Rack and Stack

[Chuck Moulton]

Colleagues,

I think the order column on the Rack and Stack spreadsheet seems
reversed. The proposals with the lowest numbers seem to have the highest
order number and the proposals with the highest numbers seem to have the
lowest order number.

In liberty,
Dr. Chuck Moulton

[Paul Darr]

Everyone,

One way to approach this is to rank the proposals from most controversial / least likely to pass to least controversial / most likely to pass. If you enter them in that order, the process will naturally result in the least controversial items appearing first.

Respectfully,

Paul Darr

Vice Chair, Libertarian National Committee

---

From: lnc-bylaws...@googlegroups.com <lnc-bylaws...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Chuck Moulton <ch...@moulton.org>
Sent: Tuesday, January 27, 2026 10:09 PM
To: LNC Bylaws Committee <lnc-bylaws...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Rack and Stack

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "LNC Bylaws Committee" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to lnc-bylaws-commi...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lnc-bylaws-committee/3f5c20a7-47e5-3078-e134-4fd623cb8d2c%40moulton.org.

[Rob Latham]

For now, my order is based on a mix of priority and "passability"; it's a judgment call, and I'm expecting the same from other committee members.

If my memory is serving me well, during the last BandRComm we underwent a similar ranking process as we are doing now. After that, we adjusted the order in the report to place a few "most likely to pass" proposals at the beginning to generate momentum at the convention. I recall Ms. Arrowwood reminded us of this approach during the January 25th meeting.

In liberty,

Rob Latham

P.S.: FWIW, my sense is that the "Order" column is the inverse of the committee's collective rankings so that the highest-ranked proposals will have the highest "order" value and the lowest-ranked proposals will have the lowest "order" value.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lnc-bylaws-committee/SA0PR13MB4062D3294B4330AF0A5265AC9191A%40SA0PR13MB4062.namprd13.prod.outlook.com.

[Paul Bracco]

Colleagues,

I'm likely missing something, but I'm not able to find where the list of passed proposals are on the committee sharepoint. Can someone please let me know where they can be found?

Sincerely,

Paul Bracco

Region 5 Alternate

---

From: lnc-bylaws...@googlegroups.com <lnc-bylaws...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Rob Latham <freeu...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2026 12:17 PM
To: lnc-bylaws...@googlegroups.com <lnc-bylaws...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Rack and Stack

 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lnc-bylaws-committee/CAOKuKG%3DTuukcyZqboZYMqiS9WVukKKejr_35uTFi33esvgkRGA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Mike Seebeck]

Not sure I track that.  The higher the number, the lower the order number in the sheet.  So we weight the least controversial/most likely to pass with the larger numbers and the the more controversial with the small numbers?  That seems reversed somehow.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lnc-bylaws-committee/SA0PR13MB4062D3294B4330AF0A5265AC9191A%40SA0PR13MB4062.namprd13.prod.outlook.com.

[Paul Darr]

The sheet this was modified from was using a ten-point scale. Least points to most controversial and most points to least. Instead of trying to do a large ranked choice, it makes a simple sorting based on a simple scale. Ranked choice can also work; it just makes it have to be reversed in order unless you change the math. 

Respectfully,

Paul Darr

Vice Chair, Libertarian National Committee

---

From: Mike Seebeck <mike.s...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2026 9:08 PM
To: Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org>
Cc: chuck <ch...@moulton.org>; LNC Bylaws Committee <lnc-bylaws...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Rack and Stack

 

[Rob Latham]

It may be the document attached to the email below:

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Mike Seebeck <mike.s...@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, Jan 27, 2026 at 5:33 AM
Subject:
To: Bylaws Committee 2026 <bylawscomm...@lp.org>

All, here's the rack and stack document.  Will be setting up the spreadsheet today; look for that under separate email.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lnc-bylaws-committee/CH3PR13MB6748CC2D674779F3FBCC5D488A91A%40CH3PR13MB6748.namprd13.prod.outlook.com.

[Andrew Martin Kolstee]

Just trying to clarify. #1 is our highest ranking and #21 is our lowest ranking? That's what I did on mine.

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lnc-bylaws-committee/CAOKuKGmL%3DGWf5muNmkpdyJkHgiCptCMV986sFYhNUxDSCFrAWQ%40mail.gmail.com.

