We could as a body specify the triggers that would cause us to cancel the second sitting as an in-person. X states under stay at home orders, more than Y deaths per day, Z hospitalization rate, etc. Something.

IMO we held out way past the point of feasibility on the May in-person convention in part because we had neither established objective criteria for pulling the trigger nor established a clear mechanism to pull the triggers. So it all came across as arbitrary and frantic, and a battle between competing subjective whims. I'd like to not relive that again.

JBH

On May 30, 2020 12:51 PM, "john.phillips--- via Lnc-business" <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:

Upon review of the contract, I feel the need to point out that the changes that Mr Sarwark is attempting to take credit for are in fact the ones that were discussed at the prior meeting between the LNC and the COC and Mr Hayes had already agreed to ask for.

Most of which were brought forward by Mrs Harlos, and some by multiple people, including the one that I was adamant about.

As such I am mostly satisfied, though I will assign credit where it is due, not to disingenuous claims.

My sole objection is the apparent possibility of it being canceled unilaterally.  Hopefully someone more skilled than I at language crafting will address that quickly.

John Phillips

Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative
Cell 217-412-5973