your rights > And oppose the use of force > Taxation is theft > References > 1. mailto:[22]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 2. mailto:[23]lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 3. mailto:[24]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 4. mailto:[25]lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 5. mailto:[26]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 6. mailto:[27]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 7. mailto:[28]lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 8. mailto:[29]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 9. mailto:[30]lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 10. mailto:[31]lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 11. [32]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting > 12. mailto:[33]lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 13. mailto:[34]lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 14. [35]https://tinyurl.co/ > 15. [36]https://tinyur/ > 16. [37]http://l.co/ > 17. mailto:[38]ss@hq.lp.org > 18. [39]https://tinyurl/ > 19. [40]https://tinyurl/ > 20. mailto:[41]Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org > > -- > -- > In Liberty, > Caryn Ann Harlos > Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary > - [42]Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org or Secretary(a)LP.org. > Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia(a)LP.org > A haiku to the Statement of Principles: > We defend your rights > And oppose the use of force > Taxation is theft > > References > > 1. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 2. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 3. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 4. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 5. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 6. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 7. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 8. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 9. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 10. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 11. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 12. https://tinyur/ > 13. http://l.com/lncvoting > 14. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 15. mailto:ss@hq.lp.org > 16. https://tinyurl.co/ > 17. https://tinyur/ > 18. http://l.co/ > 19. mailto:ss@hq.lp.org > 20. https://tiny/ > 21. https://tiny/ > 22. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 23. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 24. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 25. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 26. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 27. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 28. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 29. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 30. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 31. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 32. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting > 33. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 34. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 35. https://tinyurl.co/ > 36. https://tinyur/ > 37. http://l.co/ > 38. mailto:ss@hq.lp.org > 39. https://tinyurl/ > 40. https://tinyurl/ > 41. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org > 42. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org > -- Richard Longstreth Region 1 Representative (AK, AZ, CO, KS, MT, NM, OR, HI, UT, WA, WY) Libertarian National Committee richard.longstreth(a)lp.org 931.538.9300 Alicia, stop playing a victim. I admit I skimmed most of your message, but I have to destroy your perceived bias based on one line. You said "When I noted your call for recount wasn’t in both elections..." CAH didn't call for an audit. I did and I called for auditing both. Unless you think Caryn Ann somehow controls my independent actions and calls from my Regional Caucus you are not remembering the past correctly at all. And yes, at Large was a bigger concern to me initially because of the one vote margin so I only called for an audit there initially. After a few days, I also introduced auditing the second election as well, something you could have easily done previously if you thought a bias was in play. Honestly, I don't know what the source of the conflict is for you two, but Alicia, I'm consistently seeing a woe is me attitude from you and regular attacks on Caryn Ann and it needs to stop. CAH isn't innocent either. We all need to act like the professional leaders of the party we were elected to be. Nobody wants to read blocks of accusations or attacks any more. While we all have the freedom to post and share as we please, I'd urge all of the LNC to take pause before sending something like Alicia's message to the public via this email list. Richard On Wed, Jul 25, 2018, 07:29 Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <[1]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: Skimmed and skipped. Not going to that dance Alicia. Continue solo if you wish. -Caryn Ann On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 5:20 AM, Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business <[1][2]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: Caryn Ann, I see we have again reached the play-the-victim portion of the script. How rude of me to defend my actual words when they are being misrepresented. Defense is now accused of being aggression and hostility. When I initially pointed out that it was unfair representation to say I would be supervising the audit, your first reaction was the not-me-and-I-didn't-want-to-do-it bit. Later you expressed that you do actually agree with the mischaracterization, even after I pointed out it’s not what I said. You projected your complaints about the first tally onto a future audit by others. You continued to re-characterize my proposal that I, "sit in a corner and work on something else while they do their task" as "being involved", which sounds like something different. I see Wayne Harlos' signature on the Colorado tally sheet in the Secretary's race. I see Dr. Buchman's signature on the Utah tally sheet in this At-Large race in which he was a candidate. After telling everyone else that EVH noticed that they had also committed lapses of judgment, you're now suggesting that I'm so toxic that I cannot even sit in the corner of the room, lest my presence hypnotize Nick's chosen independent auditors into failing to do their job, but you would be happy to be present instead, as if you were some kind of non-partisan here. Don't forget that you were a nominator for Dr. Buchman. I presume him to be the candidate about whom you have publicly described as having been "screwed by this whole process", in the next breath calling it a "suspect election". You didn’t say all candidates were screwed by the process, just one particular candidate, as though he was entitled to win but he didn’t. That told me you were unhappy with the result. When I noted your call for recount wasn’t in both elections that I tabulated in which I was a candidate, only the one where you had already expressed displeasure with the result, out came the victim card. You said I was attacking you, and ridiculously accused me of using a "shaming and silencing tactic", though 1 out of every 3 emails to this list is from you. While I was spending many hours assembling more-than-requested information, and giving you updates on my progress, I was accused of "ignoring" the situation. When you singled out Aaron with no mention of the others, we got the drama of, “I think the optic of this make Arvin's comments look like the height of civility.” Really? Worse than a guy saying school board shootings are a good idea? Worse than Arvin’s philosophies about 14-year-old girls? You're not exactly a neutral party in this matter, and yet you think it's fine for you to be present for the next audit, but somehow it’s a “huge mis-step in judgment” for me to even sit in a corner and do something else while others do the audit. The comments you posted here about Aaron’s role also do not accurately portray the situation. I realize you haven’t had to actually do the job yet, so you haven’t experienced that time pressure to get the data assembled and announced. It feels like installing a roof during a hurricane. I have manually tallied three conventions, including our two largest, with an unusually large number of candidates this year. The 2018 At-Large race had 604 delegates voting for a whopping 36 options. (In 2016, only 418 delegates voted for 20 At-Large options.) This year, while the tellers were still trying to double-check the At-Large tally sheets, we had to pause and distribute and collect the ballots on which 501 delegates voted for 22 Judicial Committee candidates. I was running out of At-Large data to enter because the tellers were spread too thin by the overlapping elections. To keep the process from completely stalling, and have a higher chance of getting results before adjournment, I pulled Aaron in to assist, plus a couple of more tellers. Aaron is a former auditor, and his brain is wired to find anomalies in a system. I knew he would do the job well, cleanly, and help train the other newcomers so we could keep the At-Large process moving. And he did. Aaron worked with a partner. When they checked California’s submission, right off the bat they realized that the number of votes written on the ballots was one more than the total on the tally sheet. When they realized the discrepancy impacted my vote total, Aaron stepped back and asked two other tellers to verify it and have them – not him – make the change to the tally sheet and sign it. Aaron also insisted that several others present witness a recount of the California ballots that had my name on it. At that point NOBODY knew how close the race was going to ultimately be. I was only partially through data entry. Perhaps people imagine that I’m up there looking at the totals every few seconds so that I constantly know where it stands, but the push to get the job done ASAP means that all I can afford to think about is keeping the data entry moving and watching for any anomalies. Another teller was beside me for the duration of the data entry. Regarding the “rumor” as you called it, I suspect someone just wasn't precise in their choice of words. It would require a time machine for the situation to have been, “…the vote for the last seat was a tie until Mr. Starr found an additional vote for Ms. Mattson in CA.” That phrasing could give the reader the impression that all the data entry was done, we knew it was a tie, and we went searching for a way to break the tie. That didn’t happen. Many people were standing around waiting for the data entry to be complete, and snapshots of my screen were taken within a few seconds of data entry being completed and sorted into a ranking order to see just how close it was. Had Aaron and his fellow teller not noticed that the California ballots contained one more vote than was on the tally sheet, when the data entry was LATER completed, the initially-reported results would have mistakenly been reported as a tie, and it would have been REALLY awkward had this fact gone unnoticed until post-convention. Instead, it was noticed in the presence of, and was verified and corrected by, other tellers before the initially-reported results. For most of a decade, I have been saying that