", 21 July 2015 (UTC)
 Sure.  So in this particular case, here is what I found.  You've been name-dropped in WaPo.  Usually, that would make you an auto-implied-endorsement... but rather than being 'strategist' or some kind of 'senior advisor' or whatever, your job title was CTO... somewhat strange for a political campaign to *have* somebody with that job-title.  Hence, I didn't count it as an auto-implied-endorsement, but looked further.  This is relatively unambiguous:  
 Ron Schnell, computer programmerhttp://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2015/06/30/supreme-court-passes-on-google-oracle-case-rand-pauls-campaign-hosts-a-hackathon/ at NSUhttp://cec.nova.edu/faculty/adjlist.html 
 But there is some wiggle room, there.  And thus, the question is:  1) per WP:ABOUTSELF, is that a public endorsement, by a ""celebrity programmer"" of sorts?  or alternatively, is that a public endorsement, by a ""celebrity professor"" of sorts?  I originally put you down as a prof, because of your earliest press being for NYU, and your current job being adjunct prof, and your years at Syracuse.  You have obviously been a programmer, but you've also obviously been in academia (of one type or another ... sysadmin at ITS counts in my book) for a very long time.  Paul has specific platform-planks that impact the world of computer science, and the computer industry:  net neutrality, NSA data-collection, and more.  There are likely to be copyright-related issues in the 2016 election (cf the oracle-vs-google lawsuit over whether the fundefs in an API are ""copyright"" or rather ""fair use"" in terms of Java libcalls  this is probably more important than the look and feel lawsuits of the 1980s).  So, I could see a case where as a programmer-slash-professor, you would endorse based on your understanding of the economic impact in the computer industry, much like Walter Block endorsed as an academic who is an economics prof (despite disagreeing with Paul on specific issues like the correct governmental level for dealing with vaccinations  they agree on economics and thus Block endorsed).  Then there is the third possibility, which is the endorsement as a staffer.  Although you are a new face as a political consultant, that doesn't necessarily make a staffer-endorsement less valuable; in some ways, it makes your endorsement more wiki-noteworthy, because you *are* an outsider, who wasn't hired based on your implied-and-pre-existing endorsement, like most of the professional-political-staffer-hires tend to be.  
       Finally, I will point out that per WP:BLP, wikipedians are pretty careful when making statements about BLPs, yourself included, as well as Rand Paul.  It is 'saying something' about Paul when somebody is listed as endorsing him, but even more so, it is 'saying something' about you when we list you as an endorsement-giver.  Since this is a borderline case, wikipedians usually just defer to what the BLP wants to happen (in this case you).  If you want to be listed as an endorsement-giver, because it is a true statement, per WP:COI you should not insert yourself.  But I already inserted you, along with a ton of other staffer-endorsements (most of the implied variety but one or two that were more carefully quotation-laden).  And that was before we became wiki-involved during the AfD of the Dunnet videogame, so it still stands an the action of an uninvolved editor.  In other words, if you'd rather be left off the list, that's fine, just say so, and why.  If somebody else inserts you into the article, don't remove yourself from the article-mainspace, per wiki-COI behavioral rule#1, but instead ask for assistance.  It will also help if you post something WP:ABOUTSELF to your blog, which says that you are not yet formally endorsing any candidate in the race, although that's not necessary at present (only if some other editor re-inserts you).  On the other hand, if after reading this, and looking over the list at Endorsements for the Republican Party presidential primaries, 2016, you end up deciding that you do belong on the list (either under the academia-subsection or under the ce