--

Andrew Martin Kolstee

andrew...@gmail.com

[Mike Seebeck]

I think it's the opposite; a larger number means higher priority and a smaller number means lower priority. 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lnc-bylaws-committee/CABPPSRXFkLtZJh_7%2BbxVf5utJqQbtWXqnppi4SRJc6dU%2BTWOJg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Chuck Moulton]

Yes, lower means earlier (and more preferred) in our rankings.

In liberty,

Dr. Chuck Moulton

Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 2, 2026, at 7:20 PM, Andrew Martin Kolstee <andrew...@gmail.com> wrote:



To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lnc-bylaws-committee/CABPPSRXFkLtZJh_7%2BbxVf5utJqQbtWXqnppi4SRJc6dU%2BTWOJg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Data Logan]

While some have stated differently, I think we all need to heed and follow the idea of the person that sent the spreadsheet out.

Seebeck states that voting numbers closer to 21 will be representing higher priority options that will be more likely to be presented at convention. And numbers closer to 1 are less likely to be presented at convention.

Data Logan

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lnc-bylaws-committee/CAGasu4TkZ8TfY1Xf-tA73En-SqjQ%3DATR7d4Pc1hya%2BbJLChtHA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Chuck Moulton]

Well, not only does that make no sense (it would be the opposite of common sense of ordinal numbers math and how we have always done things for over a decade), but it also would mean everyone would need to redo their submissions.

In liberty,

Dr. Chuck Moulton

Sent from my iPhone

On Feb 4, 2026, at 12:10 AM, Data Logan <data...@gmail.com> wrote:



To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lnc-bylaws-committee/CAD3N-6SdpLszLoY-t%2BJBU%2BKnGN_8WB4NZuPTKc1Qp08%2Bumx47A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Mike Seebeck]

I said I think that's the case.

Paul, could you clarify, please?

[Paul Darr]

The instructions from Mr. Seebeck were reverse order if looking at it as a ranked choice. I and most others seemed to have ranked following those directions. You can observe the change when adding in your rankings. 

Respectfully,

Paul Darr

Vice Chair, Libertarian National Committee

---

From: lnc-bylaws...@googlegroups.com <lnc-bylaws...@googlegroups.com> on behalf of Mike Seebeck <mike.s...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 4, 2026 6:56 AM
To: chuck <ch...@moulton.org>
Cc: datalogan <data...@gmail.com>; andrewkolstee <andrew...@gmail.com>; freeutahns <freeu...@gmail.com>; Paul Bracco <paul....@lp.org>; LNC Bylaws Committee <lnc-bylaws...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Rack and Stack

 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lnc-bylaws-committee/CAGasu4Rj91DPOGRnHu_5%2BqMeZacYYRRGaGMrLDyKJzNNGYx-rg%40mail.gmail.com.

[Paul Darr]

Mr. Seebeck,

I think the below is more like what you had intended but please review:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16tQC5QXYKDY-vME2KvE3GpfUlkCDoT64nVmZXKUxIIE/edit?usp=sharing

Note that values entered are just test data to demonstrate the sorting.

Respectfully,

Paul Darr

Vice Chair, Libertarian National Committee

---

From: Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org>
Sent: Thursday, February 5, 2026 7:06 AM
To: mike.seebeck <mike.s...@gmail.com>
Cc: Bylaws Committee 2026 <bylawscomm...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: Rack and Stack

 

Mr. Seebeck,

We had agreed to review the spreadsheet together prior to its distribution to the committee. You chose to distribute it before that review occurred and without my consent. At that point, the document became solely your work, as you assumed full control over both its final content and its distribution.

I routinely accept responsibility when materials I have reviewed are shared by other committee members. In this instance, however, I was not given the opportunity to review the document prior to distribution.

Respectfully,

Paul Darr

Vice Chair, Libertarian National Committee

---

From: Mike Seebeck <mike.s...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 4, 2026 11:51 AM
To: Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org>
Cc: Bylaws Committee 2026 <bylawscomm...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: Rack and Stack

 

Yeah, those weren't my formulas. They were yours. I didn't change the calculations, just the ranges to accommodate all the columns.

On Wed, Feb 4, 2026, 9:59 AM Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org> wrote:

Mr. Seebeck,

While working with your spreadsheet, I noticed that entering a rating of 1 results in a ranking of 21, and entering a rating of 21 results in a ranking of 1. As a result, the current formula appears to be ranking the values in reverse order.