we should move to electronic voting. The delegates have previously rejected it, leaving me with no choice but to do my best to try to catch and fix the errors before the initial results. I have been pointing out how error-susceptible our human-tallying elections are. I have been educating about how difficult it is to get exact results with the time pressures, multi-tasking, noise levels, disruption levels, etc. that are experienced during the convention. I have argued against the convention conducting other business during the votes because it makes it harder to get the really important tallying job done. I wrote the proposal which became Convention Rule 10, adopted by delegates to require tellers to double-check the state tallies, and to require the on-screen review of the tally spreadsheet (previously that step was often skipped just to save time). Though it still doesn’t fix everything, those things do increase the number of errors we catch onsite before the results are displayed. For me to now be portrayed with such inflammatory rhetoric as someone who ran a “suspect election”, as someone making the party look worse than Arvin Vohra did, and now to have you taint the perception of the future audit with misrepresentations of my words…well, that’s just a special experience. I do not deserve that. -Alicia On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 4:05 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <[1][2][3]caryn.ann.harlos(a)lp.org> wrote: Alicia, I am not going to engage the aggression here. Your comment is completely out of bounds on multiple levels and I ask that you stop the personal hostility. But you are free to make it, and I shall decline to engage further. All those allegedly are a smooth way to try to call me a liar. I do respect you for all the reason I said in the past (intelligence, skill-set, competence). I do think being involved in this count at all both past and present is a huge mis-step in judgment. And I also think - and communicated to the persons that EVH pointed out - that delegation chairs similarly situated demonstrated a mis-step in judgment as well. And I do think you should step out of this entire process entirely. PS: I don't think the member was entirely incorrect so I would not say that to them. The reason I was reluctant to share it is precisely because of this. It seems you want to keep making things personal between you and me. They are not. A political race is not personal. I never got personal with you or about you in my campaign, and I don't intend to start now. -Caryn Ann On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 4:35 PM, Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business <[2][3][4]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: Caryn Ann, When you received this feedback from the anonymous member, you had the opportunity to tell them, "That's not what she said. Go back and read her post again." Instead you repeated the misrepresentation, with all its implications, here on a public list to give it a broad audience. For someone who allegedly is not attacking me, and allegedly has respect for me, and allegedly "did not even want to pass along", ya just flopped it right out there... Don't pretend that you had an obligation to do it. You're not fooling anyone with this game. -Alicia On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 3:59 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <[1][3][4][5]caryn.ann.harlos(a)lp.org> wrote: Alicia I am passing along directly what the member said. That member reads the list and can decide if they think they were being unfair. I did not solicit this feedback and did not even want to pass along but it is member feedback. -Caryn Ann On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 12:35 AM, Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business <[2][4][5][6]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: CAH> A concerned member (no permission to share name) wrote me and inquired if any audit should be supervised by a candidate. Seriously? Do you think that's a fair way to portray what I proposed? What I actually said was, "I can sit in a corner and work on something else while they do their task, but if at some point their number doesn't match mine, we can all take a look at it right then without going back and forth via email." I also said to Nick, "Phoenix is within that zone, and you could personally supervise if you wish." I suggested that I sit in a corner, and I invited Nick to supervise. -Alicia On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 2:26 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <[1][3][5][6][7]caryn.ann.harlos(a)lp.org> wrote: A concerned member (no permission to share name) wrote me and inquired if any audit should be supervised by a candidate. Since I agree with Alicia that the actual ballots are a better solution, if the Chair wishes it, I can make myself available as the current Secretary to be personally present at any audit. I can then confer with Alicia about any issues found. -Caryn Ann On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 2:59 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <[2][4][6][7][8]caryn.ann.harlos(a)lp.org> wrote: I will make those two changes thank you Alicia. On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 5:51 PM Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business <[3][5][7][8][9]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: Sorry for needing to send one more email on this subject, however, it has occurred to me that if the start/end dates in the Secretary's report are listed as 07/12/18 to 07/19/18, then the footnote that I wrote will make me sound like a person who can't subtract 12 from 19. I should have written the footnote to be more specific as follows: * Since the published vote period of 11:53 p.m. Pacific on 07/11/18 to 11:59:59 p.m. Pacific on 07/19/18 resulted in a voting period which exceeded 8 days, Ms. Mattson had expressed a belief that the end date should be changed from 7/19/18 to 7/18/18. During this final day of voting which is disputed, Mr. Redpath changed his vote from "no" to "yes". These reported results reflect the changed vote during the disputed time period, but the outcome of the vote is not impacted by the question of how to report this one vote. -Alicia On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 1:55 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <[1][4][6][8][9][10]caryn.ann.harlos(a)lp.org> wrote: I added that note to the tally sheet and will include that in my Secretary's Report. -Caryn Ann On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 2:44 PM, Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business <[2][5][7][9][10][11]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: Since these results include a vote change during the final day, I do think these results need to be footnoted as follows: * Since the published ending time of the ballot resulted in a voting period which exceeded 8 days, Ms. Mattson had expressed a belief that the end date should be changed from 7/19/18 to 7/18/18. During this final day of voting which is disputed, Mr. Redpath changed his vote from "no" to "yes". These reported results reflect the changed vote during the disputed time period, but the outcome of the vote is not impacted by the question of how to report this one vote. If they're footnoted, given that it doesn't impact the result, I won't feel a need to raise a point of order about the reported results and ask the LNC to make a decision on how to report that vote change. -Alicia On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 12:18 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <[1][3][6][8][10][11][12]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: Voting has ENDED for the email ballot TITLE Voting "aye": Bilyeu, Hagan, Harlos, Hewitt, Longstreth, Lyons, Mattson, Merced, Phillips, Redpath, Smith Voting "nay": Bishop-Henchman, Goldstein, Van Horn Express Abstention: Lark, Nekhaila With a final vote tally of 11-3-2, the motion PASSES. Note: Sarwark did not vote. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1][2][4][7][9][11][12][13]https://tinyur [13][14]l.com/lncvoting On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 7:30 AM, William Redpath via Lnc-business <[2][3][5][8][10][12][14]lnc- [15]business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: I will change my vote on an LNC At-Large voting audit to Yes. Bill Redpath On 2018-07-19 02:11, Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business wrote: I vote yes. -Alicia On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 11:53 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <[1][3][4][6][9][11][13]lnc-busine [15][16]ss(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by July 19, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Bowden, Harlos, Longstreth, Mattson Motion: Move that the LNC would have an audit of the At Large ballots done by two independent auditors appointed by the Chair, ie someone not in the race. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1][2][4][5][7][10][12][14][16][17]https://tinyurl.co m/lncvoting -- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2]Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org or Secretary(a)LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia(a)LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft References 1. [3][5][6][8][11][13][15][17][18]https://tinyur [16][18][19]l.co m/lncvoting 2. mailto:[4]Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP. org References 1. mailto:[6][7][9][12][14]lnc- busine [17][19][20]ss(a)hq.lp.org 2. [7][8][10][13][15][18][20][21]https://tiny url. com/lncvoting 3. [8][9][11][14][16][19][21][22]https://tiny url. com/lncvoting 4. mailto:[9]Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP. org -- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [10]Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org or Secretary(a)LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia(a)LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft -- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [20]Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org or Secretary(a)LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia(a)LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft References 1. mailto:[22][23]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 2. mailto:[23][24]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 3. mailto:[24][25]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 4. mailto:[25][26]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 5. mailto:[26][27]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 6. mailto:[27][28]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 7. mailto:[28][29]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 8. mailto:[29][30]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 9. mailto:[30][31]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 10. mailto:[31][32]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 11. [32][33]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 12. mailto:[33][34]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 13. mailto:[34][35]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 14. [35][36]https://tinyurl.co/ 15. [36][37]https://tinyur/ 16. [37][38]http://l.co/ 17. mailto:[38][39]ss@hq.lp.org 18. [39][40]https://tinyurl/ 19. [40][41]https://tinyurl/ 20. mailto:[41]Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org -- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [42]Caryn.Ann. Harlos(a)LP.org or Secretary(a)LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - LPedia(a)LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft References 1. mailto:[42]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 2. mailto:[43]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 3. mailto:[44]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 4. mailto:[45]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 5. mailto:[46]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 6. mailto:[47]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 7. mailto:[48]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 8. mailto:[49]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 9. mailto:[50]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 10. mailto:[51]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 11. mailto:[52]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 12. [53]https://tinyur/ 13. [54]http://l.com/lncvoting 14. mailto:[55]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 15. mailto:[56]ss@hq.lp.org 16. [57]https://tinyurl.co/ 17. [58]https://tinyur/ 18. [59]http://l.co/ 19. mailto:[60]ss@hq.lp.org 20. [61]https://tiny/ 21. [62]https://tiny/ 22. mailto:[63]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 23. mailto:[64]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 24. mailto:[65]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 25. mailto:[66]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 26. mailto:[67]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 27. mailto:[68]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 28. mailto:[69]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 29. mailto:[70]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 30. mailto:[71]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 31. mailto:[72]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 32. [73]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 33. mailto:[74]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 34. mailto:[75]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 35. [76]https://tinyurl.co/ 36. [77]https://tinyur/ 37. [78]http://l.co/ 38. mailto:[79]ss@hq.lp.org 39. [80]https://tinyurl/ 40. [81]https://tinyurl/ 41. mailto:[82]Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org 42. mailto:[83]Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org -- Richard Longstreth Region 1 Representative (AK, AZ, CO, KS, MT, NM, OR, HI, UT, WA, WY) Libertarian National Committee [84]richard.longstreth(a)lp.org 931.538.9300 References 1. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 2. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 3. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 4. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 5. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 6. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 7. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 8. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 9. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 10. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 11. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 12. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 13. https://tinyur/ 14. http://l.com/lncvoting 15. mailto:business@hq.lp.org 16. mailto:ss@hq.lp.org 17. https://tinyurl.co/ 18. https://tinyur/ 19. http://l.co/ 20. mailto:ss@hq.lp.org 21. https://tiny/ 22. https://tiny/ 23. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 24. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 25. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 26. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 27. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 28. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 29. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 30. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 31. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 32. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 33. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 34. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 35. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 36. https://tinyurl.co/ 37. https://tinyur/ 38. http://l.co/ 39. mailto:ss@hq.lp.org 40. https://tinyurl/ 41. https://tinyurl/ 42. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 43. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 44. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 45. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 46. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 47. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 48. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 49. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 50. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 51. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 52. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 53. https://tinyur/ 54. http://l.com/lncvoting 55. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 56. mailto:ss@hq.lp.org 57. https://tinyurl.co/ 58. https://tinyur/ 59. http://l.co/ 60. mailto:ss@hq.lp.org 61. https://tiny/ 62. https://tiny/ 63. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 64. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 65. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 66. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 67. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 68. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 69. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 70. mailto:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 71. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 72. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 73. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 74. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 75. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 76. https://tinyurl.co/ 77. https://tinyur/ 78. http://l.co/ 79. mailto:ss@hq.lp.org 80. https://tinyurl/ 81. https://tinyurl/ 82. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org 83. mailto:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org 84. mailto:richard.longstreth@lp.org Yep. Though Richard put it a lot more politely than I did last time a similar issue came up with different participants. I also was involved in pushing the audits, particularly the JC audit, Richard made the motion for that one based on my concerns, which I appreciated, just dropped it when the acknowledge motion did not pass. We have plenty of things to argue about, take the crap elsewhere. We can always borrow a boxing ring in Phoenix and let people glove up if people need to work some shit out. John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell [1]217-412-5973 ------ Original message------ From: Richard Longstreth via Lnc-business Date: Wed, Jul 25, 2018 9:21 AM To: [2]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org; Cc: Richard Longstreth; Subject:Re: [Lnc-business] Email Ballot 2018-12: INDEPENDENT AUDIT OF AT-LARGE VOTE RESULTS Alicia, stop playing a victim. I admit I skimmed most of your message, but I have to destroy your perceived bias based on one line. You said "When I noted your call for recount wasn’t in both elections..." CAH didn't call for an audit. I did and I called for auditing both. Unless you think Caryn Ann somehow controls my independent actions and calls from my Regional Caucus you are not remembering the past correctly at all. And yes, at Large was a bigger concern to me initially because of the one vote margin so I only called for an audit there initially. After a few days, I also introduced auditing the second election as well, something you could have easily done previously if you thought a bias was in play. Honestly, I don't know what the source of the conflict is for you two, but Alicia, I'm consistently seeing a woe is me attitude from you and regular attacks on Caryn Ann and it needs to stop. CAH isn't innocent either. We all need to act like the professional leaders of the party we were elected to be. Nobody wants to read blocks of accusations or attacks any more. While we all have the freedom to post and share as we please, I'd urge all of the LNC to take pause before sending something like Alicia's message to the public via this email list. Richard On Wed, Jul 25, 2018, 07:29 Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <[3] lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: > Skimmed and skipped. > Not going to that dance Alicia. Continue solo if you wish. > -Caryn Ann > > On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 5:20 AM, Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business > <[1[4]]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: > > Caryn Ann, > I see we have again reached the play-the-victim portion of the > script. > How rude of me to defend my actual words when they are being > misrepresented. Defense is now accused of being aggression and > hostility. > When I initially pointed out that it was unfair representation to > say I > would be supervising the audit, your first reaction was the > not-me-and-I-didn't-want-to-do-it bit. Later you expressed that > you do > actually agree with the mischaracterization, even after I pointed > out > it’s not what I said. You projected your complaints about the > first > tally onto a future audit by others. You continued to > re-characterize > my proposal that I, "sit in a corner and work on something else > while > they do their task" as "being involved", which sounds like > something > different. > I see Wayne Harlos' signature on the Colorado tally sheet in the > Secretary's race. I see Dr. Buchman's signature on the Utah > tally > sheet in this At-Large race in which he was a candidate. After > telling everyone else that EVH noticed that they had also > committed > lapses of judgment, you're now suggesting that I'm so toxic that > I > cannot even sit in the corner of the room, lest my presence > hypnotize > Nick's chosen independent auditors into failing to do their job, > but > you would be happy to be present instead, as if you were some > kind of > non-partisan here. > Don't forget that you were a nominator for Dr. Buchman. I presume > him > to be the candidate about whom you have publicly described as > having > been "screwed by this whole process", in the next breath calling > it a > "suspect election". You didn’t say all candidates were screwed > by the > process, just one particular candidate, as though he was entitled > to > win but he didn’t. That told me you were unhappy with the > result. > When I noted your call for recount wasn’t in both elections that > I > tabulated in which I was a candidate, only the one where you had > already expressed displeasure with the result, out came the > victim > card. You said I was attacking you, and ridiculously accused me > of > using a "shaming and silencing tactic", though 1 out of every 3 > emails > to this list is from you. > While I was spending many hours assembling more-than-requested > information, and giving you updates on my progress, I was accused > of > "ignoring" the situation. When you singled out Aaron with no > mention > of the others, we got the drama of, “I think the optic of this > make > Arvin's comments look like the height of civility.” Really? > Worse > than a guy saying school board shootings are a good