Hybrid Convention idea
According to Rule 3 of the Convention Special Rules of Order, delegates can be polled individually if a state's vote report is challenged, and they must sign computer readable ballots if they're used. There's no requirement for a secret ballot. I listened in on the Bylaws Committee meeting yesterday. They worked on an amendment that would allow a hybrid convention. I'd fully support what they had at the end of their meeting, and it's very similar to your idea. Of course, It would need to be passed by the in-person attendees to become in effect. --- Tim Hagan Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee On 2020-05-04 09:34, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
Attached is a rough idea that I had that might satisfy both sides of the issue. It was relatively popular with Ohio folks
I want to get your guys' thoughts on a hybrid convention. Here's how it would work roughly:
As many delegates as possible/want to would meet at a time and place best suited and ASAP. They would then authorize emergency bylaws allowing remote voting for those with health concerns, compromised family, etc. Each delegation chair would make the decision on who would meet the criteria and the delegation chair would need to be on site at the physical portion of convention. Those voting remote could only vote on things that aren't voice. (Such as President, VC, LNC officers and at large, and JC) and would do so by email ballot (my only concern here is no secret ballot). The state chairs would then tabulate the combined votes and send them to the on site secretary as usual.
Tim and Dustin, there is a majority of LNC members now who are willing to sign on to a different compromise. An all online P/VP election very soon and an in person convention for everything else in July/august with no hybrid option. This way everyone gets something of what they want. I am willing to sign off on that. I hope you will too Tim. *In Liberty,* * Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. * On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 10:51 AM Tim Hagan via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
According to Rule 3 of the Convention Special Rules of Order, delegates can be polled individually if a state's vote report is challenged, and they must sign computer readable ballots if they're used. There's no requirement for a secret ballot.
I listened in on the Bylaws Committee meeting yesterday. They worked on an amendment that would allow a hybrid convention. I'd fully support what they had at the end of their meeting, and it's very similar to your idea. Of course, It would need to be passed by the in-person attendees to become in effect.
--- Tim Hagan Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee
On 2020-05-04 09:34, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
Attached is a rough idea that I had that might satisfy both sides of the issue. It was relatively popular with Ohio folks
I want to get your guys' thoughts on a hybrid convention. Here's how it would work roughly:
As many delegates as possible/want to would meet at a time and place best suited and ASAP. They would then authorize emergency bylaws allowing remote voting for those with health concerns, compromised family, etc. Each delegation chair would make the decision on who would meet the criteria and the delegation chair would need to be on site at the physical portion of convention. Those voting remote could only vote on things that aren't voice. (Such as President, VC, LNC officers and at large, and JC) and would do so by email ballot (my only concern here is no secret ballot). The state chairs would then tabulate the combined votes and send them to the on site secretary as usual.
Because of scattered phone calls and the like. A proposed motion will be on the list soon. Nothing nefarious just the nature of people talking in various venues and finally coming together. And I wanted to feel out if there was support. If not, I have a family to attend to rather than waste time on a futile task. I am convinced there is support. But my line in the sand is the bylaws. I will not cross it. The only item for which the emergency provision can be invoked to override the bylaws is the P/VP nomination,. I am willing to support carving out an exception for that and for that alone. I will not violate our bylaws by doing so for other things for which there is no such emergency. *In Liberty,* * Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. * On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 11:27 AM <dustin.nanna@lp.org> wrote:
Also why is the proposal off the list? I think now more than ever we need to be putting everything on the business list. (Totally not accusing anyone of anything I just want our members to have faith in us)
On May 4, 2020 1:25 PM, dustin.nanna@lp.org wrote:
I'm actually not sure I'd be willing to support a postponement that doesn't also allow remote participation but I could be swayed if that's what the delegation wants.
On May 4, 2020 1:18 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Tim and Dustin, there is a majority of LNC members now who are willing to sign on to a different compromise. An all online P/VP election very soon and an in person convention for everything else in July/august with no hybrid option. This way everyone gets something of what they want. I am willing to sign off on that.
I hope you will too Tim.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 10:51 AM Tim Hagan via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
According to Rule 3 of the Convention Special Rules of Order, delegates can be polled individually if a state's vote report is challenged, and they must sign computer readable ballots if they're used. There's no requirement for a secret ballot.
I listened in on the Bylaws Committee meeting yesterday. They worked on an amendment that would allow a hybrid convention. I'd fully support what they had at the end of their meeting, and it's very similar to your idea. Of course, It would need to be passed by the in-person attendees to become in effect.
--- Tim Hagan Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee
On 2020-05-04 09:34, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
Attached is a rough idea that I had that might satisfy both sides of the issue. It was relatively popular with Ohio folks
I want to get your guys' thoughts on a hybrid convention. Here's how it would work roughly:
As many delegates as possible/want to would meet at a time and place best suited and ASAP. They would then authorize emergency bylaws allowing remote voting for those with health concerns, compromised family, etc. Each delegation chair would make the decision on who would meet the criteria and the delegation chair would need to be on site at the physical portion of convention. Those voting remote could only vote on things that aren't voice. (Such as President, VC, LNC officers and at large, and JC) and would do so by email ballot (my only concern here is no secret ballot). The state chairs would then tabulate the combined votes and send them to the on site secretary as usual.
I will not support without a hybrid option. If a POTUS/VP nomination can be done electronically/remotely. Then so can the other convention business. This isn't about "everyone gets something they want". It's about not asking people to risk their health or that of family. --- Elizabeth Van Horn LNC Region 3 Representative (IN, MI, OH, KY) On 2020-05-04 13:25, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
I'm actually not sure I'd be willing to support a postponement that doesn't also allow remote participation but I could be swayed if that's what the delegation wants.
On May 4, 2020 1:18 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Tim and Dustin, there is a majority of LNC members now who are willing to sign on to a different compromise. An all online P/VP election very soon and an in person convention for everything else in July/august with no hybrid option. This way everyone gets something of what they want. I am willing to sign off on that.
I hope you will too Tim.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 10:51 AM Tim Hagan via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
According to Rule 3 of the Convention Special Rules of Order, delegates can be polled individually if a state's vote report is challenged, and they must sign computer readable ballots if they're used. There's no requirement for a secret ballot.
I listened in on the Bylaws Committee meeting yesterday. They worked on an amendment that would allow a hybrid convention. I'd fully support what they had at the end of their meeting, and it's very similar to your idea. Of course, It would need to be passed by the in-person attendees to become in effect.
--- Tim Hagan Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee
On 2020-05-04 09:34, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
Attached is a rough idea that I had that might satisfy both sides of the issue. It was relatively popular with Ohio folks
I want to get your guys' thoughts on a hybrid convention. Here's how it would work roughly:
As many delegates as possible/want to would meet at a time and place best suited and ASAP. They would then authorize emergency bylaws allowing remote voting for those with health concerns, compromised family, etc. Each delegation chair would make the decision on who would meet the criteria and the delegation chair would need to be on site at the physical portion of convention. Those voting remote could only vote on things that aren't voice. (Such as President, VC, LNC officers and at large, and JC) and would do so by email ballot (my only concern here is no secret ballot). The state chairs would then tabulate the combined votes and send them to the on site secretary as usual.
I won't support that. If this is what we are going to pushing, I will go back to my family life and stick to my original position. *In Liberty,* * Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. * On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 1:43 PM john.phillips--- via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Agreed Elizabeth. Tho i believe the easiest way to make that happen is making it first thing on the convention agenda. I believe bylaws is working on the language already, and most of us agree on the necessity.
Perhaps that is something we could do on Saturday? Motion to "make consideration of bylaws amendment to allow remote participation first item on the agenda"?
A few of us were already discussing it, but since you brought it up here ...
John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973
On May 4, 2020 2:27 PM, Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
I will not support without a hybrid option. If a POTUS/VP nomination can be done electronically/remotely. Then so can the other convention business.
