Our problem is we are unable to find competent volunteers. Libertarians
want to be paid for their expertise as if that were not as, if not more,
important than having candidates at all.
gail
PS: Yes, I should come first. I know the ballot lists the state candidates
first but the one election we need to win in 2010 is US Senate. How the
voters can accept either choice is beyond me. gkl
In a message dated 10/30/2010 1:33:56 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
sfdreamer@earthlink.net writes:
Phil,
I agree that it takes too many clicks to find our candidates [in case
you didn't find them, choose the "Learn" tab and select "Our
Candidates", then choose the category you want (local, state or
federal) from this page -- http://www.ca.lp.org/candidates/2010].
Definitely Libertarian candidates should be more visible on the state
party's website in an election season. I'd also recommend that people
be able to see all the candidates at once, instead of (or at least in
addition to) having to click to view them one at a time.
I'm copying Flavio, the site's architect, on this message, as well as
Allen Rice (aka Willow Glen Libertarian Alliance), who is apparently
responsible for maintenance of the candidates page -- perhaps one or
both of them can do something about these issues. I also notice that
I'm not even listed as a local candidate for SF School Board, and the
LPSF has not yet been added to the links for county parties despite my
repeated urging for this to happen.
But in general I think the new LPC website is a drastic improvement
over the old one, which was a real eyesore. The new site is much more
visually attractive, and offers much more in the way of interactivity
and social networking possibilities. Problems and unfinished status
notwithstanding, imho it's the most promising thing to happen to the
LPC in recent memory.
Love & Liberty,
((( starchild )))