idea? Worse > than > Arvin’s philosophies about 14-year-old girls? > You're not exactly a neutral party in this matter, and yet you > think > it's fine for you to be present for the next audit, but somehow > it’s a > “huge mis-step in judgment” for me to even sit in a corner and do > something else while others do the audit. > The comments you posted here about Aaron’s role also do not > accurately > portray the situation. I realize you haven’t had to actually do > the > job yet, so you haven’t experienced that time pressure to get the > data > assembled and announced. It feels like installing a roof during > a > hurricane. > I have manually tallied three conventions, including our two > largest, > with an unusually large number of candidates this year. The 2018 > At-Large race had 604 delegates voting for a whopping 36 > options. (In > 2016, only 418 delegates voted for 20 At-Large options.) > This year, while the tellers were still trying to double-check > the > At-Large tally sheets, we had to pause and distribute and collect > the > ballots on which 501 delegates voted for 22 Judicial Committee > candidates. I was running out of At-Large data to enter because > the > tellers were spread too thin by the overlapping elections. > To keep the process from completely stalling, and have a higher > chance > of getting results before adjournment, I pulled Aaron in to > assist, > plus a couple of more tellers. Aaron is a former auditor, and > his > brain is wired to find anomalies in a system. I knew he would do > the > job well, cleanly, and help train the other newcomers so we could > keep > the At-Large process moving. And he did. > Aaron worked with a partner. When they checked California’s > submission, right off the bat they realized that the number of > votes > written on the ballots was one more than the total on the tally > sheet. > When they realized the discrepancy impacted my vote total, Aaron > stepped back and asked two other tellers to verify it and have > them – > not him – make the change to the tally sheet and sign it. Aaron > also > insisted that several others present witness a recount of the > California ballots that had my name on it. > At that point NOBODY knew how close the race was going to > ultimately > be. I was only partially through data entry. Perhaps people > imagine > that I’m up there looking at the totals every few seconds so that > I > constantly know where it stands, but the push to get the job done > ASAP > means that all I can afford to think about is keeping the data > entry > moving and watching for any anomalies. Another teller was beside > me > for the duration of the data entry. > Regarding the “rumor” as you called it, I suspect someone just > wasn't > precise in their choice of words. It would require a time > machine for > the situation to have been, “…the vote for the last seat was a > tie > until Mr. Starr found an additional vote for Ms. Mattson in CA.” > That > phrasing could give the reader the impression that all the data > entry > was done, we knew it was a tie, and we went searching for a way > to > break the tie. That didn’t happen. Many people were standing > around > waiting for the data entry to be complete, and snapshots of my > screen > were taken within a few seconds of data entry being completed and > sorted into a ranking order to see just how close it was. > Had Aaron and his fellow teller not noticed that the California > ballots > contained one more vote than was on the tally sheet, when the > data > entry was LATER completed, the initially-reported results would > have > mistakenly been reported as a tie, and it would have been REALLY > awkward had this fact gone unnoticed until post-convention. > Instead, > it was noticed in the presence of, and was verified and corrected > by, > other tellers before the initially-reported results. > For most of a decade, I have been saying that we should move to > electronic voting. The delegates have previously rejected it, > leaving > me with no choice but to do my best to try to catch and fix the > errors > before the initial results. I have been pointing out how > error-susceptible our human-tallying elections are. I have been > educating about how difficult it is to get exact results with the > time > pressures, multi-tasking, noise levels, disruption levels, etc. > that > are experienced during the convention. I have argued against the > convention conducting other business during the votes because it > makes > it harder to get the really important tallying job done. > I wrote the proposal which became Convention Rule 10, adopted by > delegates to require tellers to double-check the state tallies, > and to > require the on-screen review of the tally spreadsheet (previously > that > step was often skipped just to save time). Though it still > doesn’t fix > everything, those things do increase the number of errors we > catch > onsite before the results are displayed. > For me to now be portrayed with such inflammatory rhetoric as > someone > who ran a “suspect election”, as someone making the party look > worse > than Arvin Vohra did, and now to have you taint the perception of > the > future audit with misrepresentations of my words…well, that’s > just a > special experience. I do not deserve that. > -Alicia > On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 4:05 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos > <[1][2[5]]caryn.ann.harlos(a)lp.org> wrote: > Alicia, I am not going to engage the aggression here. Your > comment is > completely out of bounds on multiple levels and I ask that you > stop the > personal hostility. But you are free to make it, and I shall > decline > to engage further. All those allegedly are a smooth way to try > to call > me a liar. > I do respect you for all the reason I said in the past > (intelligence, > skill-set, competence). I do think being involved in this count > at all > both past and present is a huge mis-step in judgment. And I also > think > - and communicated to the persons that EVH pointed out - that > delegation chairs similarly situated demonstrated a mis-step in > judgment as well. And I do think you should step out of this > entire > process entirely. > PS: I don't think the member was entirely incorrect so I would > not say > that to them. The reason I was reluctant to share it is > precisely > because of this. It seems you want to keep making things > personal > between you and me. They are not. A political race is not > personal. > I never got personal with you or about you in my campaign, and I > don't > intend to start now. > -Caryn Ann > On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 4:35 PM, Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business > <[2][3[6]]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: > Caryn Ann, > When you received this feedback from the anonymous member, > you > had the > opportunity to tell them, "That's not what she said. Go > back and > read > her post again." Instead you repeated the > misrepresentation, > with all > its implications, here on a public list to give it a broad > audience. > For someone who allegedly is not attacking me, and allegedly > has > respect for me, and allegedly "did not even want to pass > along", > ya > just flopped it right out there... Don't pretend that you > had an > obligation to do it. You're not fooling anyone with this > game. > -Alicia > On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 3:59 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos > <[1][3][4[7]]caryn.ann.harlos(a)lp.org> wrote: > Alicia I am passing along directly what the member said. > That > member > reads the list and can decide if they think they were being > unfair. I > did not solicit this feedback and did not even want to pass > along > but > it is member feedback. > -Caryn Ann > On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 12:35 AM, Alicia Mattson via > Lnc-business > <[2][4][5[8]]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: > CAH> A concerned member (no permission to share name) > wrote > me > and > inquired if any audit should be supervised by a > candidate. > Seriously? Do you think that's a fair way to portray > what I > proposed? > What I actually said was, "I can sit in a corner and > work on > something > else while they do their task, but if at some point > their > number > doesn't match mine, we can all take a look at it right > then > without > going back and forth via email." > I also said to Nick, "Phoenix is within that zone, and > you > could > personally supervise if you wish." > I suggested that I sit in a corner, and I invited Nick > to > supervise. > -Alicia > On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 2:26 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos > <[1][3][5][6[9]]caryn.ann.harlos(a)lp.org> wrote: > A concerned member (no permission to share name) wrote > me > and > inquired > if any audit should be supervised by a candidate. > Since I agree with Alicia that the actual ballots are a > better > solution, if the Chair wishes it, I can make myself > available as > the > current Secretary to be personally present at any > audit. > I can then confer with Alicia about any issues found. > -Caryn Ann > On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 2:59 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos > <[2][4][6][7[10]]caryn.ann.harlos(a)lp.org> wrote: > I will make those two changes thank you Alicia. > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 5:51 PM Alicia Mattson via > Lnc-business > > <[3][5][7][8[11]]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: > Sorry for needing to send one more email on this subject, > however, it > has occurred to me that if the start/end dates in the > Secretary's > report are listed as 07/12/18 to 07/19/18, then the > footnote > that > I > wrote will make me sound like a person who can't subtract > 12 > from > 19. > I should have written the footnote to be more specific as > follows: > * Since the published vote period of 11:53 p.m. Pacific > on > 07/11/18 to > 11:59:59 p.m. Pacific on 07/19/18 resulted in a voting > period > which > exceeded 8 days, Ms. Mattson had expressed a belief that > the > end > date > should be changed from 7/19/18 to 7/18/18. During this > final > day > of > voting which is disputed, Mr. Redpath changed his vote > from > "no" > to > "yes". These reported results reflect the changed vote > during > the > disputed time period, but the outcome of the vote is not > impacted > by > the question of how to report this one vote. > -Alicia > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 1:55 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos > > <[1][4][6][8][9[12]]caryn.ann.harlos(a)lp.org> wrote: > I added that note to the tally sheet and will > include > that > in my > Secretary's Report. > -Caryn Ann > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 2:44 PM, Alicia Mattson > via > Lnc-business > > <[2][5][7][9][10[13]]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: > Since these results include a vote change during the > final > day, I > do > think these results need to be footnoted as follows: > * Since the published ending time of the ballot > resulted > in > a > voting > period which exceeded 8 days, Ms. Mattson had > expressed > a > belief > that > the end date should be changed from 7/19/18 to > 7/18/18. > During > this > final day of voting which is disputed, Mr. Redpath > changed > his > vote > from "no" to "yes". These reported