This isn't about "everyone gets something they want". It's about not asking people to risk their health or that of family.
--- Elizabeth Van Horn LNC Region 3 Representative (IN, MI, OH, KY)
On 2020-05-04 13:25, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
I'm actually not sure I'd be willing to support a postponement that doesn't also allow remote participation but I could be swayed if that's what the delegation wants.
On May 4, 2020 1:18 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Tim and Dustin, there is a majority of LNC members now who are willing to sign on to a different compromise. An all online P/VP election very soon and an in person convention for everything else in July/august with no hybrid option. This way everyone gets something of what they want. I am willing to sign off on that.
I hope you will too Tim.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 10:51 AM Tim Hagan via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
According to Rule 3 of the Convention Special Rules of Order, delegates can be polled individually if a state's vote report is challenged, and they must sign computer readable ballots if they're used. There's no requirement for a secret ballot.
I listened in on the Bylaws Committee meeting yesterday. They worked on an amendment that would allow a hybrid convention. I'd fully support what they had at the end of their meeting, and it's very similar to your idea. Of course, It would need to be passed by the in-person attendees to become in effect.
--- Tim Hagan Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee
On 2020-05-04 09:34, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
Attached is a rough idea that I had that might satisfy both sides of the issue. It was relatively popular with Ohio folks
I want to get your guys' thoughts on a hybrid convention. Here's how it would work roughly:
As many delegates as possible/want to would meet at a time and place best suited and ASAP. They would then authorize emergency bylaws allowing remote voting for those with health concerns, compromised family, etc. Each delegation chair would make the decision on who would meet the criteria and the delegation chair would need to be on site at the physical portion of convention. Those voting remote could only vote on things that aren't voice. (Such as President, VC, LNC officers and at large, and JC) and would do so by email ballot (my only concern here is no secret ballot). The state chairs would then tabulate the combined votes and send them to the on site secretary as usual.
I realized I was unclear please read my latest message. We have no authority to change the convention agenda. *In Liberty,* * Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. * On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 2:06 PM <john.phillips@lp.org> wrote:
Caryn Ann, to be clear, are you saying you will not support us doing it, or will not support putting it on the in person convention agenda? Or both?
John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973
On May 4, 2020 2:54 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org> wrote:
I won't support that. If this is what we are going to pushing, I will go back to my family life and stick to my original position.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 1:43 PM john.phillips--- via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Agreed Elizabeth. Tho i believe the easiest way to make that happen is making it first thing on the convention agenda. I believe bylaws is working on the language already, and most of us agree on the necessity.
Perhaps that is something we could do on Saturday? Motion to "make consideration of bylaws amendment to allow remote participation first item on the agenda"?
A few of us were already discussing it, but since you brought it up here ...
John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973
On May 4, 2020 2:27 PM, Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
I will not support without a hybrid option. If a POTUS/VP nomination can be done electronically/remotely. Then so can the other convention business.
This isn't about "everyone gets something they want". It's about not asking people to risk their health or that of family.
--- Elizabeth Van Horn LNC Region 3 Representative (IN, MI, OH, KY)
On 2020-05-04 13:25, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
I'm actually not sure I'd be willing to support a postponement that doesn't also allow remote participation but I could be swayed if that's what the delegation wants.
On May 4, 2020 1:18 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Tim and Dustin, there is a majority of LNC members now who are willing to sign on to a different compromise. An all online P/VP election very soon and an in person convention for everything else in July/august with no hybrid option. This way everyone gets something of what they want. I am willing to sign off on that.
I hope you will too Tim.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 10:51 AM Tim Hagan via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
According to Rule 3 of the Convention Special Rules of Order, delegates can be polled individually if a state's vote report is challenged, and they must sign computer readable ballots if they're used. There's no requirement for a secret ballot.
I listened in on the Bylaws Committee meeting yesterday. They worked on an amendment that would allow a hybrid convention. I'd fully support what they had at the end of their meeting, and it's very similar to your idea. Of course, It would need to be passed by the in-person attendees to become in effect.
--- Tim Hagan Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee
On 2020-05-04 09:34, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
Attached is a rough idea that I had that might satisfy both sides of the issue. It was relatively popular with Ohio folks
I want to get your guys' thoughts on a hybrid convention. Here's how it would work roughly:
As many delegates as possible/want to would meet at a time and place best suited and ASAP. They would then authorize emergency bylaws allowing remote voting for those with health concerns, compromised family, etc. Each delegation chair would make the decision on who would meet the criteria and the delegation chair would need to be on site at the physical portion of convention. Those voting remote could only vote on things that aren't voice. (Such as President, VC, LNC officers and at large, and JC) and would do so by email ballot (my only concern here is no secret ballot). The state chairs would then tabulate the combined votes and send them to the on site secretary as usual.
It is vitally critical that we all familiarize ourselves with our rules. We cannot make rookie mistakes like thinking we can change the convention agenda. We can't. I understand that not everyone memorizes the rules as I do, but now is the time to be very familiar with them. *In Liberty,* * Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. * On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 2:12 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org> wrote:
I realized I was unclear please read my latest message. We have no authority to change the convention agenda.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 2:06 PM <john.phillips@lp.org> wrote:
Caryn Ann, to be clear, are you saying you will not support us doing it, or will not support putting it on the in person convention agenda? Or both?
John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973
On May 4, 2020 2:54 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org> wrote:
I won't support that. If this is what we are going to pushing, I will go back to my family life and stick to my original position.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 1:43 PM john.phillips--- via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Agreed Elizabeth. Tho i believe the easiest way to make that happen is making it first thing on the convention agenda. I believe bylaws is working on the language already, and most of us agree on the necessity.
Perhaps that is something we could do on Saturday? Motion to "make consideration of bylaws amendment to allow remote participation first item on the agenda"?
A few of us were already discussing it, but since you brought it up here ...
John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973
On May 4, 2020 2:27 PM, Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
I will not support without a hybrid option. If a POTUS/VP nomination can be done electronically/remotely. Then so can the other convention business.
This isn't about "everyone gets something they want". It's about not asking people to risk their health or that of family.
--- Elizabeth Van Horn LNC Region 3 Representative (IN, MI, OH, KY)
On 2020-05-04 13:25, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
I'm actually not sure I'd be willing to support a postponement that doesn't also allow remote participation but I could be swayed if that's what the delegation wants.
On May 4, 2020 1:18 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Tim and Dustin, there is a majority of LNC members now who are willing to sign on to a different compromise. An all online P/VP election very soon and an in person convention for everything else in July/august with no hybrid option. This way everyone gets something of what they want. I am willing to sign off on that.
I hope you will too Tim.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 10:51 AM Tim Hagan via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
According to Rule 3 of the Convention Special Rules of Order, delegates can be polled individually if a state's vote report is challenged, and they must sign computer readable ballots if they're used. There's no requirement for a secret ballot.
I listened in on the Bylaws Committee meeting yesterday. They worked on an amendment that would allow a hybrid convention. I'd fully support what they had at the end of their meeting, and it's very similar to your idea. Of course, It would need to be passed by the in-person attendees to become in effect.
--- Tim Hagan Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee
On 2020-05-04 09:34, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
Attached is a rough idea that I had that might satisfy both sides of the issue. It was relatively popular with Ohio folks
I want to get your guys' thoughts on a hybrid convention. Here's how it would work roughly:
As many delegates as possible/want to would meet at a time and place best suited and ASAP. They would then authorize emergency bylaws allowing remote voting for those with health concerns, compromised family, etc. Each delegation chair would make the decision on who would meet the criteria and the delegation chair would need to be on site at the physical portion of convention. Those voting remote could only vote on things that aren't voice. (Such as President, VC, LNC officers and at large, and JC) and would do so by email ballot (my only concern here is no secret ballot). The state chairs would then tabulate the combined votes and send them to the on site secretary as usual.