The higher the number, the more weighted the vote is for the ranking.

Respectfully,

Paul Darr

Vice Chair, Libertarian National Committee

---

From: Mike Seebeck <mike.s...@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 4, 2026 8:04 AM

To: Bylaws Committee 2026 <bylawscomm...@lp.org>

Subject: Fwd: Rack and Stack

 

This was from before.

The rankings column seem to rank the lower numbers at the bottom and the higher numbers at the top.

[Paul Darr]

Mr. Seebeck,

The previous spread sheet was changed to reflect that and the scoring on your spreadsheet now appears to meet that criteria.

Respectfully,

Paul Darr

Vice Chair, Libertarian National Committee

---

From: Mike Seebeck <mike.s...@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, February 5, 2026 7:48 AM
To: Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org>
Cc: Bylaws Committee 2026 <bylawscomm...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: Rack and Stack

 

Mr. Darr,

No, I ran it past you and you said that I had it. You canceled the review. 

That doesn’t change how it was created. 

All I did was expand the table to include everyone.

The formulas and instructions were yours. You built the original and then shared it with me. I have the email chain. I also have the recording of the last meeting where it was discussed.

I am not going to be thrown under the bus for this.

So here's what's going to happen.

I'm going to do what I shouldn't have to do and fix it. People can rerank accordingly right now. It will be fixed as follows:

• Ranking criteria: The lower the number, the higher the priority to the individual doing the ranking, however they chooseto decide it.  A "1" means highest priority, a "21" means lowest priority.  

• Scoring: The rankings will be totaled. Lowest total becomes Proposal #1, highest total becomes Proposal #21.

Committee members can rerank based on this criteria *immediately.* I have already added a totals column to start that fix. Those who haven't ranked at all should do so.

From there, the first draft of the report will be created. The rationales for proposals carried over from the previous committee will be included in the first draft. So will the rationales for my own proposals that are in there. The other proposals from others will have those areas blank so their makers can handle those. The sooner those are done, the better. Nobody should be putting words in their mouths, nor mine, and I will not do that, either.

On Thu, Feb 5, 2026, 7:06 AM Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org> wrote:

Mr. Seebeck,

We had agreed to review the spreadsheet together prior to its distribution to the committee. You chose to distribute it before that review occurred and without my consent. At that point, the document became solely your work, as you assumed full control over both its final content and its distribution.

I routinely accept responsibility when materials I have reviewed are shared by other committee members. In this instance, however, I was not given the opportunity to review the document prior to distribution.

Respectfully,

Paul Darr

Vice Chair, Libertarian National Committee

---

From: Mike Seebeck <mike.s...@gmail.com>

Sent: Wednesday, February 4, 2026 11:51 AM

To: Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org>
Cc: Bylaws Committee 2026 <bylawscomm...@lp.org>

Subject: Re: Rack and Stack

Yeah, those weren't my formulas. They were yours. I didn't change the calculations, just the ranges to accommodate all the columns.

On Wed, Feb 4, 2026, 9:59 AM Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org> wrote:

Mr. Seebeck,

While working with your spreadsheet, I noticed that entering a rating of 1 results in a ranking of 21, and entering a rating of 21 results in a ranking of 1. As a result, the current formula appears to be ranking the values in reverse order.

The higher the number, the more weighted the vote is for the ranking.

Respectfully,

Paul Darr

Vice Chair, Libertarian National Committee

---

From: Mike Seebeck <mike.s...@gmail.com>

Sent: Wednesday, February 4, 2026 8:04 AM
To: Bylaws Committee 2026 <bylawscomm...@lp.org>
Subject: Fwd: Rack and Stack

This was from before.

The rankings column seem to rank the lower numbers at the bottom and the higher numbers at the top.

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Paul Darr <paul...@lp.org>
Date: Wed, Jan 28, 2026, 9:34 PM

Subject: Re: Rack and Stack

To: mike.seebeck <mike.s...@gmail.com>
Cc: chuck <ch...@moulton.org>, LNC Bylaws Committee <lnc-bylaws...@googlegroups.com>

[Andrew Martin Kolstee]

Can the instructions be clearly added to the spreadsheet somehow so that we all can do exactly what we need to do?

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/lnc-bylaws-committee/SA0PR13MB4062891DD0AA2C853FF16BF19199A%40SA0PR13MB4062.namprd13.prod.outlook.com.