results reflect > the > changed > vote > during the disputed time period, but the outcome of > the > vote > is > not > impacted by the question of how to report this one > vote. > If they're footnoted, given that it doesn't impact > the > result, I > won't > feel a need to raise a point of order about the > reported > results > and > ask the LNC to make a decision on how to report that > vote > change. > -Alicia > On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 12:18 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos > via > Lnc-business > > <[1][3][6][8][10][11[14]]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> > wrote: > Voting has ENDED for the email ballot TITLE > Voting > "aye": > Bilyeu, > Hagan, Harlos, Hewitt, Longstreth, Lyons, > Mattson, > Merced, > Phillips, > Redpath, Smith Voting "nay": > Bishop-Henchman, > Goldstein, Van > Horn > Express Abstention: Lark, Nekhaila With a > final > vote > tally > of > 11-3-2, > the motion PASSES. Note: Sarwark did not > vote. You > can > keep > track > of > the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: > > [1][2][4][7][9][11][12]https://tinyur > [13][15]l.com/lncvoting > On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 7:30 AM, William > Redpath > via > Lnc-business > <[2][3][5][8][10][12][14]lnc- > [16] business(a)hq.lp.org> > wrote: > I will change my vote on an LNC > At-Large > voting > audit > to > Yes. > Bill > Redpath > On [17]2018-07-19 02:11, Alicia Mattson via > Lnc-business > wrote: > I vote yes. > -Alicia > On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 11:53 PM, > Caryn > Ann > Harlos > via > Lnc-business > <[1][3][4][6][9][11][13]lnc-busine > > [15[18]]ss(a)hq.lp.org> > wrote: > We have an electronic mail ballot. > Votes > are > due > to the > LNC-Business > list by July 19, 2018 at 11:59:59pm > Pacific > time. > Co-Sponsors: > Bowden, > Harlos, Longstreth, Mattson > Motion: Move that the LNC would have > an > audit > of > the At > Large > ballots > done by two independent auditors > appointed > by > the > Chair, ie > someone not > in the race. You can keep track of > the > Secretary's > manual > tally > of > votes here: > > [1][2][4][5][7][10][12][14][16][19]https://tinyurl.co > m/lncvoting > -- > -- > In Liberty, > Caryn Ann Harlos > Libertarian Party and > Libertarian > National > Committee > Secretary > - [2][20]Caryn.Ann.[21] Harlos(a)LP.o rg > or > [22] Secretary(a)LP.org. > Chair, LP Historical > Preservation > Committee - > [23] LPedia(a)LP.org > A haiku to the Statement of > Principles: > We defend your rights > And oppose the use of force > Taxation is theft > References > 1. > [3][5][6][8][11][13][15][17]https://tinyur > [16][18][24]l.co > m/lncvoting > 2. > mailto:[4][25]Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP. > org > References > 1. mailto:[6][7][9][12][14]lnc- > busine > [17][19[26]]ss(a)hq.lp.org > 2. > [7][8][10][13][15][18][20]https://tiny > url. > com/lncvoting > 3. > [8][9][11][14][16][19][21]https://tiny > url. > com/lncvoting > 4. mailto:[9][27]Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP. > org > -- > -- > In Liberty, > Caryn Ann Harlos > Libertarian Party and Libertarian > National > Committee > Secretary > - [10][28]Caryn.Ann.[29] Harlos(a)LP.org or > [30] Secretary(a)LP.org. > Chair, LP Historical Preservation > Committee - > [31] LPedia(a)LP.org > A haiku to the Statement of Principles: > We defend your rights > And oppose the use of force > Taxation is theft > -- > -- > In Liberty, > Caryn Ann Harlos > Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary > - [20][32]Caryn.Ann.[33] Harlos(a)LP.org or[34] Secretary(a)LP.org. > Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[35] LPedia(a)LP.org > A haiku to the Statement of Principles: > We defend your rights > And oppose the use of force > Taxation is theft > References > 1. mailto:[22[36]]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 2. mailto:[23[37]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 3. mailto:[24[38]]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 4. mailto:[25[39]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 5. mailto:[26[40]]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 6. mailto:[27[41]]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 7. mailto:[28[42]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 8. mailto:[29[43]]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 9. mailto:[30[44]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 10. mailto:[31[45]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 11. [32][46]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting > 12. mailto:[33[47]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 13. mailto:[34[48]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 14. [35][49]https://tinyurl.co/ > 15. [36]https://tinyur/ > 16. [37][50]http://l.co/ > 17. mailto:[38[51]]ss@hq.lp.org > 18. [39]https://tinyurl/ > 19. [40]https://tinyurl/ > 20. mailto:[41[52]]Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org > > -- > -- > In Liberty, > Caryn Ann Harlos > Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary > - [42][53]Caryn.Ann.[54] Harlos(a)LP.org or[55] Secretary(a)LP.org. > Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[56] LPedia(a)LP.org > A haiku to the Statement of Principles: > We defend your rights > And oppose the use of force > Taxation is theft > > References > > 1. mailto[57]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 2. mailto[58]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 3. mailto[59]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 4. mailto[60]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 5. mailto[61]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 6. mailto[62]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 7. mailto[63]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 8. mailto[64]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 9. mailto[65]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 10. mailto[66]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 11. mailto[67]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 12. https://tinyur/ > 13. [68]http://l.com/lncvoting > 14. mailto[69]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 15. mailto[70]:ss@hq.lp.org > 16. [71]https://tinyurl.co/ > 17. https://tinyur/ > 18. [72]http://l.co/ > 19. mailto[73]:ss@hq.lp.org > 20. https://tiny/ > 21. https://tiny/ > 22. mailto[74]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 23. mailto[75]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 24. mailto[76]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 25. mailto[77]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 26. mailto[78]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 27. mailto[79]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 28. mailto[80]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 29. mailto[81]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org > 30. mailto[82]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 31. mailto[83]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 32. [84]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting > 33. mailto[85]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 34. mailto[86]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org > 35. [87]https://tinyurl.co/ > 36. https://tinyur/ > 37. [88]http://l.co/ > 38. mailto[89]:ss@hq.lp.org > 39. https://tinyurl/ > 40. https://tinyurl/ > 41. mailto[90]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org > 42. mailto[91]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org > -- Richard Longstreth Region 1 Representative (AK, AZ, CO, KS, MT, NM, OR, HI, UT, WA, WY) Libertarian National Committee[92] richard.longstreth(a)lp.org [93]931.538.9300 Alicia, stop playing a victim. I admit I skimmed most of your message, but I have to destroy your perceived bias based on one line. You said "When I noted your call for recount wasn’t in both elections..." CAH didn't call for an audit. I did and I called for auditing both. Unless you think Caryn Ann somehow controls my independent actions and calls from my Regional Caucus you are not remembering the past correctly at all. And yes, at Large was a bigger concern to me initially because of the one vote margin so I only called for an audit there initially. After a few days, I also introduced auditing the second election as well, something you could have easily done previously if you thought a bias was in play. Honestly, I don't know what the source of the conflict is for you two, but Alicia, I'm consistently seeing a woe is me attitude from you and regular attacks on Caryn Ann and it needs to stop. CAH isn't innocent either. We all need to act like the professional leaders of the party we were elected to be. Nobody wants to read blocks of accusations or attacks any more. While we all have the freedom to post and share as we please, I'd urge all of the LNC to take pause before sending something like Alicia's message to the public via this email list. Richard On Wed, Jul 25, 2018, 07:29 Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <[1[94]]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: Skimmed and skipped. Not going to that dance Alicia. Continue solo if you wish. -Caryn Ann On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 5:20 AM, Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business <[1][2[95]]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: Caryn Ann, I see we have again reached the play-the-victim portion of the script. How rude of me to defend my actual words when they are being misrepresented. Defense is now accused of being aggression and hostility. When I initially pointed out that it was unfair representation to say I would be supervising the audit, your first reaction was the not-me-and-I-didn't-want-to-do-it bit. Later you expressed that you do actually agree with the mischaracterization, even after I pointed out it’s not what I said. You projected your complaints about the first tally onto a future audit by others. You continued to re-characterize my proposal that I, "sit in a corner and work on something else while they do their task" as "being involved", which sounds like something different. I see Wayne Harlos' signature on the Colorado tally sheet in the Secretary's race. I see Dr. Buchman's signature on the Utah tally sheet in this At-Large race in which he was a candidate. After telling everyone else that EVH noticed that they had also committed lapses of judgment, you're now suggesting that I'm so toxic that I cannot even sit in the corner of the room, lest my presence hypnotize Nick's chosen independent auditors into failing to do their job, but you would be happy to be present instead, as if you were some kind of non-partisan here. Don't forget that you were a nominator for Dr. Buchman. I presume him to be the candidate about whom you have publicly described as having been "screwed by this whole process", in the next breath calling it a "suspect election". You didn’t say all candidates were screwed by the process, just one particular candidate, as though he was entitled to win but he didn’t. That told me you were unhappy with the result. When I noted your call for recount wasn’t in both elections that I tabulated in which I was a candidate, only the one where you had already expressed displeasure with the result, out came the victim card. You said I was attacking you, and ridiculously accused me of using a "shaming and silencing