If the LNC wants to innovate and provide for future conventions, I have no opinion or problem with that. But we cannot direct that this time. It is not the place of the LNC to do so. In fact it is highly improper for us to use our positions of power to influence this. *In Liberty,* * Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. * On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 2:13 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org> wrote:
It is vitally critical that we all familiarize ourselves with our rules. We cannot make rookie mistakes like thinking we can change the convention agenda. We can't. I understand that not everyone memorizes the rules as I do, but now is the time to be very familiar with them.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 2:12 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org> wrote:
I realized I was unclear please read my latest message. We have no authority to change the convention agenda.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 2:06 PM <john.phillips@lp.org> wrote:
Caryn Ann, to be clear, are you saying you will not support us doing it, or will not support putting it on the in person convention agenda? Or both?
John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973
On May 4, 2020 2:54 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org> wrote:
I won't support that. If this is what we are going to pushing, I will go back to my family life and stick to my original position.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 1:43 PM john.phillips--- via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Agreed Elizabeth. Tho i believe the easiest way to make that happen is making it first thing on the convention agenda. I believe bylaws is working on the language already, and most of us agree on the necessity.
Perhaps that is something we could do on Saturday? Motion to "make consideration of bylaws amendment to allow remote participation first item on the agenda"?
A few of us were already discussing it, but since you brought it up here ...
John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973
On May 4, 2020 2:27 PM, Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
I will not support without a hybrid option. If a POTUS/VP nomination can be done electronically/remotely. Then so can the other convention business.
This isn't about "everyone gets something they want". It's about not asking people to risk their health or that of family.
--- Elizabeth Van Horn LNC Region 3 Representative (IN, MI, OH, KY)
On 2020-05-04 13:25, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
I'm actually not sure I'd be willing to support a postponement that doesn't also allow remote participation but I could be swayed if that's what the delegation wants.
On May 4, 2020 1:18 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Tim and Dustin, there is a majority of LNC members now who are willing to sign on to a different compromise. An all online P/VP election very soon and an in person convention for everything else in July/august with no hybrid option. This way everyone gets something of what they want. I am willing to sign off on that.
I hope you will too Tim.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 10:51 AM Tim Hagan via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
According to Rule 3 of the Convention Special Rules of Order, delegates can be polled individually if a state's vote report is challenged, and they must sign computer readable ballots if they're used. There's no requirement for a secret ballot.
I listened in on the Bylaws Committee meeting yesterday. They worked on an amendment that would allow a hybrid convention. I'd fully support what they had at the end of their meeting, and it's very similar to your idea. Of course, It would need to be passed by the in-person attendees to become in effect.
--- Tim Hagan Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee
On 2020-05-04 09:34, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
> Attached is a rough idea that I had that might satisfy both sides of the issue. It was relatively popular with Ohio folks > > I want to get your guys' thoughts on a hybrid convention. Here's how it would work roughly: > > As many delegates as possible/want to would meet at a time and place best suited and ASAP. They would then authorize emergency bylaws allowing remote voting for those with health concerns, compromised family, etc. Each delegation chair would make the decision on who would meet the criteria and the delegation chair would need to be on site at the physical portion of convention. Those voting remote could only vote on things that aren't voice. (Such as President, VC, LNC officers and at large, and JC) and would do so by email ballot (my only concern here is no secret ballot). The state chairs would then tabulate the combined votes and send them to the on site secretary as usual.
Plus John, the LNC has zero authority to modify the agenda. The agenda is in our standing convention rules and only the delegates in convention can modify that. There is not a thing we can do about that. You can hope delegates will do that, but there is no guarantee, and since that is not in the agenda, we cannot instruct the CoC to prepare for that lest we be seen as salting the soup. A majority (or close to) of LNC members have agreed on a compromise. A compromise means everyone gives up something. If there is no willingness to do so, then this exercise is futile. And that's okay if that is what people want. But without a willingness to compromise, I will not support any revisiting of the decision we made. It was made, let move forward. *In Liberty,* * Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. * On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 1:54 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org> wrote:
I won't support that. If this is what we are going to pushing, I will go back to my family life and stick to my original position.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 1:43 PM john.phillips--- via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Agreed Elizabeth. Tho i believe the easiest way to make that happen is making it first thing on the convention agenda. I believe bylaws is working on the language already, and most of us agree on the necessity.
Perhaps that is something we could do on Saturday? Motion to "make consideration of bylaws amendment to allow remote participation first item on the agenda"?
A few of us were already discussing it, but since you brought it up here ...
John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973
On May 4, 2020 2:27 PM, Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
I will not support without a hybrid option. If a POTUS/VP nomination can be done electronically/remotely. Then so can the other convention business.
This isn't about "everyone gets something they want". It's about not asking people to risk their health or that of family.
--- Elizabeth Van Horn LNC Region 3 Representative (IN, MI, OH, KY)
On 2020-05-04 13:25, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
I'm actually not sure I'd be willing to support a postponement that doesn't also allow remote participation but I could be swayed if that's what the delegation wants.
On May 4, 2020 1:18 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Tim and Dustin, there is a majority of LNC members now who are willing to sign on to a different compromise. An all online P/VP election very soon and an in person convention for everything else in July/august with no hybrid option. This way everyone gets something of what they want. I am willing to sign off on that.
I hope you will too Tim.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 10:51 AM Tim Hagan via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
According to Rule 3 of the Convention Special Rules of Order, delegates can be polled individually if a state's vote report is challenged, and they must sign computer readable ballots if they're used. There's no requirement for a secret ballot.
I listened in on the Bylaws Committee meeting yesterday. They worked on an amendment that would allow a hybrid convention. I'd fully support what they had at the end of their meeting, and it's very similar to your idea. Of course, It would need to be passed by the in-person attendees to become in effect.
--- Tim Hagan Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee
On 2020-05-04 09:34, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
Attached is a rough idea that I had that might satisfy both sides of the issue. It was relatively popular with Ohio folks
I want to get your guys' thoughts on a hybrid convention. Here's how it would work roughly:
As many delegates as possible/want to would meet at a time and place best suited and ASAP. They would then authorize emergency bylaws allowing remote voting for those with health concerns, compromised family, etc. Each delegation chair would make the decision on who would meet the criteria and the delegation chair would need to be on site at the physical portion of convention. Those voting remote could only vote on things that aren't voice. (Such as President, VC, LNC officers and at large, and JC) and would do so by email ballot (my only concern here is no secret ballot). The state chairs would then tabulate the combined votes and send them to the on site secretary as usual.
Who is the "we" you want to announce. It cannot be the LNC. If you as a delegate want to band with other delegates to do so, feel free, but that has nothing to do with the LNC. *In Liberty,* * Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. * On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 3:55 PM <john.phillips@lp.org> wrote:
I was unaware that the agenda was only set by bylaws. That is a valid concern. Thank you for pointing it out Caryn Ann.
There is an easy way around that however. We announce that it is our intention to make a motion at the start of business to suspend the rules to bring this subject forward for immediate debate. Then the delegates can decide. Pretty sure they will be in favor, and those not will have their opportunity to debate.
While the agenda may be set, amount of time I am pretty sure is not, as I sat in and listened to the COC discuss time allotments, including cutting out a VP debate. So we simply announce that we plan to do so, and ask the COC to make a time allowance in the schedule.
If we have managed to make this other compromise there will be a lot of extra time in the schedule anyway.
Any other issues? As you can see, I am more than willing to work within the bylaws to see this matter addressed.
John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973
On May 4, 2020 3:12 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org> wrote:
Plus John, the LNC has zero authority to modify the agenda. The agenda is in our standing convention rules and only the delegates in convention can modify that. There is not a thing we can do about that. You can hope delegates will do that, but there is no guarantee, and since that is not in the agenda, we cannot instruct the CoC to prepare for that lest we be seen as salting the soup.
