Received: from localhost ([::1]:44050 helo=stodi.digitalkingdom.org) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1bIKDW-00075b-Ti; Wed, 29 Jun 2016 11:28:06 -0700 Received: from mail.cracksucht.de ([148.251.217.217]:55966 helo=pb.cracksucht.de) by stodi.digitalkingdom.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86) (envelope-from ) id 1bIKDP-00074L-EK for llg-board@lojban.org; Wed, 29 Jun 2016 11:28:05 -0700 To: llg-board@lojban.org References: <8auD1t00W56Cr6M01auEnA> From: selpahi Message-ID: <822daa99-6878-512e-6793-0d3a5f0fd70a@selpahi.de> Date: Wed, 29 Jun 2016 20:27:50 +0200 In-Reply-To: X-Spam-Score: -1.9 (-) X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_bar: - Subject: Re: [llg-board] Volunteers and qualifications for office X-BeenThere: llg-board@lojban.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.20 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: llg-board@lojban.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; Format="flowed" Errors-To: llg-board-bounces@lojban.org I've been silent this whole time because I don't know how to best phrase my feelings with regards to LLG in general, lojbab's continued presidency, and Curtis' proposal(s). First of all, I wish to say that I am glad to hear that lojbab thinks he is capable health-wise to continue his presidency for another year. I wish only the best for him. That said, it is no secret that the LLG meetings have been a bit lacking in recent years. I do not blame this on lojbab alone; every member should feel some obligation to serve (in some way) the organization they chose to become members of. If they don't contribute, there is little the president can do. On the other hand, it is probably possible to have a president who is a little bit more involved and who finds ways to spur others into action. (But what actions are even needed?) Unfortunately (but understandably), even if such a person were to be found, they would probably be put off by all the bureaucracy needed to fill and run the position. In a way, it might seem like a wasted effort, since such a person would likely be more valuable in the BPFK were actual language matters are being worked on. I am not surprised that there aren't lots people waiting in line to become the next president. As for Curtis, it is at times not clear what the nature of his involvement with the language is. Most people know Curtis only via his contributions on jbovlaste where he is (in)famous for adding large amounts of highly technical mathematical jargon (cmavo) and similar amounts of experimental gismu. Hardly anybody has seen him produce any Lojban (though they would really like to see him do so). It is not clear how familiar he is with Lojban culture and history. What is evident is that he has a knack for Legalese (some of his proposals during the meeting were in fact phrased in a way that some had serious trouble understanding them). Does the LLG need (even more) bureaucracy? I think not. What LLG does need I do not know either. Word on the street has been that LLG has not exactly been a very useful institution. How does LLG remain relevant, or find back to relevancy, in the eyes of the Lojban community? Say we find a new president, then what? There are no concrete plans or goals that I can see. There are only these abstract officer jobs, and then once a year the membership meets and, well, nothing happens. Or as guskant put it: "I protest against an LLG that decides about no important subjects but adjournment." During the meeting (2016/03/19) John Cowan said: "I think the time has passed for official words, official dictionaries, or official anything else." If even Cowan himself feels this way, what is there left for LLG to do? Curtis has voiced repeatedly his will to help the language and the community. But is LLG really the place to serve either of those two? Lojbanology (jboske) happens anywhere but here. The BPFK works on definitional matters and works out under-formalized areas of the language. LLG does not. Motivated members of the community create Lojban artworks and enrich the culture of the language. LLG does not. Volunteers write teaching materials and teach people through various mediums. LLG does not. What *does* LLG do? If I seem overly critical of this institution, it is only because I myself cannot give any good answers to any of these questions, and because this sentiment is widely shared among people who only see the LLG from the outside, so it only seems the right thing to do to carry it to the board. If nobody else has answers, at least the board should. If someone came to me and asked me how they could best help out the community, nothing would be further from my mind than telling them to become an LLG-member. I think this alone speaks volumes. ~~~mi'e la selpa'i _______________________________________________ llg-board mailing list llg-board@lojban.org http://mail.lojban.org/mailman/listinfo/llg-board