tactic", though 1 out of every 3 emails to this list is from you. While I was spending many hours assembling more-than-requested information, and giving you updates on my progress, I was accused of "ignoring" the situation. When you singled out Aaron with no mention of the others, we got the drama of, “I think the optic of this make Arvin's comments look like the height of civility.” Really? Worse than a guy saying school board shootings are a good idea? Worse than Arvin’s philosophies about 14-year-old girls? You're not exactly a neutral party in this matter, and yet you think it's fine for you to be present for the next audit, but somehow it’s a “huge mis-step in judgment” for me to even sit in a corner and do something else while others do the audit. The comments you posted here about Aaron’s role also do not accurately portray the situation. I realize you haven’t had to actually do the job yet, so you haven’t experienced that time pressure to get the data assembled and announced. It feels like installing a roof during a hurricane. I have manually tallied three conventions, including our two largest, with an unusually large number of candidates this year. The 2018 At-Large race had 604 delegates voting for a whopping 36 options. (In 2016, only 418 delegates voted for 20 At-Large options.) This year, while the tellers were still trying to double-check the At-Large tally sheets, we had to pause and distribute and collect the ballots on which 501 delegates voted for 22 Judicial Committee candidates. I was running out of At-Large data to enter because the tellers were spread too thin by the overlapping elections. To keep the process from completely stalling, and have a higher chance of getting results before adjournment, I pulled Aaron in to assist, plus a couple of more tellers. Aaron is a former auditor, and his brain is wired to find anomalies in a system. I knew he would do the job well, cleanly, and help train the other newcomers so we could keep the At-Large process moving. And he did. Aaron worked with a partner. When they checked California’s submission, right off the bat they realized that the number of votes written on the ballots was one more than the total on the tally sheet. When they realized the discrepancy impacted my vote total, Aaron stepped back and asked two other tellers to verify it and have them – not him – make the change to the tally sheet and sign it. Aaron also insisted that several others present witness a recount of the California ballots that had my name on it. At that point NOBODY knew how close the race was going to ultimately be. I was only partially through data entry. Perhaps people imagine that I’m up there looking at the totals every few seconds so that I constantly know where it stands, but the push to get the job done ASAP means that all I can afford to think about is keeping the data entry moving and watching for any anomalies. Another teller was beside me for the duration of the data entry. Regarding the “rumor” as you called it, I suspect someone just wasn't precise in their choice of words. It would require a time machine for the situation to have been, “…the vote for the last seat was a tie until Mr. Starr found an additional vote for Ms. Mattson in CA.” That phrasing could give the reader the impression that all the data entry was done, we knew it was a tie, and we went searching for a way to break the tie. That didn’t happen. Many people were standing around waiting for the data entry to be complete, and snapshots of my screen were taken within a few seconds of data entry being completed and sorted into a ranking order to see just how close it was. Had Aaron and his fellow teller not noticed that the California ballots contained one more vote than was on the tally sheet, when the data entry was LATER completed, the initially-reported results would have mistakenly been reported as a tie, and it would have been REALLY awkward had this fact gone unnoticed until post-convention. Instead, it was noticed in the presence of, and was verified and corrected by, other tellers before the initially-reported results. For most of a decade, I have been saying that we should move to electronic voting. The delegates have previously rejected it, leaving me with no choice but to do my best to try to catch and fix the errors before the initial results. I have been pointing out how error-susceptible our human-tallying elections are. I have been educating about how difficult it is to get exact results with the time pressures, multi-tasking, noise levels, disruption levels, etc. that are experienced during the convention. I have argued against the convention conducting other business during the votes because it makes it harder to get the really important tallying job done. I wrote the proposal which became Convention Rule 10, adopted by delegates to require tellers to double-check the state tallies, and to require the on-screen review of the tally spreadsheet (previously that step was often skipped just to save time). Though it still doesn’t fix everything, those things do increase the number of errors we catch onsite before the results are displayed. For me to now be portrayed with such inflammatory rhetoric as someone who ran a “suspect election”, as someone making the party look worse than Arvin Vohra did, and now to have you taint the perception of the future audit with misrepresentations of my words…well, that’s just a special experience. I do not deserve that. -Alicia On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 4:05 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <[1][2][3[96]]caryn.ann.harlos(a)lp.org> wrote: Alicia, I am not going to engage the aggression here. Your comment is completely out of bounds on multiple levels and I ask that you stop the personal hostility. But you are free to make it, and I shall decline to engage further. All those allegedly are a smooth way to try to call me a liar. I do respect you for all the reason I said in the past (intelligence, skill-set, competence). I do think being involved in this count at all both past and present is a huge mis-step in judgment. And I also think - and communicated to the persons that EVH pointed out - that delegation chairs similarly situated demonstrated a mis-step in judgment as well. And I do think you should step out of this entire process entirely. PS: I don't think the member was entirely incorrect so I would not say that to them. The reason I was reluctant to share it is precisely because of this. It seems you want to keep making things personal between you and me. They are not. A political race is not personal. I never got personal with you or about you in my campaign, and I don't intend to start now. -Caryn Ann On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 4:35 PM, Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business <[2][3][4[97]]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: Caryn Ann, When you received this feedback from the anonymous member, you had the opportunity to tell them, "That's not what she said. Go back and read her post again." Instead you repeated the misrepresentation, with all its implications, here on a public list to give it a broad audience. For someone who allegedly is not attacking me, and allegedly has respect for me, and allegedly "did not even want to pass along", ya just flopped it right out there... Don't pretend that you had an obligation to do it. You're not fooling anyone with this game. -Alicia On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 3:59 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <[1][3][4][5[98]]caryn.ann.harlos(a)lp.org> wrote: Alicia I am passing along directly what the member said. That member reads the list and can decide if they think they were being unfair. I did not solicit this feedback and did not even want to pass along but it is member feedback. -Caryn Ann On Sun, Jul 22, 2018 at 12:35 AM, Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business <[2][4][5][6[99]]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: CAH> A concerned member (no permission to share name) wrote me and inquired if any audit should be supervised by a candidate. Seriously? Do you think that's a fair way to portray what I proposed? What I actually said was, "I can sit in a corner and work on something else while they do their task, but if at some point their number doesn't match mine, we can all take a look at it right then without going back and forth via email." I also said to Nick, "Phoenix is within that zone, and you could personally supervise if you wish." I suggested that I sit in a corner, and I invited Nick to supervise. -Alicia On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 2:26 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <[1][3][5][6][7[100]]caryn.ann.harlos(a)lp.org> wrote: A concerned member (no permission to share name) wrote me and inquired if any audit should be supervised by a candidate. Since I agree with Alicia that the actual ballots are a better solution, if the Chair wishes it, I can make myself available as the current Secretary to be personally present at any audit. I can then confer with Alicia about any issues found. -Caryn Ann On Sat, Jul 21, 2018 at 2:59 AM, Caryn Ann Harlos <[2][4][6][7][8[101]]caryn.ann.harlos(a)lp.org> wrote: I will make those two changes thank you Alicia. On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 5:51 PM Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business <[3][5][7][8][9[102]]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: Sorry for needing to send one more email on this subject, however, it has occurred to me that if the start/end dates in the Secretary's report are listed as 07/12/18 to 07/19/18, then the footnote that I wrote will make me sound like a person who can't subtract 12 from 19. I should have written the footnote to be more specific as follows: * Since the published vote period of 11:53 p.m. Pacific on 07/11/18 to 11:59:59 p.m. Pacific on 07/19/18 resulted in a voting period which exceeded 8 days, Ms. Mattson had expressed a belief that the end date should be changed from 7/19/18 to 7/18/18. During this final day of voting which is disputed, Mr. Redpath changed his vote from "no" to "yes". These reported results reflect the changed vote during the disputed time period, but the outcome of the vote is not impacted by the question of how to report this one vote. -Alicia On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 1:55 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <[1][4][6][8][9][10[103]]caryn.ann.harlos(a)lp.org> wrote: I added that note to the tally sheet and will include that in my Secretary's Report. -Caryn Ann On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 2:44 PM, Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business <[2][5][7][9][10][11[104]]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: Since these results include a vote change during the final day, I do think these results need to be footnoted as follows: * Since the published ending time of the ballot resulted in a voting period which exceeded 8 days, Ms. Mattson had expressed a belief that the end date should be changed from 7/19/18 to 7/18/18. During this final day of voting which is disputed, Mr. Redpath changed his vote from "no" to "yes". These reported results reflect the changed vote during the disputed time period, but the outcome of the vote is not impacted by the question of how to report this one vote. If they're footnoted, given that it doesn't impact the result, I won't feel a need to raise a point of order about the reported results and ask the LNC to make a decision on how to report that vote change. -Alicia On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 12:18 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <[1][3][6][8][10][11][12[105]]lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: Voting has ENDED for the email ballot TITLE Voting "aye": Bilyeu, Hagan, Harlos, Hewitt, Longstreth, Lyons, Mattson, Merced, Phillips, Redpath, Smith Voting "nay": Bishop-Henchman, Goldstein, Van Horn Express Abstention: Lark, Nekhaila With a final vote tally of 11-3-2, the motion PASSES. Note: Sarwark did not vote. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1][2][4][7][9][11][12][13]https://tinyur [13][14][106]l.com/lncvoting On Thu, Jul 19, 2018 at 7:30 AM, William Redpath via Lnc-business <[2][3][5][8][10][12][14]lnc- [15[107]]business(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: I will change my vote on an LNC At-Large voting audit to Yes. Bill Redpath On [108]2018-07-19 02:11, Alicia Mattson via Lnc-business wrote: I vote yes. -Alicia On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 11:53 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <[1][3][4][6][9][11][13]lnc-busine [15][16[109]]ss(a)hq.lp.org> wrote: We have an electronic mail ballot. Votes are due to the LNC-Business list by July 19, 2018 at 11:59:59pm Pacific time. Co-Sponsors: Bowden, Harlos, Longstreth, Mattson Motion: Move that the LNC would have an audit of the At Large ballots done by two independent auditors appointed by the Chair, ie someone not in the race. You can keep track of the Secretary's manual tally of votes here: [1][2][4][5][7][10][12][14][16][17][110]https://tinyurl.co m/lncvoting -- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [2][111]Caryn.Ann. [112] Harlos(a)LP.org or [113] Secretary(a)LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - [114] LPedia(a)LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft References 1. [3][5][6][8][11][13][15][17][18]https://tinyur [16][18][19][115]l.co m/lncvoting 2. mailto:[4][116]Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP. org References 1. mailto:[6][7][9][12][14]lnc- busine [17][19][20[117]]ss(a)hq.lp.org 2. [7][8][10][13][15][18][20][21]https://tiny url. com/lncvoting 3. [8][9][11][14][16][19][21][22]https://tiny url. com/lncvoting 4. mailto:[9][118]Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP. org -- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [10][119]Caryn.Ann.[120] Harlos(a)LP.org o r [121] Secretary(a)LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee - [122] LPedia(a)LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft -- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [20][123]Caryn.Ann.[124] Harlos(a)LP.org or[125] Secretary(a)LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[126] LPedia(a)LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft References 1. mailto:[22][23[127]]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 2. mailto:[23][24[128]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 3. mailto:[24][25[129]]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 4. mailto:[25][26[130]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 5. mailto:[26][27[131]]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 6. mailto:[27][28[132]]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 7. mailto:[28][29[133]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 8. mailto:[29][30[134]]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 9. mailto:[30][31[135]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 10. mailto:[31][32[136]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 11. [32][33][137]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 12. mailto:[33][34[138]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 13. mailto:[34][35[139]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 14. [35][36][140]https://tinyurl.co/ 15. [36][37]https://tinyur/ 16. [37][38][141]http://l.co/ 17. mailto:[38][39[142]]ss@hq.lp.org 18. [39][40]https://tinyurl/ 19. [40][41]https://tinyurl/ 20. mailto:[41[143]]Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org -- -- In Liberty, Caryn Ann Harlos Libertarian Party and Libertarian National Committee Secretary - [42][144]Caryn.Ann.[145] Harlos(a)LP.org or[146] Secretary(a)LP.org. Chair, LP Historical Preservation Committee -[147] LPedia(a)LP.org A haiku to the Statement of Principles: We defend your rights And oppose the use of force Taxation is theft References 1. mailto:[42[148]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 2. mailto:[43[149]]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 3. mailto:[44[150]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 4. mailto:[45[151]]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 5. mailto:[46[152]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 6. mailto:[47[153]]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 7. mailto:[48[154]]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 8. mailto:[49[155]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 9. mailto:[50[156]]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 10. mailto:[51[157]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 11. mailto:[52[158]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 12. [53]https://tinyur/ 13. [54][159]http://l.com/lncvoting 14. mailto:[55[160]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 15. mailto:[56[161]]ss@hq.lp.org 16. [57][162]https://tinyurl.co/ 17. [58]https://tinyur/ 18. [59][163]http://l.co/ 19. mailto:[60[164]]ss@hq.lp.org 20. [61]https://tiny/ 21. [62]https://tiny/ 22. mailto:[63[165]]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 23. mailto:[64[166]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 24. mailto:[65[167]]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 25. mailto:[66[168]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 26. mailto:[67[169]]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 27. mailto:[68[170]]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 28. mailto:[69[171]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 29. mailto:[70[172]]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 30. mailto:[71[173]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 31. mailto:[72[174]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 32. [73][175]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 33. mailto:[74[176]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 34. mailto:[75[177]]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 35. [76][178]https://tinyurl.co/ 36. [77]https://tinyur/ 37. [78][179]http://l.co/ 38. mailto:[79[180]]ss@hq.lp.org 39. [80]https://tinyurl/ 40. [81]https://tinyurl/ 41. mailto:[82[181]]Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org 42. mailto:[83[182]]Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org -- Richard Longstreth Region 1 Representative (AK, AZ, CO, KS, MT, NM, OR, HI, UT, WA, WY) Libertarian National Committee [84[183]]richard.longstreth(a)lp.org [184]931.538.9300 References 1. mailto[185]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 2. mailto[186]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 3. mailto[187]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 4. mailto[188]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 5. mailto[189]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 6. mailto[190]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 7. mailto[191]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 8. mailto[192]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 9. mailto[193]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 10. mailto[194]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 11. mailto[195]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 12. mailto[196]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 13. https://tinyur/ 14. [197]http://l.com/lncvoting 15. mailto[198]:business@hq.lp.org 16. mailto[199]:ss@hq.lp.org 17. [200]https://tinyurl.co/ 18. https://tinyur/ 19. [201]http://l.co/ 20. mailto[202]:ss@hq.lp.org 21. https://tiny/ 22. https://tiny/ 23. mailto[203]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 24. mailto[204]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 25. mailto[205]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 26. mailto[206]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 27. mailto[207]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 28. mailto[208]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 29. mailto[209]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 30. mailto[210]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 31. mailto[211]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 32. mailto[212]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 33. [213]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 34. mailto[214]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 35. mailto[215]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 36. [216]https://tinyurl.co/ 37. https://tinyur/ 38. [217]http://l.co/ 39. mailto[218]:ss@hq.lp.org 40. https://tinyurl/ 41. https://tinyurl/ 42. mailto[219]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 43. mailto[220]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 44. mailto[221]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 45. mailto[222]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 46. mailto[223]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 47. mailto[224]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 48. mailto[225]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 49. mailto[226]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 50. mailto[227]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 51. mailto[228]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 52. mailto[229]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 53. https://tinyur/ 54. [230]http://l.com/lncvoting 55. mailto[231]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 56. mailto[232]:ss@hq.lp.org 57. [233]https://tinyurl.co/ 58. https://tinyur/ 59. [234]http://l.co/ 60. mailto[235]:ss@hq.lp.org 61. https://tiny/ 62. https://tiny/ 63. mailto[236]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 64. mailto[237]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 65. mailto[238]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 66. mailto[239]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 67. mailto[240]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 68. mailto[241]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 69. mailto[242]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 70. mailto[243]:caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 71. mailto[244]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 72. mailto[245]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 73. [246]https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 74. mailto[247]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 75. mailto[248]:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 76. [249]https://tinyurl.co/ 77. https://tinyur/ 78. [250]http://l.co/ 79. mailto[251]:ss@hq.lp.org 80. https://tinyurl/ 81. https://tinyurl/ 82. mailto[252]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org 83. mailto[253]:Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org 84. mailto[254]:richard.longstreth@lp.org References 1. tel:217-412-5973 2. mailto:lnc-business@hq.lp.org 3. mailto: lnc-business(a)hq.lp.org 4. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 5. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 6. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 7. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 8. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 9. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 10. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 11. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 12. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 13. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 14. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 15. http://l.com/lncvoting 16. mailto: business(a)hq.lp.org 17. tel:2018-07-19 02 18. mailto:]ss@hq.lp.org 19. https://tinyurl.co/ 20. http://Caryn.An/ 21. mailto: Harlos(a)LP.org 22. mailto: Secretary(a)LP.org. 23. mailto: LPedia(a)LP.org 24. http://l.co/ 25. http://Caryn.An/ 26. mailto:]ss@hq.lp.org 27. http://Caryn.An/ 28. http://Caryn.An/ 29. mailto: Harlos(a)LP.org 30. mailto: Secretary(a)LP.org. 31. mailto: LPedia(a)LP.org 32. http://Caryn.An/ 33. mailto: Harlos(a)LP.org 34. mailto: Secretary(a)LP.org. 35. mailto: LPedia(a)LP.org 36. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 37. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 38. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 39. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 40. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 41. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 42. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 43. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 44. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 45. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 46. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 47. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 48. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 49. https://tinyurl.co/ 50. http://l.co/ 51. mailto:]ss@hq.lp.org 52. mailto:]Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org 53. http://Caryn.An/ 54. mailto: Harlos(a)LP.org 55. mailto: Secretary(a)LP.org. 56. mailto: LPedia(a)LP.org 57. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 58. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 59. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 60. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 61. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 62. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 63. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 64. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 65. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 66. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 67. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 68. http://l.com/lncvoting 69. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 70. mailto::ss@hq.lp.org 71. https://tinyurl.co/ 72. http://l.co/ 73. mailto::ss@hq.lp.org 74. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 75. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 76. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 77. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 78. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 79. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 80. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 81. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 82. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 83. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 84. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 85. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 86. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 87. https://tinyurl.co/ 88. http://l.co/ 89. mailto::ss@hq.lp.org 90. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org 91. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org 92. mailto: richard.longstreth(a)lp.org 93. tel:931.538.9300 94. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 95. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 96. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 97. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 98. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 99. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 100. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 101. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 102. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 103. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 104. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 105. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 106. http://l.com/lncvoting 107. mailto:]business@hq.lp.org 108. tel:2018-07-19 02 109. mailto:]ss@hq.lp.org 110. https://tinyurl.co/ 111. http://Caryn.An/ 112. mailto: Harlos(a)LP.org 113. mailto: Secretary(a)LP.org. 114. mailto: LPedia(a)LP.org 115. http://l.co/ 116. http://Caryn.An/ 117. mailto:]ss@hq.lp.org 118. http://Caryn.An/ 119. http://Caryn.An/ 120. mailto: Harlos(a)LP.org 121. mailto: Secretary(a)LP.org. 122. mailto: LPedia(a)LP.org 123. http://Caryn.An/ 124. mailto: Harlos(a)LP.org 125. mailto: Secretary(a)LP.org. 126. mailto: LPedia(a)LP.org 127. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 128. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 129. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 130. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 131. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 132. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 133. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 134. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 135. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 136. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 137. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 138. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 139. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 140. https://tinyurl.co/ 141. http://l.co/ 142. mailto:]ss@hq.lp.org 143. mailto:]Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org 144. http://Caryn.An/ 145. mailto: Harlos(a)LP.org 146. mailto: Secretary(a)LP.org. 147. mailto: LPedia(a)LP.org 148. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 149. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 150. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 151. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 152. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 153. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 154. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 155. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 156. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 157. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 158. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 159. http://l.com/lncvoting 160. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 161. mailto:]ss@hq.lp.org 162. https://tinyurl.co/ 163. http://l.co/ 164. mailto:]ss@hq.lp.org 165. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 166. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 167. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 168. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 169. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 170. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 171. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 172. mailto:]caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 173. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 174. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 175. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 176. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 177. mailto:]lnc-business@hq.lp.org 178. https://tinyurl.co/ 179. http://l.co/ 180. mailto:]ss@hq.lp.org 181. mailto:]Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org 182. mailto:]Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org 183. mailto:]richard.longstreth@lp.org 184. tel:931.538.9300 185. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 186. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 187. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 188. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 189. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 190. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 191. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 192. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 193. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 194. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 195. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 196. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 197. http://l.com/lncvoting 198. mailto::business@hq.lp.org 199. mailto::ss@hq.lp.org 200. https://tinyurl.co/ 201. http://l.co/ 202. mailto::ss@hq.lp.org 203. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 204. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 205. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 206. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 207. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 208. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 209. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 210. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 211. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 212. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 213. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 214. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 215. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 216. https://tinyurl.co/ 217. http://l.co/ 218. mailto::ss@hq.lp.org 219. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 220. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 221. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 222. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 223. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 224. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 225. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 226. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 227. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 228. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 229. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 230. http://l.com/lncvoting 231. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 232. mailto::ss@hq.lp.org 233. https://tinyurl.co/ 234. http://l.co/ 235. mailto::ss@hq.lp.org 236. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 237. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 238. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 239. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 240. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 241. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 242. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 243. mailto::caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org 244. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 245. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 246. https://tinyurl.com/lncvoting 247. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 248. mailto::lnc-business@hq.lp.org 249. https://tinyurl.co/ 250. http://l.co/ 251. mailto::ss@hq.lp.org 252. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org 253. mailto::Caryn.Ann.Harlos@LP.org 254. mailto::richard.longstreth@lp.org

1 0