A majority (or close to) of LNC members have agreed on a compromise. A compromise means everyone gives up something. If there is no willingness to do so, then this exercise is futile. And that's okay if that is what people want. But without a willingness to compromise, I will not support any revisiting of the decision we made. It was made, let move forward.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 1:54 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org> wrote:
I won't support that. If this is what we are going to pushing, I will go back to my family life and stick to my original position.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 1:43 PM john.phillips--- via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Agreed Elizabeth. Tho i believe the easiest way to make that happen is making it first thing on the convention agenda. I believe bylaws is working on the language already, and most of us agree on the necessity.
Perhaps that is something we could do on Saturday? Motion to "make consideration of bylaws amendment to allow remote participation first item on the agenda"?
A few of us were already discussing it, but since you brought it up here ...
John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973
On May 4, 2020 2:27 PM, Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
I will not support without a hybrid option. If a POTUS/VP nomination can be done electronically/remotely. Then so can the other convention business.
This isn't about "everyone gets something they want". It's about not asking people to risk their health or that of family.
--- Elizabeth Van Horn LNC Region 3 Representative (IN, MI, OH, KY)
On 2020-05-04 13:25, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
I'm actually not sure I'd be willing to support a postponement that doesn't also allow remote participation but I could be swayed if that's what the delegation wants.
On May 4, 2020 1:18 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Tim and Dustin, there is a majority of LNC members now who are willing to sign on to a different compromise. An all online P/VP election very soon and an in person convention for everything else in July/august with no hybrid option. This way everyone gets something of what they want. I am willing to sign off on that.
I hope you will too Tim.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 10:51 AM Tim Hagan via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
According to Rule 3 of the Convention Special Rules of Order, delegates can be polled individually if a state's vote report is challenged, and they must sign computer readable ballots if they're used. There's no requirement for a secret ballot.
I listened in on the Bylaws Committee meeting yesterday. They worked on an amendment that would allow a hybrid convention. I'd fully support what they had at the end of their meeting, and it's very similar to your idea. Of course, It would need to be passed by the in-person attendees to become in effect.
--- Tim Hagan Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee
On 2020-05-04 09:34, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
Attached is a rough idea that I had that might satisfy both sides of the issue. It was relatively popular with Ohio folks
I want to get your guys' thoughts on a hybrid convention. Here's how it would work roughly:
As many delegates as possible/want to would meet at a time and place best suited and ASAP. They would then authorize emergency bylaws allowing remote voting for those with health concerns, compromised family, etc. Each delegation chair would make the decision on who would meet the criteria and the delegation chair would need to be on site at the physical portion of convention. Those voting remote could only vote on things that aren't voice. (Such as President, VC, LNC officers and at large, and JC) and would do so by email ballot (my only concern here is no secret ballot). The state chairs would then tabulate the combined votes and send them to the on site secretary as usual.
I as an individual delegate will argue and vote against. But once again, that has nothing to do with the LNC. The LNC cannot interfere in the process of the delegates. *In Liberty,* * Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. * On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 3:58 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org> wrote:
Who is the "we" you want to announce. It cannot be the LNC. If you as a delegate want to band with other delegates to do so, feel free, but that has nothing to do with the LNC.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 3:55 PM <john.phillips@lp.org> wrote:
I was unaware that the agenda was only set by bylaws. That is a valid concern. Thank you for pointing it out Caryn Ann.
There is an easy way around that however. We announce that it is our intention to make a motion at the start of business to suspend the rules to bring this subject forward for immediate debate. Then the delegates can decide. Pretty sure they will be in favor, and those not will have their opportunity to debate.
While the agenda may be set, amount of time I am pretty sure is not, as I sat in and listened to the COC discuss time allotments, including cutting out a VP debate. So we simply announce that we plan to do so, and ask the COC to make a time allowance in the schedule.
If we have managed to make this other compromise there will be a lot of extra time in the schedule anyway.
Any other issues? As you can see, I am more than willing to work within the bylaws to see this matter addressed.
John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973
On May 4, 2020 3:12 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org> wrote:
Plus John, the LNC has zero authority to modify the agenda. The agenda is in our standing convention rules and only the delegates in convention can modify that. There is not a thing we can do about that. You can hope delegates will do that, but there is no guarantee, and since that is not in the agenda, we cannot instruct the CoC to prepare for that lest we be seen as salting the soup.
A majority (or close to) of LNC members have agreed on a compromise. A compromise means everyone gives up something. If there is no willingness to do so, then this exercise is futile. And that's okay if that is what people want. But without a willingness to compromise, I will not support any revisiting of the decision we made. It was made, let move forward.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 1:54 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org> wrote:
I won't support that. If this is what we are going to pushing, I will go back to my family life and stick to my original position.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 1:43 PM john.phillips--- via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Agreed Elizabeth. Tho i believe the easiest way to make that happen is making it first thing on the convention agenda. I believe bylaws is working on the language already, and most of us agree on the necessity.
Perhaps that is something we could do on Saturday? Motion to "make consideration of bylaws amendment to allow remote participation first item on the agenda"?
A few of us were already discussing it, but since you brought it up here ...
John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973
On May 4, 2020 2:27 PM, Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
I will not support without a hybrid option. If a POTUS/VP nomination can be done electronically/remotely. Then so can the other convention business.
This isn't about "everyone gets something they want". It's about not asking people to risk their health or that of family.
--- Elizabeth Van Horn LNC Region 3 Representative (IN, MI, OH, KY)
On 2020-05-04 13:25, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
I'm actually not sure I'd be willing to support a postponement that doesn't also allow remote participation but I could be swayed if that's what the delegation wants.
On May 4, 2020 1:18 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Tim and Dustin, there is a majority of LNC members now who are willing to sign on to a different compromise. An all online P/VP election very soon and an in person convention for everything else in July/august with no hybrid option. This way everyone gets something of what they want. I am willing to sign off on that.
I hope you will too Tim.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 10:51 AM Tim Hagan via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
According to Rule 3 of the Convention Special Rules of Order, delegates can be polled individually if a state's vote report is challenged, and they must sign computer readable ballots if they're used. There's no requirement for a secret ballot.
I listened in on the Bylaws Committee meeting yesterday. They worked on an amendment that would allow a hybrid convention. I'd fully support what they had at the end of their meeting, and it's very similar to your idea. Of course, It would need to be passed by the in-person attendees to become in effect.
--- Tim Hagan Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee
On 2020-05-04 09:34, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
Attached is a rough idea that I had that might satisfy both sides of the issue. It was relatively popular with Ohio folks
I want to get your guys' thoughts on a hybrid convention. Here's how it would work roughly:
As many delegates as possible/want to would meet at a time and place best suited and ASAP. They would then authorize emergency bylaws allowing remote voting for those with health concerns, compromised family, etc. Each delegation chair would make the decision on who would meet the criteria and the delegation chair would need to be on site at the physical portion of convention. Those voting remote could only vote on things that aren't voice. (Such as President, VC, LNC officers and at large, and JC) and would do so by email ballot (my only concern here is no secret ballot). The state chairs would then tabulate the combined votes and send them to the on site secretary as usual.
#I'mWithJohn On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 5:49 PM john.phillips--- via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Ok Mrs Harlos. Since you seem to want to make this difficult I will be exceedingly clear.
I have planned since the beginning of this crisis to stand up and make a motion at the beginning of business to make a modification to the bylaws allowing our delegates to vote remotely if there was no other way to accomplish it.
I have said that publicly more than once.
Obviously Elizabeth Van Horn feels strongly as well. As does JBH, and some others. Since you ask who we is, there is a we to start I am hoping.
You objected on bylaws grounds. I did not disagree, I simply presented a solution that falls well within your cherished bylaws. In a way that usurped no power, and clearly allowed the delegates present to debate, vote, and decide themselves.
