Open Thread for CFL Feedback

[ronpaulhawaii]

As per the discussion in another thread, we want to start collecting constructive ideas for the CFL. There are other threads like this and if anyone who is familiar with them can post some of the better ideas here, please do. I will also start a closed thread in the CFL section to collect the ideas. Lets, also, practice Roberts Rules a bit. If you like an idea second it and call for objections. Once objections are settled, if the idea still statnds we can move it to the closed thread.

[Edit - Lets try to keep this thread for motions and seconds. Once a proposal is seconded, a discussion thread should be started in the CFL sub-forum, such as this. After creating a discussion thread, then add a link to your OP like this - thanks ]

onward and forward

 

[MRoCkEd]

website:
* new design (terra eclipse? or design contest?)
* keep me logged in box

 

[LittleLightShining]

To clarify, are these ideas ways that the C4L website/HQ operations can be improved or ideas for individual chapters and members can use to further the cause?

 

[ronpaulhawaii]

To clarify, are these ideas ways that the C4L website/HQ operations can be improved or ideas for individual chapters and members can use to further the cause?

C4L HQ.

This will be a work in progress. I don't know where it will go, but together I believe we can make it work.

 

[LittleLightShining]

Ok, then I think there MUST be a way for people(whether PL's, County, District or State coordinators) to send bulk mailings to members.

Also, there should be some sort of alert sent to emails letting folks know when there is a message for them at the C4L site.

 

[ronpaulhawaii]

website:
* new design (terra eclipse? or design contest?)
* keep me logged in box

I like the idea of the logged in box, and I think a design contest would be better if we want a make-over. I imagine there could be more discussion on this...

LLS - Yes, the email notification thing would be great, as well as the mass email feature...

 

[LittleLightShining]

I like the idea of the logged in box, and I think a design contest would be better if we want a make-over. I imagine there could be more discussion on this...

LLS - Yes, the email notification thing would be great, as well as the mass email feature...

Logged in box, yes. [edit - discussion moved - http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?p=1844382]

Design contest-- I'm open to it but do not think it will go anywhere with HQ.

And thank you

 

[USAFCapt]

Come up with a "CFL rating" with a score of 0 to 100 for each candidate running for Congress, Governor, and President.

 

[Imperial]

There MUST be a way for people(whether PL's, County, District or State coordinators) to send bulk mailings to members.

I second the resolution, and move that we amend it to "There MUST be a way for precinct leaders and higher to send bulk mailings to members."

Create a keep me logged in box

I second the resolution. Any objections?

There should be some sort of alert sent to emails letting folks know when there is a message for them at the C4L site.

I second the resolution, as long as there is some degree of being able to opt out. Any objections?


*All seconds as [illegally] amended by myself for grammatical clarity, unless there are objections.

 

[LittleLightShining]

Oops, sorry. I forgot we were using Robert's Rules.

Come up with a "CFL rating" with a score of 0 to 100 for each candidate running for Congress, Governor, and President.

I second.

 

[nobody's_hero]

I second.

Thirded.

It wouldn't exactly be an endorsement, just a 'liberty rating' or something . . .

 

[ronpaulhawaii]

Come up with a "CFL rating" with a score of 0 to 100 for each candidate running for Congress, Governor, and President.

I like this idea but will refrain from seconding anything

I second the resolution, and move that we amend it to "There MUST be a way for precinct leaders and higher to send bulk mailings to members."



I second the resolution. Any objections?



I second the resolution, as long as there is some degree of being able to opt out. Any objections?


*All seconds as [illegally] amended by myself for grammatical clarity, unless there are objections.

methinks I am going to learn a bit of parliamentary procedure I hope you all can help me make this work I believe the "logged in" motion is about ready to be listed in the closed thread...

 

[MRoCkEd]

Come up with a "CFL rating" with a score of 0 to 100 for each candidate running for Congress, Governor, and President.

I also like this - how about different liberty categories (foreign policy, personal liberties) with individual scores that all add up to a possible 100?

 

[Imperial]

Thirded.

You can only second something; there are no thirds. However, there can be any number of seconds for a motion. (similar I believe to co-sponsoring leglislation in Congress).

Simple majority vote to determine if something passes?

 

[Austin]

Ok, then I think there MUST be a way for people(whether PL's, County, District or State coordinators) to send bulk mailings to members.

I move to make an amendment on this issue.

