I was referring to where you said that the LP is "...philosophy based rather than a team." In my opinion, this is what is wrong with the LP, not what is right. If you are a member of a philosophy club, why should you admit those people who do not share your beliefs?
This is why I say the LP is extremist. The objectivists and anarchists set the terms of the debate, write the platform, etc. While it is interesting for a philosophy club to discuss theory of eliminating government, the goal of a political party is to elect candidates to public office. The LP to date has been less than successful at this, and my point is that this is because the LP considers itself a "political philosophy" rather than a party.
Indeed you frame the dilemma well. The precise problem is that politics demands caving in to the status-quo, which cuts to the quick. This is why I believe large-scale lib change, if ever, will likely not come from the party. The LP does have a place of keeping the other two parties somewhat honest.