I was very obviously asking for support from other members of this body in allowing the delegates to vote on whether or not to disenfranchise our duly selected delegates due to circumstances beyond their control.
You say will not support this, that you will argue against it, that is your choice. I know that every single delegate in region 6 will be interested to know that, as I am sure most of the rest of the country. They will be most interested to know that you insist they put their lives at risk to participate in the process.
I still ask the other members of this board to stand in support of this when the time comes. I was hoping that we could be united on at least supporting our delegates' voices being heard. If not that is very disappointing.
Regardless, I will be standing waiting to make this motion when the gavel falls, unless a better spokesperson steps up. I will be there if I am the only one, and I will plead for their votes to be counted. I hope I am not alone.
And if it doesn't happen, and the delegates say to hell with them and their voices, then that will tell me all I need to know about the direction this party has gone, and I will walk out the door with my head held high knowing I fought for my people and say to hell with this party that will no longer be the party of caring that it claims to be. I will also probably be cursing and letting the birds fly, but by then I won't care.
Again I am hoping I do not stand alone at that mic fellow Libertarians and board members, but I will stand.
John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973
On May 4, 2020 5:01 PM, john.phillips@lp.org wrote:
In addition the only action that asks of the actual LNC is to ask the COC to allow some extra time at the beginning.
Though I would think a unified effort to allow for our delegates to have their voice would be nice, so us making the motion as a body would be a good thing, it is of course not required.
John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973
On May 4, 2020 4:55 PM, john.phillips@lp.org wrote:
I was unaware that the agenda was only set by bylaws. That is a valid concern. Thank you for pointing it out Caryn Ann.
There is an easy way around that however. We announce that it is our intention to make a motion at the start of business to suspend the rules to bring this subject forward for immediate debate. Then the delegates can decide. Pretty sure they will be in favor, and those not will have their opportunity to debate.
While the agenda may be set, amount of time I am pretty sure is not, as I sat in and listened to the COC discuss time allotments, including cutting out a VP debate. So we simply announce that we plan to do so, and ask the COC to make a time allowance in the schedule.
If we have managed to make this other compromise there will be a lot of extra time in the schedule anyway.
Any other issues? As you can see, I am more than willing to work within the bylaws to see this matter addressed.
John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973
On May 4, 2020 3:12 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org> wrote:
Plus John, the LNC has zero authority to modify the agenda. The agenda is in our standing convention rules and only the delegates in convention can modify that. There is not a thing we can do about that. You can hope delegates will do that, but there is no guarantee, and since that is not in the agenda, we cannot instruct the CoC to prepare for that lest we be seen as salting the soup.
A majority (or close to) of LNC members have agreed on a compromise. A compromise means everyone gives up something. If there is no willingness to do so, then this exercise is futile. And that's okay if that is what people want. But without a willingness to compromise, I will not support any revisiting of the decision we made. It was made, let move forward.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 1:54 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org> wrote:
I won't support that. If this is what we are going to pushing, I will go back to my family life and stick to my original position.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 1:43 PM john.phillips--- via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Agreed Elizabeth. Tho i believe the easiest way to make that happen is making it first thing on the convention agenda. I believe bylaws is working on the language already, and most of us agree on the necessity.
Perhaps that is something we could do on Saturday? Motion to "make consideration of bylaws amendment to allow remote participation first item on the agenda"?
A few of us were already discussing it, but since you brought it up here ...
John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973
On May 4, 2020 2:27 PM, Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
I will not support without a hybrid option. If a POTUS/VP nomination can be done electronically/remotely. Then so can the other convention business.
This isn't about "everyone gets something they want". It's about not asking people to risk their health or that of family.
--- Elizabeth Van Horn LNC Region 3 Representative (IN, MI, OH, KY)
On 2020-05-04 13:25, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
I'm actually not sure I'd be willing to support a postponement that doesn't also allow remote participation but I could be swayed if that's what the delegation wants.
On May 4, 2020 1:18 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Tim and Dustin, there is a majority of LNC members now who are willing to sign on to a different compromise. An all online P/VP election very soon and an in person convention for everything else in July/august with no hybrid option. This way everyone gets something of what they want. I am willing to sign off on that.
I hope you will too Tim.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 10:51 AM Tim Hagan via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
According to Rule 3 of the Convention Special Rules of Order, delegates can be polled individually if a state's vote report is challenged, and they must sign computer readable ballots if they're used. There's no requirement for a secret ballot.
I listened in on the Bylaws Committee meeting yesterday. They worked on an amendment that would allow a hybrid convention. I'd fully support what they had at the end of their meeting, and it's very similar to your idea. Of course, It would need to be passed by the in-person attendees to become in effect.
--- Tim Hagan Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee
On 2020-05-04 09:34, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
Attached is a rough idea that I had that might satisfy both sides of the issue. It was relatively popular with Ohio folks
I want to get your guys' thoughts on a hybrid convention. Here's how it would work roughly:
As many delegates as possible/want to would meet at a time and place best suited and ASAP. They would then authorize emergency bylaws allowing remote voting for those with health concerns, compromised family, etc. Each delegation chair would make the decision on who would meet the criteria and the delegation chair would need to be on site at the physical portion of convention. Those voting remote could only vote on things that aren't voice. (Such as President, VC, LNC officers and at large, and JC) and would do so by email ballot (my only concern here is no secret ballot). The state chairs would then tabulate the combined votes and send them to the on site secretary as usual.
Mr. Phillips. You slandered me. I am not going to labor that point here on this list. If you want to repair that, you know how to reach me without bothering the rest of the LNC. There are others on the LNC who have the same position as I do. I don't how you live with yourself surrounded by such murderers. I think you need to step back and check your rhetoric and repair some friendship damage you just did. Off list. Your choice. But I can tell you, that I don't think I have been this angry with anyone for anything they have ever said to me in a very very long time. With that, I will say no more here. Either this relationship is important to you or not. The ball is in your court. *In Liberty,* * Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. * On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 6:57 PM <john.phillips@lp.org> wrote:
It was just pointed out to me there may be a misunderstanding here that is at least partially my fault. So let me clarify.
I am NOT speaking in favor of this particular proposal.
I AM speaking in favor of SOME proposal that allows delegates to vote remotely during this years convention.
That is the important bit to me. The details of how that is accomplished are 100% negotiable. That is what I want support on. Agreeing that that is the end we want. From talking with others that is the impression I got from them as well.
I think I showed that when I quickly bowed to the bylaws objection and moved to a different answer with not only no objection, but a thank you for pointing it out.
I have said it before, if we agree on the goal, but you don't like the solution, lets come up with a different solution. Propose alternatives or amendments. As you yourself pointed out in our meeting on Saturday Caryn Ann.
If we agree on the goal, just had a misunderstanding on what I meant about the means, then I offer a heartfelt apology for not being more clear and my reaction, and I will do so on every platform. I assumed my many previous statements to that affect would have made it clear, and we all know what happens when we assume.
However, if we truly don't agree on that goal, then I am prepared to die on that hill.
John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973
On May 4, 2020 5:55 PM, Phillip Anderson <phillip.anderson@lp.org> wrote:
#I'mWithJohn
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 5:49 PM john.phillips--- via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Ok Mrs Harlos. Since you seem to want to make this difficult I will be exceedingly clear.
I have planned since the beginning of this crisis to stand up and make a motion at the beginning of business to make a modification to the bylaws allowing our delegates to vote remotely if there was no other way to accomplish it.
I have said that publicly more than once.
Obviously Elizabeth Van Horn feels strongly as well. As does JBH, and some others. Since you ask who we is, there is a we to start I am hoping.
You objected on bylaws grounds. I did not disagree, I simply presented a solution that falls well within your cherished bylaws. In a way that usurped no power, and clearly allowed the delegates present to debate, vote, and decide themselves.