There must be a way for state coordinators of their respective domains to send bulk mailings. District and County coordinators must be able to also send bulk mailings to their domains, with the ability to send the message to next tier up, as per the approval of the coordinator in the tier.

For instance, a county coordinator could have planned something that applies to the whole state, or obtained a new piece of information. He should have the ability to send this information to not only his county, but to his district and entire state as well, so long as the respective coordinators approve of the message.

Any objections?

 

[Austin]

I also like this - how about different liberty categories (foreign policy, personal liberties) with individual scores that all add up to a possible 100?

I propose an amendment.

The Campaign For Liberty should present a Liberty Score, based on a number of categories that may include, but are not limited to: foreign policy, civil liberties, monetary policy, economic policy, and constitutionalism. The Liberty Score will be assessed by finding the mean of the rating given by the Campaign for Liberty dues-paying members.

Any objections?

Some of my own suggestions include: making it so only county coordinators' scores on up count toward the mean score. There is also the possibility of having a short quiz to ensure that the voter has researched the candidate properly. Also, we could have the mean Liberty Score of the members, and then a rating given by Dr. Paul himself, given he be willing to participate. Additionally, the score could be given in categories.

• Mean Score as voted by Precinct Leaders
• Mean Score as voted by County Coordinators
• Mean Score as voted by District Coordinators
• Mean Score as voted by State Coordinators

Any other suggestions or objections are welcome.

 

[ronpaulhawaii]

You can only second something; there are no thirds. However, there can be any number of seconds for a motion. (similar I believe to co-sponsoring leglislation in Congress).

Simple majority vote to determine if something passes?

That is where we may run into problems as I don't know of a way to "vote". Also, due to the nature of the forum we will never have a quorum, so we must modify the rules to suit. What I have done in the closed thread is mention that motions can be re-opened for discussion for those members who are not here much... If anyone has any ideas on how we can most fairly deal with this all, please speak up. My thoughts are that if I see a motion seconded that has not been amended nor objected to, and has been here for a period of time, I will feel comfortable moving it

Thoughts?

 

[Austin]

That is where we may run into problems as I don't know of a way to "vote". Also, due to the nature of the forum we will never have a quorum, so we must modify the rules to suit. What I have done in the closed thread is mention that motions can be re-opened for discussion for those members who are not here much... If anyone has any ideas on how we can most fairly deal with this all, please speak up. My thoughts are that if I see a motion seconded that has not been amended nor objected to, and has been here for a period of time, I will feel comfortable moving it

Thoughts?

Considering there is not too much activity in the CFL sub-forum, we could use seperate threads for each issue. After a few days of discussion, or if someone moves to make a vote, the issue could be decided. After it has been added to the closed post, someone could propose an amendment even after it has been passed.

Think of the closed post as one huge bill. Well, one really small one when you compare it to the junk congress spits out...

This will be a living document for some time, until someone makes a motion to vote on the proposal/bill, upon which we should have a poll open for x amount of days.

Or, we could have a few days of discussion and those that really want to be involved in this process could form a committee. After the committee is formed, ideas from all will be welcomed and likely used. However, the final voting authority would rest in the committees hands.. That said, getting into the committee would not be a difficult task, but we need to make sure the people making the "decisions" are dedicated...

What do you think?

 

[Pete]

I propose an amendment.

The Campaign For Liberty should present a Liberty Score, based on a number of categories that may include, but are not limited to: foreign policy, civil liberties, monetary policy, economic policy, and constitutionalism. The Liberty Score will be assessed by finding the mean of the rating given by the Campaign for Liberty dues-paying members.

Any objections?

Some of my own suggestions include: making it so only county coordinators' scores on up count toward the mean score. There is also the possibility of having a short quiz to ensure that the voter has researched the candidate properly. Also, we could have the mean Liberty Score of the members, and then a rating given by Dr. Paul himself, given he be willing to participate. Additionally, the score could be given in categories.

• Mean Score as voted by Precinct Leaders
• Mean Score as voted by County Coordinators
• Mean Score as voted by District Coordinators
• Mean Score as voted by State Coordinators

Any other suggestions or objections are welcome.

Personally, I favor the yes/no/unknown format. It would be fun to show the candidate's position, with a big old asterisk and explanatory footnotes about evidence that the answers might not be trustworthy.

Voter and issue guides are sure to be a HUGE part of the program.

 

[MRoCkEd]

I second voter guides and candidate ratings