McArdle Blocks Harlos Motion

Caryn Ann Harlos moved to delay the formation of a joint fundraising committee while the Judicial Committee hears her petition, which she filed yesterday. McArdle refused to allow the motion to me seconded and voted upon on the grounds that the motion was dilatory.  The full debate, as taken from the pages of the LNC Public list, reads

From: LP Secretary <secr…@lp.org>
Subject: Request for Co-Sponsors

Move to cease any public execution of the joint fundraising plan until the final resolution of the Harlos Judicial Committee Appeal filed yesterday. This would not stop any behind the scenes planning, only its public execution.

——————

From: Angela McArdle <angela….@lp.org>
Subject: Re: Request for Co-Sponsors

This is dilatory and out of order.

——————-

From: LP Secretary <secr…@lp.org>
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2024 8:58:59 AM

And I’m still requesting sponsors.

—————————–

From: Angela McArdle <angela….@lp.org>

You need to come to order now and stop trying to overturn my rulings. Many times last term you asked me to bring other members to order on the list. Let’s please be consistent as we apply the same standards.

——————————

From: LP Secretary <secr…@lp.org>

And you can kill all discussion.

This is the interesting thing about email votes. The making of the motion stops nothing. It “delays” nothing unless it passes. That is why dilatory is irrelevant in this context. It only matters if it wins. If it wins, it’s the will of body. Using dilatory to stop a valid motion that ceases nothing unless it passes.

I am not out of order, I’m allowed to explain my position.

That’s all I will say. The members can judge what is being done.

—————————-

From: Angela McArdle <angela….@lp.org>

You’re dilatory and unprofessional right now, and I’m asking you to stop. There is already a motion to rescind, which has the same effect.

Angela McArdle