I was very obviously asking for support from other members of this body in allowing the delegates to vote on whether or not to disenfranchise our duly selected delegates due to circumstances beyond their control.
You say will not support this, that you will argue against it, that is your choice. I know that every single delegate in region 6 will be interested to know that, as I am sure most of the rest of the country. They will be most interested to know that you insist they put their lives at risk to participate in the process.
I still ask the other members of this board to stand in support of this when the time comes. I was hoping that we could be united on at least supporting our delegates' voices being heard. If not that is very disappointing.
Regardless, I will be standing waiting to make this motion when the gavel falls, unless a better spokesperson steps up. I will be there if I am the only one, and I will plead for their votes to be counted. I hope I am not alone.
And if it doesn't happen, and the delegates say to hell with them and their voices, then that will tell me all I need to know about the direction this party has gone, and I will walk out the door with my head held high knowing I fought for my people and say to hell with this party that will no longer be the party of caring that it claims to be. I will also probably be cursing and letting the birds fly, but by then I won't care.
Again I am hoping I do not stand alone at that mic fellow Libertarians and board members, but I will stand.
John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973
On May 4, 2020 5:01 PM, john.phillips@lp.org wrote:
In addition the only action that asks of the actual LNC is to ask the COC to allow some extra time at the beginning.
Though I would think a unified effort to allow for our delegates to have their voice would be nice, so us making the motion as a body would be a good thing, it is of course not required.
John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973
On May 4, 2020 4:55 PM, john.phillips@lp.org wrote:
I was unaware that the agenda was only set by bylaws. That is a valid concern. Thank you for pointing it out Caryn Ann.
There is an easy way around that however. We announce that it is our intention to make a motion at the start of business to suspend the rules to bring this subject forward for immediate debate. Then the delegates can decide. Pretty sure they will be in favor, and those not will have their opportunity to debate.
While the agenda may be set, amount of time I am pretty sure is not, as I sat in and listened to the COC discuss time allotments, including cutting out a VP debate. So we simply announce that we plan to do so, and ask the COC to make a time allowance in the schedule.
If we have managed to make this other compromise there will be a lot of extra time in the schedule anyway.
Any other issues? As you can see, I am more than willing to work within the bylaws to see this matter addressed.
John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973
On May 4, 2020 3:12 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org> wrote:
Plus John, the LNC has zero authority to modify the agenda. The agenda is in our standing convention rules and only the delegates in convention can modify that. There is not a thing we can do about that. You can hope delegates will do that, but there is no guarantee, and since that is not in the agenda, we cannot instruct the CoC to prepare for that lest we be seen as salting the soup.
A majority (or close to) of LNC members have agreed on a compromise. A compromise means everyone gives up something. If there is no willingness to do so, then this exercise is futile. And that's okay if that is what people want. But without a willingness to compromise, I will not support any revisiting of the decision we made. It was made, let move forward.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 1:54 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org> wrote:
I won't support that. If this is what we are going to pushing, I will go back to my family life and stick to my original position.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 1:43 PM john.phillips--- via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Agreed Elizabeth. Tho i believe the easiest way to make that happen is making it first thing on the convention agenda. I believe bylaws is working on the language already, and most of us agree on the necessity.
Perhaps that is something we could do on Saturday? Motion to "make consideration of bylaws amendment to allow remote participation first item on the agenda"?
A few of us were already discussing it, but since you brought it up here ...
John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973
On May 4, 2020 2:27 PM, Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
I will not support without a hybrid option. If a POTUS/VP nomination can be done electronically/remotely. Then so can the other convention business.
This isn't about "everyone gets something they want". It's about not asking people to risk their health or that of family.
--- Elizabeth Van Horn LNC Region 3 Representative (IN, MI, OH, KY)
On 2020-05-04 13:25, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
I'm actually not sure I'd be willing to support a postponement that doesn't also allow remote participation but I could be swayed if that's what the delegation wants.
On May 4, 2020 1:18 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Tim and Dustin, there is a majority of LNC members now who are willing to sign on to a different compromise. An all online P/VP election very soon and an in person convention for everything else in July/august with no hybrid option. This way everyone gets something of what they want. I am willing to sign off on that.
I hope you will too Tim.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 10:51 AM Tim Hagan via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
According to Rule 3 of the Convention Special Rules of Order, delegates can be polled individually if a state's vote report is challenged, and they must sign computer readable ballots if they're used. There's no requirement for a secret ballot.
I listened in on the Bylaws Committee meeting yesterday. They worked on an amendment that would allow a hybrid convention. I'd fully support what they had at the end of their meeting, and it's very similar to your idea. Of course, It would need to be passed by the in-person attendees to become in effect.
--- Tim Hagan Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee
On 2020-05-04 09:34, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
Attached is a rough idea that I had that might satisfy both sides of the issue. It was relatively popular with Ohio folks
I want to get your guys' thoughts on a hybrid convention. Here's how it would work roughly:
As many delegates as possible/want to would meet at a time and place best suited and ASAP. They would then authorize emergency bylaws allowing remote voting for those with health concerns, compromised family, etc. Each delegation chair would make the decision on who would meet the criteria and the delegation chair would need to be on site at the physical portion of convention. Those voting remote could only vote on things that aren't voice. (Such as President, VC, LNC officers and at large, and JC) and would do so by email ballot (my only concern here is no secret ballot). The state chairs would then tabulate the combined votes and send them to the on site secretary as usual.
Hi John, I'm not sure of the best way to do it, but do think it needs done. We're lucky that many are working on solutions. I'm glad the hybrid/online concept is being discussed. We need to have this be an open and transparent process. Which is why I'm replying to people about this on our email list. Our members want to see that the LNC is working to help the delegates participate. This situation that we're under (virus crisis) isn't the norm. So, the LP needs to adapt. As Libertarians we should be innovative and forward acting. --- Elizabeth Van Horn LNC Region 3 Representative (IN, MI, OH, KY) On 2020-05-04 15:43, john.phillips@lp.org wrote:
Agreed Elizabeth. Tho i believe the easiest way to make that happen is making it first thing on the convention agenda. I believe bylaws is working on the language already, and most of us agree on the necessity.
Perhaps that is something we could do on Saturday? Motion to "make consideration of bylaws amendment to allow remote participation first item on the agenda"?
A few of us were already discussing it, but since you brought it up here ...
John Phillips Libertarian National Committee Region 6 Representative Cell 217-412-5973
On May 4, 2020 2:27 PM, Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
I will not support without a hybrid option. If a POTUS/VP nomination can be done electronically/remotely. Then so can the other convention business.
This isn't about "everyone gets something they want". It's about not asking people to risk their health or that of family.
--- Elizabeth Van Horn LNC Region 3 Representative (IN, MI, OH, KY)
On 2020-05-04 13:25, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
I'm actually not sure I'd be willing to support a postponement that doesn't also allow remote participation but I could be swayed if that's what the delegation wants.
On May 4, 2020 1:18 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business <lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Tim and Dustin, there is a majority of LNC members now who are willing to sign on to a different compromise. An all online P/VP election very soon and an in person convention for everything else in July/august with no hybrid option. This way everyone gets something of what they want. I am willing to sign off on that.
I hope you will too Tim.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 10:51 AM Tim Hagan via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
According to Rule 3 of the Convention Special Rules of Order, delegates can be polled individually if a state's vote report is challenged, and they must sign computer readable ballots if they're used. There's no requirement for a secret ballot.
I listened in on the Bylaws Committee meeting yesterday. They worked on an amendment that would allow a hybrid convention. I'd fully support what they had at the end of their meeting, and it's very similar to your idea. Of course, It would need to be passed by the in-person attendees to become in effect.
--- Tim Hagan Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee
On 2020-05-04 09:34, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
Attached is a rough idea that I had that might satisfy both sides of the issue. It was relatively popular with Ohio folks
I want to get your guys' thoughts on a hybrid convention. Here's how it would work roughly:
As many delegates as possible/want to would meet at a time and place best suited and ASAP. They would then authorize emergency bylaws allowing remote voting for those with health concerns, compromised family, etc. Each delegation chair would make the decision on who would meet the criteria and the delegation chair would need to be on site at the physical portion of convention. Those voting remote could only vote on things that aren't voice. (Such as President, VC, LNC officers and at large, and JC) and would do so by email ballot (my only concern here is no secret ballot). The state chairs would then tabulate the combined votes and send them to the on site secretary as usual.
John, here is the fact. It doesn't matter that you support a hybrid and I don't. The choice is not ours. It is the delegates. Our last motion did not mention anything about hybrid and we all recognized it didn't preclude it either. Nothing has changed. We just can't dictate it - it is not our place, the delegates can however. And my opinion on that is irrelevant. The only item I will agree to immediately do by electronic means if the P/VP nominations as that is in fact an emergency situation that can override the bylaws. Nothing else does. Everything else to be put off to the previously adopted in person agenda. It will be up to the delegates at that convention if they want to allow remote participation. Not us. And I doubt it will happen because it will be too late. The best we can hope for is that they pass something that will allow such things next convention for either a matter of course or as an emergency provision. The bylaws committee can craft language and leave it in the hands of the delegates. *In Liberty,* * Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. * On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 2:25 PM justin.odonnell--- via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Potus and VP nominations an elections are inherently non-deliberative. The issue raised with the electronic convention and hybrid conventions are the limitations in the participation of delegates in the deliberatove process surrounding bylaws, platform, and resolutions.
While I'm of the opinion we need to act on elections sooner rather than later, and that we can do so via Electronic means, I'm also unconvinced that a suitable electronic platform exists to accomodate active debate and the full participation of delegates in the process. To me, the idea of a hybrid model should be to seperate the non deliberarive processes and settle them ASAP via electronkc balloting, and schedule an in person convention to handle deliberative motions when and where safe to do so.
Justin O'Donnell LNC Region 8 Representative
On May 4, 2020 3:27 PM, Elizabeth Van Horn via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
I will not support without a hybrid option. If a POTUS/VP nomination can be done electronically/remotely. Then so can the other convention business.
This isn't about "everyone gets something they want". It's about not asking people to risk their health or that of family.
--- Elizabeth Van Horn LNC Region 3 Representative (IN, MI, OH, KY)
On 2020-05-04 13:25, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
I'm actually not sure I'd be willing to support a postponement that doesn't also allow remote participation but I could be swayed if that's what the delegation wants.
On May 4, 2020 1:18 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Tim and Dustin, there is a majority of LNC members now who are willing to sign on to a different compromise. An all online P/VP election very soon and an in person convention for everything else in July/august with no hybrid option. This way everyone gets something of what they want. I am willing to sign off on that.
I hope you will too Tim.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 10:51 AM Tim Hagan via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
According to Rule 3 of the Convention Special Rules of Order, delegates can be polled individually if a state's vote report is challenged, and they must sign computer readable ballots if they're used. There's no requirement for a secret ballot.
I listened in on the Bylaws Committee meeting yesterday. They worked on an amendment that would allow a hybrid convention. I'd fully support what they had at the end of their meeting, and it's very similar to your idea. Of course, It would need to be passed by the in-person attendees to become in effect.
--- Tim Hagan Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee
On 2020-05-04 09:34, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
Attached is a rough idea that I had that might satisfy both sides of the issue. It was relatively popular with Ohio folks
I want to get your guys' thoughts on a hybrid convention. Here's how it would work roughly:
As many delegates as possible/want to would meet at a time and place best suited and ASAP. They would then authorize emergency bylaws allowing remote voting for those with health concerns, compromised family, etc. Each delegation chair would make the decision on who would meet the criteria and the delegation chair would need to be on site at the physical portion of convention. Those voting remote could only vote on things that aren't voice. (Such as President, VC, LNC officers and at large, and JC) and would do so by email ballot (my only concern here is no secret ballot). The state chairs would then tabulate the combined votes and send them to the on site secretary as usual.
1) This mentions state chairs tabulating and reporting votes...where are the state chairs in this scenario? 2) Who decides what location is "best suited" and what "possible" means in ASAP? 3) Who decides who the delegation chairs are? 4) When would the determination of eligibility for the remote participants be made? Prior to the gathering? Or would everyone on-site have to wait for this to happen? 5) What if those on-site do not "authorize emergency bylaws"? On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 12:25 PM dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
I'm actually not sure I'd be willing to support a postponement that doesn't also allow remote participation but I could be swayed if that's what the delegation wants.
On May 4, 2020 1:18 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Tim and Dustin, there is a majority of LNC members now who are willing to sign on to a different compromise. An all online P/VP election very soon and an in person convention for everything else in July/august with no hybrid option. This way everyone gets something of what they want. I am willing to sign off on that.
I hope you will too Tim.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 10:51 AM Tim Hagan via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
According to Rule 3 of the Convention Special Rules of Order, delegates can be polled individually if a state's vote report is challenged, and they must sign computer readable ballots if they're used. There's no requirement for a secret ballot.
I listened in on the Bylaws Committee meeting yesterday. They worked on an amendment that would allow a hybrid convention. I'd fully support what they had at the end of their meeting, and it's very similar to your idea. Of course, It would need to be passed by the in-person attendees to become in effect.
--- Tim Hagan Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee
On 2020-05-04 09:34, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
Attached is a rough idea that I had that might satisfy both sides of the issue. It was relatively popular with Ohio folks
I want to get your guys' thoughts on a hybrid convention. Here's how it would work roughly:
As many delegates as possible/want to would meet at a time and place best suited and ASAP. They would then authorize emergency bylaws allowing remote voting for those with health concerns, compromised family, etc. Each delegation chair would make the decision on who would meet the criteria and the delegation chair would need to be on site at the physical portion of convention. Those voting remote could only vote on things that aren't voice. (Such as President, VC, LNC officers and at large, and JC) and would do so by email ballot (my only concern here is no secret ballot). The state chairs would then tabulate the combined votes and send them to the on site secretary as usual.
-- *Whitney Bilyeu* Libertarian National Committee Region 7 Representative 281.433.4966 LP.ORG
Mr. Phillips, your comments go way beyond the bounds of decorum. I do not know what has gotten into you, but I will not engage with that kind of baseless rhetoric. It is unfortunate you think you have to posture in that manner when although I absolutely disagreed with your vote last time I went out of my way on social media to defend you. I oppose hybrid on bylaws grounds. Don't you dare insult my character by claiming I want to kill people. That is outrageous. *In Liberty,* * Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. * On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 5:15 PM Erin Adams via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
I'm absolutely open to discussing ideas about hybrids and finding solutions to getting our POTUS candidate nominated as soon as possible but I don't think what I'm seeing in this proposal is an appropriate solution
Erin Adams Region 7 alt.
On May 4, 2020 6:13 PM, Whitney Bilyeu via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
1) This mentions state chairs tabulating and reporting votes...where are the state chairs in this scenario?
2) Who decides what location is "best suited" and what "possible" means in ASAP?
3) Who decides who the delegation chairs are?
4) When would the determination of eligibility for the remote participants be made? Prior to the gathering? Or would everyone on-site have to wait for this to happen?
5) What if those on-site do not "authorize emergency bylaws"?
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 12:25 PM dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
I'm actually not sure I'd be willing to support a postponement that doesn't also allow remote participation but I could be swayed if that's what the delegation wants.
On May 4, 2020 1:18 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Tim and Dustin, there is a majority of LNC members now who are willing to sign on to a different compromise. An all online P/VP election very soon and an in person convention for everything else in July/august with no hybrid option. This way everyone gets something of what they want. I am willing to sign off on that.
I hope you will too Tim.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 10:51 AM Tim Hagan via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
According to Rule 3 of the Convention Special Rules of Order, delegates can be polled individually if a state's vote report is challenged, and they must sign computer readable ballots if they're used. There's no requirement for a secret ballot.
I listened in on the Bylaws Committee meeting yesterday. They worked on an amendment that would allow a hybrid convention. I'd fully support what they had at the end of their meeting, and it's very similar to your idea. Of course, It would need to be passed by the in-person attendees to become in effect.
--- Tim Hagan Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee
On 2020-05-04 09:34, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
Attached is a rough idea that I had that might satisfy both sides of the issue. It was relatively popular with Ohio folks
I want to get your guys' thoughts on a hybrid convention. Here's how it would work roughly:
As many delegates as possible/want to would meet at a time and place best suited and ASAP. They would then authorize emergency bylaws allowing remote voting for those with health concerns, compromised family, etc. Each delegation chair would make the decision on who would meet the criteria and the delegation chair would need to be on site at the physical portion of convention. Those voting remote could only vote on things that aren't voice. (Such as President, VC, LNC officers and at large, and JC) and would do so by email ballot (my only concern here is no secret ballot). The state chairs would then tabulate the combined votes and send them to the on site secretary as usual.
-- *Whitney Bilyeu* Libertarian National Committee Region 7 Representative 281.433.4966 LP.ORG
PS my statement was more figurative. As I have secretarial duties that I don't intend to pass on to anyone else, I will not be at the microphone for anything this convention. *In Liberty,* * Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. * On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 6:50 PM Caryn Ann Harlos <caryn.ann.harlos@lp.org> wrote:
Mr. Phillips, your comments go way beyond the bounds of decorum. I do not know what has gotten into you, but I will not engage with that kind of baseless rhetoric.
It is unfortunate you think you have to posture in that manner when although I absolutely disagreed with your vote last time I went out of my way on social media to defend you.
I oppose hybrid on bylaws grounds. Don't you dare insult my character by claiming I want to kill people. That is outrageous.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 5:15 PM Erin Adams via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
I'm absolutely open to discussing ideas about hybrids and finding solutions to getting our POTUS candidate nominated as soon as possible but I don't think what I'm seeing in this proposal is an appropriate solution
Erin Adams Region 7 alt.
On May 4, 2020 6:13 PM, Whitney Bilyeu via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
1) This mentions state chairs tabulating and reporting votes...where are the state chairs in this scenario?
2) Who decides what location is "best suited" and what "possible" means in ASAP?
3) Who decides who the delegation chairs are?
4) When would the determination of eligibility for the remote participants be made? Prior to the gathering? Or would everyone on-site have to wait for this to happen?
5) What if those on-site do not "authorize emergency bylaws"?
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 12:25 PM dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
I'm actually not sure I'd be willing to support a postponement that doesn't also allow remote participation but I could be swayed if that's what the delegation wants.
On May 4, 2020 1:18 PM, Caryn Ann Harlos via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
Tim and Dustin, there is a majority of LNC members now who are willing to sign on to a different compromise. An all online P/VP election very soon and an in person convention for everything else in July/august with no hybrid option. This way everyone gets something of what they want. I am willing to sign off on that.
I hope you will too Tim.
*In Liberty,*
* Personal Note: I have what is commonly known as Asperger's Syndrome (part of the autism spectrum). This can affect inter-personal communication skills in both personal and electronic arenas. If anyone found anything offensive or overly off-putting (or some other social faux pas), please contact me privately and let me know. *
On Mon, May 4, 2020 at 10:51 AM Tim Hagan via Lnc-business < lnc-business@hq.lp.org> wrote:
According to Rule 3 of the Convention Special Rules of Order, delegates can be polled individually if a state's vote report is challenged, and they must sign computer readable ballots if they're used. There's no requirement for a secret ballot.
I listened in on the Bylaws Committee meeting yesterday. They worked on an amendment that would allow a hybrid convention. I'd fully support what they had at the end of their meeting, and it's very similar to your idea. Of course, It would need to be passed by the in-person attendees to become in effect.
--- Tim Hagan Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee
On 2020-05-04 09:34, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
Attached is a rough idea that I had that might satisfy both sides of the issue. It was relatively popular with Ohio folks
I want to get your guys' thoughts on a hybrid convention. Here's how it would work roughly:
As many delegates as possible/want to would meet at a time and place best suited and ASAP. They would then authorize emergency bylaws allowing remote voting for those with health concerns, compromised family, etc. Each delegation chair would make the decision on who would meet the criteria and the delegation chair would need to be on site at the physical portion of convention. Those voting remote could only vote on things that aren't voice. (Such as President, VC, LNC officers and at large, and JC) and would do so by email ballot (my only concern here is no secret ballot). The state chairs would then tabulate the combined votes and send them to the on site secretary as usual.
-- *Whitney Bilyeu* Libertarian National Committee Region 7 Representative 281.433.4966 LP.ORG
Tim, while I'm not aware of what the bylaws people did yesterday, I fully support the hybrid convention idea. --- Elizabeth Van Horn LNC Region 3 Representative (IN, MI, OH, KY) On 2020-05-04 12:51, Tim Hagan via Lnc-business wrote:
According to Rule 3 of the Convention Special Rules of Order, delegates can be polled individually if a state's vote report is challenged, and they must sign computer readable ballots if they're used. There's no requirement for a secret ballot.
I listened in on the Bylaws Committee meeting yesterday. They worked on an amendment that would allow a hybrid convention. I'd fully support what they had at the end of their meeting, and it's very similar to your idea. Of course, It would need to be passed by the in-person attendees to become in effect.
--- Tim Hagan Treasurer, Libertarian National Committee
On 2020-05-04 09:34, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
Attached is a rough idea that I had that might satisfy both sides of the issue. It was relatively popular with Ohio folks
I want to get your guys' thoughts on a hybrid convention. Here's how it would work roughly:
As many delegates as possible/want to would meet at a time and place best suited and ASAP. They would then authorize emergency bylaws allowing remote voting for those with health concerns, compromised family, etc. Each delegation chair would make the decision on who would meet the criteria and the delegation chair would need to be on site at the physical portion of convention. Those voting remote could only vote on things that aren't voice. (Such as President, VC, LNC officers and at large, and JC) and would do so by email ballot (my only concern here is no secret ballot). The state chairs would then tabulate the combined votes and send them to the on site secretary as usual.
Dustin, I appreciate you bringing this to the LNC. Also, that Ohio folks thought it a good idea. Thank you! --- Elizabeth Van Horn LNC Region 3 Representative (IN, MI, OH, KY) On 2020-05-04 12:34, dustin.nanna--- via Lnc-business wrote:
Attached is a rough idea that I had that might satisfy both sides of the issue. It was relatively popular with Ohio folks
I want to get your guys' thoughts on a hybrid convention. Here's how it would work roughly:
As many delegates as possible/want to would meet at a time and place best suited and ASAP. They would then authorize emergency bylaws allowing remote voting for those with health concerns, compromised family, etc. Each delegation chair would make the decision on who would meet the criteria and the delegation chair would need to be on site at the physical portion of convention. Those voting remote could only vote on things that aren't voice. (Such as President, VC, LNC officers and at large, and JC) and would do so by email ballot (my only concern here is no secret ballot). The state chairs would then tabulate the combined votes and send them to the on site secretary as usual.
participants (9)
-
Caryn Ann Harlos -
dustin.nanna＠lp.org -
Elizabeth Van Horn -
Erin Adams -
john.phillips＠lp.org -
justin.odonnell＠lp.org -
Phillip Anderson -
Tim Hagan -
Whitney Bilyeu